User talk:Jim Henry

The Wood Beyond the World by William Morris

What is your source for dating this 1892? ISFDB dates 1894, and the London edition is dated 1895.

Regards. Septentrionalis 01:52, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at the history [1], you'll see it was already dated 1892 before I edited the article. Don't assume that the last person who edited an article takes responsibility for the accuracy of everything in it. --Jim Henry | Talk 14:11, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough; I just saw you were inserting systematically, and concluded that you had a source that wasn't obvious to me. For all I know, 1892 is provably when Morris actually wrote it, for example. I wanted to make sure before I made a fool of myself; that's all. Septentrionalis 19:55, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No unobvious source; I just happen to notice that two books of his that I own weren't mentioned in the article, so I added them without taking time to look up their dates. --Jim Henry | Talk 22:14, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Voting on wikipedia:conlangs has started

Since you've been part of the discussion I thought I'd let you know. Do spread the word to others who would like to vote on it too. --Kaleissin 14:11:12, 2005-08-29 (UTC)

Re: natlangs failing corpus size

Many languages still have no written corpus whatsoever (not even a grammatical description in some other language) and in many areas missionaries have become unwanted (I don't know why but I can guess) so no gospel of Mark, furthermore, the missionaries' grasp of the language and general linguistics varies to the point that the gospel of Mark is really for an unintentional conlang... see the history of Tolomako as compared to Sakao. --Kaleissin 16:07:47, 2005-08-29 (UTC)

Of course, you're right. I wasn't thinking clearly. But I'm still not sure how the lack of written corpus on the part of some natlangs is relevant to this criteria re: conlang verifiability and notability. --Jim Henry | Talk 16:13, 29 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Catholic Encyclopedia

Thank you for your contributions to the Catholic Encyclopedia project. While I'm not Catholic, or not even religious I think incorporation of the information of this public domain source is important and appreciate your efforts. Reflex Reaction 05:58, 3 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You'll also be happy to know that I've done a lot of revision on the Bible translations page, as well as adding your Catholic Encyclopedia link to it. --J. J. 06:55, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Conlang WikiProject

Hello!

It has recently been brought to my attention that you might be interested in participating in the new WikiProject concerning constructed languages. The project has been created to observe, maintain, organize and improve all articles on Wikipedia relating to constructed languages. If you are interested, please add your name to the "Participants" section, and also feel free to add anything to the project page, the to-do list, or leave a comment on the talk page. Also, please check out the constructed languages portal.

Thank you!

Jon Moore 00:47, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Catholic Bias in Wikipedia

Hello!. You post derogatory terms toward evangelicals in Bible Society article,but delete PROVED references to persecution against evangelicals. Why?. Wikipedia is a catholic ministry?. Evangelicals hadn`t any human rights?. Do you endorse persecution from evangelicals?.

(above unsigned comment by User talk:Guillen)

I don't understand what part of my recent edit to Bible society you consider "derogatory terms toward evangelicals". Can you quote the specific phrases or sentences you object to? And I did not delete the references to persecution of evangelicals, but commented them out because (1) they were phrased in inflammatory, non-NPOV terms, and (2) I didn't have time to read the sources and rewrite the text in a more neutral mode. "endured violent persecution by Catholics hordes instigated by Hierarchy" is both inflammatory ("hordes") and a bit vague.

The older text I restored, -- "Also, until the development of ecumenical Bible translations (by joint committees of Catholic and Protestant translators) in recent decades, Catholics were suspicious of Protestant Bible translations, which they saw as biased and inaccurate compared with Church-approved translations by Catholic scholars." -- is not derogatory toward evangelicals, but is (as best as I can phrase it) a NPOV statement about what Catholics have said about some Protestant Bible translations. Jim Henry 15:30, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

You are using wikipedia as an proselytist media for catholicism. I will report you to Jimbo Wales. Your comments are NO neutral,and are very defamotories against evangelicals.

According to you, PROVEN persecution by catholics must to be written only in politically correct -and previously aproved by Catholic League- terms?. And you think to delete the article on Holocaust,because it is no neutral toward nazis?.

You don`t have time for reading sources and documents,but edit and delete articles linked to these same documents?. Tries to be serious,some people writing here are serious and mature people,no lazy teenagers as you.

(above unsigned comment by Guillen)

I will admit to being lazy, but I haven't any connection with the Catholic League and I unfortunately haven't been a teenager for a while now. I will be happy to consider revising or removing any comments of mine that you consider "defamotories against evangelicals" if you will quote specific comments you consider defamatory, instead of just repeating the charge in the same vague terms.

I just reverted part of your changes to Bible society -- you seem to keep making the same ungrammatical and (in my opinion) inflammatory edits after User:BigDT reverts them -- but I tried to keep the most useful parts you added. Let me know if the compromise merge is acceptable to you. I kept most or all of your links and references, but moved them to the references and external links section out of the body of the article.

Probably Talk:Bible society would be a more suitable place to continue this conversation. --Jim Henry 14:20, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew Drummond (artist)

Hi nice painter but look at the bottom of the Andrew Drummond (artist) page for how to categorize this is very important. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 15:21, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Can you point me to a page that has a concise list of all the stub template names? I can't usually remember the ones for areas I don't often work in. --Jim Henry 12:59, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Plutarch's Influence on Shakespeare

Hello Jim. I read your comments in the Talk page of the Plutarch article where you talked about Plutarch's influence on Shakespeare and give a reference. Would you mind writing a paragraph specifically on how Shakespeare used Plutarch, since that is one of the most famous of of Plutarch's influencees? I'm currently trying to upgrade the Plutarch article. Your help would be much appreciated. BiancaOfHell 16:06, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Again, I'm at work and don't have the Michael Grant book handy. But I recently ran across another reference, in the introduction or foreword to an online etext of Plutarch -- one of the Plutarch editions at Project Gutenberg. --Jim Henry 17:32, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Recent deletion of Category:Esperantists up for review

In case you'd like to chime in, go here. --Orange Mike 18:09, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Esperanto II

Hi Jim,

As a start to fixing up the Esperanto II article, I tried translating the sample passage. (I did the same for the eo-wiki article.) Most of it is pretty straightforward, and you can catch glimpses of the grammatical regularity Saussure created, but there are two words I can't ID, lo and tiente (also the suffix -ente in general, which also occurs on pliente). Could you take a stab at it?

Thanks, kwami (talk) 23:36, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In regards to your discussion on "'Mundus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur'....

Hi, My name is Jared and I am fairly new to using Wikipedia as a tool for information. I really just started using it because I read a book with the phrase "mudus vult decipi" and the meaning seemed a valid point, therefore I have been researching it. If you hav'nt heard or read "Killing time" by Caleb Carr, it may be of intrest to you. I've found it to be a great read into the posibility of our ever changing world. Don't know if this makes sense or even does anything, but I am a young person with a thirst for knowledge. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JBradford87 (talk • contribs) 17:54, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Ithkuil

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Ithkuil. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ithkuil (2nd nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:06, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Jim Henry! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. Please note that all biographies of living persons must be sourced. If you were to add reliable, secondary sources to this article, it would greatly help us with the current 3 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

Nina Kiriki Hoffman - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 19:28, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA reassessment of Toki Pona

I have conducted a reassessment of the above article following a request on the talk page. You are being notified as you have made a number of contributions to the article. I have found some concerns which you can see at Talk:Toki Pona/GA2. I have placed the article on hold whilst these are fixed. Thanks. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 00:35, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion request for Glossary of terms in the Jean le Flambeur series

You may be interested in commenting on the deletion request for this article, as you have previously contributed to it. Thanks, Pete Tillman (talk) 23:28, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 1

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Day of the Locust, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Andy Duncan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:44, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sources of the Ditransitive verb's edition of September the 12th 2008

Hello. I'm looking for your sources for your sources on calling the subject of ditransitive verbs D for donnor, and I can't find that nomenclature in the articles that appear on the reference. From what I've seen, everyone uses Dryer's nomenclature that does not distinguish D from A. Is it from an obscure or disabled source (I've seen that some sources don't exist anymore)? Or is it an innovation of yours? Thank you in advance. --Rmmarto (talk) 01:27, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's not an innovation of mine, but it's been so long since I studied this that I don't remember where I found that terminology used. My guess is that it was some linguistics article that someone linked from a mailing list I'm on, but finding it again after all this time, if I didn't link it in the WP article, will be impossible. --Jim Henry (talk) 17:37, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Versions of the Bible" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Versions of the Bible and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 December 26#Versions of the Bible until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Veverve (talk) 14:15, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Bible, Versions of the" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Bible, Versions of the and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 December 26#Bible, Versions of the until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Veverve (talk) 14:16, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

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]