User talk:Kwamikagami#Reflist needed.

30px

The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=South_Italian_language&redirect=no South Italian language] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at {{section link|1=Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 7#South Italian language}} until a consensus is reached. 1234qwer1234qwer4 03:53, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

Why are you replacing straight apostrophes with curly ones, citing MOS:APOSTROPHE -- which says just the opposite. -- Elphion (talk) 00:43, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

(If these are not curly quotes but something like {{hamza}}, it would be helpful to use the templates instead of the actual character, since it's hard to tell what a bare symbol is when editing.) -- Elphion (talk) 00:49, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

:Yes, it's a letter like the hamza. Sometimes I do use the templates, but some people complain about that.

:There's a quick test to see if an apostrophe-like character is a punctuation mark or a letter, though it doesn't work on all browsers: When I click on a word that's all letters, like Hawai{{okina}}i, the whole word will be selected. But when a punctuation mark is substituted, like Hawai'i [same with a curly quote], then the selection ends before that character. I don't know if that will work for you.

:There are bots that clean up curly quotes, and they distinguish the two. — kwami (talk) 03:18, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

::The double-click trick does work in my browser -- thanks for the tip. (Though, of course, it won't work when the word is a link, grrr). I just wish browsers would make it easier to see the underlying character codes. Otherwise uninitiated editors (like yours truly), dutifully applying WP:APOSTROPHE, will just change all the "curly apostrophes" back into straight apostrophes. Forestalling that is one advantage of the templates. -- Elphion (talk) 13:59, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

:::Yes, it is. I'll try to be more consistent. — kwami (talk) 19:14, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

:::Last I checked, there weren't any WP titles with curly quotes in them. Was that you? Previously SQL runs had turned up hundreds, the first time I ran it over a thousand. — kwami (talk) 19:17, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

::::No, not me -- I change curly to straight when I stumble upon them, but I don't hunt them! -- Elphion (talk) 20:47, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

Maybe this tip should be inserted into MOS:APOSTROPHE, to avoid some well-meaning editors from reverting the correct changes because the letters look indistinguishable from curly apostrophes. Double sharp (talk) 13:53, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

:Or maybe not. For me it selects the whole word even with a straight apostrophe. Double sharp (talk) 13:59, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

::It seems to not work for most people. Presumably a matter of which browser they're using — kwami (talk) 21:08, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

:::Regardless, it still makes me think that MOS:APOSTROPHE should include some words noting that apostrophe-like letters can often resemble curly quotes, and exhorting that some effort be made to check before reverting. :) Double sharp (talk) 11:27, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

::::It would be useful in MOS:APOSTROPHE to mention the existence of various templates for similar characters. A list of those templates at MOS:APOSTROPHE might be overkill, but a reference to the table in the template documentation -- as at template:Hamza -- would be useful. -- Elphion (talk) 16:12, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

:::::But we do mention them there. — kwami (talk) 19:06, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

::::::Yes, I see. Not sure how I missed that. The table included in the templates' documentation is what really got my attention. -- Elphion (talk) 14:42, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Should we actually be considering the result of taking the IAU definition totally literally? AFAIK no one does that, since there's no calls to demote Mercury to SSSB. :) Double sharp (talk) 13:51, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

:I was being ambiguous. If we want to use the practical definition, then for consistency we'll need to change the definition of a planet to contradict the IAU in our other articles. I'm fine with doing that -- that a planet is a body that has been in HE at some point in its history and retains that shape -- but thought that might be more trouble than saying bodies like Quaoar and Iapetus are ambiguous as dwarf/satellite planets.

:Mercury is also a planet because it's on the list of 8 objects that the IAU has declared to be planets. They've wisely not attempted to do that with DPs, which leaves things ambiguous — kwami (talk) 21:02, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

::Hmm, yeah. There may be a problem in the sense that the practical definition seems to be thought of as too obvious to state outright. So I guess it's okay as it is.

::Well, I guess it's not so bad for major planets. The difference between the big 8 and everyone else is so obvious. Double sharp (talk) 23:10, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

:::In the Solar system - I doubt it holds elsewhere — kwami (talk) 02:27, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

:::I still think Stern's 'if it looks like a world' definition works best. It just doesn't sound scientific, so the IAU resorted to pseudoscience for credibility. — kwami (talk) 02:30, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

::::I was thinking only of the Solar System. But happy to concede the point indeed; it must be only a matter of time before we find some truly strange exoplanets.

::::I likewise prefer Stern's definition. Well, maybe if we can call Vesta an ex-world. :) Double sharp (talk) 09:57, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

So, um, what's the IPA for the "dental þ" that JRRT was describing in "The Shibboleth of Fëanor"?

{{cquote|It would appear that for reasons not now, of course, fully understood, the majority of the Ñoldor developed a distaste for the sound þ. This in Quenya was earlier, as it remained in Vanyarin, a dental spirant (made with the tongue-tip behind the back of the upper front teeth, which makes the passage to s easier). Similarly the labial spirant f was bilabial, and so remained in Vanyarin. The shift from dental and labial þ and f to interdental þ and labio-dental f occurred first in Telerin. The labio-dental f soon spread to Ñoldorin. Probably because it helped to make f and the voiceless w (transcribed hw) of Quenya more clearly distinguished.(1) Why the Ñoldor did not then proceed to adopt the interdental þ and so clarify the distinction between þ and s remains uncertain. ... But for 'political' reasons and in times of peace and calm thought the loremasters would no doubt have prevailed and the change to interdental þ have been accepted.|source=Vinyar Tengwar 41, p. 7}}

Clearly one of the sound changes discussed in Telerin is ɸ > f, but how should I write the other one, that changed to s in Quenya and θ in Telerin? Double sharp (talk) 09:54, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

:If you mean a dental vs interdental θ, you might transcribe it {{angbr IPA|θ̠}}, assuming it's not a sibilant, but it's iffy to try to transcribe sounds that aren't described in much detail — kwami (talk) 21:47, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

I reverted your moves at Te'mexw Treaty Association and Naut'sa mawt Tribal Council. Per WP:TSC and WP:APOSTROPHE we should avoid using non-standard apostrophes/curly apostrophes in articles (unless they are of course part of that language's orthography like Hawaiʻian). Te'mexw and Naut'sa are both anglicizations of words so they are English-language terms, and English doesn't use curly apostrophes as part of its orthography. I also posted on WP:RM/TR about the Scia'new First Nation article, since Scʼiⱥnew is not right in any case (it should be SC’IȺNEW (assuming they are using Saanich now over at Becher Bay--Maybe it's Sooke and from some unpublished Sooke orthography). Thx PersusjCP (talk) 17:51, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

:Are they just punctuation, then, and not part of the names? Do you have a source for that?

:Also, TSC is irrelevant. It just says to leave a rd. — kwami (talk) 18:03, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

::No, I'm saying that there is no orthographical difference between Te'mexw Treaty Association and using curly apostrophe. It's not more proper somehow. Curly apostrophe is not part of the English language. I don't know why they spell it like that. That's just how anglicizations of Indigenous languages are. They use non-standard spellings. Just look at T'sou-ke. Why do they have an apostrophe and hyphen? IDK. So unless you have a source saying that English uses curly apostrophe like that, it shouldn't be used.

::In hul̕q̓umín̓um̓ it would be spelled nuc̓am̓at (nuts’umat in practical orthography), or for Te'mexw it is tumuxw (tumuhw practical orthography--Strangely, they pull this one from Halkomelem even though it is mostly Northern Straits FNs in the association). This one doesn't even have any apostrophe at all, even though the English does. So to answer why, I don't know. That's just how they anglicize it now.

::TSC says redirect if "exceptionally." I wouldn't say this is an exceptional situation. It's typical anglicization of non-English terms. PersusjCP (talk) 18:46, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

:::The spelling T'sou-ke is an exoticization of Sooke. The apostrophe is a mere decorative element, just as the hyphen is, and so it should be encoded as an ASCII apostrophe. It sounds like the apostrophe in Te'mexw is similar, and so you were right to revert me. However, if the 'apostrophe' is a letter or part of a letter, as in Hawai{{okina}}i, then it is not actually an apostrophe, and APOSTROPHE does not apply [as that page explains]. In English we would either drop it [as in 'Hawaii'] or retain it, but if we retain it we should encode it properly. From what you've said, it appears that the t's in Naut'sa mawt indicates glottalization, not just a separation of t and s as an apostrophe would indicate. The same situation applies to e.g. Serbian names, which often end in -ić. We can either drop the accent or retain it, but we shouldn't substitute it with something like -iç just because English orthography doesn't have the letter ć. — kwami (talk) 19:20, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

::::I agree that the Naut'sa "apostrophe" is probably indicating glottalization. Per themselves, they seem to just use an apostrophe instead of a specially encoded character [https://www.nautsamawt.org/]. So I think it should stick with what they use (Same as Te'mexw) PersusjCP (talk) 20:05, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

:::::But WP does not copy coding approximations from electronic sources. Doing so would needlessly multiply variants. For example, many sources use a curly quotation mark for the Hawaiian okina; we do not follow that practice. Instead we use the Unicode character intended for the letter. Unicode letters and punctuation marks behave differently, so it can cause problems to substitute one for the other even if our sources do so. — kwami (talk) 20:09, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

::::::What would you suggest using then, ʼ ? I would support that for Naut'sa mawt then :) side note, is there an easy way to type that on Wikipedia, like a template, that I could use? PersusjCP (talk) 20:36, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

:::::::Yes, that's what I would use.

:::::::The template {{tl|hamza}} will get you the 9-shaped glottal stop, and {{tl|okina}} the Hawaiian 6-shaped one.

:::::::The MOS recommends using these templates in the text of an article, so the difference [and intention] is apparent -- some typefaces make a visible distinction, but many do not. That's not a possibility for the page name of course.

:::::::I often forget to do that; due to a an argument that we shouldn't use the templates, I switched to Unicode a few years ago and keep forgetting to switch back. — kwami (talk) 20:46, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

::::::::Will do, thanks. Do you want to move the page back? PersusjCP (talk) 20:55, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::Either way. It would probably look better if you did it. — kwami (talk) 20:56, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

::::::::::Hmm, I tried, but seems I can't and is giving an error message due to the blacklist: (?!(User|Wikipedia)( talk)?:|Talk:)\P{L}*\p{Latin}.*[^\p{Latin}\P{L}ʻ].* # Latin + non-Latin. PersusjCP (talk) 21:11, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::::Yeah, I think that's to prevent mixing scripts and phishing titles; I've reported it before. — kwami (talk) 21:15, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

Working with an indigenous intellectual in Eastern DRC, via whatsapp, we intend to build a page that reflects the actual reality of Kinyindu (iso=nyg, glotto=nyin1248). However, my Wikipedia skills are limited. Can we loop you into the conversation? Malangali (talk) 04:32, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

:Sure.

:Bear in mind though that most native speakers of a language don't know much about their language in an encyclopedic sense. I know native English-speakers that insist that English is a Romance language, Hindi-speakers who claim that their language is completely unrelated to Urdu, and all sorts of other nonsense. But a native speaker is good for verifying that language texts are grammatically correct, that the translations are good, etc. — kwami (talk) 04:38, 26 April 2025 (UTC)