text:
User talk:Jdavidb/Archive1

Hello, welcome to Wikipedia. Here are some useful links in case you haven't already found them:

 * How to edit a page
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style

If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

Tip: you can sign your name with ~

Dersonlwd Talk 14:11, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Hi, David. Welcome to Wikipedia. I'm glad to see someone with your musical perspective added to the group of Wikipedia "editors". I've left a comment on the singing school talk page also. - Rlvaughn 21:56, 5 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Hi, Rlvaughn. Thanks for taking an interest in my singing school article. I'm glad to have someone with your additional perspective helping. Going to be quite busy in the next few days, but I can't wait to come back and add more info. Jdavidb 15:38, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Andrew Jackson and divorce
I left a question on Talk:Ronald Reagan: my understanding is that Reagan was indeed the first divorced man to be president. But if you have other information about Jackson, I'd love to be corrected! - Nunh-huh 20:48, 11 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Yes, I was wrong on that. Misunderstood that it was Jackson's wife who was divorced, not Jackson himself. Jdavidb 19:04, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)

 * If nothing else, looking it up taught me that Jackson was one of the (presumably) few presidents who have "married" (and lived with) a married woman! - Nunh-huh 20:31, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)

 * Yes, at least we all learned something. :) Jdavidb 15:40, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Edits to ASV article
Thanks for the GREAT edits to the American Standard Version article. They have made the article more informative. I agree about the Internet copies. I can't believe the error rate that there is in them! But I guess that it's better than nothing. iHoshie 03:31, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Thank you! It's made my day to see that I did something somebody found useful here. :)  I have hope that at some point the ASV text will be loaded into Wiksource where it can be collaboratively corrected. Jdavidb 18:36, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Apostrophe
Gilgamesh and/or Fanger, please discuss here what you might know about use of an apostrophe in the possessive of a singular noun already ending in s, specifically the possessive of Jesus. Thanks. Jdavidb 14:34, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * I'm not Gilgamesh of Fanger, but see Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style and search for Making possessives. Style sheets don't agree on such things, in part because people's pronunciations don't agree. Jesus'  was the standard way of doing it but some now use Jesus's. And people get very hotted up about the apostrophe issue. jallan 17:05, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * I'm very sorry for the delayed response. I have not been around much, and indeed may not be around much in future. It's an interesting subject, and as Jallan and you have said there is much interpretation and disagreement. I really only reacted quite so strongly because of something in the other user's tone of voice, which cheesed me off. As you probably know, if you do a Google on "apostrophe jesus moses" you'll get about 84 billion pages discussing it. My favourite reference in a book I regard as very useful is the Oxford Dictionary for Writers and Editors and it is clear about the exception for "ancient names" (or something) and quotes examples like "Jesus' love" and "Moses' law". It probably does not matter a great deal, and almost certainly matters less than courtesy between users! Thank you for raising it. Goodbye for now. --Fanger 07:27, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Commercial sites
Feedback re: removing links to commercial sites. A massive majority of websites are commercial. This is doubly true in areas such as entertainment. Thus it is not inappropriate that Wikipedia links to such sites in general. The crux point is that such an external link should be worthwhile (e.g. it should be the best fan site devoted to Brad Pitt, or whoever). When an anon goes round adding virtually identical links to lots of articles, this criteria is very rarely satisfied and so it is right to remove the links, as you have been doing - I just wanted to point the reason for removal is because they are poor links, not commercial ones. I hope you don't think I am being too petty by labouring this distinction. Pcb21| Pete 20:59, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * I earnestly agree with you! Yes, the problem is not that they are commercial, but that they are not worthwhile.  I simply adopted the same wording used by some who came before me deleting the same links.  In the case of the two sites I have (so far) singled out, these appear to be vanity links to drive traffic to the sites in question, presumably posted by the owners of the sites.  The first one purports to sell archives of U.S. government papers on certain topics - not a useful link for further (free) research.  The second is someone's "news" site ... site apparently has access to some limited database of news and has set up a lot of virtual hosts in his domain named for various celebrities; visiting a site named for a celebrity yields a couple of news articles that include the celebrity's name (nothing a person couldn't have done on a news site, and not even necessarily directly related) followed by a very large section (10-12 headlines) of articles that are billed as "News Related to " but are not.

 * THANK YOU for making the distinction. It is that kind of precision that makes Wikipedia a good encyclopedia as well as a pleasant and productive community.  I do not have any problem with commercialism per se, myself, including commercial websites.  You are quite correct that the vast majority of websites are, of course "commercial." Jdavidb 21:19, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Home Education
I advocate home education for those who want to. Not only is it a great and flexible way of learning, but you get to go to places, follow your interests, and make friends all over the country and abroad.

I am quite interested in how your wife got on in later years of home education. Did she go to college and/or university or did she go and get a job? --Spe88 18:14, 1 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * My wife completed a custom course of secondary education at home which as near as I can tell is roughly comparable to most high school Texas educations (though I would have liked more math). Most of her secondary education was self-paced and self-taught, and she completed more than a year early.  She then entered a local junior college and acquired a certificate in a field of her choice (something less than an associate's degree, I believe, but still requiring two years of work), then transferred to a four year state university in my area and is on track to complete a bachelor's degree in linguistics in a year and a half to two years.  She receives A's in almost all courses.  She is surprised at the inability of many entering college students to learn on their own from books, something which she has been doing for longer than she can remember.  Like many college students, she has changed her major multiple times, which has slowed her down somewhat, or she would be finished by now. :) Jdavidb 16:31, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Purpose of the Bible
Okay,David if that is not the method and purpose of the bible what is it? Put answer in Bible discussion. Remember no personal opinon. Charlie

Jdavidb 15:26, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC) Thanks David, I'm not that interested in the subject. Just how would you define it to someone who had never heard of it before? Wikipedia is too much of a popularity contest and lack of expertise. I have yet too run into good professional biblical scholarship. But I have certainly come across a lot of suspicion and paranoia. I have often wondered how Galileo would have fared on here. Not to well, me thinks. Thanks for your kind words. Charlie Turek charlesturek@comcast.net
 * 1) Please put comments under a new heading, not at the top of the page.
 * 2) Please discuss it on the talk page for the article.
 * 3) That is not the purpose of the Bible for everyone. If you want to say that's the purpose the authors had in mind, say so.  If you want to say that's the purpose modern readers have, say which readers.
 * Yes, that is more or less the purpose of the Bible for me, and perhaps for you, but not for everyone.
 * 1) Welcome to Wikipedia. Please get an account.

 * If you want to discuss a change to an article, the best place to discuss is on the article's talk page. (Click "discuss this page" on the article.)

 * Well, the article already says "The Bible is the primary sacred scripture of both the Jewish and Christian religions," and "Some religious sects, notably, several of the 'Protestant' Christian sects, believe the Bible to be the ultimate and authoritative guide in all spiritual matters." What exactly do you want to add to the article that is not already said there?

 * I'm sorry if you think Wikipedia has some drawbacks. It's not perfect, but I think it's a wonderful place to be. Jdavidb 19:30, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Article Licensing
Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 2000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:
 * Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
 * Multi-Licensing Guide
 * Free the Rambot Articles Project

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the " " template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

 * Option 1
 * I agree to multi-license all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

OR
 * Option 2
 * I agree to multi-license all my contributions to any U.S. state, county, or city article as described below:

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace " " with "  ". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)

Successor of St.Peter
I don't understand why the use of this phrase is not NPOV. --Eleassar777 21:56, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Please carry this discussion to the talk page of Pope John Paul II. I will explain here, but we need to reach consensus there. (Unfortunately the discussion was just archived, so we may need to start it again.)

Basically it is not NPOV because there are a number of Protestants who do not believe that Peter could even have any legitimate successors. Some have stated in the discussion that the dispute is only over the extent of his powers, but I don't think they have the whole picture of Protestantism. There are many who don't believe Peter could be succeeded, and there are probably some who believe he could but who don't believe the Pope is a legitimate successor. This doesn't even get into Eastern Orthodox -- I don't know if they accept him as a "successor of Peter" or not. (I think they probably do.)

Let's talk there for consensus and compromise. Maybe we can say, "26Nth successor of Peter, to the Roman Catholic Church." Jdavidb 22:02, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * Um, thanks for the smilely on Talk:Pope John Paul II, but I'm not exactly sure what I fixed. I rhink I was just reverting the anon edits because the user deleted a large section of the text, not because of the sucessor number.

 * By the way, the | Vatican web site uses "264th pope." And Eastern Orthodox recongize him as the successor of Peter, they just believe that he does not have legitimate authority over their Church. Oh, and I'm sorry if my talk page archive disrupted any conversations you were having, but the page was 102 kb long, and it probably should have been done long ago. Cheers, Bratschetalk 04:27, Apr 7, 2005 (UTC)
 * Not a problem. Anytime! Hey, do you think the Pope article could be a featured article once all the dust settles? Bratschetalk 04:37, Apr 7, 2005 (UTC) Source of Reply

I think definitely. It's got good pictures, very thorough, NPOV, etc. Jdavidb 13:21, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Requests_for_comment/NCdave
I'm curious what you view is on NCdave's RFC. You and I bumped heads on the Terri article about the Terri-in-disabled-state photo and you showed me an angle I hadn't considered... We reached an agreement, and I felt that the result was better than what I could have done on my own. I haven't been recently editing that article, because there was just too much pressure from users who seem to refuse to behave as reasonably as you did. ... and checking in, it seems to be getting worse now that the matter has hit the Terri blogs. **sigh** In any case, thanks for being a grade A wikipedian. :) --Gmaxwell 05:27, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * Thank you. It means a lot to be called a grade A Wikipedian, and it means even more to hear that I successfully showed you a new angle.  Wikipedia has been so very expansive for me, and it is very gratifying to help contribute to it being that way for others.
 * I have put a comment on the RFC, but I've decided to try to focus on the article rather than his behavior, because to be honest, I've been more focused on the article than his behavior to the extent that I don't think I could honestly say I know if he is being railroaded or not (though I have my suspicions).
 * I really enjoyed our collaboration on that image. There is a different image there today, and the text is far better than anyone could have come up with on their own.  We all made something great together.  And we gave everybody's views a fair shake.
 * I think in this charged environment, possibly because of NCdave, a double standard is being applied. There are more changes that need to be made to the article to make it NPOV.  But any attempt to report the Schindler's POV is met with all kinds of unfair excuses, "The article is too big; that would be bloat," or "That poll is unscientific."  Pardon me, but it is NEVER up to Wikipedia to decide truth.  We contextualize and report in a factual manner.  Most of the time when people are objecting, their objections should be included in the article along with the material they are objecting to, rather than removing the material.  And that is exactly what we did for that image, and it worked out great.  And this is a double-standard; we don't get to ask the same questions or raise the same issues with the Michael Schiavo POV.
 * I just want all the chaos to die down so I can get in the article and help make it better without having my changes reverted on sight by people who don't want to take time to think or discuss, and people who don't even comment on what they are doing in the edit summary. I want each view on this subject to get a fair shake.
 * NPOV is a beautiful "treaty," to me. It is our international law in the midst of anarchy.  Please forgive me if I gush a bit, but I honestly think the NPOV policy is one of the most impressive innovations in human history and ranks up alongside historic documents like the Magna Carta and United States Constitution and Declaration of Independence.  The amazing thing is that it is something we can all agree on.  People who DO have a point of view can still make unbiased, neutral edits that will be acceptable to the other side.
 * If we forsake NPOV, if we allow the Michael Schiavo side to carry the day and dictate truth for the article, we have done an extraordinary disservice to the Wikipedia community and to the Wikipedia audience: all of humanity.
 * If we have to kick people out (from either or both sides) to make editing the article peaceful enough, then it ought to be swift and certain. (I think Wikipedia is transitioning on this ... looking forward to days when this policy is clearer.)  I'm a believer in instant no-questions asked bans of increasing duration (from one week to permanent) for violations of the three-revert rule.  I have a feeling NCdave has probably violated that one many times; we probably could have solved this a long time ago.
 * There's some basic decency standards we need to ask all sides to follow: the three-revert rule, required explanations of changes in the edit summary rather than reverting and hoping the other side won't notice, and working for consensus in the talk page. If you could convince some of the people you know editing this article to hold to these higher standards, I would be so appreciative, and Wikipedia would be so much better.  I've learned that I need to pick small changes (like the picture), start discussion on the talk page, propose my changes, work for consensus, and then watch like a hawk and call people on it when they revert my changes without commenting or without discussing.  I think it really surprises people and helps build my case when they see me editing conscientiously, wanting to discuss rather than wanting to participate in a silent edit war.  And we can all expose each other to more than we would have considered otherwise, and make Wikipedia something better than any one faction could have done on it's own.
 * I'm in contact with some of the guys from the blogs and have tried to encourage the higher-standard behavior. And I don't know about fly-by-night editors who might pop up and replace the entire article in a single blow, but several have listened to me and, I hope, are working on holding to that higher standard.  We can all recognize and agree (eventually) on how to word an article so that it will be acceptable to all points of view, but we have to be talking and listening to do it.  And we gain so much from the experience. :)
 * Thanks again. Jdavidb 14:38, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * I hear you loud and clear, though I don't have time to reply to all in detail. As far as additional edits go, I didn't see the need when I last read the complete article (which has been a while), but thats exactly the point: we have a different perspective on the matter so we will see different things, thats fine as long as we both know how to use NPOV to come to an agreement. The problem you face is that bad editors like NCdave have soured everyone who doesn't hold a position simmlar to his (and perhaps those who do, as well), so it's far less likely that the other editors are even willing to discuss these matters with you.  There *are* other editors who should be able to work rationally with you, but everyone has a differing tolerance level... and I think that most have crossed that bound already. It's very difficult to edit out bad POV inserts made by bad-actors like NCdave, so at some point editors break and just start removing everything on that side.... It's not right, but from their posistion it seems unlikely that additional edits will be NPOV (because in their mind it's already in a good state), and it's too hard to sort things out if you're just going to have to argue with a brick wall at the end.   Because of this issue I've started speaking up on your behalf, thought not yet in the Terri talkpage (because I'm still resisting getting sucked back in, perhaps if NCdave ends up barred from making edits there...). It is my hope that I can advance the idea that you are someone that editors on the other side should strive to work with to improve the article. You might be interested in my comments on User_talk:Professor_Ninja. --Gmaxwell 02:11, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Jdavidb, I hesitate to jump into such troubled waters, but I feel obliged to offer my comments on some of your recent contributions. I am doing this because I believe you are commited to NPOV (your treaty comments were very well put), and hope that you will be big enough to accept these remarks in the spirit with which they are intended. I have observed your use of terms like "anti-Terri" and "pro-Terri" to refer to those with POVs supportive of Michael Schiavo and the Schindlers respectively. Given that Michael alleges (and the courts have, at least to some extent, agreed) that he has enacted Terri's wishes, I'm asking you to give some consideration to whether these terms are appropriately NPOV. I realise that you're using them in talk (and off Wikipedia), not in articles, but I hope that you can see how people may find these terms pejorative amd inflamatory, and consequently doubt your commitment to NPOV. Bovlb 04:26, 2005 Apr 14 (UTC)

Talk:Yoghurt requested move
Hello. Since you were part of an earlier discussion on the name of this page, could you take a look at it again? This page was originally at Yogurt but some time ago it was moved to Yoghurt (where it is now). There is a request on WP:RM to move it back, and I think the policies say it should be, but that is being disputed. Regards. Jonathunder 16:53, 2005 May 12 (UTC)

Link spam
Thanks for taking the time to get rid of link spam. Ive removed a lot myself in the past. If you ever need support on somthing, over a dispute or whatever, let me know. There have been cases where I clean up an articles external link section (Literature comes to mind) and ive removed dozens of links leaving just a few, all of them self-serving advertising. It would be good if Wikipedia had a better policy for external links, such as requireing an explanation on why its relevant to the article is one thought. Stbalbach 16:26, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Thanks for the message of support! Jdavidb 18:01, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

I agree wholeheartedly with your attitude to linkspam. You have summarised its characteristics very well your page dedicated to the topic. I have seen (and reverted) enough of it in my time to know. Cheers --PhilipO 23:44, September 8, 2005 (UTC)

Restorationism
Hey David, I just thought that Restorationism is one article you may want to look at. I've done some minor stuff to it, but it needs a little more work. Carltonh 23:13, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

Linkspam?
They're high quality articles from an encyclopedic source, and on topic. I'm inclined to keep most of them. Jayjg (talk) 18:57, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

AFethke
From User:AFethke, moved from my user page:

Well it may be generally acceped, but I don't and it is my page, thank you very much! Play police somewhere else.

11:16, 3 August 2005

Category:open source
I notice you've been removing this category from various roguelikes, some of which I probably added myself - apologies if that was inappropriate.

In my experience the phrase "open source" is regularly used in two quite distinct manners, one being the strict sense promoted by FSF, and the other more vernacular sense of "you can download the source code and compile it if you want".

It is additionally confusing that Category:open source claims to be in the process of deferring to Category:Free software, but I haven't yet found the discussions that led to that. However presumably there must still be a category that does catch the "you can download ..." sense where the stricter sense doesn't apply, and I don't know of a name to call it other than "open source" - do you know of such a category? Hv 02:29, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

JDavid,

I left you a note on the homeschool article talk page and then I went to my talk page and read your welcome and comments about how to do things. I think I made some more mistakes(didn't put the post at the bottom, didn't use the(okay, I just found that little mark on my computer keyboard. You're right, I should figure out how this works before posting again. I'll read the articles you recommended. Thanks for being understanding.Linda Kelley Did I do that right?

Category:Pro-life celebrities
Can I ask you to consider, on the category talk page, whether this is really an appropriate Wikipedia category? DJ Clayworth 16:23, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

Linkspam project
I support the project wholeheartedly. Part of the problem I see is that the ambiguity in Spam, and even Cite sources and Reliable sources provides a means for spammers to (intentionally or not) game the system. Unfortunately, I have to tell you that I'm going to be on an indefinite WikiBreak soon. After this weekend, I'll be gone, but I'll probably make an appearance next weekend if I can. Anyway, for what it's worth, I'll sign on. Tell me i there's anything you want my help with this weekend. And I suggest that you publicize/ask for comment on the Village Pump, see what happens. Sorry that I can't do more than that, but this is a Good Thing to do! Dmcdevit·t 21:55, September 2, 2005 (UTC)

Speaking of...
Would you mind directly signing the consensus statement with ~ ? The user is currently complaining about his block. Add something stronger if you like. - Taxman Talk 19:38, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

Bernard Cardinal Law and NPOV
Hi, Jdavidb, we don't often edit the same articles, but anytime I've been on one of the pages you were active at, I could see that you care a lot about NPOV. If you have time, and if this doesn't clash too much with your main interests, could you have a quick look at Bernard Cardinal Law. I found what I considered to be clear NPOV violations (e.g. "the infamous Cardinal Law" . . . "Law's name has become known nationwide for his scandalous behavior in the Church, and he is arguably recognized as the most corrupt official the Roman Catholic Church has had in centuries"), and I removed them as well as doing a little bit of rewording. The editor who had put them in reverted me with an edit summary "rv false pov claims by Ann Heneghan". I reverted again, objecting again to the use of the word "infamous". The editor reverted me, but then voluntarily removed "infamous", though leaving the other changes.

Because I'm a Catholic, I'm not necessarily the best person to have a clear idea on NPOV for this article. I have a strong sense of outrage at Cardinal Law's reassignment of offending priests. I also have a strong wish not to have the Church in general appear in a bad light. (I have heard that Pope John Paul was never made aware of the Law situation, though obviously people who don't want to believe that won't believe it.) I think I'm going to stay away from that article for the moment. It might be good if someone who isn't Catholic or anti-Catholic took a look at it, solely for the purpose of making it NPOV. I promise it wouldn't be as time-consuming as getting involved in Terri Schiavo! Thanks.

By the way, I like the photo of the baby! Ann Heneghan (talk) 15:23, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

Edit count chart; a comment on your response
Hi; I just wanted to take a moment to say first, congratulations on the marriage! Looking at the data, it looks like your honeymoon was right about two weeks long :) Second, congratulations on your new boy! I've got little ones of my own (youngest less than a year). Editing Wikipedia is difficult with a writhing little infant on your lap :)

For what it's worth; I really think you'd make a good admin, if only you had more exposure to admin-esque areas of the pedia. That's my only strong hesitancy. I think your RfA is going to pass with flying colors. But, if it doesn't (and even if it does) please spend a bit more time in areas other than the article and user namespaces. I think your contributions would be most welcome in those areas in addition to your work in the above two namespaces. All the best, --Durin 22:49, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

Handbook of Texas proposed deletion
Please go here and express your opinion on whether Category:Handbook of Texas citations should be deleted. As a Wikipedian in Texas, your opinion on this topic is particularly valuable. 66.167.253.162 17:31, 26 September 2005 (UTC).

title: User talk:Jdavidb/Archive1


text:
Talk:Auslan

Untitled
some problems with this article:
 * does not mention impact (or potential impact) of video conferencing.
 * does not mention impact of text messaging (SMS).
 * not sure about terminology.. "people who sign in Auslan (perhaps as a first language) or consider themselves part of the Deaf community" is pretty long so i didn't use it.
 * not much on grammar or examples of signs or info for people who want to learn auslan
 * does not discuss much of australia's deaf culture or history
 * do you call the variants "dialects" or "differences" ?
 * I agree with the above suggestions, especially about grammar and the basics of the language itself (as opposed to how it relates to other languages). I perhaps would also include any effects Auslan/those who use Auslan has/have on Aborigines in Australia. Is erasure of Aboriginal sign languages affected by the popularity of Auslan? I also think some of the citations could be updated or there should be more recently published works. Tuj21794 (talk) 22:13, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

How many people use Auslan as their main language?
It has been widely cited for some years that there are 16,000 Auslan users. This has been largely unchallenged speculation; there is a lack of reliable data available. Other figures that have been given are 9,500 (Flynn 1985), 7,000 (Power 1987), 10,000 (Johnston 1989), 15,000 (Deaf Society of NSW 1989), 15,400 (Hyde and Power 1991), 15,000 (Ozolins and Bridge 1998), and 5,305 (2001 Australian Census). Latrobe university NIDS even suggest on the website that the figure is 30,000.

The most credible attempt I have seen to determine the real number of people for whom Auslan is their primary language was the 2004 paper by Trevor Johnston (the guy who coined the word "Auslan") in the American Annals of the Deaf (volume 148 no. 5), where he looks at all these estimates and a number of other studies, arriving at a figure of around 6,500 for the year 2001. This also fits well with statistics available in other western countries. If any wikipedians are unable to find the journal in their local library and are interested, I may be able to email a copy (it is 544KB in size) - contact me on my talk page. I think the next edition of the journal will have a number of responses to the paper (and it's worrying claim that Auslan is an endangered language as the size of the community is shrinking).

I suggest we use the 6,500 figure for now unless anyone can justify their claims (another editor replaced 6,500 with the NIDS figure 30,000 - don't believe everything you read on the web!). I would be happy to compromise by giving a range (eg 5,000 - 10,000), but I think figures higher than 10,000 are really unlikely. ntennis 09:34, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Fair enough, fair enough, I will accept your better reasoning/better-sourced arguments. If you think a range is justified, you can do it, but don't just on account of me. BTW: If the Auslan speaker-base is shrinking, what is it being replaced with? Is deafness becoming less of a problem? —Felix the Cassowary ( ɑe hɪː jɐ ) 13:20, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

Whether deafness is a problem or not is entirely a matter of perspective! :) But apparently there are fewer proundly deaf children (the core Auslan-using group) than there was before, due to vaccinations (Rubella in particular) and other medical technologies (eg. cochlear implants), combined with a shift away from specialist deaf schools in favor of mainstream settings, reducing the exposure deaf children have to sign language. So in a sense, the answer to your question is that Auslan is being replaced by English. Time (50 years?) will tell I guess. ntennis 22:55, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

I heard an interesting angle on this today, relating to the fact that the largest cause of deafness in the Auslan signing community is maternal rubella (now virtually eliminated in Australia). Apparently many of these deaf adults born during the rubella epidemics have had deaf children, and some grandchildren, which nobody expected would happen. If deafness is now carried genetically in these populations (who are to some degree endogamous), it could mean that the deaf community here is not necessarily destined to shrink. I didn't know hereditary genes could appear like that! ntennis 16:17, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Yes, I think I'm inclined to be a little sceptical about that—but then I'm not a geneticist. (Regarding describing "deafness" as a problem, I realise it's about perspective, but if it isn't a problem, then why do deaf people get cochlear implants? Perhaps that's just another aspect of the endogamy/distinction of culture, outsiders (losing hearing later in life; children of hearers) who become deaf will unbecome deaf, whereas insiders (children of the Deaf) who become deaf will remain deaf. Something like that?) Thanks! —Felix the Cassowary ( ɑe hɪː jɐ ) 19:51, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

I think you are on the right track here. Regarding the cultural attachments of deaf and hearing people, it's worth noting that about 95% of the Deaf community in Australia are born to hearing parents. While most hearing parents of deaf children want their kids to be as "hearing" as possible (speaking/lipreading/hearing aids/cochlear implants), and rarely learn Auslan, many of these deaf children don't want those things at all, and identify strongly with Deaf culture, regarding English as their second language — the average English literacy level of deaf high-school graduates in Victoria was grade 5 or 6 level when the study was done about ten years ago. Others want "the best of both worlds", and would argue that that getting a cochlear implant (for example) is about access to social privilegde and opportunity. Thus deafness is a "problem" perhaps in the same way as being an ethnic minority is a "problem", and those deaf people that do want cochlear implants may be comparable to migrants to Australia wanting to learn English. There is a powerful incentive to attempt to assimilate to the dominant culture; sometimes even at the cost of one's "own" culture. I know most people who haven't encountered the deaf community find the cultural framework hard to accept, and rather see deafness as a medical deficit. However, many people who use Auslan as their main language do see themselves very much as members of a linguistic minority with a rich and unique visual culture that is worth preserving.

I'm sorry if any of that sounded like a sermon. Do you think the Auslan article needs more explanation of any of this stuff? ntennis 01:02, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

I would be pushing towards the 30,000 figure of NDIS. The Trevor Johnson figures rely on the enrolement figures for the main Deaf Schools - in the decades after "intergration" policy was adopted - so not surprisingly those figures fell (But did allow Trevor to get funding to continue his study of Auslan as it was now an "Endangered Language". Those students are now in the mainstream where their teachers and aides need to have some sign language. There is also a lot more support for families to learn Auslan to communicate with their child, even in the last 10 years. Auslan is increasingly being used with children with other communication disorders, such as severe Autism and Cerebral Palsy. The Auslan being used in these situations may not be as a complete language, but for piecemeal communication. Trevor Johnson and the RIDBC and Deaf Australia circle would discount this even though it is sign language used as a primary means of communication, and they are using Australian signs. They argue that only the children of Deaf signing adults (Auslan as their first language) are true Auslan users. Even on their figures, this suggests that only 5% of Auslan users do so correctly, and excludes most of Deaf Australia who claim to own Auslan (see video currently on the home page at http://www.deafau.org.au/). When looking at statistics like this, we need to be clear about the boundaries of the studies. One 2008 petition for auslan use had over 32,000 child users (http://www.bilby.net/sign/AuslanPetition.asp). My experience is there is much more Auslan in use than previously, more social events in Auslan such as coffee shops, and more support and training (see http://www.deafchildrenaustralia.org.au/node/436) MrFredPoll (talk) 11:50, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

 * Not at all: it was very interesting. The Auslan article doesn't stand on it's own, it needs to be read in conjunction with the Deaf culture article, I'd say, so I don't really think it needs to be expanded on here (what I'd rather see is information about the grammar, "phonology" etc. of Auslan, which seems to be lacking on the Internet at all except in broad, hand-wavy terms). But I'm still a bit confused. What proportion of people who are deaf, are also Deaf? And of both groups, what proportions use Auslan? Perhaps the article appears to exaggerate that?

 * Also, one thing about cochlear implants. During our perceptual psychology lectures at Uni, it was mentioned that people who had been blind since birth but through miracles of modern technology had been given sight were unable to properly comprehend what they say (e.g. they could see a square and a circle as different shapes, but no matter how intelligent they were, if you showed them only one, they could not identify it), and generally preferred to once again lose their sight. Do deaf-since-birth people experience similar difficulties and confusion with hearing with a cochlear implant? (or are people who can benefit from them usually able to have had some limited hearing before, even if it's wildly insufficient to let them understand speech?).

 * Thanks! (BTW: Are you deaf/Deaf/related (or friends etc.) with any, or do you just know the topic well? if you don't mind.) —Felix the Cassowary ( ɑe hɪː jɐ ) 10:39, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

OK I will write a reference to Deaf culture into the intro. You are right about the lack of information about the grammar — I've been meaning to expand on this and you've given me a little incentive to do so. In fact there's been very little published on the grammar of Auslan, compared to what's available for most spoken langauges, or ASL and BSL. Linguistic research on sign languages is still in its infancy, and on Auslan even more so — the first dictionary was written less than 20 years ago. I was actually planning a general page on sign language linguistics,                               but perhaps I should start here first.

Regarding Deaf vs deaf, the simple answer is that Deaf use Auslan and deaf don't; language issues determine cultural affiliations. The core group of Auslan-users are typically born deaf or have lost their hearing at a young age, and have a kind of deafness that prevents them from hearing intelligible speech. They are a small minority of Australians with hearing impairments (most of whom are elderly). Again, figures are hard to come by, but "one in ten Australians have a hearing loss" is a typical statement. From the www.hearingawarenessweek.org.au school kit: ''Recent studies with Australian Primary Schools have indicated that 1 in every 10 children have a hearing loss of the level likely to impede normal learning, language acquisition and development. By the time the children in your class are ready to start work (approx 15 yrs), 22% of them will have a significant hearing loss. By the time they retire over 90% will have damaged hearing!''

I'm not sure if I can answer your third question about cochlear implants with much authority; I'm sure there's research on this somewhere. I believe, as you suggested, that cochlear implants (and hearing aids in general) are more effective for "late-deafened" people. Many people I know who grew up deaf find the sound they hear with assisted hearing devices to be annoying, and prefer to have their full attention available for sight. The way I see it, the person we are has been developing since birth to adapt to our environment. If that enviroment doesn't include sound, we develop differently than if it does. Rather than being "impaired", we just put our energies into different (eg. visual/spatial) areas. You probably know that many Deaf people don't consider themselves disabled, wouldn't want to be hearing if given the choice, and are proud when their children are born deaf, whereas for a hearing adult to lose their hearing is devastating because they've developed a reliance on it.

You might be interested to see a documentary due to screen on SBS early next year called "Welcome 2 my Deaf World". There's a scene where one of the two main characters, who has grown up profoundly deaf without using hearing aids, tries one on. The look on her face probably answers your question better than words could! She describes her immediate experience of hearing sound and (though it didn't make it into the final cut) eventually loses interest in wanting to hear.

As for you final question, I am hearing (you can probably tell from my written English that it's my native language — it's usually pretty easy to pick the ESL features of Deaf English). I work (sometimes) as a sign language interpreter, and my partner and many of my friends are deaf. ntennis 01:31, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Thanks again. I will be looking forward to your additions on Auslan (and sign language) linguistics.

 * Those statistics seem to require a very generous definition of "significant hearing loss". I've probably got the worst hearing of anyone I know that can hear well-enough without hearing aids or whatever; and I don't think I know many who (obviously) have them. Either that or I just only know people who can hear relatively well! (Which is possible if people who can't hear well aren't provided-for well enough in our education system that they tend to drop out before they get to University...)

 * That SBS show does sound like it's interesting, except that I'm really likely to forget to watch it. Even if someone tells me ten minutes before a show I want to watch starts, I won't remember to watch it!—let alone a few months ahead of time ;) Do you know if there is/going to be some sort of tape or DVD of it?

 * Without having "spoken" to (m)any Deaf people or knowing Auslan grammar, it's hard to know what sort of mistakes they're likely to use in English; and anyway, I've come across many an ESL speaker who you can't really tell most of the time when they're writing. Still, I suspected it was your partner or someone close like that.

 * —Felix the Cassowary ( ɑe hɪː jɐ ) 03:50, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Oh, also, do Deaf people have names in sign language, or do they always fingerspell written ones? —Felix the Cassowary ( ɑe hɪː jɐ ) 06:13, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

Yes there is a DVD, and a schools pack is currently in production so eventually it should be available at libraries etc. Contact me on my talk page if you want more info about the doco. The representation of names is an interesting feature of sign languages and probably worth noting on the Auslan page. When someone introduces themself in Auslan, they fingerspell their names as in written English. After that, names are never used to address someone, and almost never used to refer to someone who is physically present. For simply referring to someone, Auslan uses pronouns (pointing or eye gaze) where English uses names. English has a number of other uses for names (such as getting someone's attention, or the "you're in trouble" register) for which Auslan has other strategies. When people are talked about, however, a name sign will often emerge in the community, which may refer to something physically striking about them (often with little regard for tact!), something they are known for, or may be a play on their 'English' name. Some examples of name signs of people I know translate roughly as SERIOUS, STREAK-OF-COLOR-IN-HAIR, WALRUS (because of their surname "Walsh"), CUED-SPEECH-R (refering to the person's educational background). The meaning of many name signs is often opaque. They are often established in school and persist for life. The person may not like the name (especially the more colorful ones) or they may in some cases not even know their name-sign. Some name-signs are just fingerspelled names (usually very short names), or initials. Name signs belong to a more casual register, and in very formal situations, full names are usually spelled.

It's been useful for me to see what you questions you've had after reading this article, because other casual readers will undoubtably have similar questions. Let me know if you have any articles you want to make sure are accessible to a newbie and I'll have a look over them. Cheers, ntennis 07:09, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

 * P.S The long-delayed doco will be on SBS at 8:30pm on September 14. ntennis 23:03, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Recent changes
I've made a few changes to make this a little more accurate. Adam Schembri.

 * Thanks Adam! It's really valuable to have your expertise here :) ntennis 23:03, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Auslan as related to other languages
The following passage now appears:
 * Auslan is related to British Sign Language (BSL) and New Zealand Sign Language (NZSL); the three have descended from the same parent language, and together comprise the BANZSL language family. Auslan has also been influenced by Irish Sign Language (ISL) and more recently has borrowed signs from American Sign Language (ASL).

This changes something I wrote last week, about Auslan not being closely related to ASL. I don't mind what wording is adopted, but I would like to see a statement something along those lines. Above, it is implicit, but not strong enough, in my opinion; it could be thought that the parent language is closely related to ASL. It is a common assumption among people who don't know much about languages and deafness that sign languages in English-speaking countries are related to English and thus to each other. It is fallacious, of course, but not illogical, if one starts from a position of honest ignorance. I write for such readers. What wording would be best? A simple negative statement (as a sentence or clause) would suffice. BrainyBabe 16:48, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

 * I'm not sure about some of the recent additions. I agree that it is a common misconception that sign languages are reflections of the regional spoken language that surrounds them; it's up there with the myth that sign language is universal. However, I don't think the lead section of the Auslan article needs to dwell on American Sign Language — and certainly should not make claims about ASL being the "world's largest sign language".

 * I also find the following statement misleading: "How many people are fluent in it, a separate question from whether it is their native language, is unknown." This exact sentence could be added thruthfully to every single language article, but I'm not sure what the point is here? The lead section has already given a best guess estimate of the size of the signing community — those who use Auslan as their "primary or preferred language" — although the exact number too is of course unknown. The nativeness question is thorny (strictly there are few native signers), but is no different from that of other deaf sign languages. Why refer to nativeness in the lead section without saying anything about it? Why introduce fluency only to say the number of fluent signers is unknown?

 * I've made some other small changes but hope we can agree about the above before I make any changes to those two sections. ntennis 13:08, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

 * Hello. I noticed your helpful and informative comments in the discussion above, and hope together we can sort this out. It seems to me that there are three, not two, areas to discuss:

 * 1. The intro. I agree with you that the lead section does not need to dwell on ASL, but here it just mentions it.  I wasn't aware that the statement re ASL's size was controversial.  I don't know any other sign language that has hundreds of thousands of speakers.  I guess that I think of it as a point of reference for the discussion of sign languages -- not for the languages themselves, of course, but for an encyclopedic discussion thereof. Anyone who comes browsing the Wikipedia to find out more about SLs, Australian languages, Deaf stuff, etc. is likely to need some points of reference, and in my opinion a comparison to ASL is one-among-many useful starting points.

 * 2. Fluency versus L1 status. You are right, of course, that this applies to many other languages as well -- not least to English itself, see linguistic theorist Braj Kachru if you are interested. I have no wish to go around to all the language articles and change them, as logic would dictate for even-handed treatment!  It is just my feeling -- admittedly unbacked by data -- that SLs, because of the non-familial way in which they tend to be learned, exhibit a different ratio of primary users (mother tongue? hand!) to fluent ones. But I may be completely wrong.  I just wanted to mention the possibility.

 * 3. You deleted the following from a section further down the article, on Auslan's relationship with English:
 * There is a natural assumption that English-dominant countries would share a common sign language; this is far from the truth. Auslan, like all true sign languages,
 * This gets back to the previous point. An encyclopedia is a good place to expose, lay bare, and then demolish "common misconceptions" as you say.  Could we find a better wording, or place, to flag up and counter this myth?

 * So those are my intentions. I feel bereft of concrete suggestions at the moment, alas.  What do you think so far? BrainyBabe 18:51, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

 * I appreciate your comments and I think I understand your reasoning (please correct me if I mischaracterise your points). I would still like to remove those two sentences from the lead section and I'll try to explain why. I believe a lead section should be concise. A comparison to ASL may be a useful starting point for North American readers, but wikipedia is global. The lead section already mentions ASL, and has indicated that Auslan is not in the same language family. ASL may have more signers than other SLs, but I don't know of a good source of this claim. I think as with Auslan, estimates of ASL have been (sometimes severly) inflated. One SL with hundreds of thousands of signers is Indo-Pakistani Sign Language. Another difficulty with comparisons of size is the lack of consensus on what constitutes varieties of a single language vs separate languages — eg. BANZSL has been called a single SL.

 * On your second point, are you using the term "primary users" to mean native signers? If so, you are right that most SL users are not native, unlike spoken languages. Only about 5% of Deaf people in Australia and the US have Deaf parents. However, for the majority of the 6,500 (?) Deaf signers in Australia, Auslan may be considered a "delayed" first language, and English an L2 (even though they encountered it first). Is this what you were getting at? I think it would be great to have a section about this on the sign language page. I guess I've edited a lot of articles on SLs, and am trying to avoid reproducing the same information in each article.

 * 3: I see why you want the article to state more strongly that English-speaking countries don't share a sign language. However, I don't think the assumption that they do is natural (common maybe). Nor is it "far from the truth" (SL varieties in Aus, NZ, UK are related, as are those in US and Canada). I'm also not sure what "true" sign languages (or "false" ones) are. How about something like "It is sometimes wrongly assumed that English-speaking countries share a sign-language." ? ntennis 02:25, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

 * Thank you for your clear explanations. 1.  IPSL is new to me -- learn something every day! One reason I love WP.  Can we agree that ASL is the most widely studied large SL?  Re where to draw the line with varieties BANZSL, if a language is a dialect with an army and navy, none of the SLs are going to count! I accept what you say about concision. I still, however, see ASL as one (of several) useful points of reference.  Would it be acceptable to keep the point (perhaps changing the wording) and move it down the article? I am running out of steam, even with ever so courteous, asynchronous, globe spanning discussion.

 * 2. By "primary users" I meant those people who either use Auslan more than they do any other language, or who are more fluent in it than any other language. I know what you mean about a delayed L1, and seeing English as an L2.  I don't object to repeating information between pages if that makes sense.  For example, it would be boring for readers to see the same thing on Auslan and sign language, but very few would look at, let us say, several other Australian languages, or several other SLs, so similar info could be included in each if there is a good reason for it.  I.e. limited repetition between parent top-level and daughter example pages, but OK between multiple different daughters. So I would not object if that sentence, about fluent v native users, or a variant thereof, were added to other SL pages (though I have no intention to).

 * 3. "It is sometimes wrongly assumed that English-speaking countries share a sign-language."
 * That sounds fine to me. We could dress it up a bit, depending on where exactly it fits into the text, e.g. X and Y do, but see also article at ABC...   Progress? BrainyBabe 20:12, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

 * OK. Can we change: "How many people are fluent in it, a separate question from whether it is their native language, is unknown." to something like "Of those who use Auslan as their main language, only about 5% learned it from their parents, with the rest acquiring it from peers at school or later in life."? I want to avoid muddying things with the concept of fluency. ntennis 03:20, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

 * Hurrah! The first change is agreed. I have inserted your sentence verbatim, deleting the previous one.  What about the other points? I suggest we insert your "It is sometimes wrongly assumed that English-speaking countries share a sign-language." in the "Auslan in relation to English " section. BrainyBabe 09:40, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

 * Go ahead. I also removed the second ASL sentence from the lead, pending its move as discussed above. ntennis 01:22, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

 * Sentence inserted. It needs a linking phrase to sit better in the para, but I've drawn a blank.  Thanks for deleting that weird vandalism.  Where should the ASL sentence go?  What about in the history section? BrainyBabe 13:51, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

the end

Scottish Sign Language
"Auslan is related to British Sign Language (BSL) and Scottish Sign Language (SSL); the three have descended from the same parent language, and together comprise the BASSL Language Family"

SSL is often used as an acronym for Spanish Sign Language. Nowhere other than wiki linked pages can I find a reference to Scottish Sign Language. In fact the Scottish Association of Sign Language Interpreters (SASLI) talks about teaching BSL Equally I can't find a link to BASSL Language Families.

Deaf or deaf?
For the purposes of this article so-called Big D is mostly appropriate since (generally speaking) those who identify with Deaf culture use Auslan. Flat Out (talk) 04:19, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

 * For the benefit of other readers here, the relevant edits are.
 * I do not think that "deaf" should be capitalised (in "the deaf community") because it is not a proper noun in this context.
 * Opinions are sought from other editors. Mitch Ames (talk) 11:38, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

 * I have to agree with Mitch. "Deaf" should only be capitalised if it's a proper noun, or the first word in a sentence. Since it's not a proper noun it should be "the deaf community", or Australian deaf community, which is not a redirect. Australian Deaf community isn't even that, but I've asked for opinions at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Capital letters to gain wider input. -- Aussie Legend  ( ✉ ) 12:49, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

 * If we accept that there is a distinct cultural group, then capitalising Deaf for naming that ethnic/cultural group would be appropriate. The fact that someone "speaks" Auslan does not automatically make them part of that group, any more than me speaking French language would implicitly make me a member of a French ethnic group (and speaking English does not make me English). From the Deaf Australia page, I don't think that not being able to hear is sufficient to define someone as Deaf, either. I don't know if there is a definite Deaf culture in Australia, but if there is, then being part of it is more than just speaking Auslan, not being able to hear, or both. It is also necessary to believe there is a Deaf culture, want to be part of it, and be accepted by other members of it. Scott Davis Talk 12:14, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

 * I concur with User:ScottDavis above. Note there is a parallel discussion taking place at WP:AWNB.  Lankiveil (speak to me) 12:40, 13 November 2015 (UTC).
 * This big-D-deaf issue is discussed in Deaf culture which uses big-D-deaf (so there is precedent here in Wikipedia). The organisation Deaf Australia Inc describes Deaf culture in Australia and identifies the use of Auslan as the single most unifying characteristic of Deaf culture in Australia. If you want more information or citations, do a Google search for "big D deaf". Kerry (talk) 07:14, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Maybe the solution for this article is to rewrite the first sentence along the lines of ... Auslan is a sign language used by deaf people in Australia. The use of Auslan is a defining characteristic of the Deaf culture in Australia. [cite Deaf Australia Inc] ... I think using deaf and Deaf with appropriate wikilinks in the lede would solve the problem. Kerry (talk) 07:25, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
 * That still makes "deaf" look like a proper noun when it's not. -- Aussie Legend  ( ✉ ) 11:42, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

And what is the criteria or source we should use to determine if a word is a proper noun or not? My copy of the Macquarie Dictionary (2009) has, under the entry deaf:  '3. the deaf.''' people unable to hear. 4. the Deaf. the community of deaf people who embrace their language (sign language) and culture.'' I'm not sure whether this entry means the Macquarie believes Deaf is a proper noun or not. Innesw (talk) 05:58, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Auslan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110217114510/http://www.asliavic.com.au/about?q=node/88 to https://www.asliavic.com.au/about?q=node/88

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 17:27, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Talk:Auslan


text:
User talk:Blackcarr

Hello, welcome to Wikipedia. Here are some useful links in case you haven't already found them:

 * How to edit a page
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style

If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

Tip: you can sign your name with ~

Dersonlwd Talk 14:11, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)

title: User talk:Blackcarr


text:
User talk:76tristatang

Hello, welcome to Wikipedia. Here are some useful links in case you haven't already found them:

 * How to edit a page
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style

If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

Tip: you can sign your name with ~

Dersonlwd 14:11, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)

title: User talk:76tristatang


text:
User talk:Carlo.Ierna

Hello, welcome to Wikipedia. Here are some useful links in case you haven't already found them:

 * How to edit a page
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style

If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

Tip: you can sign your name with ~

Dersonlwd 14:11, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Hi Cat, I just saw your introduction on the new user log. Welcome to wikipedia. If you enjoy translating (and what a great range of languages you speak!) you might want to put Translation into English on your watchlist. Oh... I see you've just found it! Well, I just wanted to welcome you. I hope you enjoy yourself here. :) fabiform | talk 14:40, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
 * Thank you for beginning work on Theodor Mommsen! I had meant to, but my German is weak enough that I wondered if I could do a good job.  I look forward to seeing what you can add to the english article!  Welcome to Wikipedia, and thanks for your help, Jwrosenzweig 17:50, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the welcome and the thanks! :) I have as good as completed Mommsen. Tomorrow I'll check spelling and add some interWiki links where advisable. Cat 18:14, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
 * Hope you don't mind -- I already looked through the article and caught some little things I thought needed fixing. You did an excellent job adding a lot of material: bravo!  A question....you link to a de:article in the Mommsen article....perhaps you'll be up to translating it next? :-) If not, can you rephrase the remark somehow so that an English speaker would know they were jumping to a German article?  Just a thought.  Very good work, very glad to see you here, please keep it up, Jwrosenzweig 19:13, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
 * I don't mind at all! :) I removed the link to the de: article, I thought it existed, but it didn't. It doesn't make much sense to link to a non-existing foreign article, so I simply changed it to a normal (empty) link. Cat 09:31, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Hallo Carlo, leuk je hier even tegen te komen. Ellywa 00:10, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
 * Hoi Elly, Nederlanders zijn wel duidelijk in de minderheid hier ... Cat 09:19, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Could you have a look at my comments in Talk:Nihilartikel, the section ==on: Classification as a literary genre== ? I realize you went through a bit translating this part. I had originally left it out on purpose (but hadn't explained myself). I'd appreciate hearing from you, since you went through the trouble of translating. -- Jmabel 00:14, 30 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Hi Cat,

I added a section to the article Roman eating and drinking, hope i didn't do parts which you've already done on paper. I'm qhite well-versed in botanical terms, so it was not so difficult for me and i thought i can help. But i would be glad if you could look at spelling and language. You do so fine in those areas. Lady Tenar 19:54, 2 Jun 2004 (UTC)

 * Excellent work Lady! I just made some very minor corrections, but it is very good. Cat 10:39, 4 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Re: Psychoactive drugs
permanently or temporarily
 * This is wordy and incorrect/misleading. First of all, simply saying "alters" covers both, so it is not strictly necessary. These drugs do not alternatively alter brain function temporarily or permanently, they affect brain function temporarily with moderate use and with extreme use can affect it permanently. The brain is so organic that moderate use of any drug cannot be said to have a permanent effect. I have now inserted a separate sentence to this effect.

(such as heroin and alcohol)
 * I reworded the sentence to not refer to a non-existent class of "recreational drugs". This example is rather pointless; these drugs do not exemplify anything about psychoactive drugs, and are already listed below.

which treat neurological or psychological illnesses
 * This is unnecessarily wordy. I made it more succinct by saying just "medical". Indeed, many of these drugs are not used for neurological or psychological illnesses, so this distinction is void. I readded that information, but it is not the ideal solution. - Centrx 20:09, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)

meta-translation and globalisation
Hi Carlo... (: There is a lot of new global translation to be done in the next week; a wikimedia newsletter, and a global press release.  See Translation requests for details.  +sj +  20:51, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Paragraph 175
Could you do me a favor? I'm trying to translate the following into English and I'm not sure I understand it correctly. (If you want context, it's in commented-out text in Paragraph 175, copied from de:Paragraph 175 (Geschichte).

 * Im vorgelegten Reformentwurf sollte zusätzlich zum Paragraphen 296, der sich weitgehend mit dem alten Paragraphen 175 deckte, der Paragraph 297 geschaffen werden.

It would be appreciated if you'd just put the translated sentence on my talk page. Thanks in advance. -- Jmabel 06:33, Sep 4, 2004 (UTC)

Also, I'm trying to decipher "Ders. (Hrsg.)" in
 * Elmar Kraushaar: Unzucht vor Gericht : Die "Frankfurter Prozesse" und die Kontinuität des § 175 in den fünfziger Jahren. In: Ders. (Hrsg.): Hundert Jahre schwul : Eine Revue. Berlin 1997. S. 60-69. ISBN 3871343072

I assume "Hrsg." is "Herausgaber", but what is "Ders." in this context? -- Jmabel 21:14, Sep 4, 2004 (UTC)

I've gone and just put these in the English-language Paragraph 175 without translation for now. You can either edit in place or let me know on my talk page. Again, thanks in advance. -- Jmabel 21:29, Sep 4, 2004 (UTC)

 * Derselbe makes perfect sense. I'd even thought of that but couldn't work out "the same as what"? I was thinking "does that mean it was self-published? That doesn't seem very likely..."

 * So do I understand from what you said that this is, indeed, a self-published work? Or can Herausgaber mean "editor" as well as "publisher"?

 * Also, I still need help with that "Im vorgelegten Reformentwurf..." sentence. -- Jmabel 05:45, Sep 6, 2004 (UTC)

Hi Jmabel,

Either I have already answered all your questions on your talk page or I didn't understand your questions correctly: I gave a translation of the passage on your talk page and IMO "Derselbe" means he is author of the article and editor (not publisher) of the whole volume, which is not all that rare. If I misunderstood you, please specify what you meant. Cat 10:11, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)

You nailed it all. Thanks. -- Jmabel 09:14, Sep 7, 2004 (UTC)

Hi Carlo. I read your article on Adolf Reinach, but there doesn't appear to be anything in it to indicate why he is notable? As it stands I think it's in danger of deletion. Could you add more about what he is famous for? DJ Clayworth 15:22, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Seeking translation help again
I'm working on translating de:Friedrich II. (HRR). I'm having real trouble with the following sentence:

"Zeitgenossen nannten ihn 'stupor mundi', d.h. Staunen der Welt, worin insbesondere die Verblüffung - nicht selten auch das Befremden - der großenteils im mittelalterlichen gottbezogenen Universalismus befangenen Beobachter über das hoch entwickelte Individualitätsbewusstsein des Staufers, seinen temperamentvollen Eigensinn und seine unorthodoxe, schier nicht zu bremsende Wissbegierde zum Ausdruck kam."

It seems a bit overblown, which is probably part of my problem. Here's what I've got so far (not all literal); can you assist? (I'll watch this page, so you can just reply here.)

"His contemporaries called him stupor mundi, the 'wonder' -- or, more precisely, the 'astonishment' -- 'of the world'; it is particularly astounding, even strange, that the bulk of [?] medieval gottbezogenen Universalismus befangenen observers over the highly developed individual consciousness of the Hohenstaufen dynasty, their tempermental stubborness and their unorthodox, nearly unstoppable Wissbegierde came to be expressed."

Jmabel 06:16, Sep 22, 2004 (UTC)

 * Quite literally:

"His contemporaries called him stupor mundi, i.e. 'wonder (or literally 'astonishment') of the world', with which the majority of the observers, caught in the medieval god-related universalism, expressed their own astonishment -- not seldom the alienation -- at the highly developed individual consciousness of the Hohenstaufen, his tempermental stubborness and his unorthodox, nearly unstoppable thirst for knowledge."

The reference "des Staufers" is directed only at Friedrich himself, it is singular. "gottbezogenen universalismus" probably refers to the idea propounded by the church that people should not indulge in their individuality (personal pleasure and gain), but consider themselves only as parts of a community (the flock of the faithful). Friedrich's individualism is quite astonishing (even alienating) and modern in this respect. Perhaps we should simply use "religious" instead of "god-related". "Wissbegierde" is stronger than curiosity, and hence "thirst for knowledge" sounds about right (actually in Dutch wijsbegeerte - "desire of wisdom" is even used as synonym of philosophy - "love of knowledge"). The passage is not all that overblown: Friedrich was indeed a very remarkable personality for his time. I'll try to give it a look in a few days. I have been very busy and unable to contribute much recently: sorry! From October onwards I should have a little more time to spare. Regards, Cat 12:39, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Thank you enormously. I've worked from there. -- Jmabel 18:50, Sep 22, 2004 (UTC)

Article Licensing
Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 2000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:
 * Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
 * Multi-Licensing Guide
 * Free the Rambot Articles Project

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the " " template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

 * Option 1
 * I agree to multi-license all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

OR
 * Option 2
 * I agree to multi-license all my contributions to any U.S. state, county, or city article as described below:

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace " " with "  ". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)

Translation
Is there any chance you could help out on the few untranslated phrases in Campeador (which eventually will be merged to El Cid). (Please let me know if you won't be doing this...) -- Jmabel | Talk 06:53, Apr 9, 2005 (UTC)

eerste nl.wikimedia.org ontmoeting
ik zou iedereen graag willen uitnodigen te overwegen of zij een rol willen en/of kunnen spelen in de oprichting van een nederlandse wikimedia-organisatie. een eerste ontmoeting wordt momenteel georganiseerd, zie daarvoor hier, op de nl.wikimedia.org wiki. er zijn nog vele stappen te nemen, en meer wikianen nodig, om e.e.a. op verantwoorde wijze verder te ontwikkelen. Radiant_ >|< 10:49, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)

Husserl
Hello!

I see that you are a Husserl scholar and at one point spent some time working on the Husserl article. I myself am an undergraduate student in philosophy and am intrigued (though only moderately acquainted with) Husserl's work. I would like to vastly improve the Husserl article, including such things as noesis, noema, hyletic data, the natural standpoint, as relating to Husserl's work. Would you be willing to help contribute to this project?

Kind regards, Kevin L. 07:09, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

VWN en WCN
Beste allemaal Al enige tijd is er een Nederlandstalig chapter in oprichting, te vinden op http://nl.wikimedia.org. Dit wordt de Vereniging Wikimedia Nederland (VWN). Je kunt je interesse om lid te worden van deze vereniging hier aangeven.

Deze vereniging gaat eind augustus/begin september een Wikimedia Conferentie in Nederland (WCN) houden, volgend op Wikimania in Boston, gedeeltelijk erop inspelend middels een aantal discussiegroepen. Om iets dergelijks te organiseren is imput erg gewenst. Dus als je wilt meehelpen, of als je interesse hebt om bij een dergelijk evenement aanwezig te zijn, geef dat dan aan op nl.wikimedia. Ik hoop daar snel je imput tegemoet te zien! Met vriendelijke groet, Effeietsanders 25 feb 2006 12:27 (CET)

Requesting short translation
I'm working on translating an 1862 from Italian to English, in order to write a featured article. If possible, can you please translate just this section, which goes from page 116-117:
 * Ho convincenti ragioni per credere che in quest'anno 1560, oppure nel seguente, egli si portasse in Venezia, nella qual città, ch'ei si facesse correttor di stampe, è tradizione riferita dallo Sweert, il quale di età non fu guari rimoto, e ripetuta quindi dal Bayle, avvegnachè non corredandola di alcuna prova: però, il frequentar ch'egli faceva la bottega del libraio e stampatore Ziletti, le belle, corrette e numerose edizioni che ne sortivano, i molti dotti uomini che a tal professione per fortuna degli scrittori allora attendevano, e tra i quali splendeva il vivo esempio di Paolo Manuzio, l'inopia stessa del Maggi, sono tutti argomenti che se non danno certezza alla cosa, la rendono per altro assai credibile. Certo è che, malgrado il suo proteiforme ingegno e l'operosità instancabile, egli non dovette dapprima avere in Venezia gran sorte, giacchè nella state del 1562 trattò per recarsi presso Massimiliano Re di Baviera, quando ad istanza di un Cadamosto e di un Cornelio da Bergamo s'indusse a restare qualche tempo ancora, e poco stante incontrò un mecenate nel senatore Giovanni Donato (1). Acgemento pure ch'egli a que'giorni poca o nessuna opera prestasse allo Ziletti, dal trovare che le due opere da lui, dopo il poema, sin allora stampate, debbonsi ai torchi di Enrico Petri di Basilea, non avendo cominciato a stampare per lo Ziletti che nel 1563 (2).

Thanks for your help :) — 0918BRIAN • 2006-03-14 20:28

speech act propagation
Hello Carlo! One simple request: I've came back to read the speech act article, and had a look at the Italian, German, and Nederlands versions. I didn't like what I saw. Seems that Italian and Nederlands versions still keep the slightly biased viewpoint I quirked about in the English version. The German article doesn't even mention this problem. I'm competent enough to read it, de, and nl, not to write them. Do yo mind taking care of that editing for me, and let me know when it's done?--- I've checked French, and it's OK; I'll take care of the Spanish version.--- Cheers, Louie 21:53, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

 * I think they're better now, but the wording I really liked was "social acts as performative", which I believe the most accurate description of Reinach's contribution.--- Did you check the German? There not even a mention of Reinach over there.--- Thanks, Louie 18:24, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

 * I guess the risk of oversimplification pervades pretty much any encyclopedic effort *sigh*. There are two points where Reinach's account of performatives may be shown to be slightly less comprehensive than Austin's as a philosophy of language, while Austin's account of performatives doesn't develop as much its implications on law and ethics; but Wikipedia is not the place to put them, or discuss them. I guess the difference lies precisely in Reinach's interest in law and ethics, and Austin's emphasis on language as a whole. In my opinion, they're more like intersecting sets rather than relations of inclusion.--- Anyway, any luck with the translations? Louie 15:40, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Brentano and the Jesuits
Hello! I just found in Franz Brentano the claim that he joined the jesuits. Is this true or some misconception (on the wrong assumption that most interesting priests are jesuits)? This claim is missing in other versions of the Paedia. Do you mind clarifying it for us? Cheers, Louie (talk) 20:13, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:13, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Happy Birthday!
 Happy Birthday! Have a very happy birthday on your special day!

Best wishes, CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:06, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

title: User talk:Carlo.Ierna


text:
User talk:44AlanChan

Hello, welcome to Wikipedia. Here are some useful links in case you haven't already found them:

 * How to edit a page
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style

If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

Tip: you can sign your name with ~

Dersonlwd 14:11, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)

title: User talk:44AlanChan


text:
User talk:Ferren~enwiki

Hello, welcome to Wikipedia. Here are some useful links in case you haven't already found them:

 * How to edit a page
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style

If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

Tip: you can sign your name with ~

Dersonlwd 14:11, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Your invitation to participate in a Wikimedia-approved survey in online behavior.
Hello, my name is Michael Tsikerdekis, currently involved as a student in full time academic research at Masaryk University. I am writing to you to kindly invite you to participate in an online survey about interface and online collaboration on Wikipedia. The survey has been reviewed and approved by the Wikimedia Foundation Research Committee.

I am contacting you because you were randomly selected from a list of active editors. The survey should take about 7 to 10 minutes to complete, and it is very straightforward.

'''Wikipedia is an open project by nature. Let’s create new knowledge for everyone!''' :-)

To take part in the survey please follow the link: tsikerdekis.wuwcorp.com/pr/survey/?user=87644596 (HTTPS).

Best Regards, Michael Tsikerdekis (talk) 08:51, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

PS: The results from the research will become available online for everyone and will be published in an open access journal.

UPDATE: This is the second and final notification for participating in this study. Your help is essential for having concrete results and knowledge that we all can share. I would like to thank you for your time and as always for any questions, comments or ideas do not hesitate to contact me. PS: As a thank you for your efforts and participation in Wikipedia Research you will receive a Research Participation Barnstar after the end of the study. --Michael Tsikerdekis (talk) 08:01, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Fixed
I fixed a reference you added on earthworms. See WP:References for more info. Best wishes HGilbert (talk) 01:17, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Ferren. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Ferren~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 23:52, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 12:52, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Ferren~enwiki


text:
User talk:Mike27112

Hello, welcome to Wikipedia. Here are some useful links in case you haven't already found them:

 * How to edit a page
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style

If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

Tip: you can sign your name with ~

Dersonlwd 14:11, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of KT Tatara
A tag has been placed on KT Tatara requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. BShiplet (talk) 06:39, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

title: User talk:Mike27112


text:
User talk:Sublium

Hello, welcome to Wikipedia. Here are some useful links in case you haven't already found them:

 * How to edit a page
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style

If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

Tip: you can sign your name with ~

Dersonlwd 14:11, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Jimi Hendrix
I left sources for the Irish-Americans with African ancestry near the bottom of the talk page. I don't have one for Jimi Hendrix, feel free to add one.

Lapsed Pacifist 21:45, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

I have posted the cite that shows Jimi's paternal grandmother was 1/2 Irish. The site is here Sublium

Image:SFreemanArrest.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:SFreemanArrest.jpg, has been listed at Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. — J3ff 16:42, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

It's good to go. Thanks.Sublium

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:12, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Sublium


text:
User talk:Blaine411

Hello, welcome to Wikipedia. Here are some useful links in case you haven't already found them:

 * How to edit a page
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style

If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

Tip: you can sign your name with ~

Dersonlwd 14:11, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)

title: User talk:Blaine411