User talk:Lfh/Archive 2

OUndle
Hi, just saw the comment you  put on  Lifelike's page. I do understand where you  are coming from  Lfh, I do, I do. However, here is yet another example of the Wikipedia telling  people how to  pronounce their home towns - and getting  it wrong. I'm sure you  grasped  several  days ago it's no you  whom  I'm  criticizing, it's the collective philosophy  of the the whole bunch  of Wikipedia IPA experts who  are following  their own herd instinct. Lemmings? --Kudpung (talk) 13:22, 17 January 2010 (UTC)


 * It's just a question of whether you write or  or .  WP:IPAEN happens to use the first.  You could take the  out, it just wouldn't quite match the key anymore.  "Oundle" has the same final syllable as "kindle", right? Lfh (talk) 13:41, 17 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Depends on how you  pronounce Oundle and kindle.  We  all pronounce it  (and other English  words like it) like the German  Dirndl which  the Collins dictionary  writes as  [ˈdɪrndl]. Pronouncing  it exactly according  to  the IPA /dəl/ would slightly  lengthen  the 'uh' phoneme and make the pronunciation  unnatural.--Kudpung (talk) 14:01, 17 January 2010 (UTC) BTW: I've already  proven Kwami  totally  and irrevocably wrong on his insistences on the interpretation  of IPA  British  pronunciation but  he keeps coming  back  with  an off-topic riposte. A far as 'matching the key' is concerned, I  don't  follow your reasoning - the WP:IPAEN is a table of phonemes, not  a list  of sounds in context.


 * That's what the examples are for, to provide context. "Bottle" is given as an example for, even though the page on syllabic consonants gives a more precise phonetic transcription of the very same word as .   just means "the sound at the end of bottle or kindle".  There isn't a longer version of the same sound corresponding to a different phoneme, so there's no need to define  as something different from .  They're just different ways of writing the same thing.


 * You could argue that we should use instead, or as an equal alternative (like the way  can be used for ).  I personally wouldn't mind; it just isn't how the key is set up at the moment. Lfh (talk) 14:25, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Just to  be the Devil's advocate here, I'm  going  to  throw in  a couple more examples taken from  a world famous dictionary that  I  happen to  know rather exceptionally  well. A couple are about that terrible argument about  the non  existent  post  vocalic r, the others  re about  words that  end in  L like we have been discussing  above. You've proaly noticed that there is something  special in the sound when  an l follows a d. My  main  contention is that  the authors of the IPA article are getting  thnings wrong, even  Kwami who almost  owns it  from  his massive edit  count on  it, is sometimes quite wrong, and even contradicts himself. One who joined in  the row but in  fact never contributed to  the article says of himself:  I'm an American who made significant contributions to the coverage of phonetics at this article so it could just be that I have my head up too far up my ass to know what makes sense to readers. So  where do  we go  from  here for the quality  of our encyclopedia? --Kudpung (talk) 16:21, 17 January 2010 (UTC) BNTW, we tried the talk page solution already, didn't we. And that's why the conversation is now taking place more intelligently  on a few user talk  pages ;)
 * spiral [ˈspaɪərəl]
 * Wandel [ˈvandl]
 * spire [spaɪə*]
 * splinter [ˈsplɪntə*]
 * If you think we need to treat final "dle" differently from e.g. "tle" ("bottle") or "ple" ("couple"), you should bring it up at one of the relevant pronunciation talk pages. WP is an ongoing project and improvements are always being sought. As for me, I'll remove the  from Oundle - as I said, some academics would have written it without one in the first place, and it might make it more intuitive to the reader.


 * "Spire" and "splinter" have nothing to do with Oundle. They are pronounced with final /r/ by rhotic speakers, and by non-rhotic speakers with linking R when followed by a vowel.


 * Anything that you disagree with Kwami about, you need to bring up on his page. I'm not acquainted with either of you, but you both seem like very amiable and intelligent people and I'm sure you can iron out your disagreements directly.  You are passionate about language and about our coverage of places in the English Midlands - nothing wrong with that. Lfh (talk) 17:02, 17 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Of course "Spire" and "splinter" have got nothing to  do  with  the Oundle article, but  they  are the very  essence of the discussion  you  started, and which  got me involved in  matters concerning  the Wikipedia's attempt to  be the ultimate IPA handbook (WP:NOT). I'm  sure that  a look at  what  the Encyclopedia Britannica says about the IPA will clarify  the point  I have constantly  been making  throughout these discussions :) --Kudpung (talk) 02:13, 18 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm sure you can't be saying that "splinter" doesn't have /r/ in any accent - try watching the Turtles! I'm not quite sure what you are saying (perhaps that dictionary words should be by default non-rhotic?), but I'll have a look in the EB and see if that throws any light on it. Lfh (talk) 08:54, 18 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Also, if you think there are any mistakes in the IPA articles (e.g. International Phonetic Alphabet, Phonetic transcription, Phoneme) why not be bold and make some changes? The worst that could happen is somebody might revert them, but even then, that would be an opportunity to discuss it - and on a talk page with a wider readership than this one!  Nobody owns any article. Lfh (talk) 09:08, 18 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I know nobody  owns the WP, but some of the authors who  are the major contributors or creators of some articles defend their POV like a woman scorned. I have no  intention  of becoming part  of any  WP language project, like I  said before, when i  come home from  work, I  prefer to  do something else for my  relaxation, and take part inprjects where there is no  silly  bickering  going on. On  the IPA page, silly  bickering  is on-going ;) Get  back to me when you've looked at  the EB, and we'll have a fireside chat  about  it.--Kudpung (talk) 10:04, 18 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Actually, could you just tell me what it is the EB says that relates to "splinter"? I don't have access to it where I am, unfortunately.  And I'm afraid you're going to have to be more clear about what you're arguing for re. rhoticity.  You have brought up a pair of words ending in R, but not actually explained what point you're trying to make, or how those examples support it, except to imply that their post-vocalic /r/ is "non-existent".  How do you think Wikipedia should transcribe words that end in R and are pronounced with /r/ by rhotic speakers?  If we gave a pronunciation on the splinter article, how would you wish to transcribe it?  I note that that page links to the Wiktionary def, which gives separate UK and US versions - is that what you think we should do?


 * As for Oundle, kindle, dirndl etc., as I have said, many (most?) sources would transcribe them in the way you suggest, and not in the way prescribed by WP:IPAEN. I changed [and then reverted myself] Oundle just to make it consistent with that key, which transcribes the sequence of /d/ followed by /l/ in a different way from your source, among others (simply as a matter of convention).  You could probably make a very strong case for changing the key, but that's not something that could be agreed on this page.  You don't have to join any projects, but you do need to say what it is you think we should do differently. Lfh (talk) 11:54, 18 January 2010 (UTC)


 * It would be a really good idea if you were to check  out the Encyclopedia Britannica. As I've said before, I've no real interest  in  getting  involved in  linguistics here. My  issue is in defending the claims of several authors that the IPA in their articles is being  changed and misspelt  by other authors who either don't  actually  know how the place names are pronounced, or who have unwittingly  misinterpreted any  Wikipedia policy on the subject, or who  have implemented a policy  that may  itself be flawed. It's up to the Wikipedia IPA task force to address the problem now that it  has been brought up.


 * Fair enough. I would put myself in the third of your categories - I think I've been applying Wikipedia's IPA standards consistently, but if those standards turn out to be confusing or irritating for a large number of readers, then this needs to be sorted out, exactly as you say.
 * Myself, I'm from Buckinghamshire - not that far from Oundle or Warwickshire, and close enough to the Midlands to know that the River Nene is "Nenn"! (And that Towcester is used for heating bread.)
 * Good luck with your Wikipedia projects and all the rest. Lfh (talk) 15:14, 18 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I think  you're right  about  that  third category.  I  now just  have to convince the others. However I'm  not  part of the IPA task force and I  don't  intend to be! Keep  up  the good work, and don't  forget  to join any  project  that  you  feel  passionately  enough about :) --Kudpung (talk) 15:56, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
Kudpung (talk) 23:02, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Nighy
I seem to recall that it's Nye, but I'm not sure. We could look around on YouTube to see if we can find a pronunciation, or write to his agent. SlimVirgin TALK  contribs 16:56, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, I would say so. Good find. SlimVirgin  TALK  contribs 17:49, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Respelling help, please?
Someone recently added a pronunciation to Neligh, Nebraska, derived from the AP Nebraska Pronunciation Guide. Could you convert it to a proper respelling and maybe add an IPA pronunciation as well? Nyttend (talk) 16:37, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Done. It was actually in line with Pronunciation respelling key already, just without the template. Lfh (talk) 17:08, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

IPA page for Bulgarian and Macedonian
No need to apologize. By the way, do you know how the IPA transcriptions on Wikipedia could be quickly updated? Kostja (talk) 16:51, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I mean changing the IPA transcriptions of Bulgarian and Macedonian names to link to the IPA page for Bulgarian and Macedonian and not to the general template. Kostja (talk) 17:07, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Rhotic R in british place names
I see that  Kwami has relaunched his attack on  the British pronunciation  of British place names, by  British  Wikipedeia authors and British  citizens. I think this campaign is deceitful and goes against  an admin's remit. I might not  be so prepared to  let things rest  this time round, especially  as Kwami is oblivious of the sensitivities he may  be affronting, and even though  I  am one editor  who  abhors opening  cans of worms.--Kudpung (talk) 11:31, 24 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Please count me out of any drama you plan to foment. The pan-dialectal transcription has already been explained to you.  There is no "attack" or "campaign", and an appeal to authority by British citizenship is not likely to work.  I don't like cans of worms either, and at present I'm simply leaving post-vocalic /r/'s alone (whether present or absent), at least until feelings settle down. Lfh (talk) 11:43, 24 February 2010 (UTC)


 * I don't plan to foment any  drama. I  plan on trying to clean up one or two issues where a clan of rogue American editors are making claims to the English language that  is used in  British articles in this encyclopedia. The pan-dialectal transcription is not  something that  should even be entertained in something as global as this encyclopedia. Feelings will  only  die down when people have asserted that  the Brits have the right  not  to  have American  pronunciation thrust  upon them. The entire IPA article, even if enormous work has been put into  it  in good faith, is a major contradiction of Wiki  policy, and Kwami  continues to implement  his private agenda with impunity, in  the knowledge that   his 'authority' as a sysop  and quasi owner of the IPA article, will  inevitably win  for him against any justifiable complaints about  his disruptive editing. Nothing  will  be gained by  simply side stepping  the problems and pretending they  will go  away, or by  producing  smoke screens.--Kudpung (talk) 15:55, 24 February 2010 (UTC)


 * We work by consensus. We used to have separate transcriptions for each dialect, but where do you stop? Do we add Aussie? NZ? How long before the entire lead is taken up by multiple dialectical transcriptions, so that no-one feels left out? It was a mess. So by consensus we decided on using a single transcription, which BTW is based on RP, not GA, as you very well know. There were Brits and Aussies as well as Yanks in the discussion, and it was due to the influence of British editors in that discussion that the transcription is based on RP. Consensus may change, and if it does, so be it. But you need to work on consensus, not simply object that because you don't like something, the rest of us need to change to please you. kwami (talk) 21:48, 24 February 2010 (UTC)


 * I understand all this Kwami, and have the greatest respect  for your knowledge of the  IPA and the huge effort you  have put into the Wiki article, but for starters, the entire IPA article is, IMHO, in  breach  of WP:NOT.  Secondly, phonetics/phonemics are only  one of the many  departments of linguistics and sociolinguistics, and nobody can know it  all. I  was drawn into  this by  others who questioned your project's implementation, and who looked to me for comment  and support simply  because the IPA does not  represent  the way  these names are most  often and usually pronounced outside the USA. I'm not being obstreperous, but applying your consensus without  some flexibility  for common sense (Wiki is not  written in  stone) is fanning  a fire i  don't even really  want  to be involved in. Please do not  suggest for example, ever again, that  I do not  bother -  in fact I just  happen to be one of the rare non-admin editors who always checks back on talk  pages, discussions, and user pages before putting  my  oar in. At the root of the problem is that Wikipedia's decision-making mechanism is thoroughly broken. ...any clique of ten editors can write a rule or standard, vote it among themselves, and declare it "consensus". Almost every guideline in Wikipedia was decided in this way. No country could survive more than a few years with such a "randomcratic" government; and it seems that Wikipedia cannot either. User:Jorge Stolfi --Kudpung (talk) 04:07, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Kudpung, for what it's worth, I don't relish the idea of being drawn into a big dispute any more than you do. But I'm not the one pushing for change. Since you understand the concept behind the pan-dialectal transcription, then you know that no one is "forcing" anything on anybody. Phonemes which have different realisations (or mergers) in different dialects are written in a way that lets the reader apply her own dialect when pronouncing the word. When a word actually takes different phonemes in different countries (eg "basil"), both versions are given. Nobody is telling anyone that they have to change the way they pronounce their own hometowns. You understand this, so please stop describing the issue in terms of coercion, as though there were some sort of war going on. (And as you also know, there are plenty of rhotic speakers outside the USA.)

You've expressed your feelings, but now I think you should explain what you think Wikipedia should actually do with the IPA. Do you think we should have (a) a different standard, (b) multiple standards, or (c) no self-created standard at all? If (a) or (b), the place to make your case is the WP:IPAEN talk. If (c), then probably the MoS, since you'd effectively be arguing to ditch WP:IPAEN anyway. Have I missed an option? I can envisage a compromise between (a) and (b) in which we add a note saying that (inter alia) post-vocalic /r/ is not included for British etc placenames, and is replaced by  in American names. Then the articles could be changed accordingly. But whatever you argue for, you need to be clear what you want.

By the way, when you criticise the "IPA article", can I check whether you mean IPA or IPA for English (which is not an article)? Lfh (talk) 06:43, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Dual IPA entries
I'm glad to see that  you  do  appear to  be somehow on  my  side in  this IPA saga after all,  and thanks for being  one editor to allow  common sense to  prevail. I really appreciate this, because as you  will  see from  the next  message after THIS, I'm now rather heavily  involved in  it. Two entries are what  are needed to keep the American IPA article editors  happy when there is a noticable difference in  frequently  used pronunciations, and all  of us away from  time-wasting conflicts. I think possibly the whole thing blew up inderectly because of the Worcester dab issue, but that's another story, and I  didn't start  either argument  ;) --Kudpung (talk) 04:59, 27 February 2010 (UTC)


 * It's good to see that dual entries might be an acceptable solution. Personally, I've just been trying to apply WP's conventions as they seem to be and as I understand them, but of course they might be improved - I have no stake in their remaining unchanged.  By the same principle, when I edit the German WP I actually add non-rhotic pronuns for British places, because the German Wiki doesn't have anything equivalent to WP:IPAEN (either for English or German) - horses for courses.  Lfh (talk) 13:11, 27 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Dual entries may well turn out to  be the best  solution and is probably  the one I  would advocate,, but do  you  have any  idea why  the 'leading' IPA editor is unable to conduct  any  discussion in  a civil  manner and refrain from  insults and personal  attacks? Does he really believe that  he can crush  any  suggestions for improvement  by  being  nasty? Is he so  obsessively possessive of his IPA articles and key that  he cannot  reason  intelligently? God knows, I've tried - I even offered him a token  of peace to  show  good faith, but even that  was met  with disdain.--Kudpung (talk) 01:17, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

IPAc-en template
Yes, this new Template:IPAc-en template is great, we need a bot to go through and replace all Template:pron-en templates with that one. and also break the word up into phonemes. e.g. : becomes  The mouseover on individual phonemes is so awesome! --Rajah (talk) 04:21, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Phil Lynott
Phil Lynott's name is pronounced LYE-nott. Funny, but true, as are/were most things about him and his life, other than his tragic death. He is sorely missed amongst some in the musical community, not to mention his fans. --Leahtwosaints (talk) 23:09, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi. Thanks for confirming that.  So Jape got it wrong, but these things happen! Lfh (talk) 07:02, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

IPA
Please don't leave off improving our IPA conventions because of Kudpung. (You comment to that effect was reverted; I don't know if that was intentional or not.) If you find him that unpleasant, perhaps you could simply ignore him? I have likewise found dealing with him to be quite frustrating and unpleasant; I can't tell if he's intelligent and acting in bad faith, or acting in good faith but utterly incoherent. Either way, he's just one person, and doesn't hold any sway here. — kwami (talk) 00:13, 4 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Kwami, That's now the most unfair thing I have heard about  my  work on this encyclopedia. You genuinely  have one of the most  unpleasant  attitudes I  have come across on this encyclopedia project. Posting such  nonsense after I  have offered a token of peace, is inappropriate. You  are most  certainly  the only  person  who does not  understand what  I post, and you  obviously  just  pretend  not  to. Good faith appears  not to  be in your vocabulary and needs explaining  to you. As an admin you should know better and I am honestly  suggesting that  your judgement  is impaired. Just  because there is serious interest  in improving  the Wikipedia visitors' experience, and just  because some of your henchment  have a more civil tongue in their heads,   are not reason  to resort  yet  again to personal attacks and incivility  as you  have done ever since I  joined these IPA discussions. It  has been noticed also  that  That  the IPA squadron  has a history of invcivility in  general,  and disruptive editing.--Kudpung (talk) 01:09, 4 May 2010 (UTC)


 * This isn't enjoyable - I think we can all agree about that - and there's no point in working on a Wikiproject that you don't enjoy. Kudpung - I don't think you're acting in bad faith, but I am another person who doesn't always understand what you say.  I'm not part of a squadron, secret garden, or practical joke, I just can't completely follow your arguments.  I'm not trying to be disruptive or put anyone off Wikipedia.  Let's hope your RfC or your ongoing discussion with Aeusoes1 will bring some clarity that I've been unable to.  For now, I'm out. Lfh (talk) 07:34, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

please go to link to support page nominated for deletion
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Pit_Bull

Evereadyo2 (talk) 13:45, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

IPA request for Penysarn
Hello, I saw that you tweaked the IPA entry on the Tatws Pum Munud page and I'm writing to ask if you would mind adding an IPA entry to the Penysarn page as I only have a rudimentary understand of this feature. Many thanks,  Obscurasky (talk) 19:08, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi, sorry for the delay. I'll add the IPA to Penysarn, and get it checked at Wikipedia talk:IPA for Welsh. Lfh (talk) 16:26, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Many thanks. Obscurasky (talk) 22:33, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually I have a question first, where is the stress - do you say "PEN-sarn" or "pen-SARN"? (The article says the y is silent.) Lfh (talk) 08:03, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I would say the latter (in a Welsh accent at least), but there's not a huge difference in the inflection. Obscurasky (talk) 10:19, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Like Penarth, then? I'll add IPA for both English and Welsh. Lfh (talk) 12:01, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

KunstHausWien
I've brought KunstHausWien to WP:TDYK, - can you suggest a better hook? East of Borschov 19:45, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks for your recommendation. How about this: "... that the KunstHausWien, devoted to Friedensreich Hundertwasser,  was once the workshop of Michael Thonet, inventor of the iconic Viennese chair along similar design principles?" Lfh (talk) 21:33, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

DYK for KunstHausWien
The DYK project (nominate) 00:04, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

IPA request
Hello again Lfh. Would it be possible for you to give me the IPA in Welsh for 'Mwng Bach'? It's the title of the US bonus disc that came with Mwng (the pronunciation you previously added for 'Mwng' is ˈmʊŋ) Thanks! Cavie78 (talk) 00:41, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
 * It's . I've added it to Mwng. Lfh (talk) 08:37, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks ever so much! Cavie78 (talk) 11:48, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Thank you
For writing Museum of Musical Instruments of the University of Leipzig. I noticed there were four articles I have worked on that needed it as a link. I hope to have the chance to visit this museum some day. Opus33 (talk) 02:59, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. (The current article is mostly a translation.) Lfh (talk) 09:25, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Galerie Neue Meister
Don't worry  about  the tags I  just  put  on  it - they  aren't  CSD  or PROD! iIm sure you'll be providing  some refs later. take them off if  you  like. --Kudpung (talk) 12:20, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 * OK. The history could probably be shortened - the layout on the German page is a bit of a mess - but I see you've done some rearranging already.  Nearly everything from the original seems to be based on the Dresden/Saxony Tourism site (External Links), which is a third party, though perhaps not a cast-iron RS.  I'll have a look around.  Lfh (talk) 14:03, 6 September 2010 (UTC)