User talk:Nardog

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If your message may be of benefit to, or may benefit from, other editors, post it on a more visible talk page.

Battles over rhotic IPA transcription[edit]

Hiya! Repeatedly throughout my time on WP, users seem bent on removing the symbol <r> in IPAc-en transcriptions where we have community-established conventions (for example, insisting /ɑːr/ should be replaced with /ɑː/ on an article with a British subject). Are you aware if we have any fast and easy policy pages where we could helpfully point these users towards? It's tiring to repeat the same battles over and over again. Any help is appreciated! Wolfdog (talk) 22:19, 4 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Wolfdog: MOS:RHOTIC. Nardog (talk) 12:08, 5 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks Nardog, but that link redirects to an MoS section that I've already tried (and failed) to use to persuade the unconvinced editors. Thanks for the try! Wolfdog (talk) 23:12, 5 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well, then they're wrong. ;) "Then you have to use {{IPA-all}}, not {{IPAc-en}}" is what I usually say next in that situation. Nardog (talk) 23:35, 5 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


By "full vowel", are you referring to the "i:" phoneme? To my ear, the sound is closer to the unstressed "i" of "happy". The article previously gave an erroneous pronunciation with the stress on the second syllable, and I think the stressed "i:" is a relic of that error.

Best wishes, Jean-de-Nivelle (talk) 11:14, 22 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

As explained in Help:IPA/English#cite_note-i-u-45, /i/ stands for a situation where conservative speakers have /ɪ/ and most speakers nowadays have /iː/ in a prevocalic or morpheme-final position. The second vowel in Thandiwe, as far as I'm aware, is neither prevocalic, morpheme-final, nor pronounced alternatively with /ɪ/. Nardog (talk) 12:07, 22 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks. I'm not sure that the footnote is trying to convey quite what you suggest. My reading of it is that /i/ represents a sound between /i:/ and /ɪ/, and the precise location on that continuum will vary with accent, "closer to /iː/ in accents with happy tensing ... and to /ɪ/ in others". The "i" of "Thandiwe" isn't strictly prevocalic, but to my ear the "i" is neither a full /iː/, nor an /ɪ/. We're also talking about an African name (meaning "beloved") pronounced by an English speaker, so the question of whether or not the "i" is morpheme-final isn't straightforward. How would you transcribe "happiness" (edit: or "handiness")? The pronunciations given here use /i/, and - again, to my ear - the sound is close to the sound of the "i" of "Thandiwe". Jean-de-Nivelle (talk) 13:16, 22 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
WP:DIAPHONEMIC means that /i/ means "this vowel is necessarily pronounced as /ɪ/ by those who pronounce happy with /ɪ/", which isn't substantiated by the source. All unstressed vowels are shorter than stressed ones (as noted at the end of Help:IPA/English#Key), so you have to ask why the key offers (i.e. {{IPAc-en}} permits) ⟨i⟩ and ⟨u⟩, in particular, without the length mark but not other tense vowels (⟨ɑ, e, o, ɔ⟩). The answer is that ⟨i, u⟩ are historical artifacts devised for notational convenience. See Happy tensing for more. Nardog (talk) 06:55, 23 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Hi, I installed User:Evad37/OneClickArchiver in my common.js and tried to use it at WP:ANI. It appended the ANI section to an archive but then hung, meaning it did not remove the section from ANI itself. I've undone the archive edit and uninstalled the script. I know people use the script, so I'm wondering why it didn't work. As you may remember, I'm very ignorant when it comes to scripts, so I'm hoping you can help me or at least point me to the right place. Evad37 hasn't edited in months, so I can't ask them. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:57, 4 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm afraid I'm not familiar with this script, so I suggest you consult a forum like WP:VPT and see if others have the same issue. My hunch though is that it would have worked if you'd just waited or it's due to your computer's capacity, given ANI is a fairly large page. Nardog (talk) 00:09, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I did wait a good bit, but thanks for the advice. What I was going to archive I'm no longer interested in archiving, so I think I'll continue to do without the script.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:19, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Barnstar for excellent scripting[edit]

Scripting Barnstar.png The Scripting Barnstar
This Scripting Barnstar is awarded to User:Nardog for outstanding work creating the script RefRenamer, enabling users for the first time to convert opaque numeric ref names generated by Visual Editor into reasonable reference names. This script addresses a problem that was and is a huge thorn in the side of many editors, and makes our work much easier and faster as a result. Thanks! Mathglot (talk) 07:06, 22 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Information.svg The redirect Out of the Blue (upcoming film) 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 Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 February 28 § Out of the Blue (upcoming film) until a consensus is reached. Steel1943 (talk) 18:03, 28 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I noticed that you've edited this page in the past. I have the Editor of the Week user box on my user page and there's now a nasty big red-link instead of a link to the nomination page (or whatever). So something is wrong with the code and I don't know what. Could you please take a look and maybe fix it? I've also left this note on the last couple of editors who've edited this userbox. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 03:45, 1 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You can see it at User:Shearonink#Userboxen. Shearonink (talk) 03:49, 1 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The date was off by one. Nardog (talk) 03:53, 1 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
YOU ARE AWESOME. Thank you for fixing that. Shearonink (talk) 04:57, 1 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Icelandic rn[edit]

Re Stjórn, yeah, it looks odd but Icelandic adds a t to the rn consonant cluster at the end of a word after a vowel, so pronounced /rtn/ despite being spelled rn. This page talks a bit about it (scroll down).Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 23:06, 14 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for the clarification. Icelandic orthography indicates it should be [stjoutn̥] or [stjourtn̥]. Pinging Þjarkur to make sure. Nardog (talk) 23:15, 14 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, I believe you're right. I've updated Stjórn... —Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 12:51, 15 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

John Dudgeon[edit]

May I ask you why you removed the hatnote in John Dudgeon? As stated in the article, Elspeth Dudgeon once used the male name "John Dudgeon" when she played a male role. --saebou (talk) 03:34, 18 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oh, sorry, I had missed that. Restored. Nardog (talk) 03:38, 18 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

Vitruvian Barnstar Hires.png The Technical Barnstar
thx a lot for the script! it works great! i copied it to c:User:RZuo/CopyCodeBlock.js and made some changes.

i'm a noob in coding, so i couldnt figure out two questions. why does the script not work when i copypasted it to my common.js, but only when it's loaded from mw.loader? it also doesnt work on text wrapped by poem or code tags, it seems? like c:Commons:Village_pump/Technical/Archive/2018/12#Bulk_rename_for_51_files, c:Template:Autoarchive_resolved_section#Usage or File:Lettre de Montaigne au maréchal de Matignon, 26 janvier 1585.jpg. RZuo (talk) 07:48, 8 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Because the script uses ES6 syntax, which is not supported by MediaWiki's validator for common.js, global.js, etc. Scripts loaded via mw.loader.load(), importScript(), etc. are not screened by MW so they just run in your browser verbatim.
Because <poem> is for poems, not code. You can make it work for poem tags by changing $content.find('pre'); to $content.find('pre, .poem');. <code> is inline only so it doesn't really make sense. Nardog (talk) 10:58, 8 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Hello, Nardog!

You may remember that we make great use of your userscript as a gadget in SqWiki. Now, I'm not the best vandal-fighter and I sometimes struggle to differentiate between rollback and undo (or what the outcomes will be if one does one instead of the other in certain scenarios) but I was thinking that maybe a QuickUndo script would be a good thing to have? Or maybe that would just "increase visual clutter without much benefits" as 9/10 you want to rollback changes instead of undoing them one by one? This is not really a request for a new script more than it is a request for your opinion on the matter. - Klein Muçi (talk) 13:13, 17 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry I got carried away. I'm having a hard time imagining what your proposed script would do. I assume it undoes an edit in one click, but where? Nardog (talk) 09:15, 22 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
In recent changes and in pages waiting for review? Also in page histories but there already is an undo command so it would only "buttonize" it. — Klein Muçi (talk) 18:16, 22 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Refrenamer choking on Waist-to-height ratio[edit]

Broad/Narrow Transcription and Spanish names[edit]

Hi Nardog, this is re your edit at Falkland Islands.

I actually made the same change myself and then reverted after looking at various phonological texts on Spanish. It seems that /s/ > /z/ after a voiced consonant is considered "correct", when in coda and across word boundaries. Now, I know that in various varieties this is not the case, rioplatense Spanish would have /s/ > /h/ as a possibility in both cases, some varieties would likely have /s/ as a possibility and southern Spanish varieties could lengthen the first vowel and delete or aspirate /s/ in a variety of ways.

Our own guides for similar cases in English would give the broad transcription, allowing [ˈislas malˈβinas], governed by policies like MOS:RHOTIC. But as this is a pronunciation guide, intended to show how the word sounds, are we not better going for the more common and correct narrow transcription [ˈizlaz malˈβinas] than the broad transcription which I think is not actually used that much?

The above question is genuine, rather than rhetorical btw! Anyway, it seems you are interested in IPA issues, if you have any idea of precedent in this case, it would be helpful.

Boynamedsue (talk) 08:00, 29 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Boynamedsue: [z] was recently removed from the Help:IPA/Spanish key after talk page discussion not only because many varieties realize preconsonantal /s/ as [h] or [] as you point out but also because recent studies show variability in voicing assimilation even in accents where it remains a dental fricative. I was replacing [z] in all IPA-es transclusions; the fact you had edited it at Falkland Islands just a few days prior is but a funny coincidence. The whole point of the key, and of {{IPA-es}} linking the input transcription to it, is to explain what the symbols mean, so restoring [z] in just this one article is counterproductive and confusing for readers (as explained in MOS:PRON#Other languages). If you think it should be restored, you should make a case for it on the key's talk page. Nardog (talk) 19:25, 29 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


I took to its talk page the edition I wanted to make for Help:IPA/Galician, you might want to check it out. Thank you. Navarretedf (talk) 13:31, 30 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Hi, if you have a few minutes, would you review my copyedit of Eth, please? It had gotten into a bit of a mess with contributions from editors with English as a second language: I think I have interpreted their intent but on a couple of occasions had to guess. I have also used {{angbr}} fairly (too?) liberally where italics, quote marks or 'regular' were being used fairly randomly. TYVM. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 16:06, 3 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. I no longer know where the file keeping the links is to fix this.

If you click on <ɡ𝼊 ɢ𝼊> and <ŋ𝼊 ɴ𝼊>, you should be taken taken to voiced retroflex click and nasal retroflex click.

Thanks! — kwami (talk) 11:30, 7 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Kwamikagami: Done. But what are you referring to when you say "per JIPA"? Nardog (talk) 06:57, 8 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I asked the editor of JIPA, and she said they had no problem with authors using extIPA letters in their 'Illustrations of the IPA'; as far as they're concerned, they are IPA. — kwami (talk) 07:07, 8 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Kwamikagami: Has the IPA ever published such a statement? How can one verify that's their position? I also don't see ⟨𝼊⟩ on the 2015 extIPA chart. So even if extIPA was considered equivalent to IPA, where can one verify ⟨𝼊⟩ is part of it? Nardog (talk) 07:11, 8 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well, you could ask (their contact info is publicly available), but how would we verify that they're not? It's a matter of semantics whether the phrase "extensions to the IPA" means that they are or are not part of the IPA; either including or excluding them would be OR without evidence. I wrote and asked for clarification, if articles in their series designed to illustrate the IPA could use extIPA letters. — kwami (talk) 07:15, 8 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That's not how it works. Since Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought, if no WP:PUBLISHED sources can be found which say something did or did not happen, we just say neither it did nor did not happen. We can say such-and-such symbols have been used in articles or have been added in Unicode, but we can't call them IPA symbols. Nardog (talk) 09:05, 8 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


You say "this is exactly one of the "articles that are actually about terms"". I would argue that, per WP:NOTDICT, this means that it doesn't belong on Wikipedia at all. --Macrakis (talk) 19:54, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The very policy you link to has a section about "When a word or phrase itself may be an encyclopedic subject". Simply being about a term doesn't automatically disqualify an article from inclusion in the encyclopedia. Failing WP:GNG does. Nardog (talk) 20:09, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, that section gives some criteria, namely "must go beyond what would be found in a dictionary entry". The OED (a dictionary) already mentions that the "hassock or footstool sense" is "perhaps due to misunderstanding of the nursery rhyme", so that doesn't "go beyond" the dictionary definition.
As for GNG, that section explicitly says that "the presence of a term in a dictionary does not by itself establish notability". The sources for tuffet include 6 general dictionaries, two specialized dictionaries, and one source which actually addresses the question in a children's book (Crothers). There are several primary sources in the form of illustrations. That doesn't seem to establish notability. --Macrakis (talk) 15:18, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]