User talk:Sweyn78/Archive 1

Nomination of International Phonetic Alphabet/Tables for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article International Phonetic Alphabet/Tables 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/International Phonetic Alphabet/Tables 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. Nardog (talk) 16:22, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

International Phonetic Alphabet
Hello,

I have written on this topic's Talk page, as I am concerned about what your changes to the article have achieved. It may be that the editing you have done has improved the article, but it's impossible for me to tell from looking at the edits. It would have been helpful if you had first written on the Talk page about what you proposed to do. I'm afraid that, not being very adept at WP editing, my attempt to copy you into my comment didn't work. I should make it clear, as a sort of declaration of interest, that I have been closely connected with the International Phonetic Association for fifty years, and I care very much about preserving the integrity of the IPA system. RoachPeter (talk) 16:47, 5 September 2017 (UTC)


 * I hope I haven't caused any trouble. This was my first major edit to Wikipedia (although I have been using MediaWiki markup for 7 years now, and am also a junior web developer), and I spent two entire days trying to get everything just right.  Maybe I don't understand how things are done here;  I figured you just rolled up your sleeves and got to work improving things.
 * Wikipedia was a huge help to me when I first started getting into Linguistics 7 years ago. I wanted to give something back to it.  I love phonetics, but the phonetics templates were poorly written, visually inconsistent with the rest of Wikipedia, and some even had incorrect information (Template:IPA chart/table co-articulated consonants, for example, had the alveolo-palatal fricatives listed as co-articulated;  Template:Consonants, on the other hand, not only had a more complete listing, but did not have this error (although it *did* have an error of its own:  /ɧ/ was listed as an occlusive).).  I saw also that there was an enormous reduplication of effort, with every table at Template:IPA chart being separately implemented at Template:Consonants.
 * So, I got to work. I rewrote everything from scratch, making sure to preserve the template variables, such as making it possible to hide non-IPA.  I went through the articles of every sound in the various tables, and verified that it was phonemic in at least one language (or that it at least had significant para/extra-linguistic use), and that it was correctly written.  The retroflex clicks, for example, were unnecessarily using a non-IPA symbol in Template:IPA chart/table non-pulmonic consonants.  And now, instead of having to edit two completely different templates whenever something needs changing, everything can be changed at one place, and propogated throughout the site.
 * The templates I made are a huge improvement over the originals in design and coding, and are far more easily extensible. The originals were littered with invalid CSS (such as "width" parameters being placed in "style=" instead of on their own).  The vowel chart didn't even line up with the heights!  The originals were also unminified, and Template:Consonants wasn't even using Template:IPA link.
 * I'm happy to fix whatever problems there may be with the templates I wrote, but they are absolutely an improvement, and the user-facing changes are almost entirely cosmetic.
 * 20:21, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello again, and thanks for your reply. I seem to have lost my first attempt at writing back to you. I want to stress that I did not say that your changes were incorrect, and accepted that they may well have improved things in this article. My objection (shared by some other editors, it seems) is that you made some major changes to the article without first using the Talk page to let users know what you were proposing to do. For someone as unskilled as me, looking at the raw WP editing record gives no possibility of understanding what the changes amount to. Please note that I did not revert your work. That was what I proposed to do if it was not possible to get a summary of the proposed changes on the Talk page so that users could decide if they were happy with the proposals.
 * Unfortunately I am going away on holiday tomorrow and will only have a mobile phone to access WP. I hope that while I am away this can be resolved: an explanation of your work (along the lines of what you just wrote to me) for readers to understand what you are changing, and hopefully a reinstatement of the changes you made if nobody has any reservations. RoachPeter (talk) 20:50, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I hope your holiday goes well. I'm sorry if I offended with my comment.  I did not realize the importance of the Talk Page on Wikipedia.  I'd be happy to show you how the View History section works, if you'd like.  A good way to compare the edits, is to click on the dates;  it will bring you to the page as it was at that time.  You can then compare the code (it even has a proper diff tool) and visuals of the different versions.  Here are links to the comparisons:
 * Pulmonic consonants | Original | Revised
 * Non-pulmonic consonants | Original | Revised
 * Co-articulated consonants | Original | Revised
 * Vowels | Original | Revised
 * Also, you can see several edits listed in the View History page. I had several more edits with several more descriptions than just "Many section had the wrong charts" (which unfortunately had a typo in it).
 * 21:21, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Any further discussion of this topic should be placed under Talk:International Phonetic Alphabet so that more people can see and participate. Thanks. Nardog (talk) 13:48, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

Signature
Please do not use a template in your signature. There's even a warning on the very preferences page. Please replace it with. Nardog (talk) 08:21, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Apologies! I'll make that change immediately.    20:07, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I've now read the reasoning behind not transcluding templatic signatures. I do have a question, though -- does transcluding Template:IPA violate the rules?  What about non-signature template transclusions on talk pages?  How are the two different?    21:19, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Ping
Regarding this edit, the re template (and the ping one) is just used to get your attention outside of your talk page, there's nothing more to it (unless your post contains replies to multiple users). Just a friendly advice. Mr KEBAB (talk) 15:32, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you; that's good to know.    02:56, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
 * No problem. Thanks for all the updates (and fixes) by the way. I appreciate them, even though I don't reply to your comments. Eventually, though, I will. Mr KEBAB (talk) 01:33, 17 September 2017 (UTC)