User talk:Mjbmr/Archive 2

__NOINDEX__

it:voy support
Please let me know which is you favourite talk to be contacted :-) -- Andyrom75 (talk) 18:43, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
 * In the meanwhile I've applied your last working patch :) -- Andyrom75 (talk) 19:37, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
 * tests done, everything seems to work fine. Please let me know if you can also support on enhancement.-- Andyrom75 (talk) 15:46, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Please see the comment. -- Andyrom75 (talk) 14:15, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Maybe there's a misunderstanding. Your solution is fine, just need to be fine tuned. PS Let me know where do you prefer to be contacted between here and in fa:voy. By my side I would prefer here because for me it's easier to write :-P -- Andyrom75 (talk) 16:48, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Edit warring
Mjbmr,

Instead of edit warring and reverting my edits without any reason nor edit summary, I suggest and ask you start giving some some now on your talk page (or mine) Those articles are dialects. Those templates are about languages, not dialects. So, they don't belong there. Many nations have tons of dialects in their countries, and if people want to know more about them, they can simpy click on the main language the dialect stems of and they'll be redirected there. Adding all those dialects is simply extreme undue weight, and therefore has to be removed from it. It simply does not belong on a template.

Regards

- LouisAragon (talk) 16:37, 24 May 2015 (UTC)


 * LouisAragon If a dialect of a macro language has a ISO 639-3 code from SIL that means it's a separate language and none of it speakers can understand other dialects within the macro language. Mjbmr (talk) 17:41, 24 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Mjbmr, thanks for your prompt response,


 * I don't agree with that. Do you have a source that backs your statement up that languages with that ISO code aren't mutually intelligble at all? I would be happy to see so. In any case, those templates are only for the various languages in the countries in question, not for the 10.000 dialects that the languages may or may not compse. Its simply redudant and obsolete. This is an online Encyclopedia used by millions of people, we shouldn't forget that. If people click on the template, they just want a quick overview of what languages are present in the country in question, not whether "that specific dialect of Azeri is spoken in that town 27,4 km's away from Tabriz" (for example)
 * They can click on the Azerbaijani language, or any other language article in question (such as Kurdish) to see further information about that, which is what the article is about anyway (in-depth focus about the language including the dialects)


 * Regards - LouisAragon (talk) 18:53, 24 May 2015 (UTC)


 * LouisAragon "... To be considered a separate language, there would need to be linguistic study which showed that speakers of ... could not understand other speakers of ... from other parts of the country ..." said Melinda Lyons, ISO 639-3 RA, SIL International.


 * Wikimedia allows proposal for new Wikipedias with a valid ISO 639 1-3 code. If they were in a same language why would Wikimedia allow such a request.


 * "ISO 639-3 is an international standard for language codes. In defining some of its language codes, some are classified as macrolanguages, which include other individual languages in the standard. The category covers borderline cases where two language varieties may be considered strongly divergent dialects or the same language or very closely related languages (dialect continuums). It also is used when there are language varieties that are sometimes considered to be the same and sometimes different languages for ethnic or political rather than linguistic reasons.


 * We have generally seen that using macro-languages as locale names bring more bad (mostly internal unreset between speakers of the different languages) than good, and thus have a policy to not allow any new macro-langauges to be introduced in translatewiki.net, and subsequently MediaWiki." said Siebrand Mazeland.


 * --Mjbmr (talk) 19:41, 24 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Yes I know that Wikimedia accept such proposals and I can see where they're coming from, but you have to understand that those templates are called "languages of " As I told, it's totally redundant to list every dialect of the existing languages in that precise template. Mate, most nations, like, Turkey, Iran, Iraq, have so many dialects. It's extremely strange to list every dialect, whether they might have that ISO code or not, in a template not designed for it. Southern Kurdish, whether not fully intelligible with other Kurdish dialects, is still a part of the greater Kurdish languages. As I mentioned, when people click on a template, they just want an overview of all languages spoken in that nation, and nothing else. If people want to know what dialects of Kurdish are spoken in Iran/Iraq, they click on "Kurdish language" on the template, and they will be further redirected from there. That's how the templates for languages have always been, and how it should stay.


 * Please consider my words.


 * Regards - LouisAragon (talk) 06:01, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

LouisAragon For an example not all dialects of Luri exist in Iraq, it should be exist in the templates as well which dialects (sub language) exist in this country. Mjbmr (talk) 07:42, 25 May 2015 (UTC)


 * They can simply click on the Luri language article and from there they will read what dialects are present there. Leave the template for that its supposed to be, please. - LouisAragon (talk) 07:51, 25 May 2015 (UTC)


 * LouisAragon There is nothing such as "it supposed to be" and we're not talking about what we could or what we can, we're talking about what it takes to increase the quality of a encyclopedia. Mjbmr (talk) 07:59, 25 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Yeah, and adding all dialects to a template for languages is simply not improving the quality of the encyclopedia. Readers don't want to see tons of different dialects in such a template. They look at the template to see what languages are spoken in the nation. Not whether Southern Kurdish, dialect of Kurdish, is spoken in Iran/Turkey or not. That's exactly what the respective article is for, when a person wants to know more about the language (and whether it perhaps has dialects) A template for languages is to give an overview of the language. Especially for nations that have tons of dialects, this is simply not appropriate in my opinion. Southern Kurdish, Northern Kurdish, etc, it's all still part of the Kurdish language, no matter whether it has that ISO code or not.
 * Look, if you vehemently want to insist in adding dialects to a language-template and giving therefore unnecessary importance to a niche that doesn't need it, as well as giving unneeded redundancy to a template, we can also bring this to the dispute resolution section on ANI. I believe you're trying to stick too much to every sentence Ethnologue states. Remember this is an independent encyclopaedia, and not something like an Ethnologue Encyclopaedia. Regards - LouisAragon (talk) 08:24, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Multiple accounts?
Please see Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring where your name has been mentioned. It would help us if you can say whether you have some connection to User:Zack90 who has been editing alongside you on the same language articles. It is unusual to see two editors whose interests are so closely aligned, and if this is one person operating two accounts, or two people who know each other in real life, it should stop. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 14:55, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
 * EdJohnston: That ain't right, do you see close edits between User:Kwamikagami and User:BarrelProof, and bringing racist material to English Wikipedia by emptying and messing into Iranian languages articles? keep pointing to essays as policies and warning people for what even they got involved. Mjbmr (talk) 15:14, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
 * It should be pretty obvious that Kwami and I are different people and are not coordinating with each other. See, for example, the discussions between us that you can find at User talk:Kwamikagami/Automated archive and Administrators' noticeboard/3RRArchive283 and Talk:Luri language. I don't understand the racism accusation, and I hope that you do not think either of us is personally making racist edits. The relationship between you and Zack90 seems less obvious. —BarrelProof (talk) 16:26, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Revoked rollbacker permission
Using the rollbacker permission to further a content dispute and/or to make reverts to good-faith edits are misuses of the permission. I've revoked the permission based on the following edits: Please review the rollback guideline. You are free to make a permission request to have it restored by another admin at a later date. I'd strongly suggest you avoid edit warring (e.g., by voluntarily adhering to WP:1RR) to demonstrate your trustworthiness not to repeat this behavior again.
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * good faith edit rollback
 * good faith edit rollback again

-- slakr \ talk / 10:15, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

Result of the AN3 complaint about Luri language
Please see Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. Your name is mentioned in the closure, since concerns have been raised about sockpuppetry. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 16:15, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry
I have blocked this account for 1 week for abusing multiple accounts (the sock Zack90 was blocked indefinitely). --Rschen7754 19:43, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

Tunisian Arabic
Dear User,

As you are one of the contributors to Tunisian Arabic. You are kindly asked to review the part about Domains of Use and adjust it directly or through comments in the talk page of Tunisian Arabic.

Yours Sincerely,

--Csisc (talk) 14:02, 1 July 2015 (UTC)