User talk:Sburke

 → → → Email me! ← ← ← Email me if you want to actually contact me– otherwise it might be weeks before I notice a message here, and I'll assume that you didn't actually want to contact me.



Pronunciation of people in the Book of Mormon
Before I or another editor starts adding pronunciations to the Book of Mormon people you have tagged, does this pronunciation guide follow the IPA format requested (or at least close enough for readers)? Thanks, 72Dino (talk) 14:42, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Okay, I have converted it to IPA and I am putting it in the entries, or: Some things don't have entries, they appear only in List_of_Book_of_Mormon_people or List_of_Book_of_Mormon_places or List_of_Book_of_Mormon_groups or Book_of_Mormon_weights_and_measures... Say, a neat project (a class project?) would be for someone to make stub entries for all these people/places that next to nothing is known about, other than their place in a geneology and their citation in Book Of Whatever. It's doable-- the number of these things isn't fourteen, but it isn't four hundred either.  Just an idea. — Sean M. Burke (talk) 06:54, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Okay, it's three weeks later, and I think I'm done... In the sense that for every item in this pronunciation guide, I have put its pronunciation somewhere: Where Wikipedia has a full entry on the item, I put its pronunciation there (e.g., Korihor).  Of the items without entries, I'll see them in Lineage of Ether and put the pronunciation there; otherwise I've put their pronunciation in List of Book of Mormon people or List of Book of Mormon places.  There may be a few exceptions to the rule that I've just described, but I think that that pretty much nails it. Note: the pronunciations are not cast in stone.  AT ALL. As to the quality of the use of IPA in the entries: they're not excellent as descriptions of what is heard, but they're just fine as instructions of what to say. (Long story short: improving them would be quite past the point of diminishing returns.  The changes would involve: pulling apart the American merger of [ɑː] vs [ɒ] ("father" vs "bother"); listening to pronunciations and noting which syllables are secondary-stressed vs completely unstressed, and turning many vowels into [ə]'s accordingly; especially in turning many/most [ʌ]'s into [ə]'s (but not all!).  Also, some people will argue over syllable boundaries, but English syllable boundaries are inherently arguable anyway.  And some people say I use [.] too much, to which my response is, has been, and ever shall be: "cry me a river!")  —Sean M. Burke (talk) 09:16, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 4
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Orontes River (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Draco and Axius


 * Aellope (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Xanthus


 * Naxos (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Dia


 * Parni (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Ochus

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 15:08, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 17
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Farquharson rifle, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages George Gibbs and John Farquharson (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:19, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Zurvanism pronunciations
Think it would just be [zɜrvənɪzm] in English, while only a very few would know or care too much about authentic ancient Persian pronunciation... AnonMoos (talk) 13:59, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 23
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited James Gould Cozzens, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Parallelism (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:20, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Well
"Parsons" is pronounced as written :). No-one much understands he fancy schmancy phonetic stuff, of course. Her forename is pronounced syllable by syllable. RayTayAh. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 23:57, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 25
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Livity (spiritual concept), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page I and I (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 00:55, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Pronunciations
You can't find a lot of these names in English dictionaries, so I use the traditional English pronunciation of Latin together with a Latin or Greek dictionary. I started the list of tagged articles alphabetically, but couldn't do them all because some of these names aren't even in the Latin and Greek dictionaries at Perseus, or at least not in any of the ones which indicate long vowels. (If you're not aware, the classical Greek alphabet was defective, as it frequently failed to indicate long α, ι, and υ, and long vowels determine where the stress goes in English, so you need a good dict to compensate.) BTW, if you have any priorities, let me know; I've got other things starting up, and probably will never get through all the articles you tagged. — kwami (talk) 04:58, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 5
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Plasticizer, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Solubility parameter (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:05, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Hugh Cook
I had no idea that he had passed away. That makes me very sad indeed.

Also - hello! —  Scott  •  talk  10:52, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

March 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=602087857 your edit] to WordStar may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 10:01, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
 * file. Merely clicking the link to the file will erroneously view the binary as plaintext.

June 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=613089568 your edit] to Urizen may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 03:09, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Blake's mythology|complex mythology]] of William Blake, Urizen{Pronunciation-needed} is the embodiment of conventional reason and law. He is usually

Nomination of David Maynard for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article David Maynard is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/David Maynard until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Transcendence (talk) 22:22, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 22
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Blog, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Diaryland. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:44, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:55, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

RFC notice
As someone interested in the, I thought I'd let you know an RFC has been started over reliable sources. Please join in Talk:List_of_ministers_of_the_Universal_Life_Church. Me-123567-Me (talk) 23:22, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Pronunciation
We do not generally put pronunciation in the lead but rather place it in the infobox disease or infobox drug. Therefore removed the tags. Best Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 02:39, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Classicists general pronunciations
There is no such thing as a standardised Classicist pronunciation, and no-one on earth is going to go through all those hundreds of articles you have tagged and make such a pronunciation up for you. We just bumble around like everyone else when we come across a word like "Ogyges", and use whatever pronunciation we think will be best communicable to the Classicist we are talking to: as a Classicist, I can assure you of this in the clearest terms. Could you please just undo all those edits and remove those unsightly tags? Dionysodorus (talk) 12:58, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Hm, wait... —Sburke (talk) 13:09, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
 * While you're waiting, I should add that people have occasionally published guidelines for this kind of thing, e.g. for actors acting out their translations of Greek tragedies, or for undergraduates; but they differ considerably over the subtler points and no-one really pays the slightest attention to them. Dionysodorus (talk) 13:17, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
 * A meta-issue, toward a common notation for discussing things... Are you passably conversant in the IPA? I don't want to just presume, since some fields use other/older systems. All the best, -Sburke (talk) 14:04, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I am conversant with the IPA. But that is beside the point: the fact is that there is no standardised pronunciation for these words used by Classicists. Dionysodorus (talk) 14:41, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Sorry to pester, but is there any way you could arrange for the removal of those tags, please? They are rather ugly, and very unlikely to result in any benefit to any of the pages, since no standardised pronunciation exists in most cases. Dionysodorus (talk) 23:16, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Really the zeroeth problem is that we're discussing different things, because I poorly expressed myself: What I mean by flagging the entries is that they would benefit from having the conventional traditional, anglicized pronunciation; for that purpose, I have flagged a lot of entries over the years, and users like Kwamikagami, The Man in Question, and Omnipaedista have supplied pronunciation in entries like, lessee,... Thurii, Hilaria, Theano, Asterion, Halirrhothius, Aeëtes, Napaeae, Thersander, Damasithymus, Neleides, Telamon, Peleus, Enarete, Aelia Eudocia, Flavius Aetius, Gaius Julius Hyginus, Ianira, Meliboea, Amphitrite, Hesione, Procris, Zeuxo, Ananke, Moirai, Ascalaphus,... my sentimental favorite Rhadamanthus,... and so on... —Sburke (talk) 10:06, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
 * But the fact is, although Kwamikagami, The Man in Question, and Omnipaedista are welcome to disagree with me, that all such pronunciations are total nonsense. There is no single standard traditional anglicised pronunciation for many, if not most, of the Greek words you have tagged. Therefore the tags are unhelpful.
 * I have said this three times or so, and you have not yet addressed my point: do you not understand what I am saying? Dionysodorus (talk) 14:02, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I also suspect most of these pronunciations contravene sourcing guidelines, and could be removed under WP:USI. For instance, The Man in Question, what is your source for thinking that Hyginus, when anglicised, is pronounced hi-JAI-nus? I'm a Classicist and I've always pronounced it HAI-ji-nus or HAI-gi-nus depending on what mood I'm in. Dionysodorus (talk) 19:31, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

The stress placement would, of course, depend on whether the i was long or short. For that all we need is to look him up on Perseus, but I would always recommend indicating vowel length for Latin names on WP, and also Greek names since the Greek alphabet is defective. As for "ji" vs "gi", there are various ways that people attempt to approximate the Latin pronunciation, but the assimilated, anglicized pronunciation, what we would expect if Hyginus were a character in Shakespeare, would be with "ji". Then there's the question of trisyllabic laxing.

The guidelines you speak of have been published for centuries. Their rules are well established in the language, even if many Classicists prefer something closer to what the think the Latin or Greek sounded like, similar to the debate over Church Latin. The fully anglicized pronunciation is the most useful to the reader. They can always choose a pronunciation somewhere between that and the Latin or Greek if they choose. That's why in our articles on astronomical bodies we add "or as in Latin/Greek XXX", to clarify that there isn't just one "correct" pronunciation. — kwami (talk) 19:40, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
 * So where are the guidelines you're working from, that have been published for centuries and are well-established? Link me to them please, show me some reliable sources saying they are well-established and not just some guy's idea of how to anglicise things, and tell me how to pronounce Ogyges based on them. I don't believe such a thing exists. Dionysodorus (talk) 20:41, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
 * In fact, there is such a thing is standard classicist pronunciation, but unfortunately the name is a bit misleading. It's not some pronunciation a bunch of classicists came up with somewhere at some time, and it did not originate with classicists: It is the result of natural sound change into modern English when words began being borrowed en masse from Latin (and via Latin from Greek) during the Middle English era. Historically, such pronunciation was the only pronunciation (in English), but as the sound rules of English continued to change (and became diluted by extensive borrowing from other languages operating under entirely different rules), the classical pronunciation became less and less intuitive (though never counterintuitive), so now we call it "classicist", because classicists are more likely to be aware of the pronunciations, whereas anyone just picking up a book might be inclined to give it a hyper-foreign pronunciation. In the simplest sense, classicist pronunciation is essentially Latin accentuation within the confines of English pronunciation. The rules are as follows: The antepenultimate syllable receives the primary stress unless the penultimate syllable is long in the original language (either a long vowel or a long consonant; i.e. Alcib i ades, Ju piter, O nes imus, Her acles vs. Aug ust us, Cal yp so, Mil e tus, Me an der; this is an English synthesis of a much older Latin rule); this one's more complicated, but normally (unless tradition dictates otherwise) the English long vowels (except for u /uː/) only remain long in the penultimate syllable and when there is no long consonant (i.e. Eur o pa, Anton i nus, Fort u na, Dion y sus, but also L u cifer); otherwise they are short (i.e. S a gittarius, M e nelaus, Heph ae stus, Ap o llo) unless they are followed by a vowel instead of a consonant (i.e. Call i ope, Hebr a ica; this is the modern outcome of a Middle English rule); this rule is further refined in that -aC a  is traditionally pronounced short, not long (i.e. d a ta, Indi a na vs. d a tum, Syl va nus), and -VCia, -VCius, -VCium, etc. are pronounced long, not short, unless V is an i or y ( A sia, Theo do sius, Saturn a lia, Hyp a tia, Rom a nia, Conf u cius, cr a nium, Polyn e sia, but Arm i nius, mil i tia, Bith y nia); c and g are always pronounced soft before e, i, y, ae, eu, or oe (i.e. Ce tus, Cae sar, Pana cae a, Ci r ce, Coe lus, Pan gae a, Hy gi ea, Ae gy ptus; this is an English synthesis of a Late Latin rule); ch is always pronounced /k/ (i.e. Ch aron, Telema ch us; this is a Late Latin sound development); double vowels are pronounced separately where they were pronounced separately in their original language, Latin or Greek (i.e. Antin ou s, Archel au s); double vowels are pronounced as one sound where they were pronounced together in their original language (Z eu s, Cr oe sus); initial consonant clusters whose original pronunciations are foreign to English (gn-, cn-, chth-, ps-, pt-, pn-, etc.) are simplified to their final phoneme (i.e. Gn ostic, Cn ossos, chth onic, Ps yche, pt erodactyl, pn eumonia); and the rest is probably intuitive. The rules on the pronunciation of -siV-, -tiV-, and -ciV- differ somewhat between American and British English; traditions differ on whether final -on should be /-ən/ (i.e. Jas on , Trit on , gorg on , Ori on ) or /-ɒn/ (Agamemn on ? Pyth on ? Marath on ?); initial unstressed vowels in open syllables are typically pronounced long ( O nesimus, T i berius, R o mania vs. o nomatopoeia, L i banus, R o mulus), but some people prefer to say them short and unstressed. Certain words have gained a strong traditional mispronunciation, like Uranus (which should technically be /ˈjʊrənəs/, not /jʊˈreɪnəs/), which has been mistakenly identified with other words ending in long Latin -ānus (like Africanus); and Perseus (which should technically be /ˈpɜrˌs(j)uːs/, not /ˈpɜrsiəs/); you can see how dictionaries have dealt with such issues: . For names that are regularly respelled in English (Neptune, Mercury, Cupid over Neptunus, Mercurius, Cupido), which only include well known names, traditional pronunciations of course apply. As for the name "Hyginus" specifically, here is a source on the length of the i: If the i'' were short, however, the pronunciation would be /ˈhɪdʒɨnəs/, not /ˈhaɪdʒɨnəs/. — the Man in Question  (in question)  19:54, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, but what's to say that you haven't just made that all up? I mean, if what you've said isn't to be considered your own WP:SYNTHESIS from the principles you think are maintained by various dictionary entries, then we need multiple reliable source that agree on all that. I still maintain that, except for the most famous names (the sorts of ones that appear in English dictionaries), standardised Anglicised pronunciations have no genuine normative status - especially in Greek (you may have a point in Latin). Dionysodorus (talk) 22:35, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I got some sources on this now. Authoritatives, scanned. ϗ ὀχαλά uploading tonight. —Sburke (talk) 00:11, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the delay. I've been surfing the web! and have found better (later/alternate) versions of one of my sources, at Google Books.  (Google Books is great, but one thing nobody has ever accused them of is careful catalogueing.  For one particular author of interest, I've found at least five different and *uncrossreferenced* ways that Google Books has been representing his name.) And in my own collection, I've found even more things I'm razoring out and scanning now. (There's an odd dilemma in disassembling an old book. On the one hand, "Don't touch it!— If I'm careful with it, it can last another fifty years, easily!" On the other hand, "what's the point of a book if you can barely touch the thing?" In any case, Worldcat-etc show that this book is widely held, so it's not like I've got foulpapers of the Codex Seraphinianus and spilling Mountain Dew on them and leaving them out in the rain!) I digress but resume scanning. —Sburke (talk) 03:49, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
 * There's no need to scan stuff for my benefit - I live close to a record library anyway, and I can look your sources up if you tell me the titles and page numbers. But if the only book you can find to back up your pronunciation system is so ancient you have to cut the pages, that might be a problem. Can't you find a more recent source? Books that are as old as that tend to be obsolete, and Wikipedia shouldn't be adopting pronunciation standards that no-one has adopted since the nineteenth century, you know. Dionysodorus (talk) 04:17, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
 * In addition, WP:SYNTHESIS exists so that, as you said, I haven't just made something up with false connections. But I have done no such thing—in my sphere of experience, these rules are widely (though not unfailingly) understood and accepted. Whether or not a comprehensive pamphlet or book on the matter can be found outside the rather obvious books that enumerate pronunciations and the few pieces that have been written on common mispronunciations of specific words, that would make it fall under SYNTH is not a rigid rule, SYNTH is not just any synthesis, and SYNTH is not unpublishably unoriginal, because this is the genuine system. As you said, it is not "for my benefit" (I use "my" generally to mean any one individual); as the SYNTH policy says, "Never use a policy in such a way that the net effect will be to stop people from improving an article." These pronunciations are not obsolete, as I showed in a few cited modern sources, but to which I can cite hundreds of examples if I really must; they are "real", inasmuch as I didn't make them up and they are widely and readily used (as far as the literature is concerned, look up the pronunciation of any such word in a dictionary, and you will see these rules followed); they are historically grounded; they are linguistically grounded; they are systematic; and they provide accessibility to the otherwise daunting task of taking what's on the page off the page and into the real world, by allowing an English speaker actually to be able to say it. — the Man in Question (in question)  21:03, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia works on the basis of reliable sources, not on the basis of your sphere of experience or your extrapolation from the pronunciation of words like Uranus. Giving a prescriptive pronunciation guide is not improving the article if that pronunciation is essentially arbitrary, or at least has no genuine prescriptive value. If your system had any authority, it would be attested in reliable sources as a system, not just as hundreds of scattered entries in dictionaries between which you feel entitled to join the dots. Can you attest a few such reliable sources with prescriptive force, or not? If not, then this is no foundation on which to build an entire encyclopedia's pronunciation guides. Dionysodorus (talk) 13:04, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
 * But this is to some extent a pointless discussion: the point is, I am glad that User:Sburke has stopped adding pronunciation tags, at my request. I have nothing against people adding pronunciations to Classical names, when standard pronunciations do exist, and are e.g. attested independently in dictionaries. But there is no warrant for tagging Classical articles on the basis that they all ought to have pronunciation guides, when in some cases such guides will be highly debatable. Given this, I may well at some point go through those articles when I have time and remove the tags; and I think future pronunciations should be added on a discretionary basis, as they are attested, but not tagged. Dionysodorus (talk) 13:11, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi guys! Yup, I've been away for a while. But I've made a list of some references like we've been talking about in the meantime: "Resources on Anglicized Classical Pronunciations", a list which expands on the links that the Man in Question gave us. —Sburke (talk) 10:46, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Phonetics request
Hi. I noticed the recent work you did in Dhaka. Can you add phonetics in Bengal as well? Would be of great help to the article. Cheers--Vaza12 (talk) 11:04, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi Vaza! I'm sorry, but what I managed to add pretty much maxed out my abilities with Subcontinent names. But some other folks seem to leap in pretty well with this stuff! —Sburke (talk) 01:43, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Rosaceae and other plant families
There is apparently no generally agreed pronunciation for Rosaceae (and other plant families) - see discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Plants. Lavateraguy (talk) 09:59, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Wow, I had no idea there is— or even could be!— so much open variance on the issue. In my (narrow) botanical education, I had only heard /-eɪ.siː.iː/, and I assumed that it was part of larger patterns with an only minor degree of variation (except when a personal name is involved, at which point my copy of Stearn's Botanical Latin makes pretty clear that it's every man for himself... imagine a "Burkeceae", etc).  OK, I've gone and reverted the edits.  Thanks for the note, and I'm sorry for the bother (and for the delay in writing you this response). —Sburke (talk) 23:28, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

grammar point
Hi dear dude Could please tell me what's the difference between "have to" and "gonna have to"? thanks Alborzagros (talk) 11:08, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
 * It's neat that you ask! I've just recently been thinking about constructs like that. In theory, "gonna have to" is simply a future form (a "going-to future" of "have to"... so, that's the literal difference that you can see in, for example, "Well, I don't have to leave now, I'm gonna have to leave in ten minutes." But in practice, "I'm going to have to" and "I have to" might end up differing only in the same way that people say "I would like..." when they mean "I want...", namely: in each case, the extra complexity is not meant to be taken literally-- just a figure of speech. I have a vague feeling that "I'm going to have to" and "I'll have to" have some minor differences in tone and immediacy, but maybe just in the ways discussed in the article: "going-to future". —Sburke (talk) 01:46, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Jambon-beurre for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jambon-beurre is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Jambon-beurre until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. KDS4444 (talk) 23:51, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Challenge project
Hi, would you like to add Balık ekmek (and other similar future articles) to the list in The 1000 Challenge (Turkey) ? Cheers.

Che Güevara listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Che Güevara. Since you had some involvement with the Che Güevara redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. — the Man in Question (in question)  04:29, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

"Esrom (Book of Mormon))" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Esrom (Book of Mormon)) and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 7 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 17:14, 7 June 2022 (UTC)