User talk:Nardog

Untitled

Hello,

A Image:Clacket.png is a board used in film making. The Producer has the information of the scene number and time of filming. While filming they shoot with a camera without sound. Sound is recorded separately. They put the clacket at the start and click the board in front of the camera. This helps the Editor start both the shots and the sound together to help him get the pictures and the sound sequence together. Basically it is a board that helps the film-crew keep the sound and pictures together.--Nasib Bitar 01:57, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

You are right, most probably the word I used is originally French I think the word you used is more accurate. Many thanks for your information.--Nasib Bitar 09:20, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Image:FDM_screenshot.png

Image deletion warning

Image:FDM_screenshot.png has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this image, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

OsamaK 14:05, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

File:FDM icon.png

File:FDM icon.png has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

81.172.23.105 17:19, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

Picture of the Year voting round 1 open

Dear Wikimedians,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2012 Picture of the Year competition is now open. We're interested in your opinion as to which images qualify to be the Picture of the Year for 2012. Voting is open to established Wikimedia users who meet the following criteria:

1. Users must have an account, at any Wikimedia project, which was registered before Tue, 01 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0000 [UTC].
2. This user account must have more than 75 edits on any single Wikimedia project before Tue, 01 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0000 [UTC]. Please check your account eligibility at the POTY 2012 Contest Eligibility tool.
3. Users must vote with an account meeting the above requirements either on Commons or another SUL-related Wikimedia project (for other Wikimedia projects, the account must be attached to the user's Commons account through SUL).

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year are all entered in this competition. From professional animal and plant shots to breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historically relevant images, images portraying the world's best architecture, maps, emblems, diagrams created with the most modern technology, and impressive human portraits, Commons features pictures of all flavors.

For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topic categories. Two rounds of voting will be held: In the first round, you can vote for as many images as you like. The first round category winners and the top ten overall will then make it to the final. In the final round, when a limited number of images are left, you must decide on the one image that you want to become the Picture of the Year.

To see the candidate images just go to the POTY 2012 page on Wikimedia Commons

Wikimedia Commons celebrates our featured images of 2012 with this contest. Your votes decide the Picture of the Year, so remember to vote in the first round by January 30, 2013.

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

---

Delivered by Orbot1 (talk) at 11:12, 19 January 2013 (UTC) - you are receiving this message because you voted last year

Picture of the Year 2013 R2 Announcement

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2013 is open!

• ⧼Wikibase-terms/Nardog⧽: Deutsch, Ελληνικά, English, ‎français, magyar, ‎italiano, македонски, ‎‎日本語, ‎‎‎русский, ‎‎‎svenska

2012 Picture of the Year: A pair of European Bee-eaters in Ariège, France.

Dear Wikimedians,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the second round of the 2013 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the eighth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2013) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year were entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

There are two total rounds of voting. In the first round, you voted for as many images as you liked. The top 30 overall and the most popular image in each category have continued to the final. In the final round, you may vote for just one image to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 2 will end on 7 March 2014. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Commons:Picture_of_the_Year/2013/Introduction/en Click here to learn more and vote »]

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2013 Picture of the Year contest.

This Picture of the Year vote notification was delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:23, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Picture of the Year 2013 Results Announcement

Picture of the Year 2013 Results

• In other languages: Deutsch, ‎español, ‎français, ‎日本語, Nederlands, русский, ‎svenska, ‎Türkçe, ‎українська

The 2013 Picture of the Year. View all results »

Dear Nardog,

The 2013 Picture of the Year competition has ended and we are pleased to announce the results: We shattered participation records this year — more people voted in Picture of the Year 2013 than ever before. In both rounds, 4070 different people voted for their favorite images. Additionally, there were more image candidates (featured pictures) in the contest than ever before (962 images total).

• In the first round, 2852 people voted for all 962 files
• In the second round, 2919 people voted for the 50 finalists (the top 30 overall and top 2 in each category)

We congratulate the winners of the contest and thank them for creating these beautiful images and sharing them as freely licensed content:

1. 157 people voted for the winner, an image of a lightbulb with the tungsten filament smoking and burning.
2. In second place, 155 people voted for an image of "Sviati Hory" (Holy Mountains) National Park in Donetsk Oblast, Ukraine.
3. In third place, 131 people voted for an image of a swallow flying and drinking.

Click here to view the top images »

We also sincerely thank to all 4070 voters for participating and we hope you will return for next year's contest in early 2015. We invite you to continue to participate in the Commons community by sharing your work.

Thanks,
the Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2013 Picture of the Year contest.

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:00, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

SVG crop

Hi Nardog, can you cropping File:Emblem of Yamaguchi Prefecture.svg with same ratio as newest version of File:Symbol of Yamaguchi Prefecture.png? Thank you in advance. --minhhuy ^(talk) 17:12, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

Thank you because your re-upload with Yamaguchi. Can you also crop File:Flag Symbol of Ishikawa Prefecture.svg? Thank you in advance again. --minhhuy ^(talk) 12:27, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

You active

Are you active? I just want to let you know cause you needed SVG versions of the flags of municipalities of Japan? Thanks. 174.113.214.250 20:34, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Umm, how can I help you? Nardog (talk) 12:55, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

I'm just curious. 174.113.214.250 02:36, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

I don't think you've told me what you wanted to let me know yet... Nardog (talk) 02:14, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

File:Emblem of Toshima, Tokyo.svg

File:Emblem of Toshima, Tokyo.svg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Xeror (talk) 13:08, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

Ƹ

You said "Ƹ" «was never an IPA symbol» yet at en:Ƹ it is stated that it «was a non standard International Phonetic Alphabet for voiced pharyngeal fricative proposed in the Principles of 1949,^[1] but now the phonetic symbol officially used is [ʕ]. It was used in the 1940s, 1950s and 1960s, for example by John Rupert Firth and Terence Frederick Mitchell, or in the 1980s by Martin Hinds and El-Said Badawi.» (source: 1. ISBN 0-226-68535-7: p.209). When I saw your edit I immediately thought I’d make a mistake (which is likely since I’ve been dissiminating hundreds of IPA symbol images in the past days), but then after looking up it seems that’s the ball is on your half. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 18:48, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

@Tuválkin: That Wikipedia article was full of misinterpretations. What Pullum & Ladusaw (1996: 209) actually said was: "Perhaps intended to be Turned Three, unofficially suggested by the IPA (Principles, 19)." Unofficially suggested by the IPA was not <ƹ> but <↋>. Indeed, you can see <↋> being mentioned as having been proposed—but not by the IPA; the IPA was just mentioning it as having been proposed (by others)—to replace <ʕ> in the 1949 Principles of the IPA, p. 19. (And even if it was <ƹ> that was proposed, I wouldn't categorize it as a "former IPA symbol" because, again, all the IPA did was mention it as having been proposed.) Nardog (talk) 19:30, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

You need to tell all this in the en:Ƹ talk page, or even go ahead and fix it yourself, then, or else other users will make the same mistake as I did. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 07:21, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

I already did. Nardog (talk) 07:38, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

I suspect this was a graphic substitution dating to before <↋> was supported by Unicode. I've run across quite a few such, and have contributed some myself. Kwamikagami (talk) 18:40, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

phonetics

glad to see my images are usefull to someone--Tavin (talk) 22:18, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Kiel Convention

Thanks for your advice. I will contact the IPA executive, and I don't imagine they will have any objection. I am glad you think the photo useful. I am trying to put as many names to faces as possible, before our collective memory fades away. You can see the names I have remembered myself at https://www.peterroach.net/the-1989-ipa-kiel-convention.html and I am asking former colleagues to join in the hunt. Peter RoachPeter (talk) 18:32, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Derivative Images

Hi! Thank you for alerting me to my "derivative work violations." The Portrait of a Musician Candidates one is all from images on Wikipedia, which I have now added a "PD-old-100" tag to. The other two colleges are also made from pictures on Wikipedia, and all either fall under the "PD-old-100" or have had permission to reuse given because of a work by being the person who uploaded them, how do I mark this on their files? Also upon further inspection, the Ralph Asher Alpher file should be deleted, yes. Apologies for that. Aza24 (talk) 02:04, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

@Aza24: Yes, this isn't enough. Please link to the files you used to make the montages in the information panels. Nardog (talk) 02:08, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

I will do so, for the portrait one it's probably fine because those are all old paintings, correct? For the other ones some more clarity would be appreciated. Am I linking in the college files to the other files pages? Or looking for the original source? Aza24 (talk) 02:10, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

@Aza24: No, just because you used works in the public domain to make a montage doesn't mean you don't need to reveal their authors and sources. You do precisely to show that they are "old paintings".

The former. See e.g. File:Montage of Toronto 4.jpg. Nardog (talk) 02:18, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Alright, will do so, thank you for letting me know. Aza24 (talk) 02:21, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

On another note, I noticed that you seem to know a lot about IPA. I had put IPA on [Orlando Gibbons' page] but removed it as it seemed unnecessary. Would it make sense to put it back, or is IPA usage on articles mainly for names that are "harder to pronounce" – if you will? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aza24 (talk • contribs) 02:26, 14 May 2020‎ (UTC)

@Aza24: It's unnecessary. See w:WP:LEADPRON. "Orlando" and "Gibbons" are both common names and the pronunciation you gave is just the usual pronunciations of them. (Btw, I've also flagged that audio because AFAIK you can't claim text-to-speech audio as your own.) Nardog (talk) 02:31, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

How do I delete this?

Hi Nardog, I figured I'd ask you since you seem to know your way around Wiki commons. I uploaded a new version of the collage I had made for the Portrait of a Musician page. The old one: File:Portrait of a Musician Candidates.jpg used a portrait of the wrong person so there doesn't seem to be any need to keep it around, as it is simply factually incorrect. How would I delete this? Best - Aza24 (talk) 23:15, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

@Aza24: Shouldn't you just overwrite the old file with the new image? The new filename has a typo ("Potrait"). Nardog (talk) 23:24, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Hmm well I was going to but the overwriting rules didn't seem to allow that. I didn't notice the typo! Do I have to contact an Admin to fix that? (I don't see an option to do so myself) Aza24 (talk) 23:32, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

@Aza24: I don't think it constitutes "substantial changes" COM:OVERWRITE designates, especially given you're the uploader and it's only a few months old. Besides, if you're going to delete the old file anyway overwriting it would practically achieve the same result with less effort. Nardog (talk) 23:35, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Fair enough. Well in that case... how would I delete the new one? Heh... Aza24 (talk) 02:47, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

@Aza24: Overwrite the old file with the new one and then place {{duplicate|Portrait of a Musician Candidates.jpg}} on File:Potrait of a Musician Candidates.jpg. Make sure to replace the page description of the overwritten file with that of the new file before placing the tag. Nardog (talk) 03:41, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

File:Peter Ladefoged with McKinney & Longacre.png

Nardog, I took the photo in question. Ken Olson used it with my full permission in another location, but inadvertently was given credit. I am the photographer, not worried about Ken getting credit. Pete unseth (talk) 22:45, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

File:WugTest.png

File:WugTest.png has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

EEng (talk) 08:49, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Pronounciation deleted

Hi, why did you reverted my pronounciation on Mid front unrounded vowel and Mid back rounded vowel? The pronounciation on both is now again wrong. —YodaMaster445 (talk) 19:46, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

@YodaMaster445: As I linked in the summaries, see COM:OVERWRITE. You aren't allowed overwrite files other people made with entirely different files.

To my ears, the current [e̞] is just fine and your [e̞] sounds too low. I find the current [o̞] too low (it even has a higher F1 than the [ɔ] sample, which is not good), but you can't just overwrite it. In addition, your samples are too short, too quiet, too noisy and too echoey. I suggest you consult w:Wikipedia:WikiProject Linguistics if you really want to improve these samples. Nardog (talk) 05:12, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

COM:OVERWRITE and File:Voiced_pharyngeal_fricative.ogg

Hey,

By linking COM:OVERWRITE there, did you mean to say that Fenakhay should've uploaded a new recording of [ʕ] instead of reverting that one to the correct pronunciation?

That's kind of problematic... File:Voiced_pharyngeal_fricative.ogg is the de-facto canonical audio file for [ʕ] on a lot of Wikimedia sites, and it's deserved that title for almost 10 straight years thanks to Adamsa123's good recording of the correct sound. The original 2005 file has been barely a memory for a long time, and pulling the rug out from under all the pages that link to the file today (which think they're getting a real pronunciation of [ʕ]) by suddenly reverting back to that wrong recording is definitely not the right move, even if it's somehow encouraged by policy.

Leonel Sohns didn't even revert to 2005 for COM:OVERWRITE's sake, he just went off of a notion that the original recording was "more accurate" (that doesn't really make sense, it's definitely not!). And if Adamsa123's updates to the file were bad, it would've been great for that to have been caught before nearly a decade had passed. Righting that wrong right now just messes up a lot of previously-OK pages all across Wikimedia.

So is it possible to revert that file to Adamsa123's correct recording like Fenakhay did and leave it alone afterwards? If not, I seriously think the file needs to be deleted if that's possible. That would be way better than having some kind of uvular in a recording labeled "pharyngeal fricative"... it'd also visibly notify wiki editors that the file needs to be swapped out for a different one, i.e. it'd visibly break pages instead of just silently breaking them like it's doing now. Which way to go?

Thanks, 24.22.219.208 08:06, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, you caught me at a busy time. I'll respond within a day or two. Thanks for your patience. Nardog (talk) 15:45, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Thanks again for your patience.

The main problem with overwriting an existing file someone else made, especially without updating the associated description, is that we don't have any assertion regarding permission, license or attribution. We technically don't know if the file is really Adamsa123's own work or what license it is under because we don't have any assertion to go by. That said, we have a precedent at File:Voiced alveolar lateral fricative.ogg, where Tuvalkin split different uploads into separate files and kept Adamsa123's version at the name originally occupied by Isotalo's. We may do that for File:Voiced pharyngeal fricative.ogg as well—but I have reservations.

I don't find Isotalo's version inaccurate. It sounds pretty similar to Esling's demonstration and certainly does not sound like "some kind of uvular", especially when compared to his uvular fricative. If it has any problem, it's that it's nasalized, not uvular. And I especially don't find Adamsa123's version superior: it sounds more like an approximant (which ⟨ʕ⟩ may represent, but not canonically), and if it is a fricative, it's obscured by the ambient noise, which is considerably more present than in Isotalo's.

So even if the two versions were kept as separate files, I don't think Adamsa123's should usurp the current filename. If you still think that should happen, I suggest you take it to a more visible forum like w:Help talk:IPA so that more people well versed in phonetics can have their input. Nardog (talk) 18:37, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

Isotalo's version does not sound anything like Esling's demonstration. Esling's version is in fact a fricative while Isotalo's version is an approximant. This proves that you obviously can't distinguish between the two while other natives clearly can (who utter both sounds, and can thus quite easily distinguish between the two). If you still disagree, would you then be so kind as to explain to me how to upload a separate file, which then replaces the de-facto canonical audio file for [ʕ] on a lot of Wikimedia sites, so that it becomes a voiced pharyngeal fricative [ʕ] instead of a voiced pharyngeal approximant [ʕ̞]? Retskrivningen (talk) 07:19, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

I never claimed the original was accurate because that's completely irrelevant. Just upload a file with correct attribution and replace references to the old file (e.g. w:Module:IPA symbol/data for English Wikipedia). You may also request the old file be renamed if you can demonstrate it's an obvious error. Nardog (talk) 09:08, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

Yes, you did — in your previous comment you wrote: "I don't find Isotalo's version inaccurate. It sounds pretty similar to Esling's demonstration[...]".

But, anyway, thanks for the response. I will try to sort it out once I've got the time, God willing. Retskrivningen (talk) 10:05, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

I stand corrected. I do hear a difference between Isotalo and Esling now, though in place rather than in manner (and the former sounds nasalized; I see no turbulence in the waveform of both). Nardog (talk) 10:32, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

Is there a way to somehow use Esling's version instead, which we all agree on? Retskrivningen (talk) 11:03, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

No. See Commons:Licensing. Nardog (talk) 11:05, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

OK.

For interest: This is how I would transcribe Isotalo's version: [ʕ̞̹ɑ̃ː ʔɑ̃ʕ̞̹ɑ̃ː]

And this is how I would transcribe Esling's version: [ʕɑː ʔɑʕɑː] Retskrivningen (talk) 11:38, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

ʘ

I don’t understand these two edits of yours. Either one is right and the other is wrong, or the other way around — not both. Unless "" is not an instance of "ʘ", is that it…? Please explain and recategorize accordingly. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 13:33, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

@Tuvalkin: ⟨ʘ⟩ used to be printed on the IPA chart like , with a circular stroke, and since 1993 it's like , with the shape of O. So while the former is indeed a former IPA symbol, ⟨ʘ⟩ as a Unicode code point is still part of the alphabet. Nardog (talk) 13:46, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, that makes sense. To avoid having contraditory categorization in a cat and in some of its media files, I created a separate subcat for this pre-1993 letterform variant. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 09:10, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

en:Template:POTD/2022-09-17

If you have time, I'd really appreciate you having a look at this. I'm not that good with linguistic theory, and don't want to mislead. Adam Cuerden (talk) 17:57, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

File:Barry Keoghan in 2020.jpg

File:Barry Keoghan in 2020.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Khiikiat (talk) 09:46, 27 January 2024 (UTC)