User talk:IJzeren Jan

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This user is no longer active on Wikipedia.


Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! - UtherSRG 07:34, Dec 23, 2004 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll do my best. In the meantime: I did know about the four tildes, but not about the three. Therefore, a little experiment. Best regards, IJzeren Jan (three tildes) / IJzeren Jan 07:40, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC) (four tildes).
Got five tildes as well: (19:43, 14 June 2006 (UTC)). See? - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 19:43, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hehe, I knew that! I'm a little more experienced by now! ;)) —IJzeren Jan In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 19:45, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bios of Ukrainian politicians[edit]

Hi. You seem to be interested in politics of Ukraine. Most articles on Ukrainian politicians are really rough "stubs". Especially, as far the biographical information is concerned. It is relatively easy to get autobiographies of all presidential candidates. However, these are in Ukrainian and I am not a particularly skilled translator. I am wondering whether you know of anyone who would be interested in doing that. Thank you. Sashazlv 06:15, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Hello! Well, yes, I am indeed interested in Ukrainian politics. As a matter of fact, I am responsible for almost all entries about Ukrainian politics in the Dutch wikipedia. Now, I wouldn't mind translating my own stuff into English. The trouble is only that the time I spend working on the Dutch wiki is about all I can spare at the moment. Besides, English is not my mother tongue, not even my L2. But if you ask me if I know somebody else, I'd definitely have to say no.
Do you have any particular links available? I can handle Ukrainian quite easily (passively, at least). Maybe I can give it a shot! Thanks for the new Moroz picture, BTW. It's much better than the older one indeed. Did you take care of the copyright yourself, or is all the material on the SPU website free?
Cheers, IJzeren Jan 15:42, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC).

Hi, again. Copyright. All materials on the SPU site are free to re-publish, provided that a proper citation of the source is given. At least, that's what they say there. Technically, this means you can take the picture and even publish it somewhere for profit, subject to citing

I think I'll handle the autobiographies in the following way. I'll place them in the articles under the discussion tab. Hopefully, someone will find time to translate them and re-organize the material. I could do the translation myself, but right away it's too large a time investment. The bios are just very basic info required by the election law.

Best regards, Sashazlv 00:29, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)


Hi Jan...I tried to translate the IB page into German...but I've gotten myself into a bit of a snit with the Germanwiki...they're not as warm and fuzzy as the Swedish or French wiki...Eep!

Anyway. IT's fun to try and read your dutch page and your Polish page is....RIGHT OUT. :)

Have you thought about doing a Wenedyk page? :) BoLingua18:43, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Hey Dan! The German entry is gone, unfortunately, so I can't even see it. :(( The problem, as far as I understood from the discussion page, was that you used a machine translation (and we both know that machine translations are often bad, if not totally incomprehensible). If you want, send it to me privately; perhaps I can improve it somewhat!
Wenedyk page? What do you mean? A page about Wenedyk exists already! A page in Wenedyk would be troublesome, since there is no Wenedyk wikipedia to store it in.
Cheers, IJzeren Jan 17:08, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC).

I had used a machine translation...but when I posted the handwritten one they disregarded it completely. I'm going to try linking through the Alternativgeschicte page in a few. Oh well. Yeah...a Wenedyk text would be difficult, but if you write enough pages you can have a Wenedyk wiki...although i think they might require it to be a real language. :) I may just send it privately. Bo-Lingua

Strange, really strange. I'm not too active in the German wikipedia, but still I follow it with interest, and from time to time I contribute something small there. I didn't have the impression that our German colleagues are unfriendly at all! Perhaps it was just a misunderstanding? Anyway, this is how it works in the Dutch wikipedia: a page can be nominated for deletion, and then there is still two weeks time to make improvements, to discuss the page, etc. Immediate deletion takes place only when a page is pure nonsense. Things like bad knowledge of the language or shameless self-promotion ("vanity") are definitely not sufficient to have a page removed immediately.
A Wenedyk wikipedia? No, that would be a bad idea. There are several wikis in constructed languages: Esperanto, Interlingua, Ido, Occidental, Lojban and Klingon, as far as I can remember. There used to be one in Toki Pona too, but that one has recently been cancelled. I don't really know why; despite the limited number of active users that wiki was quite active. Probably it's just the fact that there will always be a large number of people who think it's all useless crap what we are doing!
Cheers, IJzeren Jan 19:30, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC).

They deleted it immediately, even though I made improvements. *sigh* I guess I'll just have to try, at a later date to link it through the alternate history page. Oh well. Bo-Lingua

This image is listed on WP:IFD because it is an orphan. Feel free to object.

No, I've no objections. The article about Mykola Azarov has another picture now, which is fine with me. So go ahead and delete it! IJzeren Jan 08:40, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)


Please see Wikipedia:Conlangs. Almafeta 14:54, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting DiLingo and Aingeljã[edit]

Re: My request to you is to restore the two pages in question, keep the VfD open in both cases, and reevaluate them once we have established some more objective notability criteria. Sorry, no. A lot of people attempt to use Wikipedia to further the goals of their personal projects; conlangers are just another special interest group among many. I am opposed to any special interest group using Wikipedia as a vehicle for their promotion. Wile E. Heresiarch 04:56, 2 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Re: An administrator should take responsibility for his actions and explain them when asked. See above, and see also my remarks [1] on vfu. Apparently you're not satisfied with that. Very well; but you may wish to bear in mind that I really have no explanations any more elaborate than that. Regards, Wile E. Heresiarch 16:31, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]


Oh, no problem. This is a new conlang, but is in construction... I wanted olny, show my language to the world. Well, even so, thank you. --Król 05:50, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

Thank you about the hints! You was a genius!
--Król 18:39, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

New Babm entry[edit]

Re: Just curious: where does your interest in Babm come from? Sorry to take so long to get back to you; I took a break from Wikipedia editing for a bit. As far as Babm itself, I stumbled on Okamoto's little enigmatic book about 20 years ago in a university library. The language interested me in that it didn't seem to be based on European languages as others were. I haven't seen the book for many years and I can't get it; that—along with the fact that I don't know Japanese—is the reason why my entry is rather meager (although accurate, I hope). Sincerely, Scott A. Neuman 18:37, 20 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]


Hello! I saw you listed as one of our rare users who are good at Latin. Would you be willing to help translating a bit of text from English into Latin? Let me know please. Yours, Radiant_>|< 09:51, August 24, 2005 (UTC)

Well, I don't have a lot of time at the moment. Far too much real life on my neck nowadays! But if there's no rush, yeah, sure, I'll be glad to be of assistance! Sounds like fun, actually! What kind of text is it?
Cheers, IJzeren Jan 19:28, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ideal language[edit]

Hi there. I'm a member of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles. We're filling in articles which exist in the Encyclopædia Britannica, Encarta, etc, but not yet in Wikipedia. One article that we are missing is ideal language - see Britannica's article. Looking at your interests, I thought you might be the ideal person to create at least a good stub, bringing in the conlang angle - or if not, to suggest someone else who could help, given that you say above that you are busy at the moment. Are you able to help at all? --OpenToppedBus - Talk to the driver 15:14, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

Don't worry about this now - Arj has suggested a redirect to engineered language instead. OpenToppedBus - Talk to the driver 09:02, August 26, 2005 (UTC)
Ah, too late! Actually, what I was going to say is this: that I thank you for your confidence, but that at the moment I really don't have the time. I was going to suggest User:Pablo-Flores or User:Jim Henry as good candidates for writing the article. To be honest, I still think that would be a better idea. Whether ideal language really warrants an encyclopedia entry I can't tell, but it surely is an interesting subject to write something about. The trouble with it is of course that "ideal language" is an extremely subjective thing. I can understand why User:Arj proposes a redirect to engineered language and I partly agree with him. But on the other hand, the context in which I have seen it used most of the time, is auxlanging in sentences like: The ideal language is very easy to learn, and therefore the vocabulary is easy to memorise, the grammar is extremely simple, and there are no irregularities. Furthermore, the language is culturally neutral, so that nobody has an advantage over anybody else. And its pronunciation is easily accessible for as many people as possible. To some, Latin would be "the ideal language", for others English. The ideal language for programming is not exactly the same as the ideal language for opera singing. In short: I think a redirect can work, but preferably in the form of a disambiguation page, where it should definitely also include international auxiliary language. You know what? Now that I think of it, a disambiguation page is not the right way to cope with this. Some short, stubby article would probably be the best solution to my mind, even though it contains mostly links. --IJzeren Jan 09:18, 26 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for thinking about this in such detail. I'll leave it with you for now, and whenever you have the time, you can pull something stubby together to replace the redirect. I was making the (always slightly foolish) assumption that the Britannica article was reasonably comprehensive and accurate - clearly not! OpenToppedBus - Talk to the driver 09:34, August 26, 2005 (UTC)
Really? What did the Britannica say?
Anyway, give me a few days and I'll take care of this. Cheers, IJzeren Jan 09:41, 26 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Here is [[Britannica's attempt, on the basis of which I think the redirect to engineered language makes sense - but you're right that it's a wider topic than that. Thanks for your help, and there's absolutely no rush for any of it. OpenToppedBus - Talk to the driver 09:46, August 26, 2005 (UTC)

Several places you've voted more than once in the same category. What type of election do you regard this to be? Not the same as me and Arj, ergo we should discuss the rules of the election, how to score it etc. --Kaleissin 12:24:31, 2005-08-29 (UTC), who is amused by the already clear cliques: artlangers/conlangers versus the rest :)

What do you mean? If you are referring to the "sufficiently large vocabulary" question, then I did that on purpose: a vocabulary of 2,500 qualifies as a minor criterion and a vocabulary of 20,000 as a major one. That's a consequence of the way the questions are asked. Frankly, I think the questionnaire might have been a little more consistent from that point of view: in the case of number of speakers one has five different sections, in some other cases we simply have to fill in one N=?. In my opinion, in this particular case two votes (1 major, 1 minor) should be allowed.
But I won't complain. If anything, I should have done that BEFORE the vote started.
If I have votes more than once in another category (you mentioned "several places"), then please tell me where, because that's obviously a mistake then! --IJzeren Jan 12:35, 29 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
"Has 10 speakers" in addition. I also notice you don't vote on all the criteria. Logically one might think that a major on "Has 10 speakers" for instance implies "Has 100 speakers" but this isn't stated anywhere... --Kaleissin 12:59:44, 2005-08-29 (UTC)
Ah yes, indeed! Well, it was suggested that we distinguish between auxlangs and artlangs. I can't find anything from that suggestion in the voting form, and I'd still like to make the distinction in this case. If that's not allowed, I will of course withdraw on of them. --IJzeren Jan 13:16, 29 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The 'sufficiently large vocabulary' is for voting on whether or not having enough vocabulary to carry on standard conversations qualifies a language, and what that target level of vocabulary is. It's not a two-tiered vote. I'll go clear that up. Almafeta 15:40, 29 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

About deleting Lara language page[edit]

Thank you for the comment "My dear, judging the (non-/)notability of a constructed language project is one thing, ridiculising language construction is another. Please don't do that. --" in the page of voting for deletion of the page Lara language. I agree that my page should not appear on wikipedia because not notable, but maybe you know that if the work is serious (complete grammar -with a lot of revisions in many years!- and more then 7000 words) it's very hard (and exciting at the same time)! Some people told me that they prefer Lara language to Esperanto, because more easy to speak and learn, and some other who speaks Esperanto created the page about Lara on wikipedia (that no one deleted!) and I thank him for that.

So, thank you again, also for more competent comment in respect to other people in wikipedia.

Ciao Alexped 08:52, 30 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for shifting Lara language to Conlang.Wikicities. I think it's the best thing to do and I didn't know of it; of course I created the page there if I knew before!

The Conlang.Wikicities is a great idea!

Now, can I improve the page? With a more complete explanation of the grammar? With texts in Lara language? I have also fantasy culture (history, people, philosophy, religion, dialects, etc.) constructed on the base of the language...but need some time because still only in italian available!

Finally, did you create an internal list of different conlangs in this web-site, in order to have a link to the language? ( I asking too much? sorry...)

Still thank you for all!!! Alexped 15:12, 30 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure. Glad to be of service. If you have a look at the main page on conlang.wikicities, you will see a "list of conlangs" (here). And yes, you can do with the page as you please, including adding grammatical details, info about the conculture, and sample texts. Cheers, --IJzeren Jan 15:58, 30 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Do you irc?[edit]

I hang on #conlang at Freenode, as does several other conlangers and wikipedians. Much quicker to discuss things there. --Kaleissin 21:20:35, 2005-09-03 (UTC)

I've never done that, and to be honest, chatting is an activity I'd much rather avoid. But if you think it could be useful, then I might give it a try after all ;) . --IJzeren Jan 03:20, 4 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the information for the Conlang portal. As with anything on Wikipedia, you are more than welcome to edit the portal as you see fit! Again, thanks! &mdash; {{User:JonMoore/sig}} 22:08, 22 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for all you contributions to (and fixes of) the Conlang wikiportal. I think it is coming along quite nicely. Obviously your knowledge of the subject far outweighs mine. I've just been a dabbler in creating my own langs, and an on-again, off-again Esperantist. I believe your name is familiar to me, though. I've done a couple of the conlang translation relays, and I believe I've seen your name on the mailing list. Anyway, I appreciate the help. Cheers. &mdash; {{User:JonMoore/sig}} 18:24, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, that's right. According to my own list you participated in two relays, in which I participated as well. Unfortunately, you missed the relay I organised myself (the tenth), but in case you're interested: I'm still adding translations of the source text to the page. So if you'd like to try your hands with Aganean...
As for the portal: I'm very happy about it. It looks really great! I have indeed built up some expertise in the field over the years, and I am more than happy to do anything I can to help giving it the place it deserves in WP. I'm not overly active on wikipedia.en, but when it comes to conlangs I give a hand whenever I can.
There's one thing I'd like to discuss with you. What shall we do with all those red links ("requested articles")? In a few cases, I'm sure they would be a welcome addition, but at the same time I see a lot of languages and other stuff there that would never survive a VFD.
Cheers, IJzeren Jan 20:19, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, I just may take you up on the offer, and translate that text. As for the redlinks, maybe we should decide which conlangs are "notable" and get rid of the rest. Also, a WikiProject might add credibility to the cause. I believe the German Wikipedia has a current conlang Project. Let me know. &mdash; {{User:JonMoore/sig}} 22:50, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The problem with those red links is that almost all of them are old IALs, most of them poorly documented. I don't know too much about auxlangs in general, so I think it would be best if someone more knowledgeable than me would look into that. ----IJzeren Jan In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 07:46, 24 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Conlang template[edit]

I am working on a template for constructed languages, User:JonMoore/conlangtemplate. Currently it is under my user namespace, but I could move it to the template namespace, which is where the "Edit this template" link currently leads. I was wondering your opinions and such. It is based on the "articles" section of the conlang portal, but probably needs thinning out.

I am also considering starting a WikiProject about conlangs, and was wondering if you would participate.

&mdash; {{User:JonMoore/sig}} 21:29, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

December Language of the Month[edit]

Yes. Quenya would be a great pick for December. As to the template, yes, your version is much better, and maybe we don't need it. We shall see.

Jon 05:18, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Polish language[edit]

Just wondering: how come you know Polish so well? It's quite an uncommon language among Dutch people, is it...Halibutt 20:10, 5 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Well, it's indeed not very common for a Dutch person to know Polish. But from my earliest youth I've been fascinated with languages. I started learning Polish when I was 18. Why? Just the timing, I suppose. If I would have turned 18 one year later it might as well have been Czech, or Romanian, or something else. Anyway, Polish it became. I'm mostly an autodidact. A few years later, I studied and worked a bit in Poland, and a few more years later I became a licenced translator/interpreter. That's my story! Oh, and I've been speaking Polish with my (Jewish-Russian-Ukrainian) wife for many years, too. :)
BTW, since your mentions the PLC as your fatherland, may I recommend you to have a look at my RTC?
Best regards, --IJzeren Jan In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 10:32, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Conlang portal DYK section[edit]

I added a rotation for the DYK section, but I really think it doesn't need to be changed once a month, maybe once a quarter? That would make it more of a manual process. See:Portal:Constructed languages/Did you know. JonMoore 20:58, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. But is there a way of programming that? I know how to use {{CURRENTDAY}} and {{CURRENTMONTHNAME}} and the like, but quarters?...
I suggest we wait a little. I've just added three more DYKs, and I'm sure we can bring the total up to some twenty or so. After that, it can simply rotate each month. Mind, the same DYK could of course easily appear in more than one month! —IJzeren Jan In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 21:06, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I wish there was something like {{LASTMONTHNAME}} or {{NEXTMONTHNAME}}, which would make it simple... Maybe I should work on that... JonMoore 21:30, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Well, we could of course use the {{CURRENTDAYNAME}}. That would mean that we need only seven sets, but it would also mean that it rotates every day! —IJzeren Jan In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 21:34, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I like that idea... Would you be against it? JonMoore 21:49, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
No, I kinda like it too! As you can see, I have added quite a few new DYKs to the list as well. It's remarkably easy: just open any article and see if there's anything interesting enough for it! :) —IJzeren Jan In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 21:52, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I'm working on it now! JonMoore 22:33, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Can I be of assistance? (asking that, because it could be inconvenient if two people worked on the same thing at the same time. Edit conflicts and the like...) —IJzeren Jan In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 22:53, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Sure! I did a preliminary layout at Portal_talk:Constructed_languages/Did_you_know. Please rearrange as you see fit. Also, 3 items a day would be nice... JonMoore 22:57, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, thanks, I'll look into it. And I'll see if I can produce another one or two items... —IJzeren Jan In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 22:59, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, yeh...and please help as much as you want! I'll look for some more items, too. JonMoore 23:05, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I'm a little tired and uninspired right now, so I have substituted the remaining three (Thu#3, Fri#3 and Sat#3) with doublets. Let's replace those later... I'm going to move the stuff to the CURRENTDAY pages now. —IJzeren Jan In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 23:11, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I have completed the transfer, and modified the Portal: from now on, it links to the day pages. In about 40 minutes, we'll see it shift from one DYK to another! :) —IJzeren Jan In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 23:23, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure if I'll see the's only 16:34 on Thursday... As to the vandalism, I guess it shows that people are looking at our portal! JonMoore 23:37, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, indeed. That's why in a way I was pleased with the vandalism! :) Anyway, here it's 0:38 AM now, time for sleep! Cheers, —IJzeren Jan In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 23:38, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Yay, it works! —IJzeren Jan In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 00:00, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to the conlang project[edit]

I created a template for an invitation to the wikiproject: Wikipedia:WikiProject Constructed languages/Invitation. I added it to the talk pages of those you suggested, thusly:

{{subst:Wikipedia:WikiProject Constructed languages/Invitation}}


You can use it if you like. JonMoore 01:27, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

LOTM and DYK suggestion pages[edit]

Please see Portal:Constructed_languages/Language_of_the_month/Suggestions and Portal:Constructed_languages/Did you know/Suggestions. I used your guidelines from the main talk page for the LOTM guidelines. JonMoore 19:55, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent! I do have one very minor issue, though. The text and its DYK equivalent are quite a mouthful of code. Instead of repeating it on every individual LOTM/DYK page, wouldn't it be much better to have this code in the portal itself? Just one thought! —IJzeren Jan In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 13:28, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, honestly, I never thought about that.
Oh, and if I'm the father than that makes you...the mother? ;-) Haha, just kidding. You are at least co-father (which I think is illegal here in the United States, but legal in the Netherlands, heh). You put a lot of work into the portal, so I should say congratulations to you, too.
I hope you enjoyed yourself in Deutschland. I studied German for 2 years in high school, but never have gotten to Europe. Someday, maybe... Happy New Year to you also! JonMoore 17:58, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Ha, you may be right about Georgian declension. I translated that (probably poorly) from the French version of the language portal. My French isn't very good. JonMoore 20:46, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Conlang topic[edit]

Before I add it, I was wondering your opinion on adding a section to the Conlang portal which includes a selected topic, other than specific languages, such as creator bios, language types, con-cultures (Ill Bethisad comes to mind :-) and other miscellaneous topics. What do you think? JonMoore 21:21, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure, to be honest. I suppose we can do it, but do we really have enough articles for that? The bulk of all conlang articles are about specific languages, and certainly not all of the few conlanger bios we have are suitable. I don't think the beginning of bios of, say, George Orwell, Hildegard von Bingen or Giuseppe Peano even mention their conlangs. You know what? Let's just have a look at articles that might be suitable. If we can find enough articles that would fit for such a purpose (twelve or so), then we can implement a system similar to the LOTM. If not, well, then let's just skip the whole idea. And sure, I think Ill Bethisad wóuld be suitable! ;) —IJzeren Jan In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 08:11, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]


I have never doubted your honest intentions or your civility. I could not, however, deny myself the opportunity to explain what I had written. Please don't think my message was written in spite. Thank you for transferring my article. What I know is language, not computers. --Erika00177 22:28, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I'm glad to hear that. It's always unpleasant doing things like this, but I've promised myself to take care of our conlang section as well as I can - and that includes weeding out articles that for one reason or another would not belong here. There's nothing personal about that; in fact, I hate doing it. But believe me: if I don't, and nobody else does, that will only be ammunition for those who don't know anything about conlangs and would love to delete everything related to it! If it hadn't been me, if would probably have been somebody else, and in all likeliness in a far less pleasant fashion!
Don't hesitate to drop me a note when you've something uploaded on your website. And please remember the suggestions I made on your talk page. I've a little experience in all this, and if you really want to share your language with others, they are a better starting point than Wikipedia.
Cheers, —IJzeren Jan In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 22:40, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

John Wilkins' Real Character[edit]

Recently you added "An Essay towards a Real Character and a Philosophical Language" back into the list because you said it wasn't a duplicate. I am pretty sure that "An Essay towards a Real Character and a Philosophical Language" is the same thing as "John Wilkins' 'Real Character'" (it looks that way from reading the two entries). Can you ascertain that they are in fact different?


its a good idea to move this Hystud to my user page. Hystudian is very dear to me, and i'd like more exposure. Akerensky99 20:15, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your Attention, Please[edit]

Jan, I am in urgent need of your help with the red link under this sub-heading! Please help me make it work! Bo-Lingua 08:37, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done! I think it should work now. Thanks! Cheers, —IJzeren Jan In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 11:06, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wenedyk Page[edit]

Looks like they're still trying to get it deleted...I guess I should get my novel published ASAP and that way we can say it's in published work. ;) You still need to e-mail me your thoughts on the story! Bo-Lingua 00:33, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And I guess you can say I vandalized your user page, if you want to. ;)
Let me know if there is and AfD vote, I'll chip in my support. I'd be happy to contribute to Veneda, time permitting - I do devote majority of my wiki editing to real PLC on Wikipedia (btw, I wrote most of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth article, among other things). I love alternate history, and especially the (rather rare) ones involving Poland (or especially PLC).--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 00:41, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
There has already been an AfD vote, which resulted in no consensus. Okay, that surely doesn't mean there won't be a second one of course.
I've seen several of your articles here. Excellent work! Some of it has already found its way into the RTC, because it's a really good source for details about the szlachta and related things. As for the rest, I see you've already found your way to us! Cheers, —IJzeren Jan In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 08:24, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jan, have you seen how beautiful the page of Venedic is on the italian wiki? [2] Bo-Lingua 02:16, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes sir! Very nice indeed. There's only one problem with it: it still uses the "old" version of Wenedyk, and a few things ought to be updated. But unfortunately I don't know any Italian... —IJzeren Jan In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 12:23, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Might I suggest you post in your nicest English and Latin and say this needs some updating as Wenedyk has recently changed? Bo-Lingua

47 in 2 of your languages[edit]

Hi, thank you, that's very kind... But I'm actually not including "private" conlangs (i.e. languages limited to just one or two persons). I only take widely known artificial languages (mostly but not entirely international auxiliary languages) ones in my list (like Esperanto, Ido, Interlingua, Klingon, for instance). Best Wishes, —N-true 21:08, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's okay. But I noticed that you included Üqoi and all Mark Rosenfelder's language, which look pretty personal to me! Cheers, —IJzeren Jan In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 23:43, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Republic of Talossa[edit]

Heads up . . . some conlang know-nothings are trying to delete the article Republic of Talossa from Wikipedia. Thought you might like to vote on this. Wiwaxia 01:32, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Hello! I`ve got one request for you. I`m from Poland and I collect words in various languages. Now I`m looking for word "sugar" in other languages. I`ve got counterparts of word "sugar" in Japanese, Ahmaric, Thai, Georgian and Chinese, so can you write me what is "sugar" in Wenedyk? I`ve got this word in 330 languages and dialects of many regions and countries in the world so it is very important for me! Thank you very much! Szoltys

I have not seen the talk page. I'm going to read it now, and undelete if appropriate, but there had been consensus before on WP:AFD and WP:CSD G4 (repost) applies. - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 19:14, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. OT, You should probably shorten your signature. It's a little bothersome. - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 19:42, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Better now? —IJzeren Jan Uszkiełtu? 19:46, 14 June 2006 (UTC) In any case, it's shorter than yours now! :))[reply]
I realized the irony when I made the request - 'least mine's all business. In fact, let me take out the contribs - make it much shorter. - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 20:45, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Here she is: - CrazyRussian talk/email
Excellent! Well done, Crazy Russian! By the way, do you have any idea why SOMETIMES the link to my talk page works and SOMETIMES it doesn't? In my experience as a programmer, it should either work or not, but not half-by-half. Cheers, —IJzeren Jan Uszkiełtu? 20:58, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't work on your talk page. Wiki software. E.g.: User:IJzeren Jan. User talk:IJzeren Jan. See? - CrazyRussian talk/email 21:00, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I was just going to say that my talk page is of course not what I mean, since it obviously won't work there, but now that you mention it, that might actually have been my problem... Stupid me! —IJzeren Jan Uszkiełtu? 21:02, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Спасибо большое! —IJzeren Jan Uszkiełtu? 21:03, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
NP. Your experience as a programmer did not let you down. - CrazyRussian talk/email 21:08, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]


I have answered to your questions at my page --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 16:09, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- siberian article about Wenedyk. Not so big, but our wiki is in the beginning now. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 16:27, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! :) —IJzeren Jan Uszkiełtu? 19:33, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I beg your pardon for disturbing you, but you know the policies better than our group, and we can not found it ourselves. May we post to the incubator wiki open source of russian-siberian and ukrainian-siberian translators so that everybody can modify it and by this mean help to develop the automatic translation system? Because we have about 10 persons in the wiki already and they can help in this perhaps. Now we are developing the automatic translation systems for translate ruwiki and ukrawiki to the siberian. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 09:49, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Witaj. Nie odpowiadałeś mi kiedy do Ciebie napisałem po angielsku więc teraz piszę po polsku. Zbieram słowo "cukier" w różnych językach i obecnie mam 363 odpowiedników. Czy mógłbyś napisać mi jak słowo "cukier" brzmi w językach: wozgijskim i wenedyku? Byłbym bardzo wdzięczny bo jest to dla mnie bardzo ważne. Dziękuję, pozdrawiam, czekam na odpowiedź. Szoltys TALK

Dlaczego nie chcesz mi pomóc? Przecież jak widzę napisałeś jak w Twoich językach brzmi liczba 47. "Cukier" to podobna sprawa :-) Pomóż proszę... Szoltys TALK
Dziękuję. Jeśli masz ochotę to zapraszam tutaj :-) pozdrawiam, Szoltys TALK

Polish Wiktionary[edit]

I invite you to Polish Wiktionary because you know a lot of language (also Polish)./Witam starego znajomego z pl wiki ;). Zapraszam Cię do polskiego wikisłownika, bo widzę, że znasz kilka języków (w tym także polski). Mógłbyś się nam przydać np. jako ekspert od holenderskiego. Pietras1988 TALK 16:25, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Edit summary[edit]

When editing an article on Wikipedia there is a small field labeled "Edit summary" under the main edit-box. It looks like this:

Edit summary text box

The text written here will appear on the Recent changes page, in the page revision history, on the diff page, and in the watchlists of users who are watching that article. See m:Help:Edit summary for full information on this feature.

Filling in the edit summary field greatly helps your fellow contributors in understanding what you changed, so please always fill in the edit summary field, especially for big edits or when you are making subtle but important changes, like changing dates or numbers. Thank you. Daniel Šebesta (talkcontribs) 07:41, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Sorry to bother you, but I got two things I really want to say to you. First, I admire your language Wenedyk, I think it's an interesting view of history might have been (I'm thinking of making a similar project). Second, our birthdays are almost on the same days! (Mine is June 8th and my brother's is June 4th)Cameron Nedland 17:56, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the nice compliment! :) —IJzeren Jan Uszkiełtu? 18:14, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No problem bro!Cameron Nedland 16:07, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Ijzeran, is it true that Dutch speakers can understand English a lot better than English speakers can understand Dutch? Thanks for your time bro.Cameron Nedland 13:31, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting Siberian Language[edit]

I suppose that this mistake of admin A_Man_In_Black. About him it is necessary to report in WP:AN or WP:ANI. Regrettably my english very weak (en-1). Could Not You leave commentary about Incidents on page WP:ANI (or WP:AN). I have left also message on User talk:A Man In Black --Yakudza 12:41, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments. However, although I basically didn't count votes (it was clear this debate attracted so much attention on BOTH sides that numbers would mean very little), I did examine all the arguments. I think the best thing from AMIB's talk page that backs up my decision (btw, I didn't read that until after my explanation & decision) was when he said that the sources detail the movement/project, but nothing seems to talk about the language at all. As I pointed out, a "no consensus" would be, pure and simple, BAD for Wikipedia. In big debates like this, we need a decision, so we can move on. Mangojuicetalk 15:05, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
AMIB made a mistake in closing that debate, in that he relied heavily on his characterization of the motives of those on one side. He wisely reconsidered that, and withdrew his closing. My job is to interpret the debate, and then make an informed decision following policy, and that's what I did, so I'm not going to reopen the debate, nor am I going to change my mind now. I appreciate that you disagree with my decision: I already knew that, though, since you wanted the article to be kept. Mangojuicetalk 15:19, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mysle ze userbox-en musi byc "4" a nie "3"[edit]

:) --VKokielov 16:07, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dziękuję... jestem skromnym człowiekiem, ale skoro już... zmieniłem to. :) —IJzeren Jan Uszkiełtu? 19:12, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Siberian language[edit]

There is a Wikipedia on the Siberian language, but no article. Can we move User:IJzeren Jan/Siberian language to the main name space? -- Petri Krohn 21:43, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, Slovianski temp forum[edit]

If you're still interested, the main forum went down so I made a temp forum at http://s8 dot invisionfree dot com/Slovianski/ -iopq 10:56, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]


I have a little question, sorry for my poor English.

Why nobody did object anything against deletion of Vorlin.

Pasqual (ca) · CUT 20:42, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Long time, no see![edit]

Jan! Send me an e-mail! It's been a while since I've seen you around! Bo-Lingua 04:39, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]


I was reading an old conlang deletion debate today and I noticed the link to Zoinx was red. It turned out someone had prodded it and it got deleted. Do you have admin powers that enable you to undelete the article, or will we have to get someone else to do it?

BTW, if I had known Vorlin was up for deletion, I would have voted to save it. Wiwaxia 00:20, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, no admin powers for me! ;)
Well, a lot of valuable stuff has been deleted that way recently. Frankly, I'm a bit tired of all this. This whole PROD thing just makes it worse: anyone can add the tag just like that and places the burden of evidence on somebody else's shoulders. Well, I simply don't have the time to constantly check for news conlang PRODs here and to start digging for evidence. So every once in a while I check what's going on here, just to find other stuff deleted. To be honest, I've been tired of all this for a long time: constantly tags all over the place, constantly the same discussions with the same people who'd much rather see ALL conlang articles deleted... I just don't have the time and the nerves for that anymore. But of course, I do regret the deletion of both Vorlin and Zoinx! Regards, —IJzeren Jan Uszkiełtu? 16:33, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Would you like to be an admin?[edit]

Hello Jan, I'm considering nominating you for adminship. Would you accept the nomination?

--PeteBleackley 11:31, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Conlang template[edit]

I used your template, plus some mods, to make {{Constructed languages}}. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Constructed languages/Templates. Sai Emrys ¿? 00:28, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lingua Franca Nova[edit]


I know that you care about such things - please see Talk:Lingua Franca Nova#References at the bottom. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 09:35, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Thanks for your interests in Fyksland-related article on Wikipedia in the past. Some Fyksland articles can now be accessed from my user page as work in progress upon completion could be moved to similar wiki for conlangs. --Kvasir (talk) 12:50, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! And keep up the great work! Regards, —IJzeren Jan Uszkiełtu? 01:17, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Aw shucks, I guess "they" deleted it after all. Fishal (talk) 22:00, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New from User:Amire80[edit]

Portal talk:Constructed languages#Reconciliation & Wikipedia talk:Verifiability#Mailing lists as sources. You may be interested. Sai Emrys ¿? 22:15, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User Category for Discussion[edit]

Speedy deletion of Foggy Mountain Rockers[edit]

A tag has been placed on Foggy Mountain Rockers requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a band, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for musical topics.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Ironholds (talk) 21:10, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Birthday![edit]

I just saw that on the Slovianski forum it's your birthday today. If this is correct I wish you a happy birthday! -iopq (talk) 10:59, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hehe, yes, you are right. June 3 was my birthday. Thank you!!! :) Cheers, —IJzeren Jan Uszkiełtu? 21:51, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Slavic Conlangs[edit]

Shalom Mr. IJzeren. I've just noticed that the article for Slovio was deleted (Yeah I know that it happened one year ago, I'm kinda slow). I'm rather glad that it happened because what Slovioists were doing in Wikipedia was unfair promotion of their project. But still it's a little sad, because it means that Wikipedia can't contain any information about Slavic conlanging (if Slovio is not notable enough, then no conlang is notable enough). I remember you once made a list of Slavic conlangs, and I thought, maybe you can make a common article for Slavic conlangs, something like Artificial Slavic languages or Slavic-inspired conlangs? I guess it would be considered notable enough. (It would be difficult not to make it an original research though) — Hellerick (talk) 15:43, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shalom to you too, Hellerick! Indeed, I have made such a list. Langmaker is (temporarily, I hope) you of the air, but the Wayback Machine found this. I'm not sure whether it would qualify as OR, since it's research I've done elsewhere. But no matter what, I don't think it would make sense to add or even use it here. Imagine, such an article appears. Of course, Slovio would have to play an important role in it, because nobody can deny that Slovio is the most notable constructed Slavic language. Then, someone points out that the article about Slovio has been deleted per AfD, and therefore can't be mentioned anywhere in Wikipedia. So Slovio has to be removed, and so do most other languages mentioned there, because they are not notable enough either (which in most cases would be true). And then, all that is left is a mutilated article without a backbone. A similar thing happened to an article about Germanic IALs: first it was argued that instead of having individual articles about languages it would be good to have an article about the group, then the article about Folkspraak was deleted per AfD, and so all references to it in other articles had to be removed, too. A bit later, Germanic IALs was deleted for lack of notable content as well.
As for Slovio: personally, I'm not a fan of it, and of course I agree that Wikipedia shouldn't be used for promotion. But IMO deleting it was a mistake, for the simple reason that it is a well-known language and more successful than at least 75% of the other IALs that do have articles here.
Best regards, —IJzeren Jan Uszkiełtu? 20:11, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, we could dream about such article, where the artificial languages (both aux- and art-) would be listed, described, classified, provided with examples... Where the question of whether Serbo-Croatian is an artificial language, and the artificially introduced features of the natural Slavic languages would be discussed. An article that would shed light on five centuries Slavic langmaking. It would be a useful and very interesting article. But such article would have chances of a snowflake in the Hell, that's how Englishmen describe such situations I believe. And I'm afraid it has nothing to do with notability :-( Hellerick (talk) 15:14, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, sorry about stalking, but as the bad anti-Slovio person in the story, i think i could say a word here.
Actually this is not a bad idea. My problem with Slovio is that it is not documented almost anywhere except its own website and a bunch of free-access blogs, wikis and mailing lists, which are not acceptable per WP:SPS (sorry about the bureaucratic acronyms). So it may be said that Slovio is the most notable Slavic IAL within the little universe of Omniglot and Langmaker, but essentially nowhere else.
There is, however, one secondary source which would be acceptable for an article that Hellerick proposes - Tilman Berger's paper in German about just that, Slavic-based artificial languages. Tilman is a Wikipedian himself (de:Benutzer:Tilman Berger) and he might even be able to help.
I'm not sure that Serbo-Croatian is mentioned in that paper. Comparing it to Slovio would be original research, unless, of course, other reliable sources have already made such a comparison. Serbo-Croatian can be mentioned as - arguably - the most notable example of Slavic language planning. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 12:26, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Progressief jodendom[edit]


I am asking you about this, because you know Dutch.

I am trying to organize the mess in the articles about denominations in Judaism, and as you know me, i always look beyond the Wikipedia in one language and try to export my organizational efforts, sometimes controversially.

There is the article nl:Liberaal jodendom. I don't really know Dutch, but from the names of the sections i guess that its content describes both Liberal and Reform Judaism and in several countries. If i am correct, then the article should be called nl:Progressief jodendom, but this is already a redirect with history, so i can't just move it.

Can you please take a look at it and maybe request moving it? It should be quite simple.

Thanks in advance. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 19:05, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Amir! I'm very busy at the moment, but I'll look into it soon. Cheers, —IJzeren Jan Uszkiełtu? 23:35, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]


I deleted the article because it didn't actually say anything about why it was notable (that's what "notability not asserted" means). I did some research, and I could not find anything to indicate why this should matter at all, not even by conlang standards. As far as I can tell, the only people who write about this are the novelist and her friends. The "further reading" had the novelist as a primary contributor. The novel was published by... well, I'll grant that Deep Listening Publications is not a vanity press, but they're really not known for publishing novels.

We have nothing on either the novel or the author. The article said nothing on why we should have an article on the conlang from the novel.

Understand now? DS (talk) 18:09, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Hey Jan, that article in Polish was a great find! Did you find it while you were googling for Wenedyk? Maybe you can work info from that paragraph into the Wikipedia article and add additional sources for the statements that are already in the WP article. Good job, Wiwaxia (talk) 02:37, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Hey Jan, I found a source for Mondlango that can be used to write the article. Check it out at the deletion "vote" page. Wiwaxia (talk) 22:50, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yorskr Tunguh[edit]

I think I've found an obscure conlang that is creator thought fit to put on Wikipedia. Check it out here: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Yorskr_Tunguh Wiwaxia (talk) 05:58, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ithkuil is up for deletion[edit]

Ithkuil has been nominated for deletion. I plus two other Wikipedians are "voting" strong keep. Wiwaxia (talk)


Just checking: the link to Igor Polyakov you made links to a Russian rower. Is this man also one of the creators of Slovkianski, or is it a different Polyakov? Paul S (talk) 16:37, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! No, this is quite definitely not the same person. I'll think of something to change it. Thanks for pointing it out! —IJzeren Jan Uszkiełtu? 12:21, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A question[edit]

Hello, I am from the Upper sorbian Wp. (hornjoserbsce), I have written a couple of articles about some minoritarian languages and am the author of quite a detailed description of Brithenig:

Please, can you help me to find Andrew Smith? I should like to try and be in touch with him.

Dank U heelmaal, --Henriku (talk) 13:02, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

North Slavic languages[edit]

Hi, i need citation of information about use this term for extinct languages as Old Novgorod dialect. You added this information in founding this article, so i hope, that you will help me, because i have with this citation problem on Czech Wikipedia. I cant find any source :-( Thank you. cs:User:Palu 22:25, 7 June 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) [reply]

Just a quick note to say that I've left a comment at the portal talk page which may interest you. Good work, though! BencherliteTalk 17:58, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I have patrolled this as a suitable article. Please bear in mind however, that any print sources and online sources you have cited must contain significant coverage of the Ill Bethisad project itself, and that references simply to constructed langauges or linguistic related topics will not comply with WP:RS. Failing this, the article may be subject to review again at any unspecified time. Otherwise, the article is looking very good.--Kudpung (talk) 03:28, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Geboren in Hoorn, woonachtig in Zaandam, en we zijn elkaar nooit tegengekomen? ;) Drmies (talk) 19:34, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. You recently added references to books from the "Webster's Quotations, Facts and Phrases" series published by Icon Group International to this article, as well as one to Books LLC. Unfortunately, Icon Group International and Books LLC are not a reliable source - their books are computer-generated, with most of the text copied from Wikipedia (most entries have [WP] by them to indicate this, see e.g. [3]).

I've only removed the reference, not any text. A lot of similar references have been removed as they are circular references; many other editors have also been duped by these sources. Despite giving an appearance of reliability, the name "Webster's" has been public domain since the late 19th century. Another publisher to be wary of as they reuse Wikipedia articles is Alphascript Publishing. Fences&Windows 23:57, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Slovio DRV[edit]

You are mentioned in the Slovio DRV nomination. A look through these posts shows more of the same. If you believe that you are the subject of a libelous statement on Wikipedia, please E-mail with details of the statement and error. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 14:59, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for pointing it out to me. I've written a reaction in the DRV. Regards, —IJzeren Jan Uszkiełtu? 14:20, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Auxlangs[edit]

Hi, Jan. I was going to add a comment or two at the deletion page for Lingua Franca Nova, but I thought that might not be considered appropriate. (I am astounded at the obsessive rule-following on wikipedia these last few years. As a former hippy, I am not good with authority!)

I am slowly working on writing lfn articles on the auxlangs covered in the book "Histoire de la langue universelle" I mentioned. You might find the original or my articles interesting. I have alread written a few on the lfn wiki. I have also summarized the grammars of a few creoles, if you are interested. I am a retired psychology professor, and so now I am returning to my old love of languages as a hobby.

I have taken a look at your conlangs - very nice! I was an early admirer of Brithneg, and am happy to see others following suit. It is a nice puzzle - to create a language with the constraint that it appear to be a natural development. It is similar to why I enjoy working on lfn: The constraint here is to make it a worthy proposal, even though we all know it is highly unlikely that lfn - or even esperanto - will ever be adopted. I suspect that someday, machine translation will get so effective that an auxlang will no longer be desired.

As you know, I was also born in the Netherlands, and can still read it well (though speaking and writing are more difficult - hence the English here). Oddly, your picture on your website looks a lot like my brother. My mother is from Zaandam. Do you have any van Olffens in your family tree? We could be related!

I also enjoyed your pictures of your wife and children. I have three grown daughters, one of whom had a boy two years ago - my one and only grandchild!

My email address is, and my website is Drop in some time, if you are interested in psychology. I have written quite a bit on the subject, as well as on Buddhism, another old interest of mine. (Basically I'm an atheist with a Buddhist morality.)

Best wishes, George — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cgboeree (talkcontribs) 22:36, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Hey Jan -- there is a deletion discussion for my article on Eaiea. I hope you join in the discussion! Wiwaxia (talk) 15:02, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Hello, and Taro ruul asz! If ye like conlangs, so Asz joh'Khala-ni? --Heavy Metal PST5 (talk) 14:12, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Why the Kotava is the only international auxiliary recognized language (code ISO AVK) not to have an article in your encyclopedia in English? A constructed language which really exists, with speakers, with many translations, a rising literature, deserves undoubtedly to be displayed. Unless it would be systematically blocked, for dark motives?

Regards. YuraniA (talk) 07:18, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Well, I am not responsible for there being or not being an article about something. If you think it should be there, don't hesitate to write it yourself, but make sure that it is properly sourced. Earlier an article about the same subject has been deleted. Regards, —IJzeren Jan Uszkiełtu? 11:52, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 10[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Romanid (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to French, Italian, Portuguese and Spanish

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:42, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

LFN - more problems![edit]

Hi, Jan. It seems that Lingua Franca Nova is once again under attack. Please, if you can help, or if you know others who can, please help me! I just don't get the hostility towards us. Thank you. George Cgboeree (talk) 22:54, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi George. This is not just an attack on LFN. The same user has done the same thing in many other articles about constructed languages as well. The surprising thing seems to be that in this case we are dealing with an Esperantist and not a person who has a problem with conlangs in general. Quite obviously there is some personal issue behind all this, as you can see quite clearly here (BTW, what does "creep" mean in this case?). On the other hand, nothing has been submitted for deletion (yet), it's just a matter of sticking tags everywhere. In some cases that may even be justified, but in some other cases (like this one) I consider it an act of vandalism because of the sheer overkill. But okay, I guess that after a few years of relative quiet, something like this was bound to happen sooner or later anyway.
I wouldn't worry about it too much. It is nowhere said that primary sources are forbidden - only that there must be a certain number of independent secondary sources that confirm etc.etc. Likewise, it is nowhere written that it is forbidden for a person to edit articles about himself or his own work - only that it is not really bon ton. However, let's face it: articles about Esperanto culture are mostly created and edited by esperantists, articles about chess are written by chess players. It shouldn't play a role who is writing, what matters is that this person writes the truth, from a neutral point of view, avoids original research, etc. In short, the person who is doing all this is merely voicing his own opinion. A lot of the articles targeted by him have already survived one or more deletion proposals in the past, so we know where the community stands in these matters. At last, notability is an extremely vague concept, and let's not forget that it is a guideline, not a rule.
That said, I do agree about one thing: the article about LFN is definitely too long, and parts of it indeed read like a manual. Mind, a grammar section is good, but it should rather be about grammar than give an accurate overview of it. Some sections (determiners, prepositions, adverbs) are merely word lists and basically don't give any information about the language at all. In my opinion it would be best to move the whole grammar section to Wikibooks and replace it here with a radically shortened version. Alternatively, a separate article Grammar of Lingua Franca Nova could be an idea, too (under the condition that there are objective sources for this grammar and not just the website).
I also agree that the first part of the text samples section is perhaps not the most fortunate choice. Travel guide stuff (as well as language promotion in the language itself) are too tendentious. IMO the Human Right Declaration is more than enough as an illustration. If anything, you might consider using a fragment of Alice. Best, —IJzeren Jan Uszkiełtu? 15:07, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Veel bedankt, Jan. I will work on it. Cgboeree (talk) 16:02, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Even though it was the wrong forum, thanks for highlighting the problems with this article. I have severely cut it back. I now have to deal with the WP:SPA.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:48, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Article notability notification[edit]

Hello. This message is to inform you that an article that you wrote recently, Spokil, has been tagged with a notability notice. This means that it may not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Please note that articles which do not meet these criteria may be merged, redirected, or deleted. Please consider adding reliable, secondary sources to the article in order to establish the topic's notability. You may find the following links useful when searching for sources: "Spokil"news · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images. Thank you for editing Wikipedia! VoxelBot 02:44, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Geachte arbitragecommissie, Op vrijdag 5 april begon ik een zaak tegen gebruiker:Wikiklaas. Nu de 72 uur (gesteld in uw richtlijnen) zijn verstreken vraag ik u: hoe lang duurt het nog alvorens de zaak bij de Arbitragecommissie behandeld wordt? Ik stel een snelle reactie op prijs. Hoogachtend, --Borvo (talk) 13:53, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - No, I completely disagree with you. When one looks at the page Categories:Constructed Languages it is ESSENTIAL that Esperanto be there - as well as Ido, Novial, Volapuk, a few other pioneers along these lines. Not putting THOSE there would be like having a category "Classical Composers" but leaving out Bach and Mozart because there are so many. Every language that is constructed belongs in that category, because they are constructed languages! Leaving any constructed language out of that category is akin to arbitrary obscurantism and in fact is simply an erroneous approach.Geĸrίtzl (talk) 23:12, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You apparently misunderstood me. Esperanto IS in Category:Constructed languages, namely in its subcategory Category:International auxiliary languages. Following your logic, do you also think English, French and Japanese should be placed in Category:Languages for the simple reason that they ARE languages - and with the additional reason that they are well-known languages? —IJzeren Jan Uszkiełtu? 23:58, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Angos (constructed language)[edit]

Hey, I thought you'd be a good addition to Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Angos_(constructed_language). You've gone over Angos in the past and are a pretty fair guy when it comes to conlang deletion discussions. Hermione is a dude (talk) 02:06, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


I missed that Kotava AFD, but the solution seems alright (although I don't think recursive links are allowed?). What do you think about some of the other articles that the Razlem mentioned? I see Unish being completely NN, while some of the Barsoomian material could fit in on John Carter (film) or Barsoom. Hermione is a dude (talk) 21:06, 16 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • I must admit I had never even read Unish before you brought it up. One thing that draws attention is that this article is heavily POV. It reads more like an advertisement. I have to say, I am kind of undecided where it comes to notability. The "Journal of Universal Language" appears to be quite a serious publication – published by a university, peer-reviewed, and definitely not merely a vehicle for promoting Unish. I do notice, however, that apart from materials hosted on, articles in this paper are the only sources. Razlem suggests that any publications about Unish in this journal should be considered primary sources, which is an interesting thought. I guess an AfD could be a good testcase.
  • As for Barsoomian language, it should be said that it has some inherited notability because of both the book, the film, Edgar Rice Burroughs and Paul Frommer. However, as an article it is worthless. It is completely unclear where the information comes from and whether the descriptions refers to the Burroughs' work or Frommer's. I suppose there should be more sources available, but if not, then deleted it should be.
  • When it comes to deleting articles, here's a series of articles that have been bothering me for years now, and I am serious considering AfD-ing them: Comparison between Esperanto and Ido, Comparison between Esperanto and Interlingua, Comparison between Esperanto and Novial, Comparison between Ido and Interlingua, Comparison between Ido and Novial. The first one might make some sense, because Ido was started as an Esperanto reform project. The same, however, can not be said about the remaining four. IMO they make as much sense as a comparison between China and Japan or a comparison between strawberries and raspberries, to give a stupid example. The problem is that these artcles are merely a matter of juxtaposing stuff from two different languages, stuff that really belongs in the descriptions of these languages. Various links and sources are given, but always to info about one individual language only. The comparisons itself are unsourced and therefore original research. What do you think? —IJzeren Jan Uszkiełtu? 23:32, 16 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Razlem had a good point about Unish. Although that journal may be quality otherwise, it is still a publication put out by the creators of Unish.
The only good source I could find on Barsoomian was [ this]. It would fit well in the article for the planet Barsoom, especially since Barsoomian is the common languages of all of that planet's races.
Those comparison articles always bothered me, too. They seem to be "legacy articles", created when Wikipedia was less defined. While articles like Comparison of Afrikaans and Dutch make sense, the Comparison between Esperanto and Interlingua says that the two languages are "radically different". The only connection between these languages is that they are all IALs. Hermione is a dude (talk) 02:52, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm really a bit difficult to understand what is the problem about the Kotava. Asked to quote sources from reporters, linguists, university studies, and so on. This is not the bottom that seems to interest, but the mediatization; not reality, but the noise. In fact, the problem is well known: a phenomenon that is not publicized in English doesn't exist! A scientist to be recognized must publish in English, a trader who wants to do business must speak English, a singer novice must bawl in English, a protester who wants to get his message must write his placard in English (just see the TV images on Egypt, environmentalists around the world, etc.).

And what a paradox for auxiliary languages! They must explain in English to rivet an interest (besides very limited of the general public), and thus demonstrate by absurdness they are completely useless and without future!

I look at the article on Láadan you put forward. Sources and references are not higher than about Kotava, even far less. These are almost all self-published sources. But they are in English. But how real speakers? What made works and products are from? A book of fiction, very well. But beyond that? Who speaks Làadan?

Once again, I have absolutely nothing against this language or another. It seems very respectable and earn a minimum of display. But I don't see how the Kotava, it, would have to be sent to the trash. There are clearly two weights and two measures.

And let's push a little bit. Since Wikipedia itself has become an essential source of knowledge and reference (most students now "suck up" from it their knowledge, it seems), I'm pretty sure, at last some third serious researchers then will take more an interest about the "Kotava phenomenon" and will study it deeply and publish on. The loop will be closed.

Wikimistusik (talk) 20:03, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Wikimistusik, I have nothing against Kotava, and it's not me who made up the rules of the game here. There's really no point in trying to convince me. For the rest, it's nowhere said that sources must be in English. Given the fact that Kotava appears to be mostly a francophone thing, there may be sources in French and they are perfectly acceptable as well, provided they are relevant and neutral. What you don't seem to get that nobody has a problem with your language, it's just that an article about it should meet certain standards. I hope you can understand what the problem is with self-published sources: I can make a hundred websites saying that I am the president of the United States, but that won't make me the president of the United States. I can make a hundred websites about my conlang, but that won't make it any more notable either. Wikipedia should never give false information, and the simple truth is that unverifiable information may be false. Suppose somebody writes here that Kotava is a mix of Swahili and Volapük, created in 1962 by the Bulgarian ex-boxer Staren Fečejev, and makes a website to support that claim. How can we know for sure that this information is wrong? Right, we can't. Just like we don't have the slightest evidence that a person named Staren Fetcey even exists. That's also the problem with what you write in your last paragraph. Yes, journalists and even academicians use Wikipedia as a source as well. Sooner or later articles will appear, duplicating Wikipedia information, and these articles will then be used as proof that the Wikipedia article is right. And as you say, the loop will be closed. Which is precisely what needs to be avoided! I can only repeat my advice: feel free to restore the Kotava article and add sources. If these sources are convincing enough, the community will certainly choose to preserve it. But also be warned, it's usually not taken well if people write about themselves or their projects, especially when it's obvious that they are here for no other reason than promoting them. Please consider one thing: if Kotava is really notable, then sooner or later somebody else will write an article about it. —IJzeren Jan Uszkiełtu? 22:14, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Once again the canard that "a phenomenon that is not publicized in English doesn't exist", which I've seen several times now as an excuse for the lack of coverage of Kotava. Pushers of fringe theories often claim that opposition is part of a grand conspiracy to silence the Truth, and now Kotavists are making the same claim. This puts you in the company of Uri Geller, and makes you sound ridiculous. Fine, let's suppose there's a grand conspiracy in l'anglophonie against Kotava: so where's the evidence for this in the francophone world? Or is la francophonie now in service to the World Anglophone Conspiracy? — kwami (talk) 02:43, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nobody talks about conspiracy, not me anyway. It's simply a fact that any publication in English has much more weight than one in another language. Even in France, where people are now required to speak and write in English in ordinary business meetings!
Kwami, which languages ​​do you speak or do you really know? Because, unlike most significant contributors to Wikipedia, you don't notice anything on it. And as you are working mainly on language articles, I guess you are a polyglot. If not?
Dear Jan, you don't answer to my question on Láadan. We are in the same situation on the sources, it seems to me. As for Staren Fetcey, I don't know her and, somehow, that doesn't particularly interest me. Similarly, knowing who wrote the Bible and Gilgamesh doesn't change anything about the great interest of these works. Kotava exists and people speak it, use it and give it realities : that is the essential, that is the only thing that should base an encyclopedic approach.
Wikimistusik (talk) 04:47, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
We'll accept non-English sources. If you have a good French publication, name it. Complaining about English is unproductive when kwami has explicitly asked for French sources.
In the Land of Invented Languages, by Arika Okrent, Encyclopedia of Fictional and Fantastic Languages, by Stephen Cain and The Dictionary of Made-Up Languages by Stephen D. Rogers all have articles on Láadan. There's any number of works on feminism in Google Books that have a paragraph on Láadan. On the other hand, Google Books shows Knowledge Needs and Information Extraction: Towards an Artificial Consciousness by Nicolas Turenne and Artificial Languages by Paolo Valore and Federico Gobbo both have one paragraph on Kotava, both talking about one facet of the language. Not remotely in the same boat, IMO.
WP:V is an essential policy for Wikipedia; no matter how important something is, it can not be added to Wikipedia without reliable sources.--Prosfilaes (talk) 09:34, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see the point of comparing Kotava with Láadan anyway. It doesn't matter that it has few speakers or none at all, since it is a fictional language. What matters is that Láadan was created by a famous, or at least a published, author, and that there's plenty of literature where it is discussed (Prosfilaes gave two examples, but there are many more). Besides, the article about Láadan bears no relation whatsoever to the article about Kotava; "other stuff exists" is never a good argument. For the record, I have nothing to do with the article about Láadan anyway.
And again, you don't seem to get my point about sources. Whether Staren Fetcey exists or not, doesn't interest you... fair deal! But the article presents her as a fact, and apparently there aren't any reliable sources to confirm it as such, in other words, we have to take someone's word for it. Give me an interview about Kotava with her in some newspaper, and we'll know it for sure. And again, the mere fact that Kotava exists does not make it inherently notable – it is as real as my cat – and neither does the fact that people use it. If a bunch of schoolkids invent a new ball game and play it every day on the street, and one of them makes a website about it, then we know it exists and there's somebody who claims that there are people who play it. But that's not a reason why an encyclopedia should write about it, because the info is neither notable nor verifiable. So for the Xth time, I am not against Kotava having its article, I'm just saying assertions made in it (especially those that concern notability) must be verifiable. —IJzeren Jan Uszkiełtu? 09:47, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Just a bottom question on constructed languages ​​(excepting the few really significant artistic languages as Klingon or Tolkien's Sindarin or Quenya): is that the criterion of speakers and attested works or resources is not THE fundamental criterion to consider? Since that's the purpose itself of a language, especially when it's artificial? For the rest, it seems to me rather specious, personally.
And since you want an interview, see for example this one published in March 2013 in Les Cahiers d'Octave Mirbeau n°20 (ISSN: 1254-6879, éd. Société Octave Mirbeau, chief redactor: Pierre Michel), annual review of the literary society of reference dedicated to the work of this French writer, an interview of the translator of the famous novel The Diary of a Chambermaid into Kotava. (These are scannings of p. 229 and 230-231, but it's a trade book not free of rights. Thus I'll withdraw them after two or three days).
Another interesting information: the translation into Kotava of The Adventures of Alice in Wonderland is in progress on behalf of an Irish publisher by a kotava-speaker, writer himself.
Despite yours skepticisms, I acknowledge that such elements are, for me, far more significant than many quotes from "experts" noticing languages ​​without speaking any word, just lighted by a theoretical and formal grammar or a conformistic buzz.
Wikimistusik (talk) 20:57, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No, the number of speakers or works translated into the language are irrelevant. What matters for any subject for Wikipedia is that we have reliable sources. The language one speaker worked out in one small notebook could get an article if for whatever reason reliable sources decided to write non-trivial sources about it.
As a gamer, the games I like to play are not necessarily the ones that get or deserve a Wikipedia article. What's significant to you isn't really relevant to what should get an article.--Prosfilaes (talk) 11:06, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
As Prosfilaes said. For the rest, I can only repeat myself. The criteria of speakers may be relevant, but only if you can prove it. A claim on Wikipedia made by a person with an obvious conflict of interest can simply not be taken into account, whether it is true or not. Whatever YOU find important doesn't matter, what matters is that claims should be substantiated. As for the article in Les Cahiers d'Octave Mirbeau: it's certainly a nice article, but again, it doesn't give any substantial information about the language itself. I can't really judge how reliable this is as a source. —IJzeren Jan Uszkiełtu? 22:47, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I could argue endlessly, but exercise doesn't interest me. I'd rather waste my time to carry on using Kotava, talking with and interacting with people not twisted. Exegetes tire me out. But I would like you to apply your same relentless grids regarding all other artificial languages​​. End of the game for me. Wikimistusik (talk) 05:12, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Being rude won't get you any further. You don't seem to have noticed that not a single participant in this discussion is against Kotava having an article, nor against Kotava itself, for that matter. All we ask is that you respect the rules and substantiate your claims. I was genuinely hoping you could do that, but if you can't, tant pis then. You have been told several times now that you can restore the article and the discussion can be reopened, so that your arguments will be heard and the community can decide. But there is no point whatsoever in trying to convince people here on my talk page. If I were you, I'd concentrate on projects that are less demanding when it comes to verifiablity etc. (for example on the Esperanto wikipedia any constructed language is considered notable AFAIK) or start adding some sources to fr:Kotava. Just remember that people are rarely the best judges of how important their own stuff is in the bigger picture. —IJzeren Jan Uszkiełtu? 12:47, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Blacklisted links[edit]

This doesn't actually need to trouble you, the bot wasn't supposed to mark talk pages. Amalthea 16:09, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]


There is a chance to end the conflict: Talk:Silesian_language#If the name with the words of dialect, language, Polish are POV, what the name of the target. Please vote, which option is better according to You. Regards, Franek K. (talk) 19:32, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of "Bhutanese passport" audio[edit]

Why, just why?

Why deny the people a good laugh? You're a special kind of scumbag. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Towe96 (talkcontribs) 15:40, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia isn't there to make comedy, there are plenty of other places for that, thank you. —IJzeren Jan Uszkiełtu? 16:02, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:54, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

History of the Poles in the United States[edit]

Given your high fluency in Polish, I am reaching out to you in regards to the History of the Poles in the United States article. It has no Polish equivalent, and any time you can spend towards translating in any capacity would be much-appreciated. I would be more than happy to help any way that I can.

Thank you! Pola.mola (talk) 20:06, 19 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Modern Gaulish[edit]

I am very unimpressed with the deletion action of that admin. -- Evertype· 11:26, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Hello, IJzeren Jan. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Foggy Mountain Rockers for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Foggy Mountain Rockers is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Foggy Mountain Rockers until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. SL93 (talk) 17:14, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Thank you for noticing my mistake at C. George Boeree, it's much appreciated. Looking back it's confusing me, I do seem to remember that I could see a red linked image file name, but of course it seems that was not the case. —72 talk 22:27, 8 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's quite simple: the uploader first placed the link, and then used it for uploading the picture, which always takes a few minutes. You probably noticed the red link before the picture had been uploaded. Cheers, —IJzeren Jan Uszkiełtu? 22:39, 8 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message[edit]

Hello, IJzeren Jan. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

à propos of nothing[edit]

I see you are interested n classical music and history, have you been to any of the cantata concerts in the Westerkerk, Amsterdam? The music director there is an old and dear friend, JanJoost van Elburg. He also conducs the Lelikoor, Amsterdam. He has a passion for Dutch classical music and introduced me to Vic Nees, Daan Manneke and Ton de Leeuw, but as a conductor of my choir in England he also brought us Monteverdi's Selva Morale e Spirituale accompanied by the English Cornett and Sackbut Ensemble and the closest thing to a flawless classical concert I have ever experienced, a performance of the Johannespassion with performers such as Bill hunt on violone and Charles Medlam on gamba. Guy (Help!) 01:45, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Such delight to speak about something else! :) Yes, I have been there. I have met Daan Manneke a couple of times: I've performed in some of his choral works under his direction, and once upon a time I failed to become his composition student (back in 1991, IIRC). My father was a student of Ton de Leeuw, and I am very fond of his music, too. A great man he was! As for the Westerkerk, it has been a long time since I've been there for the last time, but my mother has been organist there for many years, playing continuo at the cantata concerts conducted by Simon C. Jansen. That was long ago, but your friend will know. Of course, I was pretty much raised with Bach cantatas, and I've been part of the choir in several of them as well. Although my personal taste is more 20th century, I am extremely fond of Baroque (my favourite is the Combattimento Consort) and Medieval music, too. Ah, and English consort music, not to forget! Cheers, —IJzeren Jan Uszkiełtu? 02:00, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your signature[edit]

Please be aware that your signature uses deprecated <font> tags, which are causing Obsolete HTML tags lint errors. Your signature is also causing Tidy bug affecting font tags wrapping links.

You are encouraged to change

&mdash;[[User:IJzeren Jan|IJzeren Jan]] [[User talk:IJzeren Jan| <font color="green"><sub>''Uszkiełtu?''</sub></font>]] : —IJzeren Jan Uszkiełtu?


&mdash;[[User:IJzeren Jan|IJzeren Jan]] [[User talk:IJzeren Jan| <sub style="color: green">''Uszkiełtu?''</sub>]] : —IJzeren Jan Uszkiełtu?

Anomalocaris (talk) 05:09, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for pointing it out. I've changed it! —IJzeren Jan Uszkiełtu? 10:55, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! —Anomalocaris (talk) 03:49, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In case you'd like to come out of retirement...[edit]

Invitation to WikiProject Portals[edit]

The Portals WikiProject has been rebooted.

There are sections on the WikiProject page dedicated to tasks (including WikiGnome tasks too), and areas on the talk page for discussing the improvement and automation of the various features of portals.

There's a watchlist, of all the pages in the portal namespace, for viewing Related changes.

And more.

You are invited to join, and participate in the effort to revitalize and improve the Portal system and all the portals in it.

We may even surprise ourselves and exceed all expectations. Who knows what we will be able to accomplish in what may become the biggest Wikicollaboration in years.

See ya at the WikiProject!

Sincerely,    — The Transhumanist   14:45, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much[edit]

The RfC discussion to eliminate portals was closed May 12, with the statement "There exists a strong consensus against deleting or even deprecating portals at this time." This was made possible because you and others came to the rescue. Thank you for speaking up.

By the way, the current issue of the Signpost features an article with interviews about the RfC and the Portals WikiProject.

I'd also like to let you know that the Portals WikiProject is working hard to make sure your support of portals was not in vain. Toward that end, we have been working diligently to innovate portals, while building, updating, upgrading, and maintaining them. The project has grown to 80 members so far, and has become a beehive of activity.

Our two main goals at this time are to automate portals (in terms of refreshing, rotating, and selecting content), and to develop a one-page model in order to make obsolete and eliminate most of the 150,000 subpages from the portal namespace by migrating their functions to the portal base pages, using technologies such as selective transclusion. Please feel free to join in on any of the many threads of development at the WikiProject's talk page, or just stop by to see how we are doing. If you have any questions about portals or portal development, that is the best place to ask them.

If you would like to keep abreast of developments on portals, keep in mind that the project's members receive updates on their talk pages. The updates are also posted here, for your convenience.

Again, we can't thank you enough for your support of portals, and we hope to make you proud of your decision. Sincerely,    — The Transhumanist   23:08, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

P.S.: if you reply to this message, please {{ping}} me. Thank you. -TT

Nomination of Dhara (film) for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Dhara (film) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dhara (film) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Harsh Rathod Poke me! 13:39, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message[edit]

Hello, IJzeren Jan. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

IJzeren Jan, the nominator responded to your review at the end of January after having made improvements to the article. Please return as soon as possible to continue reviewing. If you aren't able to continue with the review, please post to the review to that effect, or let me know here, and we'll see about finding someone to take over. Thank you very much. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:29, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a five minutes thing, and I haven't had the time yet to look into it. I'll do that once I have time. But for the record, it would be better if others look at the nomination as well. Cheers, —IJzeren Jan Uszkiełtu? 23:09, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Edo is not a artificial language[edit]

I have proof that Edo is not a artificial language and that you're wrong my proof is at (talk) 16:46, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That doesn't prove anything. In fact, there is also an artificial language called Edo. Here's a link: Since that language was created in the 1990s by a Russian author (Anton Antonov), it's quite possible that this is the language mentioned in the census. Anyway, that's what the source says, and there's no point in arguing whether it's right or not. —IJzeren Jan Uszkiełtu? 18:12, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Toki Pona[edit]

I passed the Toki Pona article a couple of hours before you wrote your review, and seeing Like you said yourself, it has improved a lot since the last review. I remember talking to a couple of users on another site over whether or not the article's use of original sources prevented it from making it a GA. I had a feeling that using them were a necessary evil when it came to articles like Toki Pona, so I didn't focus as much on that. Some of the people I asked about the article were calling even the notability of the article into question, which is worrying. I ended up passing the article anyways, because it does fit what I consider GA criterion. Though seeing your review makes me put my decision into doubt...I guess the deed is done, but I don't want this article to go towards an immediate GAR if primary sources make it a dealbreaker.Jerry (talk) 22:05, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry, Jerry, I am not questioning your decision. The discussion happened on a page that was not on my watchlist and therefore I wasn't aware of it, otherwise I'd have written my comments earlier. I agree with you about the use of primary sources: basically, there's nothing wrong with them as long as it is clear that they are primary sources, and as long as the most relevant information in the article is based on secondary sources. For a description of the grammar, for instance, using primary sources is inevitable. Those who claim that a blog, a Youtube video or a forum post cannot be used as sources are simply wrong: even if they can't be used to prove a fact, they can at least prove that person X said Y on Z. And let's face it: the most reliable source for the number of members of a Facebook group is the group's membership counter itself. It's ridiculous if a writer has to refer to an old newspaper article that mentioned the state of affairs as it was years ago instead.
Besides, we just have to accept that relevant secondary sources about conlangs are relatively scarce. Another thing is that secondary sources are by no means reliable by definition: you've no idea how much nonsense I've seen about my own work in so-called reliable third-party sources! Besides, it's not like secondary sources always bring salvation. If a language has, say, 10,000 speakers according to one source and 500 according to another, it would be manipulative to mention only the first one.
My main problem with secondary sources is the pressure to overuse them. In a normal scientific publication, references should be added to direct and indirect quotes, figures and questionable facts. But here on Wikipedia people are pressured to add a reference to virtually every sentence, because a) that's how they must prove the notability of the subject, and b) they have to prove their own credibility. Of course, verifiability is crucial, but not every verifiable fact automatically needs a reference.
I would much prefer a short list of truly relevant sources that discuss the subject with some depth. The problem with a forest of references like the one we are dealing with here, is that it takes hours and hours to find out which sources have the language as their primary subject, which ones merely present a few facts about it, and which ones mention it only in passing. I'm pretty sure some of them merely duplicate information that could also be found in other sources already used. Cheers, —IJzeren Jan Uszkiełtu? 17:11, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:04, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]


@IJzeren Jan: (I don't know how else to reply to the message you just sent me.) Your last edit, cross-referencing Idodalen, was bogus: that's "a valley in Dickson Land at Spitsbergen, Svalbard" [Norway]. I didn't see that you had moved a categorization. That was reasonable; Idodalen was not. Please remove the Idodalen link.

--Thnidu (talk) 23:57, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Thnidu: Ah, I understand! The reason why I added Idodalen is that I found by total accident that it was named after the language. But you're right, putting it under "see also" was lazy on my part. I'll try writing something like Esperanto#Eponymous entities, how about that? Cheers, —IJzeren Jan Uszkiełtu? 00:01, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@IJzeren Jan: If that's the only one I wouldn't think it very appropriate. --Thnidu (talk) 00:15, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, perhaps not. Well, the article also mentions a river flowing through it, Idoelva. The source doesn't mention its etymology, although it's quite obvious that it must be named after the language as well, at least indirectly. Anyway, I think it would be worth mentioning it in the article. It's quite an honour for a constructed language to have some geographical entity named after you! —IJzeren Jan Uszkiełtu? 00:22, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:19, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 8[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Pan-Slavic language, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Slavic diaspora. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 05:53, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sudhanshu Pandey moved to draftspace[edit]

An article you recently created, Sudhanshu Pandey, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Hatchens (talk) 07:42, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:06, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Query about Interslavic[edit]

Regarding this edit: [4]

Do you mind possibly enlightening me as to how that was correct? The Cyrillic Д being roughly equivalent to the Latin D, and the sound in question being a dj, and the necessary order apparently requiring the letters to be ordered ДЖ, made it seem to me like that was an erroneous change. I don't doubt that I am incorrect, but I'd rather like to know how! Mako001 (C)  (T)  🇺🇦 13:30, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Mako001! Yes, I can see that it looks strange, but it is true that Proto-Slavic -dj-- developed into -žd- in Old Church Slavonic. It is a feature OCS has in common with modern Bulgarian, where the same change occurs, f.ex. PSl. medja ("border") > OCS/Bg. mežda. You can find the same pattern in a lot of Russian words as well, because Russian is full of borrowings from OCS, for example предупредить vs. предупреждать ("to warn", perfective and imperfective respectively). Cheers, —IJzeren Jan Uszkiełtu? 13:52, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure![edit]

Hi IJzeren Jan! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

-- 16:21, Friday, November 4, 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:27, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:21, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Spokil for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Spokil is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Spokil until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

DirtyHarry991 (talk) 05:31, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]