Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Language/2013 June 19

= June 19 =

"All your data is belong to us"
When a German says that, why is he making this mistake? How would it be in German? OsmanRF34 (talk) 00:02, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Maybe AYBABTU — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.101.52.130 (talk) 00:08, 19 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Yes, it's nothing to do with German. It's the (broken) English meme that the preceding poster linked to. --ColinFine (talk) 07:57, 19 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Plenty of English-speakers (who presumably haven't studied Latin) use data as singular. —Tamfang (talk) 03:13, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Dock of the Bay
I have always been puzzled by the song title "(Sittin' On) The Dock of the Bay". What exactly is the "dock of the bay"? Does it simply mean a dock (i.e. place for ships to moor) located in a bay (inlet of the sea)? If so, is "dock of the bay" normal English for such a meaning? 81.159.109.26 (talk) 00:25, 19 June 2013 (UTC)


 * I'd have the same interpretation as you, but for my (Midwestern American) dialect I'd prefer on the bay (or maybe in the bay). Lsfreak (talk) 01:04, 19 June 2013 (UTC)


 * In American vernacular, the (nautically incorrect) word "dock" can be used to mean "pier" or "wharf". See Dock (maritime) which explains this usage.  Strictly speaking, the proper definition of "dock" is "the place where the floaty things park" and is thus in the water itself, while the dry wooden place where people walk to get to the floaty things are either a "pier" (perpendicular to the land) or a "wharf" (parallel to the land).  Otis Reading, not being a sailor, but being American, is using the word dock to mean a a man-made seaside structure.  He's sitting on the edge of said structure, perhaps dangling his feet in the water, and enjoying the scenery.  Wasting time.  -- Jayron  32  01:28, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * In that meaning, does "of" seem like the correct preposition to you? 81.159.109.26 (talk) 01:32, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Chances are it fit the meter better. Grammar gets thrown out the window when poetics are involved. Mingmingla (talk) 02:48, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * However, any single-syllable preposition would fit the meter equally well. 86.160.222.45 (talk) 03:16, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Although the more correct by or on would be heavier than ǝ. —Tamfang (talk) 03:15, 20 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Jayron, there's a place in England called Reading, which people unfamiliar with it tend to pronounce like the verb "reading". It is in fact pronounced "redding". Across the pond, Otis Redding was, as you say, an American, and if he had spelt his name Reading, it's likely people would have called him Otis "reeding".  But they never have, in my experience.  --   Jack of Oz   [Talk]  05:22, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * There is likewise a Reading, Pennsylvania, presumably named for Reading, England, and for which the Reading Railroad was presumably named, and which lives on as a square in Monopoly (game). And the word "read" by itself can be pronounced both "reed" and "red". And while "lead" can be pronounced both "leed" and "led"... and so on. Meanwhile, "Otis" is usually spelled "Otis" but can also be "Ottis", but that's typically pronounced like "oat" rather than "ott". Then there was Dock Ellis, who was pierless. The endless quirks of English. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 11:21, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I can soon fix that. I hereby coin the word "quirksend" (sounds like a Kiwi saying "quicksand").  :) --   Jack of Oz   [Talk]  11:45, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

$200 is collected
MOS:YOU suggests "When Go is passed, $200 is corrected" to avoid the second person. But shouldn't it be "$200 are collected"? Or should I just be bold? -- Ypnypn (talk) 00:25, 19 June 2013 (UTC)


 * No, "is" is correct. Amounts of money are normally viewed as singular quantities (as are lengths of time ("three hours is a long time"), distances ("five miles is a long way"), etc.). You mean "collected", by the way... 81.159.109.26 (talk) 00:36, 19 June 2013 (UTC)


 * That's interesting... (Thanks for your collection.) -- Ypnypn (talk) 00:45, 19 June 2013 (UTC)


 * But Ypnypn, I've just noticed on your talk page that you are a native English speaker (I assumed you weren't when I answered). Does "$200 is collected" not sound correct to you? 81.159.109.26 (talk) 00:57, 19 June 2013 (UTC)


 * In text, when the $ symbol is used instead of "dollars", is seems right. But how about "Sixteen trillion dollars is owed by the American government"? Or "Twenty-six miles is run in a marathon"? These don't sound correct at all. (Of course, neither does the word coolly.} -- Ypnypn (talk) 01:33, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * You wouldn't say "the amount are" or "the distance are". ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:45, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * But that's because the verb follows the subject. Take "The purchase was two apples" vs. "Two apples were purchased". -- Ypnypn (talk) 02:18, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * IMO "two apples were purchased" because two apples are seen as two discrete items, but "two dollars was owed" because we focus on the overall quantity, or amount, rather than the fact that it is two items, each of which is a dollar. "The purchase was two apples" is different because the verb subject has changed to an indisputably singular noun. 81.159.109.26 (talk) 02:26, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * The cost was two dollars vs. The cost were two dollars. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 03:34, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Two dollars was the cost. Three corners has my hat. Card Zero  (talk) 13:13, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * To me "Two hundred dollars were collected" is possible, but strongly suggests that what changed hands was a stack of one dollar bills. --ColinFine (talk) 08:02, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Agreed. (As a side note, Bugs, "the cost was two dollars" has to use a singular verb, since the subject of the sentence is "cost" which is singular; the "two dollars" doesn't enter into it.) Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 13:50, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

No Expressions for God in Chinese?
Is it true that Chinese has no expressions for God and creation? --Omidinist (talk) 03:35, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Google Translate gives some options. Have you tried there? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 04:14, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * That simple! The guy is a philosopher who is making that claim. He says This is precisely why the missionaries were unable to translate into Chinese the first verse of the Pentateuch, because that language has no expressions for God and creation…. --Omidinist (talk) 04:39, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I am pretty sure that the sentence "the missionaries were unable to translate into Chinese the first verse of the Pentateuch, because that language has no expressions for God and creation…" is a ridiculous claim. They may have found it hard and had to use a much longer sentence, but surely they were not "unable". "The only omnipotent being" can be used to replace the word God and "make" can be used to mean create, even though there must be a better equivalent for create, you can't claim that the concept of make doesn't have an equivalent in Chinese. --Lgriot (talk) 07:40, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Whether it is a ridculous claim rather depends on whether "unable" refers to the missionaries' inadequacy in the Chinese language or to supposed shortcomings in the language itself. 86.160.222.45 (talk) 11:51, 19 June 2013 (UTC) Sorry, ignore my comment, I didn't read it properly. 86.160.222.45 (talk) 12:36, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Well you kind of have a point, if they were not good in Chinese, they indeed might be "unable". But then, they would not try to translate, they would have other concerns, like survival in China without being able to communicate with the locals.--Lgriot (talk) 14:04, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Bearing in mind there is not a clear distinction in English (apart from the spelling with a capital letter) between God "the only supreme being" and god "one of supernatural spirits or beings", and the word creation is not originally English by itself, well, thus English also has (or at least had) "no expressions for God and creation". :) --Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk) 10:12, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Lüboslóv Yęzýkin is right. Even in Chinese 神 can mean either 'god' or 'spirit'. However, surely, they could come up with a phrase meaning 'the highest/supreme god'.  KägeTorä - (影虎)  ( TALK )  12:06, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Maybe he is talking about a single word for God (with capital g) which is absent in Chinese? And Creation in Abrahamic sense? Omidinist (talk) 13:54, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * "Creation" in all senses, including the Abrahamic sense, is just "making stuff", I don't see why it would be impossible to translate it in any language, especially not in a culture that has an industrious history of making stuff all the time. The method of making the universe is quite different from the human method, I acknowledge that, but that method is not described in the first verse, therefore I don't see why "create" is suitable in English, but the Chinese equivalent wouldn't be --Lgriot (talk) 14:12, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Chinese has plenty of words referring to deities and the divine, but when Westerners wanted to express their religion in the Chinese language, they didn't really find a term which clearly referred to an omnipotent monotheistic God. Protestants and Catholics came up with different semi-stopgap solutions, which gave some Chinese-speakers the idea that Protestants and Catholics did not worship the same god. For further information, see Chinese terms for God... -- AnonMoos (talk) 14:19, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for all comments, and thank you AnonMoos. The very first paragraph of that article explains the whole mess. Omidinist (talk) 15:23, 19 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Both words ("God" and "creation") are used in Colossians 1:15, and both words are used in Revelation 3:14. Each of those external pages has a Simplified Chinese version in the seventh place in the first column.  That website does not include the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures used by Jehovah's Witnesses, but you can see those verses on their website at http://m.wol.jw.org/zh-Hans/wol/b/r23/lp-chs/51/1 (Colossians 1) and http://m.wol.jw.org/zh-Hans/wol/b/r23/lp-chs/66/3 (Revelation 3) in Simplified Chinese, and at http://m.wol.jw.org/zh-Hant/wol/b/r24/lp-ch/50/1 (Colossians 1) and http://m.wol.jw.org/zh-Hant/wol/b/r24/lp-ch/66/3 (Revelation 3) in Traditional Chinese.
 * —Wavelength (talk) 15:44, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * As those sources show, Chinese certainly has a verb meaning "to create". It is 创造 （simplified) [chuàngzào (pinyin)]. According to the most common Chinese story of creation, a being called Pangu created the world, but Pangu is not the omnipotent God to Chinese.  The merging of creator and God into one entity would have been alien to non-Muslim Chinese when the first western Christian missionaries arrived.  Marco polo (talk) 15:53, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Wavelength, can you inform me (as a non-Chinese-speaker) how the Watchtower Society renders LORD/YHWH/Jehovah into Chinese? Does it use the term listed as sounding most like 'Jehovah', or something else? Thanks. AlexTiefling (talk) 15:56, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * My knowledge of Chinese is very limited (I found the book of Colossians in the "index" by counting from Matthew), so I chose a verse where I know that the divine name occurs twice consecutively, namely, Exodus 34:6. You can see the English version at http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/b/r1/lp-e/2/34.  At http://m.wol.jw.org/zh-Hant/wol/b/r24/lp-ch/2/34, it is easy to find "耶和華".  After I found that, I was able to use the search function to find the article about "耶和華" at http://m.wol.jw.org/zh-Hant/wol/d/r24/lp-ch/1200002391.  That is Traditional Chinese.  For Simplified Chinese, Exodus 34 is at http://m.wol.jw.org/zh-Hans/wol/b/r23/lp-chs/2/34, where it is easy to find "耶和华".  There is an article about "耶和华" at http://m.wol.jw.org/zh-Hans/wol/d/r23/lp-chs/1200002391.  The English version of that article is at http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200002391.
 * —Wavelength (talk) 16:59, 19 June 2013 (UTC) and 17:48, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * The English Wikipedia article "Jehovah" has an interlanguage link to the Traditional Chinese article zh:耶和華 and an interlanguage link to zh-yue:耶和華, where "zh-yue" apparently means "Yue Chinese". Wiktionary translates Jehovah to Traditional Chinese 耶和華 and Simplified Chinese 耶和华.  The components are explained at 耶 and 和 and 華 and 华.
 * —Wavelength (talk) 18:29, 19 June 2013 (UTC) and 22:11, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Anonmoos has a point there. Christianity in the Far East is quite complex. I had students who went to a 'christian school', and when I told them my family was catholic, they insisted that catholicism wasn't christian, and yet they worshipped the Pope. Most of them really don't have a clue, to be honest.  KägeTorä - (影虎)  ( TALK )  17:52, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * That's because of a confused translation: Christianity and Protestantism can be translated into Chinese (and I expect, some other East Asian languages) with the same word -- as I understand it, originally the work of Protestant missionaries. This has resulted in a distinction in general understandings of these denominations between Catholicism on the one hand (in Mandarin Chinese: tianzhujiao - "the religion of the lord of heaven"), and Protestantism or Christianity on the other hand (in Mandarin Chinese: jidujiao - "the religion of Christ"). It's just a matter of semantics, though, I'm pretty sure most people will understand that the two sects share common features, they just don't have a word to describe them together because to them the "the religion of Christ" means only Protestant Christianity.
 * (For people who are more aware of the nuances, they would usually use jidujiao (the religion of Christ) to mean Christianity as a whole, and xinjiao (the new religion) to mean Protestantism. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 16:45, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Exactly. Unfortunately, the reciprocal is true. Most people in the UK think Nirvana is a band whose singer shot himself. However, even in the Far East, people want this little father figure to help them. Why can't people just sort their own fucking lives out?  KägeTorä - (影虎)  ( TALK )  01:19, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

ch?
Hello. I was recently playing Scrabble® on Facebook, and my opponent played the two-letter word "ch". The word list attached to the game says it is valid, but I can't find it in the online Scrabble® dictionary, nor in any other dictionary. Is it really a word? If not, why is it on the game's word list? → Michael J Ⓣ Ⓒ Ⓜ 14:43, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * The Chambers Dictionary (or at least the iPhone app version), which is used to be the usual arbiter for Scrabble words in the UK, lists 'ch', with definition: '(SW Eng dialect; obsolete) A short form of the first person singular pronoun ich, always fused with the verb, as cham I am, chave I have, chill I will.' So it's not really a word in its own right, but presumably it's accepted as it appears as a headword in Chambers. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 15:01, 19 June 2013 (UTC)


 * First of all you need to know that there are two official word lists for Scrabble, OWL2 (formerly known as TWL) and SOWPODS. OWL2 is used in competitions in North America, whilst SOWPODS is used in Britain and internationally (sometimes under the name OSWI). Ch is only found in SOWPODS and not OWL2. This gives us a lead for the definition, since it's obviously therefore a word found in Britain and not the US. This forum post suggests that the word is an obsolete dialect form of 'I' from south-west England, deriving from the custom of using 'Ich' (as in modern German) for the first person singular pronoun. This was shortened to simply 'ch'. Here is a paper referring to the area around the River Parrett as 'the land of Utch', and noting that "Some twenty years later, in 1897, reviewing the situation in the same area, he stated that, though surviving in the locality, utch was now “worn down to a mere faint ch”". There's also a quote from Thomas Hardy showing that German pronouns were used in the West Country around his time. - Cucumber Mike (talk) 15:04, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Hmm. I may have got the information about the names of the Scrabble dictionaries wrong. I've certainly linked the wrong article for OWL2. I'm not a Scrabble player, so I was going off the info here. Maybe someone else can help me straighten out the mess. - Cucumber Mike (talk) 15:06, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * It's at Official Tournament and Club Word List. I think OWL2 needs to be a disambiguation page, not a redirect. I've now made that change; somebody tell me if I've done it wrong. Card Zero  (talk) 17:18, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Ch regret to inform you that you've done it wrong. One bluelink per entry. Off to dab purgatory for you. Clarityfiend (talk) 21:32, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

German Translation!
My girlfriend has given me a note in German (which I don't speak/read/write, but she DOES) and I have no idea what it says. I'm sure it's very nice and thoughtful, but....yeah. Normally for her one sentence things I can struggle through google translate. No such luck here, it's too long and google loses all meaning.

Da steh ich und muß denken und muß sinnen, so wie ein Traumender verloren sinnt. Mein ganzes Herze Konntest du gewinnen, in einen Augenblick, geliebtes kind. und um nun Sein die leichten Fäden spinnen, die zart and weich, doch unzerreißbar sind. In meinen Busen gleiht ein wonnig Minnen, und längst erwachten schon so sanft wund lind des Herzens süße - zartgehegte. Triebe im goldnen Morgenstrahl der jungen Liebe.

some of the lower case m's may be actually n's.

thanks!24.218.57.201 (talk) 16:09, 19 June 2013 (UTC)


 * It's a poem. A google search should identify the author.  Here's google translate which gives a vague idea of the sense. gt. μηδείς (talk) 16:28, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I said above that I punched it through google translate and found it less than useful -- I appreciate the help that it's a poem.24.218.57.201 (talk) 16:37, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * It's by Rilke; see here. Deor (talk) 16:32, 19 June 2013 (UTC)


 * thanks Deor! I totally thought she'd written it though! (and that Rilke was her "german" name. Yes she added that part...RED FACED AM I)24.218.57.201 (talk) 16:37, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * That she's not the original author doesn't mean she didn't mean it. Deor (talk) 16:41, 19 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Here's my attempt at a translation:
 * Here I stand and must think and must ponder,
 * Just as a lost dreamer ponders.
 * You could win my whole heart,
 * In the blink of an eye, beloved child,
 * And around my being spin the light threads,
 * Sweet and delicate, and thus unbreakable.
 * In my bosom glows a blissful passion,
 * And long ago, so gentle and so soft,
 * Awoke the heart's own sweetness -
 * Delicately nurtured shoots of young love
 * In the beams of morning light.
 * AlexTiefling (talk) 16:52, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

It should be noted that there are many typos in the note... check out Deor's link for the correct text. --KnightMove (talk) 17:06, 20 June 2013 (UTC)


 * For "doch unzerreißbar" I would put "but unbreakable" or "and yet unbreakable". Otherwise a pretty fair rendering. -- Elphion (talk) 17:49, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Etymology of "Homo"
Is there any connection between the greek-derived homo ("same"), and the latin-derived homo ("human")? -- 71.35.127.227 (talk) 16:43, 19 June 2013 (UTC)


 * No -- Greek initial "h" comes from Proto-Indo-European "s" in this context, while Latin initial "h" comes from Proto-Indo-European "gh". One source traces the two words back to  Proto-Indo-European roots sem- and dhghem-... AnonMoos (talk) 16:49, 19 June 2013 (UTC)


 * No, Greek homo is cognate with English same and Latin homo is cognate with Greek Chthon and English groom > likely 'goon', from an original root meaning "earthling". μηδείς (talk) 16:51, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Huh, so "groom" comes from OE "guma"? Nyttend (talk) 16:56, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * No, only when it stands for "bridegroom", which was certainly altered from "bridguma". But that very alteration seems to have been under the influence of an existing word "groom" (originally "boy", "young man"), for which the OED does not give a settled etymology. --ColinFine (talk) 17:21, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, that was unclear of me. Two modern English words seem to be reflexes of the PIE *dhghem root.  Bridegroom is known originally to have been bridguma as Colin mentions, with the insertion of -r- an irregularity explained by interference from the separate word groom..  Goon may also possibly descend from guma. μηδείς (talk) 17:28, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

message
Can the word message pronounce /ˈmɛseɪdʒ/ ? 198.105.116.142 (talk) 18:16, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Not really. At least, I can't imagine a native speaker of any variety of English I'm familiar with pronouncing that way. It's /ˈmɛsɪdʒ/ or, for those with the weak vowel merger, /ˈmɛsədʒ/. Angr (talk) 18:20, 19 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Reminds me of "Will this wind be so mighty as to lay low the mountains of the arrth?". --   Jack of Oz   [Talk]  20:57, 19 June 2013 (UTC)


 * When I try to pronounce the OP's version (maybe incorrectly, I don't really understand this system), the voice of Gomer Pyle comes into my head. (If you don't know what that means, try Youtube.) Looie496 (talk) 13:48, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

What languages are used in this Sailor Moon multilanuage anime video?
I recognize the German language used in this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hfNe-se5GPU bit I don't recognize the languages Ypea, Albertish, and Anokasa. Could someone please tell what countries these languages are in? Venustar84 (talk) 19:11, 19 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Without having seen the video: Ethnologue, Omniglot and de:WP do not know these terms. I doubt they are languages. --79.195.115.161 (talk) 16:17, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

enquête
Is there a Quebecois can record the word enquête in Wikimedia ? 198.105.116.142 (talk) 20:59, 19 June 2013 (UTC)


 * To clarify, are you asking for a sound recording of the word as pronounced in Quebec?� —Tamfang (talk) 03:18, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

I want someone records the pronunciation of the word enquête with a Quebec accent ? 198.105.116.142 (talk) 11:07, 20 June 2013 (UTC)


 * See User:Fête for details of the user's global block and history asking for recordings of words in Quebecois ending in -ête. μηδείς (talk) 16:45, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Contemporary UK argot
A recent case on BAILII concerns a chap who was convicted of witness intimidation for sending the following message:

A sad reflection on the standards of education among the UK's criminal classes, I know. However, what does "bmt" mean in this context? A quick Google search only reveals references to one of Subway's sandwiches. Tevildo (talk) 23:45, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * No idea. This is slumdog speech, and most of them can't even understand eachother.  KägeTorä - (影虎)  ( TALK )  00:09, 20 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Yes, the world is sadly lacking in highly educated criminals. --   Jack of Oz   [Talk]  00:13, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Big man ting looks plausible. http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Big Man Ting (Don't know how to make the link work). HenryFlower 02:02, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Just copy the URL: like this. --   Jack of Oz   [Talk]  02:08, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Possibly a misspelling of bnt => bint (an insulting term for woman) MChesterMC (talk) 09:37, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Actually, while that makes sense in the first context, it doesn't work in the second... MChesterMC (talk) 09:38, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I doubt it's a misspelling of 'bint' - three times, the exact same typo, plus 'bint' is only used by very old men these days (I, however, use it occasionally). It comes from Arabic for 'daughter', and I don't use it offensively. As for the 'bmt', I have no idea what it's supposed to mean. I get these types of messages on my phone and on Facebook, and I really want to shout out loud at them - very loud - and say "Did you fucking go to school? Did you learn English? Can you write? Don't write to me like this, I will give you a box of crayons (that you will probably eat)."  KägeTorä - (影虎)  ( TALK )  11:03, 20 June 2013 (UTC)


 * I think it's more like "black man ting", judging from the rest of the argot. --TammyMoet (talk) 11:04, 20 June 2013 (UTC)


 * I agree with Henry: according to Urban Dictionary it means "Big Man Ting", which is London argot for "I really really mean what I'm saying". Looie496 (talk) 16:57, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks everyone for the info! "Please on a bmt level" is actually quite a neat way of expressing both "Please, in the most sincere way I can express it", and "'Please', in the sense that I, as a Big Man(TM), do not expect my will to be thwarted by a mere chit of a girl, and expect you to comply."  Not that Mr Z is likely to have consciously constructed the phrase in that fashion. Tevildo (talk) 21:45, 20 June 2013 (UTC)