User talk:Sechlainn

Windows 10
That change is already mentioned under removed features, with a more technical explanation:

"While all Windows 10 editions include fonts that provide broad language support, some fonts for Middle Eastern and East Asian languages (Arabic, Chinese, Hindi, Japanese, Korean, etc.) are no longer included with the standard installation to reduce storage space used, but are available without charge as optional font packages. When software invokes text in languages other than those for which the system is configured and does not use the Windows font fallback mechanisms designed always to display legible glyphs, Windows displays unsupported characters as a default 'not defined' glyph, a square or rectangular box, or a box with a dot, question mark or 'x' inside."

ViperSnake151  Talk  02:05, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

September 2016
Hello, I'm ViperSnake151. I noticed that you made a change to multiple articles, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. ViperSnake151  Talk  02:08, 29 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Here is the evidence:


 * Balinese alphabet (ᬅᬓ᭄ᬱᬭᬩᬮᬶ)
 * Batak alphabet (ᯘᯮᯮᯒᯖ᯲ ᯅᯖᯂ᯲, also used for the Karo, Simalungun, Pakpak and Angkola-Mandailing languages)
 * Baybayin script (ᜊᜌ᜔ᜊᜌᜒᜈ᜔)
 * Chakma script (𑄇𑄳𑄡𑄈𑄳𑄡 𑄉𑄳𑄡)
 * Hanunó'o alphabet (ᜱᜨᜳᜨᜳᜢ)
 * Limbu script (ᤔᤠᤱᤜᤢᤵ)
 * Pollard script (𖼀𖼁𖼂𖼃𖼄𖼅𖼆𖼇)
 * Saurashtra script (ꢱꣃꢬꢯ꣄ꢡ꣄ꢬ)
 * Sharada script (𑆐𑆑𑆒𑆓𑆔𑆕𑆖𑆗𑆘)
 * Sundanese script (ᮃᮊ᮪ᮞᮛ ᮞᮥᮔ᮪ᮓ)
 * Sylheti Nagari (ꠍꠤꠟꠐꠤ ꠘꠣꠉꠞꠤ)
 * Tai Tham alphabet (ᨲ᩠ᩅᩫᨾᩮᩥᩬᨦ)

If all that you can see in the bracketed text are square boxes then the point has been proved and hence the claims of the inability to see the text are verified. Even if there are currently no online sources stating that this is the case, this factual evidence still cannot be denied. --Sechlainn (talk) 02:28, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
 * And that makes it original research, which is never allowed on Wikipedia. ViperSnake151   Talk  02:45, 29 September 2016 (UTC)