Word/quotation of the moment:

Keep Redskins White!

Previous:

• "homosapiens are people, too!!"
• Spaghetti Weevil
• "I've always had a horror of husbands-in-law."
• awkwardnessful
• anti–zombie-fungus fungus
• "Only an evil person would eat baby soup."

A day or two ago, an editor made some changes to the very beginning of the article on Dari (Persian dialect). I left a note on Lysozym's talk page asking whether he/she approved; he/she responded that they're not bad. But I still wonder. The very first one changed the first words in the article from "Dari is" to "Dari Persian is". Since the title of the article is "Dari (Persian dialect)", shouldn't the first words in the article be just "Dari is..."? I don't know about the rest of it. I just thought, since you were so knowledgeable about languages, you could evaluate these edits (made by Metalman). CorinneSD (talk) 17:06, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The common name is "Dari", not "Dari Persian". The rest of the lead makes it obvious enough that it's a Persian dialect, so the change is not necessary. More problematic is the claim that "Dari" is the Persian name of Afghanistan, which AFAIK is simply wrong. Reverted. — kwami (talk) 17:16, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Another thing: that editor added the phrase ("in terms of accent"). I am pretty sure that Dari differs in more than just accent from the Persian spoken in Iran. They use some verb forms that are considered "old-fashioned" in modern Persian. CorinneSD (talk) 17:11, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And if it were just an accent, our article dab would be wrong. — kwami (talk) 17:16, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the revert and the explanation. CorinneSD (talk) 20:29, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

May I ask why you reverted my contributions to Filipino language? (See [1]) I believe what you did was a mistake. It was not vandalism, and all information changed/added were well-cited.

Regards. 舎利弗 (talk) 18:27, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You were in effect claiming that Filipino has millions of native speakers who are not Tagalog speakers. Whether Filipino is a standard form of Tagalog, or an artificial language as proponents claim, it doesn't really have native speakers. With your edits, you're saying Filipino is the same as Tagalog, and should therefore be merged into that article. — kwami (talk) 19:14, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Let's move this discussion to Talk:Filipino language for the benefit of everyone watching that page. 舎利弗 (talk) 19:20, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In the article on Cendol, in the "Etymology" section, a sentence ends:

"In Myanmar it is known as mont let saung or မုန့်လက်ဆောင်း."

I was wondering why I cannot see the word at the end of the sentence. I can usually see most words written in other scripts, but I can't see this one.

Also, the third paragraph of the next section starts, "The affluence of Singapore". I wonder whether it shouldn't be "The influence of Singapore". What does the relative affluence of Singapore have to do with cendol? CorinneSD (talk) 23:14, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have the same problem, even though I have several Burmese Unicode fonts installed. I suspect that Burmese just has poor OS support. You can fix it by going to the left of your screen, down below the search bar, under 'languages' where the interwiki links are. You should see a gear by 'languages'. Click on it to get your WP language settings, go to the fonts tab, and check the box for 'Download fonts when needed'. Why this works when you already have the fonts you need, I don't know. You should now be able to see Burmese, but headers or other languages may get screwed up, so you'll need to play with it to see what works for you. This was intended to be rolled out as the default interface, but it's still too buggy. — kwami (talk) 17:30, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

O.K. Thanks. What about "affluence" vs. "influence"? CorinneSD (talk) 03:07, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Why remove ué?
• éon, eóo and eoa have /ɔ/, not /o/.
• iam has /w̃/.

Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV (talk) 22:20, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ué is an interjection. I guess we don't say explicitly those are excluded, so we could put it back. I wasn't sure about iam. Many sources transcribe am with a final consonant, but almost all also say it's a diphthong. The two possibilities are not distinct in Portuguese, so I don't know which is more accurate. — kwami (talk) 17:23, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OK. A correction to the above:

• éon, has /ɛ/, not /e/.

Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV (talk) 22:41, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Where you find kazakh-nogay languages? 46.251.216.72 (talk) 11:59, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The clade, if not the name, is found in the Glottolog ref in the info box. I don't know where the names came from. — kwami (talk) 15:39, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Israeli Jews has a a character in PUA and needs your attention. -- Magioladitis (talk) 05:00, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]