Misplaced Pages

User talk:Maunus: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 13:02, 1 May 2018 editSharkslayer87 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users4,436 edits There is a difference between claims and acceptance: new section← Previous edit Revision as of 13:31, 1 May 2018 edit undoMaunus (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers60,250 edits There is a difference between claims and acceptanceNext edit →
Line 44: Line 44:


== There is a difference between claims and acceptance == == There is a difference between claims and acceptance ==

Rajus don't claim they are Kshatriyas. They are Kshatriyas and there is acceptance for that. ] (]) 13:02, 1 May 2018 (UTC) Rajus don't claim they are Kshatriyas. They are Kshatriyas and there is acceptance for that. ] (]) 13:02, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
:Then you need to present the sources that say so unequivocally. And if there are sources that say otherwise then they need to be included as well.] · ] 13:31, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Revision as of 13:31, 1 May 2018


Bon article

Hi Maunus, for information, after translation in French of most of the article Language, I've started a label procedure and mentionned your name ], assuming you were the main author, but correct me if I am wrong. Thanks a again for this beautiful article and for the interaction. Cordially Cathrotterdam (talk) 06:46, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi Cathrotterdam, I am sorry I did not get involved much in the translation process, but am happy to see that you have nominated it for bon article. There are of course other authors of the artivcle, but I think it is correct to consider me the main contriubutor to its current state (User:Rjanag wrote the poart about neurolinguistics, User:Cnilep the part about acquisition). Many thanks for keeping me updated and bonne chance with the nomination.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 07:01, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Much oblige

This is a "don'øt", right?

Thanks for helping out with Swedish language. Good call on the order of sections.

Gonna try to satisfy the concerns over at Misplaced Pages:Featured article review/Swedish language/archive2, so help or advice (like good sources) will be most welcome.

And have some pastry for your troubles. :-)

Peter 09:41, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi Maunus, I was about to ask about the same thing but met the new multi-coloured edit conflict gadget, more confusing than a whole fairground lit up in twinkly lamps. The article is in pretty good order and deserves to be rescued. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:46, 24 March 2018 (UTC)
I have some well-deserved leave this week and I'll start working on the Swedish article. Could you e-mail me the PDF you mentioned in the FAR? I'm sure it could be very helpful.
Peter 10:18, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
Actually, it turned out to be pretty useless - mostly reading lessons. I will see if I don't receive the two other grammars I ordered sometime during this week.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 10:26, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
@Peter Isotalo:, now I have Auwera and Koenig and Holmes and Hinchcliffe's "Essential Swedish Grammar" both of which will be useful. I may be able to scan important parts and send them to you.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 06:38, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

Seseo

Sorry, I linked to a wrong section. I meant to link to Phonological_history_of_Spanish_coronal_fricatives#Historical_evolution. As you can see, it's clearly wrong to call seseo a "merger of /s/ and /θ/" because accents with seseo have never had the latter in the first place. It's rather like calling the foot-strut split a merger. It's wrong. Mr KEBAB (talk) 17:39, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Ok, understood now. I have selfreverted my reversion of your change. Thanks!·maunus · snunɐɯ· 17:42, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Aztec legacy

Maunus, I'll see what I can do next week to improve the article. Amuseclio (talk) 01:59, 4 April 2018 (UTC)Amuseclio

Aztec etc

Hey I just noticed it's in GAN. I'm busy for the near future, but when we're both done, I'll chip in in any way I can. May be a few weeks tho, sorry. later... Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 05:02, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Hey @Lingzhi:, thanks for the statement of moral support. I personally don't mind long GA reviews, as long as the article gets better - but I think the reviewer may well want to have it done earlier than a couple of weeks. But thanks! I know you are working on the Bengal famine article and that there is some sort of what shall we say...hullaballoo...going on with that. I hope you get it solved, so the article can be promoted. Best.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 07:38, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Bengal famine of 1943 spot checks

Ok, it would have taken me some time. But it did seem like it was going nowhere. I think some of the objections to the writing style were also valid. I am sorry your work didn't pay off.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 06:23, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

There is a difference between claims and acceptance

Rajus don't claim they are Kshatriyas. They are Kshatriyas and there is acceptance for that. Sharkslayer87 (talk) 13:02, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Then you need to present the sources that say so unequivocally. And if there are sources that say otherwise then they need to be included as well.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 13:31, 1 May 2018 (UTC)