User talk:Akiss
Mother tongues
[edit]Maybe it's too personal a question, but how come you have 3 native tongues?--Tamas 19:33, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- I have 3 mothers :) No, actually, I was born half Szekely half Hungarian in Romania, and I'm living in France since quite some time now. So technically Hungarian is my mother tongue, but in reality I am thinking in both - or a mix of - these three languages. And since I understood the Wikipedia:Babel definition of native tongue as "comparable to a native speaker", i put them all.. If I'm to look at the full half of the glass, I'd say, one must have quite fine ears to tell I have a non-native accent in any of my languages. :) Or, to look at the empty half, I'd say I don't really master any of those at a perfect native speaker level. Hungarian education was brief and stopped too early (since my fourth grade Hungarian classes were replaced by Romanian - as one of the presents of the Ceausescu regime of the time), Romanian came in for some time in the middle, and French arrived late. So, any suggestion to change the list? Or maybe propose changing the template? Akiss 21:34, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Csak kivancsi voltam :) Szerintem nyugodtan hagyd igy. --Tamas 09:11, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC) Translating: 'I was just curious. Suggest leaving it as it is.'
Hungarian versions of place names in articles pertaining to Romania
[edit]Hi! There is a bit of a controversy evolving about the Hungarian versions of place names in articles pertaining to Romania. Criztu has started to delete the Hungarian (and in one case, German) variants of place names from the following articles, claiming that they were irrelevant: (Harghita, Covasna_(county), Cluj). I feel this move is unjustified. I would appreciate if you could have a look at the problem and give your opinion on Talk:Harghita.--Tamas 28 June 2005 15:22 (UTC)
In response to your question, the Category:Eurasian nomads contains many people who were historically nomadic (such as the Buglars) but who have since settled. The article doesn't discuss their nomadic history in great length but it does mention it. I would be happy to add to that section of the article when time permits. --Briangotts 8 July 2005 14:19 (UTC)
You might want to take a look at how I dealt with this: I just reformatted his comments so that it was clear where they fit in (this is how he probably should have formatted them in the first place). This comes up a lot: a lot of people only have a limited grasp of wikisyntax. -- Jmabel | Talk 17:59, July 11, 2005 (UTC)
wikipedia naming convention
[edit]hi, i inform u that in accordance with Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names) i removed the names of the hungarian kingdom administrative divisions that were provided as alternate names for contemporary romanian administrative divisions from the leading paragraph in their coresponding articles Criztu 10:01, 10 July 2006 (UTC) criztu
Great Lakes
[edit]Just a quick note to let you know that I undid your contribution to the Great Lakes article, not because I necessarily disagree with what you're saying, but because your addition is not supported by the citations that already appear at the end of the sentence you edited. If you review the discussion page of the article you'll see that recently there was a fairly "lively" debate regarding this topic. If you can cite a reputable source for your claim, personally I have no problem including it. cheers Deconstructhis (talk) 15:04, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
- The appropriate citations are in the first paragraph of Lake Baikal. I don't have time to read the "lively" discussion, or go into lengthy conversations about this issue. Note only that saying "the greatest" implies "greatest by all measures (volume and area)" which is not true. When comparing water masses (such as lakes) volume is usually the implicit measurement. I let you decide if you prefer to leave the article as is, or change it. Thanks Akiss (talk) 19:20, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
File source problem with File:Orbanbalazs.jpg
[edit]
Thank you for uploading File:Orbanbalazs.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.
If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 18:51, 5 May 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:51, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
