Word/quotation of the moment:

It is a mortifying circumstance, which greatly perplexes many a painstaking philosopher, that nature often refuses to second his most profound and elaborate efforts; so that often after having invented one of the most ingenious and natural theories imaginable, she will have the perverseness to act directly in the teeth of his system, and flatly contradict his most favorite positions. This is a manifest and unmerited grievance, since it throws the censure of the vulgar and unlearned entirely upon the philosopher; whereas the fault is not to be ascribed to his theory, which is unquestionably correct, but to the waywardness of Dame Nature, who, with the proverbial fickleness of her sex, is continually indulging in coquetries and caprices, and seems really to take pleasure in violating all philosophic rules, and jilting the most learned and indefatigable of her adorers. [...] The philosophers took this in very ill part, and it is thought they would never have pardoned the slight and affront which they conceived put upon them by the world had not a good-natured professor kindly officiated as a mediator between the parties, and effected a reconciliation. Finding the world would not accommodate itself to the theory, he wisely determined to accommodate the theory to the world.

Template:Annual readership Template:Annual readership Template:Annual readership Template:Annual readership Template:Annual readership

Jeez man, calm down.I used Celestia to take that picture. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Benjamin Borg (talk • contribs) 16:32, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You didn't take that picture with Celestia. It's not a 'picture' at all. And you falsely attributed it.

BTW, people have been thanking me for reverting your edits. — kwami (talk) 10:39, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fine, I admit I was wrong to do it, sorry. - Benjamin Borg (talk) 13:07, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

you merged today the article Planetary object with Geophysical definition of 'planet'.

I find the merger a bit sudden, dont you think it deserves a discussion.

For example if merging, wouldnt the Planet article be better since it has a subsection regarding and referencing planetary mass objects.

I personally think it deserves an own article. Nsae Comp (talk) 13:10, 16 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, if there had been an article on the topic, but there wasn't. The "article" was nothing more than Stern's definition from 2002, which does not deserve its own article. It was more like a subdefinition of a Wiktionary entry.

As for where it should be, you may be correct that it would be better at 'planet', and others have suggested that. However, there's pushback form editors who insist we need balance with the 'IAU def of planet' article -- if one has its own article, then they both need to. I don't accept that myself, but I don't feel it's worth the argument. — kwami (talk) 13:13, 16 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Woulnt it be better in that case to just mark it as needing additional content, instead of merging? Nsae Comp (talk) 13:16, 16 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, because it isn't a separate topic. We also had a 'planemo' article on the same topic that was merged a few years ago. (Though both titles should probably link to the same article.) And it's been around for 7 yrs. If nothing's significant has been added in that time, and no-one's bothered to fix the incoming links in the past 5 yrs, there obviously isn't much need for it.

Whether it should be a separate article from 'planet' I leave to others. But IMO if there is a separate article on the topic, there should only be one.

But maybe you're right about it redirecting to 'planet', same treatment as 'planetary-mass object' (which has rd'd there for the last 5 yrs) and linking to the geophysical def article from there. Let's try that. — kwami (talk) 13:21, 16 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In my optinion you could also say since the article stayed for 7 yrs it has some legitimacy. In any case merging it without any discussion unilateraly is quite sweeping. Nsae Comp (talk) 14:14, 16 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

But it wasn't an encyclopedia article. A Wikiquote, maybe, or Wiktionary definition. Only marginally belonged in WP per NOTADICTIONARY. — kwami (talk) 22:54, 16 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for trying a different solution. Nsae Comp (talk) 14:15, 16 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I would possibly proofread a lot or all of the phonological charts/information that you have given on various language pages. I just saw that you forgot a /j/ glide consonant for the Akan language. I just fixed it, and added a source provided. Also, is there a way that I can view all of the language pages that you provided information on? Fdom5997 (talk) 21:37, 17 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The only thing I can think of is going through my user contributions and filtering by "language".

Not sure if I forgot the /j/ or if it wasn't in the source I used. — kwami (talk) 23:13, 17 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, for some reason I tried that, and it did not work. It wasn't showing any results. Fdom5997 (talk) 02:11, 18 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I dunno. Try tech help. There must be a way to do it. (And let me know if you find out!) — kwami (talk) 04:37, 18 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Please can you help fix the links to new dab Koli language? It's not obvious to the layman whether they mean Kachi Koli language or something else. Thanks, Certes (talk) 15:42, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your recent contributions to one of Wikipedia's articles related to the solar system. Given the interest you've expressed by your edits, have you considered joining WikiProject Solar System? We are a group of editors dedicated to improving the overall coverage of the solar system on Wikipedia. If you would like to join, simply add your name to the list of participants. If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask at the project talk page. We look forward to working with you in the future! --Soumya-8974 ^talk _contribs ^subpages 17:31, 24 October 2020 (UTC) --Soumya-8974 ^talk _contribs ^subpages 17:41, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Just found this list today, sorry...happy to work, sorry for the delay Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 04:46, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]