User talk:Dan Pelleg

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 A TOR Story 1.1 oh no, not again 2 No offense 3 Wikipedian Brights 4 merging away my vote 5 Diplomacy and other nonsense 6 Hebrew phonology 7 IPA in Hebrew alphabet 8 IPA for Hebrew 9 Ligatures 10 what it was 11 Vav consecutive form 12 Reply 13 de-linked IPA

[edit] A TOR Story

I have been notified that I was blocked by User:Curps (I have no idea why). I work from my home computer (not an open proxy). User:Curps has supplied no email address through which to contact him (and his user talk page announces that he has left Wikipedia, so I assume there's no help coming from there.) Dan Pelleg 18:48, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately we don't permit editing though open proxies since there has been so much abuse. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 19:16, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

I repeat: I work from my home computer (not an open proxy).

Why is my home computer believed to be working through an open proxy? Dan Pelleg 19:26, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Y	Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s): No longer a TOR node. Request handled by: —Ryūlóng (竜龍) 19:33, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Ryūlóng. I wonder, could you please explain what a TOR node is, and what was it, that was one, and no longer is, and how could that happen, and could it happen again? Just curious (I know very little about internet technology) and a little worried. Dan Pelleg 19:47, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Read Tor (anonymity network)—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 22:19, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Hey Ryūlóng, thanks for referring me there. I'm afraid it's Chinese to me (too much unfamiliar terminology). But:

1. What made anyone decide that I was using "anonymous outgoing connections"?

2. Was I?

3. What caused it?

4. What stopped it?

5. And what can I do to prevent it from happening again?

I would really appreciate a layman explanation (wouldn't other users benefit from that too?) - thanks again, Dan Pelleg 13:31, 14 July 2007 (UTC).

[edit] oh no, not again

I repeat, again:

• I work from my home computer (not an open proxy).
• Why is my home computer believed to be working through an open proxy?
• What made anyone decide that I was using "anonymous outgoing connections"?
• Was I?
• What caused it?
• What stopped it last time?
• And what can I do to prevent it from happening again?

Dan Pelleg (talk) 12:50, 5 April 2008 (UTC) {{85.178.22.250|Tor {{openproxy}}|Curps}}

You are not being blocked by that IP address. The block on 85.178.22.250 (talk · contribs) was lifted months ago. You need to copy your new block message with the new IP address that is causing the problem and the new blocking admin's name for someone to lift it. What I can only assume is happening is you are on a dynamic IP and someone else in your range is running a TOR node. The TOR node gets automatically blocked, but then you switch onto that IP later. --B (talk) 13:49, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] No offense

No offense taken, sorry for taking so long, I've been on vacation. I have written a reply in Talk:Theory of relativity. Cheers! Izbitzer 10:20, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedian Brights

The category is up for deletion. You may wish to oppose. -- Evertype·✆ 13:53, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your correction. -- Evertype·✆ 22:37, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] merging away my vote

Dear Jc37, you removed all but one of my oppositions to category deletions on Wikipedia:User categories for discussion. Is it against regulations to express the same (exact) opinion on several distinct points? Dan Pelleg 23:42, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Not at all. At issue is that several people, including you, were not addressing the specific sub-nominations, but User categories in general (and they were mostly simple copy/pastings). For clarity and general readability, it seemed easier to merge all those comments to the umbrella nomination. The closer will still take the comments from the umnrella nom in consideration of the individual groupings (Note that Kbdank71's comments are also at the umbrella nom.) I hope this helps clarify. - jc37 00:01, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

I see. Still: I copypasted my opinion not everywhere but only where I wanted to express it concerning the categories in question. Dan Pelleg 00:34, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

As it was a copy/pasted comment, that was generic, and in no way addressed the categories directly under discussion, but merely Wikipedian categories in general, and as the comments would have been given weight by the closer as part of the umbrella nom (applying those comments to every subcategory), your comments would have been the weight due them, and would have been applied to those sub-categories. My apologies if you felt that your general comments about Wikipedian categories, did not apply to all Wikipedian categories, but merely those which you commented on. In reading your comments I would not have imagined that perspective:

• "Nothing will be gained by deleting. There's generally no need for a fanatic witch-hunt on everything on user pages that isn't purely "Wikipedian". I for one do find it helpful to know facts about Wikipedians, which they are willing to share about themselves. This has nothing to do with social networking: it's completely relevant to, and useful for, the exchange of information while editing here (exactly as user language templates are)."

As I said in the discussion, this isn't about the templates, but the Wikipedian categories. Incidentally, I would not characterise my act of nominating some categories for discussion to be a "fanatic witch-hunt". You may wish to consider your words, or at least do a bit of research on your target, before making such acccusations. - jc37 18:10, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

I do not think that JC37 is doing anything to make the Wikipedia a better place. The actions you point to, Dan, show that as well. -- Evertype·✆ 07:58, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

While you're entitled to your opinion, you perhaps should assume good faith, or even perhaps do some research before making such a blanket statement. - jc37 18:10, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Dear Jc37! Thanks for explaining about the umbrella nomination principal; though I do believe I wasn't the only one who didn't get it… By "fanatic witch-hunt" I wasn't at all referring to you or to your acts personally (I admit: I hadn't carefully studied the network of persons behind the discussion before posting), I didn't even mean to say that there was a witch-hunt taking place, only that I sensed the looming possibility of one. I realized too that my opposition was also generic and continued to explain my point of view in the talk page. Dan Pelleg 22:00, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Diplomacy and other nonsense

Dear Don

Your edit summaries rely heavily on the word "nonsense" - they usually refer to correcting something yuo say is "nonsensical". No doubt you're right and the things you correct are nonsense, but other editors, less knowledgeable and yet, incomprehensibly, even more egotistical, than yourself, tend to take offense at assaults on all they hold dear. Tone down the language my son, you'll get further with sugar than with vinegar. PiCo (talk) 14:43, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll avoid the term from now on. Dan Pelleg (talk) 18:38, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hebrew phonology

Hi. You recently expanded a table in the article Hebrew phonology, but you left the old version of the table behind as well. Perhaps you could see what can be salvaged from the old table, and merge the two. Regards. FilipeS (talk) 22:40, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi FilipeS, I'd love to comply but I couldn't figure out what you mean: I added the missing vowel signs, arranged them according to the traditional "length" attribute, and separated for clarity between phoneme/pronunciation/example in English, then I moved the phoneme /ə/ to the bottom since the assertion that it's a Hebrew phoneme is controversial – but I believe that all the information that was there before is actually still there. Dan Pelleg (talk) 00:47, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Hello again. Hebrew_phonology#Vowels currently has two tables, one you added at the top, and another (in the subsection "Orthography") that was already there before your edits. There is information that is repeated in the two tables. I think the two tables should be combined into just one. This is all. Regards. FilipeS (talk) 17:39, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi FilipeS, I'm away from home for a few days – I'll look into it as soon as I can... by the way, merry X-mas & a happy new year! Dan Pelleg (talk) 18:02, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi again. Ok, I misunderstood because I didn't actually add that first table, i.e. I just took the information that was already listed there, put it into a table, and then expanded and filled in missing information. The second table is slightly inaccurate, when I have some time I'll do the work (if no one beats me to it...) Dan Pelleg (talk) 13:14, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] IPA in Hebrew alphabet

Why did you change the dashes into brackets? FilipeS (talk) 21:29, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Because phonetics are denoted by square brackets, whereas phonemes are denoted by slashes. Take a look e.g. at Phoneme#Notation: "A transcription that only indicates the different phonemes of a language is said to be phonemic. Such transcriptions are enclosed within virgules (slashes), / /; these show that each enclosed symbol is claimed to be phonemically meaningful. On the other hand, a transcription that indicates finer detail, including allophonic variation like the two English L's, is said to be phonetic, and is enclosed in square brackets, [ ]. Dan Pelleg (talk) 17:57, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

That's right, but I think a phonemic transcription makes more sense in an article about an alphabet. Anyway, happy holidays to you as well. :-) FilipeS (talk) 16:58, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Hey FilipeS! You're right, although I think it doesn't hurt to have the phonetic information too. In any case, I only changed the slashes to brackets where the transcriptions had already been listed as IPA-transcriptions before I'd made any changes. Dan Pelleg (talk) 12:59, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] IPA for Hebrew

Dear Don Pelleg,

Modelling after Template:IPAEng, which links to an English specific Help page, I created Template:IPAHe, which links to IPA for Hebrew. I tried it out on Sheqel sign and Ktiv male , what do you think? Epson291 (talk) 10:10, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Great. I'd maybe tag the IPA link with the <small> tag to produce e.g. IPA: [ktiv χa'saʁ ni'kud], for better reading flow? Dan Pelleg (talk) 10:35, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Good idea, I shall change it. Epson291 (talk) 02:33, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Ligatures

There is a difference, though not all languages make the distinction. If you want to be specific, you can use a tie bar [t͡s]. If you use Internet explorer like I do, then it's probably off a little but it's supposed to look like this: . Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 21:17, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Nope, it shows as [t□s] (IE7 on Windows XP Home Edition), which version / system do you use? I am actually unhappy with the way diphthongs are represented in Wikipedia, since using two vowels without a liaison implies two syllables, whereas diphthongs are monosyllabic (Hebrew ['bait] means "house" when it's disyllabic, "byte" when it's monosyllabic). So, are ligatures actually non standard in IPA, or just uncommon? Dan Pelleg (talk) 00:55, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] what it was

You may be right, though I thought the spelling "tsadick" was suspicious. FilipeS (talk) 19:58, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

:-) I suspect it was a naïve inadvertence. Dan Pelleg (talk) 00:08, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Vav consecutive form

It is true that the Hebrew perfect and imperfect tenses have essentially developed into past and future tenses (with the participle functioning as a present tense), but Modern Hebrew does not use vav consecutive forms. Biblical Hebrew, which does use the vav consecutive, did not have tenses in the Indo-European sense, being aspective instead. I'll update the explanation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nolewr (talk • contribs) 20:01, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Reply

Could well be, actually. I just copied those from a box on...daleth I think it was. Thought it looked nifty. I'm an amateur when it comes to the Hebrew alphabet, sadly. Would it be wise to change it to "serif"/"sans-serif"? Cheers! --Yossarian 05:28, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] de-linked IPA

Sorry, in the edit summary I should have referenced my user page, which has a detailed explanation of my reasoning. The long and the short of it is that the MOS recommends against doing so. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 22:58, 6 April 2008 (UTC)