Birdofadozentides

We do of course have the [ gw ] [ ȝƿ ] [ ᚱᚢᚾ ] option at the head of every page, which gives the option to display it with those letters.

The 'ȝƿ' thing caused civil war here before.

'ƿ' is authentic but 'ȝ' is not: it a Middle English letter. Yogh was invented after the Conquest to represent what we now consider a 'y' sound, formed from the shape of thee letter 'g' as it had been written in uncial. If this wiki were using an uncial font, that is how a 'g' would appear, but it does not.

Using 'w' for 'ƿ' was a practical matter. It is authentically found in some Old English texts, but of more import, 'w' is used in academic texts, and this is in essence an academic project.

Hogweard (mōtung) 23:34, 10 Solmōnaþ 2018 (UTC)

I know about Ȝogh and I've never put it in the texts here, all I did was getting rid of w. I was thinking about using Insular G (ᵹ) that is available, but I didn't. I'm glad you have this option but honestly I failed to find it, guess it's only me.

The fact that 'w' is used in most of academic textsinstesd of Ƿynn is unfair, I don't see why Ƿynn is not supposed to be used in Old English texts. Yes, u and uu were also used, but Ƿynn was the letter of Old English alphabet and using it more than natuaral. I guess I won't be wrong if I say that almost all (if not all) modern Old English textbooks and programms are using 'w', as if Ƿynn would make text absolutely impossible to read. People just have to remember how Ƿynn looks like and become accustomed to it. 'P' and Ƿynn are written differently, epesially in electronic versions.

So you want me to stop changing orthography, right? And otherwise all my edits will reverted. Maybe we can agree about that? Maybe thare are some pages you absolutly don't want me change, and other pages could be changed? Some things like titles and some tablets I can't change anyway. Perhaps Modern English names written in Old English are not supposed to be changed, but I thought it'd be alright since they're written in Old English. I'd love to find this option you are talking about,but I can't find it, I don't know why.

--Birdofadozentides (mōtung) 15:07, 11 Solmōnaþ 2018 (UTC)

I'm not really trying to make a fuss, but the overwhelming style for this Wicipædia has been to use "w", and the links, templates etc are set up on that assumption. I am going to continue to use 'w', as, it seems are most of the contributors here. Others have been reverting too, I see. My instinct is that if we start using ƿ widely, it will put contributors off, and there are few contributors as it is.

Names are an interesting one, since you mention it. I have been using OE forms of Christian names, hence articles on 'Iacobus Cook' instead of 'James Cook' (actually I think someone else refined it further to 'Iacobus Cōc'). The names of kings of course take an Old English form as the names echo down the ages. As you can imagine, there is inconsistency throughout the work on names though - across the ocean we also have an article Dufenal Trump (an authentic, attested version of 'Donald') but a John Adams which should presumably be 'Iohannes Adams' etc. Hogweard (mōtung) 22:42, 13 Solmōnaþ 2018 (UTC)

You think using Ƿynn would scare people away? That when people see Ƿynn they will think: "What is this unknown letter? Everything is too complicated, I'd better be off"? But why so? Why not otherwise, why can't people think: "What is this uknown letter? Why is it here? I wanna know". I think there should be a page with Old English alphabet (maybe there is one?) and on this page should be the alphabet, some information about letters, how to read letters and ect. And if people read this page and see Ƿynn on it, it wouldn't scare them, they'll just accept it as a rule and keep reading. There are not a lot Old English resourses using Ƿynn, and Ƿynn could make this one look so much better.

"the links, templates etc are set up on that assumption" Oh yes, I've noticed. But the links still work with Ƿynn in them, it's not a problem. About names, I think it's a good thing you're using Old English forms, it makes text look in more "Old English way".

I at last noticed that ȝƿ option, but only on one page, then it disappered again. I guess it's a technical problem, most likely this option is not available on my computer or on my browser, sadly.

--Birdofadozentides (mōtung) 00:14, 14 Solmōnaþ 2018 (UTC)

Editors have been driven away before over this. I think if we have a sort of self-denying orndance here where we can write without seeing everything rewritten for another's preferences, that would calm things down. If you are going to use Ƿ, great care must be taken with links and templates: you have changed a some "on this day" text even to the extent of changing the name of the 'Dweolinge dagas' template so that it is now a redlink. Hogweard (mōtung) 07:56, 15 Solmōnaþ 2018 (UTC)

It's a redlink now and it wasn't like that before? I didn't expect that, sorry, I don't know why it went that way, this link must be different if it's happened. Technical problems are the evil, many things just occur because of them.

Special character are unseen on many devices, and if only they could be used as simple and easy as Latin letters and common symbols, things would be much, much better and less troublesome. And if that great option was avaliable for me, this talk just wouldn't exist. And I'm sure there are other users who don't have it, otherwide they wouldn't have asked years ago why this option had disappeared.

Again, I'm sorry about that link, I won't touch it anymore. It was unseen before renaming, and then it became seen and red, I should've noticed it and been more carefull.

--Birdofadozentides (mōtung) 21:08, 15 Solmōnaþ 2018 (UTC)

I know I'm not that active on here anymore, but I am okay with w being changed to wynn, so long as it's pretty thorough. I now agree that ƿynn+g is the most straightforward convention in modernity which gives a nod to historical practice.   Ƿes hāl!    00:00, 31 Hrēþmōnaþ 2018 (UTC)

Gottistgut, Ƿes hāl! I'm so glad you are not againist it and that you think so.

About g, Ȝogh is often used in it's place, though Ȝogh actually belongs to Middle English, it was insular g (ᵹ) that was used. So Ȝogh is imitating ᵹ. Using ᵹ here would be great, but... 1. technical problems. ᵹ is not so wide used and when I wanted to create page on Wictionary with it, ᵹ just wasn't shown. Technical problems is evil. I hope ᵹ (insular g) is seen on your device. 2. Well, putting ᵹ in text would take a lot of effect, and I'm not sure if I can handle this. I live in neverending fear that one day all my edits will be reverted, seriously, it became a nightmare.

And I don't really want to use Ȝogh in Old English, though I like this symbol, but it's not really its place.

Sometimes I see already edited pages with Ƿynn and Ȝogh and that's amazing.

I often saw your name in pages' history, you've done much for this Wikipedia, thank you.

--Birdofadozentides (mōtung) 00:36, 31 Hrēþmōnaþ 2018 (UTC)

To clarify (and I should have done so sooner), best practice in a modern context is to use g rather than ȝ. The ȝ you see in older pages are legacy and should be updated to g. Reason is that ȝ was merelly a local version of g (as demonstrated by ancient English writers using it in Latin texts for g), no different from special local forms for s, t, f, y, d, and so forth (in other words, it was merely a matter of font), whereas wynn was effectively a distinct letter.   Ƿes hāl!    00:18, 17 Sēremōnaþ 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I agree, Ȝogh is used only to imitate insular ᵹ because sadly Ȝogh happens to be a more easy letter to use. And in this case (imitating insular ᵹ) I can accept its using. But then capital G is not supposed to be changed into capital Ȝogh, 'cause wherever Ȝogh is used it's also used instead of capital G.

Also, there is an Old English Phasebook that uses both ȝ and g: ȝ when it is to be pronounced like y (in "you") or the g in angel and g for other cases. It's not historically right or authentic, but it helps in pronounsation and studing, Ȝogh plays not the "imitating" role there.

I think it'd be beautiful if some pages could be written with Old English forms for g, s, t, f, y, d, for example, the main page, but I doubt it's technically possible, the symbols would just not be seen on many devices. Birdofadozentides (mōtung) 00:49, 18 Sēremōnaþ 2018 (UTC)

Hi. I could easily change the yogh settings so that capital G remains the same. I'd like User:Hogweard's input before doing that, though. I can also have it set a cookie so that it remembers which setting you prefer instead of having to click it on every page you load, if anyone wants that feature. PiRSquared17 (mōtung) 00:27, 5 Mǣdmōnaþ 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I'd like that feature, though I'm also okay with clicing on every page. About 'ᵹƿ' option, is it a new one? I don't remember people talking about it before. Thank you so much for adding it, it's my favorite option. I'd only like capital G not to be turned into capital insular g. I'll ask Hogweard about that and about 'ȝƿ' too. --Birdofadozentides (mōtung) 16:29, 5 Mǣdmōnaþ 2018 (UTC)

The options '[ gw ] [ ȝƿ ] [ ᚱᚢᚾ ]' have been there for several years; since the last time there was a civil war on the subject. I'd not spotted '[ ᵹƿ ]': that must be new. Hogweard (mōtung) 22:50, 5 Mǣdmōnaþ 2018 (UTC)

Correct. I only added it recently. It should have been there from the beginning, since it is the most authentic option. Do you agree about not changing the capital G? PiRSquared17 (mōtung) 22:55, 5 Mǣdmōnaþ 2018 (UTC)

Hogweard, should I go ahead and make it so that capital G is not changed? As far as I can tell, you haven't answered this question yet. PiRSquared17 (mōtung) 03:47, 10 Mǣdmōnaþ 2018 (UTC)

I agree. The [ ᵹƿ ] version is a great improvement on [ ȝƿ ], and yes, the capital G should remain the shape of a 'G', as that is authentic. Hogweard (mōtung) 20:12, 10 Mǣdmōnaþ 2018 (UTC)

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey

Hello! The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey. We want to know how well we are supporting your work on and off wiki, and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation. You have been randomly selected to take this survey as we would like to hear from your Wikimedia community. The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes.

Take the survey now!

You can find more information about this survey on the project page and see how your feedback helps the Wikimedia Foundation support editors like you. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement (in English). Please visit our frequently asked questions page to find more information about this survey. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email through the EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys to remove you from the list.

Thank you!

WMF Surveys, 18:41, 29 Hrēþmōnaþ 2018 (UTC)

Reminder: Share your feedback in this Wikimedia survey

Every response for this survey can help the Wikimedia Foundation improve your experience on the Wikimedia projects. So far, we have heard from just 29% of Wikimedia contributors. The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes to be completed. Take the survey now.

If you have already taken the survey, we are sorry you've received this reminder. We have design the survey to make it impossible to identify which users have taken the survey, so we have to send reminders to everyone. If you wish to opt-out of the next reminder or any other survey, send an email through EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys. You can also send any questions you have to this user email. Learn more about this survey on the project page. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this Wikimedia Foundation privacy statement. Thanks!

WMF Surveys, 01:38, 13 Ēastermōnaþ 2018 (UTC)

Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia survey

Hello! This is a final reminder that the Wikimedia Foundation survey will close on 23 April, 2018 (07:00 UTC). The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes. Take the survey now.

If you already took the survey - thank you! We will not bother you again. We have designed the survey to make it impossible to identify which users have taken the survey, so we have to send reminders to everyone. To opt-out of future surveys, send an email through EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys. You can also send any questions you have to this user email. Learn more about this survey on the project page. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this Wikimedia Foundation privacy statement.

WMF Surveys, 00:48, 20 Ēastermōnaþ 2018 (UTC)

Vandalism

Hello. I would like to inform you that the acts of vandalism performed by globally locked user Fjaoga (talk⧼dot-separator⧽contribs) are still in place in this project. They consist in changing the title of random pages into provocative, sometimes obscene messages written in Russian. I am not able to rename said pages, so could you please handle it, or ask someone else to do it? Thank you in advance. Best regards, ^›› Fugitron - 09:49, 7 Wēodmōnaþ 2018 (UTC)

@Fugitron: I reverted all this user's page moves and deleted all pages they created. For future reference, you may consider asking for help on m:SRM. PiRSquared17 (mōtung) 04:40, 8 Wēodmōnaþ 2018 (UTC)

PiRSquared17, thank you for making it right! I wanted to reverted these edits, but it showed it'd been already reverted. It's awful that such things happen :( --Birdofadozentides (mōtung) 17:27, 8 Wēodmōnaþ 2018 (UTC)

Reverting page moves is harder than it should be. As you discovered, the undo/rollback links do nothing (see phab:T6433). You can however simply move the page back to its original title, although this will leave a redirect that only local admins and users with global permissions can delete. If you ever need help dealing with vandalism, I'd recommend asking for help on m:SRM. PiRSquared17 (mōtung) 13:42, 9 Wēodmōnaþ 2018 (UTC)

PiRSquared17, thank you for telling, I'll keep it in mind. Birdofadozentides (mōtung) 23:10, 9 Wēodmōnaþ 2018 (UTC)

W and Ƿ again

Thanks for the note. I've just been leaving it so that whoever wants to write using Ƿ can do so and whoever wants to use W, as I do, will and just not interfere. Hogweard (mōtung) 20:27, 11 Solmōnaþ 2019 (UTC)

Hogweard, so, may I please edit that W page? Birdofadozentides (mōtung) 23:05, 11 Solmōnaþ 2019 (UTC)

There are separate pages for W and Ƿ, each describing the particular character, not the sound. Hogweard (mōtung) 13:54, 12 Solmōnaþ 2019 (UTC)

Yes, but if one reads the W page in ȝƿ or ᵹƿ mode it won't look correctly, that's why I wanted to edit it, leaving W when it's needed. I guess that means no. Such a pity, it could solve the problem in some minutes. Birdofadozentides (mōtung) 01:24, 13 Solmōnaþ 2019 (UTC)

Hmm. I don't know how that can be done. I tried Unicode numbers, but that didn't work. Maybe whoever programmed it could think of something. Hogweard (mōtung) 00:14, 14 Solmōnaþ 2019 (UTC)

It isn't nessesary, this option works perfectly, it's only that page. If I edit it, leaving W when it's needed, and putting Ƿynn to other words, it'll look right in ȝƿ or ᵹƿ mode. May I please do it? Birdofadozentides (mōtung) 02:47, 14 Solmōnaþ 2019 (UTC)

Your Perverse Gatekeeping of the Tutorial on Old English

My ONLY concern is to spread Old English to as many people as possible and to do so in the 21st Century.

Heark, the Anglo-Saxon THEMSELVES forsook almost all of the runes!

I leave alternatives with wynn on Wiktionary because those are entries that would be reached by CHOICE. You aren't giving people, more importantly beginners, that choice. You give them a POINTLESS obstacle, your own Little Idol.

In a way, you're right about the module on that particular page. The option to change to wynn and insular g should NOT be present on an article addressed to beginning learners because it is not an article in Old English but about it.

Williamclayton (mōtung) 05:18, 27 Mǣdmōnaþ 2019 (UTC)

You don't give the people that choice either, now they can read this page and be introduced to Old English only the way you'd like it, because, as I mentioned before, the [ ȝƿ ] and [ ᵹƿ ] options wouldn't work correctly. The [ gw ] option would have worked. A short message in the beginning that says to switch the page to [ gw ] if you'd like to read it using this orthography could be enough.

I think the best way to solve this is to create an alternative page of that one, like in Wiktionary. However I don't know if it's possible on this resourse. I'll try to. --Birdofadozentides (mōtung) 09:11, 27 Mǣdmōnaþ 2019 (UTC)

Finding grammar and texts

I have puzzling over a thing, which led to a wider question. You might have some ideas.

I was looking for is the imperative of þeon ('to thrive'). The singular imperative of seon is seoh, but þeon is of a different verb class, so it might be þieh, or 'þeoh'. It may be that in the entire corpus of Old English the verb 'þeon' never appears in the imperative or in the subjunctive.

(It does not help that spelling is inconsistent even in the cases in which the word is used.)

This leads to the question: is there any accessible resource of which you are aware which could answer questions like this, with reference to the entire corpus?

Hogweard (motung) 17:36, 4 Eastermonað 2021 (UTC)

Hogweard, no, I sadly don't know any examples. Wiktionary says that imparative should be þēoh and there is a second etymology, is also an alt.form, and in this case imperative is þēo - https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%C3%BEeon

Maybe this word could be used in Beowulf? Wikisource have many Old English texts, maybe you could find something - [1] But that is like looking for a needle in the haystack. And I think you already could have searched there.

I asked some months ago why [ ȝƿ ] and [ ᵹƿ ]options disappear, but nobody answered. Now there's no ƿynn option at all. Probably you know something about it? Birdofadozentides (motung) 19:36, 5 Eastermonað 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. That will be a pile of material to wade through!

I don't know about the [ȝƿ] and [ᵹƿ] options - that is beyond my technical expertise. Someone was talking about using Python a while back for something or other, but what was done or not, or if it is unrelated, I cannot tell. Hogweard (motung) 22:48, 5 Eastermonað 2021 (UTC)

Hogweard, I'm glad it helped. I hope you will find the examples of this word.

I see, thank you for your reply. --Birdofadozentides (motung) 23:48, 5 Eastermonað 2021 (UTC)