Well, I guess you were wrong. :-) | AndonicO ^{Talk | Sign Here} 19:14, 25 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Could you please supply a source for your statement[1] in answer to the Da Vinci question? We need to keep Wikipedia's verifiability policy in mind while responding on the desk.—eric 01:11, 14 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I don't have a source. It's from a documentary I saw in my Italian language class once. Sorry. 惑乱 分からん 12:08, 14 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Can I suggest you consider reverting or seriously amending your edit about the Virgin Mary? Some people are bound to find it offensive. --Dweller 13:25, 16 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It looks fine, right now. Even if someone's faith is strong, he should be able to accept alternative opinion from heretics. =S 惑乱 分からん 15:38, 16 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• This professor says that Mary was probably not a virgin in the modern sense of the word.Giovanni33 21:54, 23 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Thanks! I skimmed through it, seems interesting! 惑乱 分からん 23:20, 23 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hallo Wakuran, I was wondering what you meant with your comment "Old Dutch is part of OLF, otherwise, I think Jonathan might have deleted some valid information. Someone knowledgeable could check out the edits..."

As far as I see the only things I really deleted are claims about pommerania and bavaria. Since the origin of Franks is widely attested by contemporain historians and is undisputed by modern scholars I'm not sure what you mean. Could you cure my curiosity? johanthon 21:06, 15 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Well, if the things you removed aren't particularly based on historical sources and evidences, I guess it might have been correct to do so. I admitted I wasn't that knowledgeable. 惑乱 分からん 00:04, 16 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Howdy! A quick request, would you consider using edit summaries more often? It generates extra work for some folks when you don't, especially when cleaning up after a vandal, and the community has even indicated that it considers the subject of edit summaries important enough that it has, on occasion, rejected adminship candidates on that basis alone. So please consider just adding a word or two whenever you edit, it'll make our jobs easier and will reflect positively upon you in the community. Regards, CHAIRBOY (☎) 15:22, 26 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Aaah, sorry. I guess it's basically laziness... I'll try to think more about it in the future... Not that I plan on being an admin in the near future, but still... 惑乱 分からん 16:20, 26 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey Wakuran,

I have noticed that lately your signature contains exclusively non-Latin characters. It's not a problem for me, since my browser supports them, but the official WP guideline (Wikipedia:Signatures) says that you should also include Latin letters because some people's browsers won't support other characters. Of course, this is just a guideline, so it's not necessary, but I wasn't sure if you were aware.

Thank you. − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 16:41, 6 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

So it's a guideline, Should think about it... 惑乱 分からん 16:48, 6 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Would 1337 suffice? Like the font... (Hmmm, I'd need to learn some sig programming) =S 惑乱 分からん * \)/ * (\ * )< * \) * (2 * /) * /)/ * 17:06, 6 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I just noticed the change. j00 PWN3D T3H H4X0R2!!!!1 V-Man737 02:39, 7 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Mwuuhahhahh!! (Old Ascii Art geek...) It's kinda big, though, I'd like to reprogram it as two half-size lines or something, but it needs some complex programming... 惑乱 分からん * \)/ * (\ * (< * \) * (2 * /) * /)/ * 03:07, 7 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm sure you can figure it out, you're t3h 1337 n00b h4xx0r! V-Man737 04:02, 7 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hope so, though I might just be a pretentious artsy twat... =S Thanks for your support, anyway... 惑乱 分からん * \)/ * (\ * (< * \) * (2 * /) * /)/ * 04:08, 7 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for removing that footnote about theos/deus. The bizarre thing about it is that if the person who added it thought it was true, then it should have occurred to him that by definition the words would be true, not false, cognates, and shouldn't even be on the list. —Largo Plazo 14:38, 15 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yeah, it's weird... Anyway, I have made that mistaken assumption, myself... Thanks for the thanks... 惑乱 分からん * \)/ (\ (< \) (2 /) /)/ * 18:27, 15 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for catching my goof. I must be accursed... Clarityfiend 01:17, 29 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Indeed... @_@ You're welcome... 惑乱 分からん * \)/ (\ (< \) (2 /) /)/ * 01:26, 29 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Wakuran. The problem with using dictionaries is that you are bound to find only the Old Icelandic forms of Old Norse words. The Old East Norse that contributed to Old English had different forms from Old Icelandic. The word for "after" was æftiR and not eptir and thus the form for "lift" would have been lyfta and not lypta.--Berig 09:50, 3 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hmmm, alright, I just looked for an attested form, found in popular dictionaries. "Lyfta" turning to "lift" makes more sense to me. The modern Scandinavian descendants are "lyfte" (Danish, Norwegian Bokmål) and "lyfta" (Swedish) so I figured at least some of the Norsemen used "lyfta". Thanks for letting me know. Go ahead and change it back, then. 惑乱 分からん * \)/ (\ (< \) (2 /) /)/ * 09:55, 3 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It is a shame that the user who called himself Utgardaloki did not provide references. It was obious that he knew what he was writing about and no one objected to his contributions, but it would have helped future editing if he had provided refs.--Berig 09:58, 3 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ah. Now it looks like you have a good idea of what's up with them. A novel with illustrations, in the « Bibliothèque Verte » series.. fr.wiki is brief and bedetheque lists it last as hors-séries[2]. I think you've solved it fine. Cheers. MURGH ^disc. 22:28, 18 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yeah, I looked it up on Bedetheque and googled the title, and found some French webpage where I could work out the gist with my school French. Maybe could need some rewriting, however. 惑乱 分からん * \)/ (\ (< \) (2 /) /)/ * (talk) 22:58, 18 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

concerning this edit: [[3]] What is meant seems to be: In German you say ich wasche mich, literally "I wash myself", instead of English "I wash", "I am washing", I am having a wash" or whatever. Thus, native speakers of German, when speaking English, tend to use reflexive pronouns where the grammar of English does not require them. Unoffensive text or character (talk) 14:35, 21 July 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Aha, reflexive verbs. Anyway, I agree about the removal. 惑乱 分からん * \)/ (\ (< \) (2 /) /)/ * (talk) 14:42, 21 July 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm leaving you a note as you may be interested in this opportunity.

People from all six Nordic Wiki-communities (sv, no, nn, fi, da and is) are coordinating a bid for Wikimania 2010 in Stockholm. I'm sending you a message to let you know that this is occurring, and over the next few months we're looking for community support to make sure this happens! See the bid page on meta and if you like such an idea, please sign the "supporters" list at the bottom. Tack (or takk), and have a wonderful day! Mike H. Fierce! 09:45, 5 August 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Can't be read, change it now. Aygo (talk) 05:50, 10 August 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Yeah, it's Ascii. Kind of grown fond to it, though, see what I could do. 惑乱 分からん * \)/ (\ (< \) (2 /) /)/ * (talk) 16:18, 11 August 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Last year, you asked about toe socks on Talk:Tabi. In case you haven’t learned the answer to your question, I’ve answered it there.

Nils (talk) 23:12, 18 August 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ahhh, haha, I've forgotten about it a long time ago (maybe not surprisingly), but thanks for your reply! 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 08:15, 19 August 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I see that you are interested in improving the articles dedicated to the albums of the Gaston Lagaffe series. One good thing would be to include in the "Story" section a subcategory "Inventions". I began to do it in the article Gaffes et gadgets, but if you are interested, you can help me, because this is a difficult work. For help, there is this link. Also, it would be good that you correct the grammatical errors in these articles. Thanks! --Pah777 (talk) 14:18, 1 September 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ah, okay, I'm not entirely sure on what the articles should contain, so I concentrate on minor mistakes and the flow of the written text, for now. I got a little confused on the albums' chronological order, but I'm sorting them according to the published date. Thanks for the message, though. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 14:28, 1 September 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Anyway, what do you think about the sorting order for the Franquin template? Chronological publishing date? Original magazine publication? Album number? What's your opinion? 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 14:41, 1 September 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I am not sure that the albums must be sorted by date of publications in albums, but rather by date of the original publication in magazines (= according to the order of the series). I mean 0->R1->R2->R3->R4->R5->6->7->...->14->15. Don't you think so ? It would be more logical. As for the Franquin template, the same order I think (I will change it). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pah777 (talk • contribs) 14:51, 1 September 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Aha~. Ah, well, I guess that makes sense. Just leave a <!--- Hidden note ---> to explain the sorting and dates for the template. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 18:01, 1 September 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I haven't seen your signature at the reference desk since .... April 2007, apparently . Given that you still hold a position among the top ten contributors of the language desk, I added your signature to this list. I hope that's alright. (nudge nudge) ---Sluzzelin talk 18:46, 29 November 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Haha, a period of intense spamming. Sure, it's allright, since it's apparent when I committed my dirty deeds. Thanks for the info! 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 22:52, 30 November 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You keep undoing edits about the origins of the word 'morning', claiming it to be nonsense. But in fact it's not. Cockerals used to crow early in the day, and without any other word to describe that time of day, the word for chicken was adapted. Over centuries this has been watered down and altered etc, as all words are, resulting in our current word for the time between 12am and 12 pm: morning. I havent reverted your changes just yet. I'd like to discuss it with you first. Thanks. Tom. Tomandhismathcore (talk) 16:55, 5 December 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What's your source? After looking up several dictionaries, All information I found indicated that "morning" is derived from Old English morgen and morne, with cognates in other Germanic languages also meaning "morning". Without any source to back it up, it'd be Original Research.惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 13:07, 6 December 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I first this during an english lecture at college, but I did find it on the net , but forgot to write down the URL. i'll have a hunt. Tomandhismathcore (talk) 22:49, 6 December 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yeah, well, okay. I maybe should have supposed good faith, sorry. Anyway, after checkning out etymonline.com, several free online English dictionaries, Deutsches Wörterbuch and Svenska Akademiens Ordbok, I couldn't find anything remotely similar to the "chicken" theory. Either it's claimed "of unknown origin", or connected to words in other IE languages reasonably similar connected to light and flickering.
And as for the quote "Morning has broken", I just thought it seemed unnecessary. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 23:57, 6 December 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Image-Marcinelle-Example.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 06:03, 9 December 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Wakuran, I saw that you had some dealings with this page and maybe you'll enjoy my addition Jcwf (talk) 00:04, 4 March 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Wakuran and thank you for the answer in the Old Norse discussion page. I have two additional questions that you might have knowledge to answer:

1) When was the Saga literature e.g. Codex Regius and Flateyjarbók book first was referred to in "learned" literature?

2) What language was the Saga e.g. Codex Regius and Flateyjarbók first written in? Was it in Latin? Thorguds (talk) 11:10, 28 March 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

1) Sorry, I don't know. I'm not really a scholar.

2) Old Icelandic, which in most respects apparently are nearly identical to Old West Norse, mostly considered a dialect. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 12:21, 28 March 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You might be interested: Here is some information gathered about the scripts of the old Saga literature. The language is Old Icelandic, but the script is Latin. According to G. M. Gunnlaugsson Latin spead to Iceland and Norway with Christianity in Europe after year 1000 and the oldest documented scripts are dated to middle or late 12th century. The Old Norse scripts are written in Praegothica Latin from around 1200. This script type is likely imported with the Anglo-Saxons, first to Norway and then to Iceland. Source of Information is found in the following sites: 1) http://www.dur.ac.uk/medieval.www/sagaconf/mar.htm 2) http://www.ksbm.oeaw.ac.at/cipl2005/vienne05_12.pdf Apropos: Gothic script style has nothing whatever to do with the Goths, but with Saracenic art of the Crusaders. Gothic is a Latin script style. The Gothic period lasted roughly from 1150 to 1500. Praegothica developed from the earlier Carolingian minuscule. Source of information: Fonts for Latin Paleography by Juan-José Marcos, 2008. 3) http://cg.scs.carleton.ca/~luc/JJMarcos-2008-FontsForLATIN_PALEOGRAPHY.pdf The Saga literature are not pagan scripts of origin, but told by the Christians about the old Nordic pagan religion and culture. "Old Nordic" seems to be a more correct word than "Old Norse" when it comes to religion and culture. Thorguds (talk) 16:22, 28 March 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yeah, I knew some of that already, but thanks. I think there is much more attested Norse writing in Latin than Runic script, actually. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 16:39, 28 March 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

For some rather weird reason the article about José Luis Munuera has been nominated for speedy (sic) deletion. Could you help me commenting on it on the talk page. --Oddeivind (talk) 22:17, 8 July 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Mixed was once thought to be derived as a backformation from Latin mixtus, but etymologists are now beginning to agree that the word has been in English all along, coming from Middle English mixen from Old English mixian, a variant of miscian (cf ask from OE āscian/āxian). Further analysis points to a Proto-Germanic etymology rather than to an OE borrowing of the Latin word for several reasons: 1). The word is well attested in Germanic (Old English, Middle Low German and Old High German), 2) There are other related words in Germanic that clearly could not have been borrowed from Latin, thus suggesting native origin (e.g. OE māsc/māx "mixture"), 3). The PIE root is found almost ubiquitously in all branches of IE (Greek, Slavic, Celtic, Baltic, Indo-Iranian), leading experts to believe that it must have also existed in Germanic as well. Leasnam (talk) 21:11, 3 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yeah, I see the reasoning, although most online dictionaries I find seem to state it's Latin. What's your sources? 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 22:21, 3 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I use these, among others--http://www.scribd.com/doc/21206305/A-Handbook-of-Germanic-Etymology; http://lexicon.ff.cuni.cz/; http://starling.rinet.ru/cgi-bin/query.cgi?basename=%5Cdata%5Cie%5Cgermet; http://www.wordnik.com/words/mix Leasnam (talk) 01:36, 4 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Alright, thanks. Just need to make clear which would be good sources. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 20:01, 4 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I finally found the one I was looking for--From An English Etymological Dictionary of the English Language [Skeat] http://books.google.com/books?id=vDZAAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=english+etymological+dictionary&cd=1#v=onepage&q=mix&f=false . p 373. Leasnam (talk) 17:27, 5 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Howdy, you are cordially invited to give your input at the photo shop

Enjoy your day! --Scott Free (talk) 21:21, 16 April 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 01:12, 18 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi,
I seem to remember that my teacher said the same thing, but apparently it's not that simple – see Apostrophe#Singular nouns ending with an “s” or “z” sound, and there were discussions about this at e.g. Britney Spears where they use "Spears's" as well. I'm not aware of any clear-cut rule on it though.
Cheers, Amalthea 14:53, 8 November 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Okay, thank you. Seems like it's not worth the effort changing it if I see it again, then. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 18:35, 8 November 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. In List of English words of Yiddish origin, I reverted the entry on Bupkes. My full OED shows bupkis preferred (listed with 'also, bupkes', implying unequal status, and my smaller electronic OED shows bupkis but doesn't list bupkes at all. Google shows 41,300 bupkis entries, but only 7400 bupkes, again suggesting bupkis as the preferred spelling.

best wishes, --UnicornTapestry (talk) 18:14, 27 November 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey! I wrote an article about Semic, but I need to find more doumentation to verify notability, and preferably also more references to the text in general. Mabe you could help me? --Oddeivind (talk) 10:02, 29 December 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm on vacation now, but I could take a look at it. Do you have any idea on if / how Semic Press and Semic Comics are related? 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 11:24, 30 December 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

As a contributor to this article, you may be interested to know I have nominated it for deletion. Your comments are welcome at WP:Articles for deletion/Syldavian. Robofish (talk) 21:42, 18 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(Note that Bordurian has been nominated for deletion as well, and is being discussed at the same AFD.) Robofish (talk) 21:44, 18 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

OK. Thanks for telling. I could probably understand the reaosning, though. I'll check it out. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 17:25, 19 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for your contribution to the Discussion page of the "Kate Osann" article. I changed "SS Death index" to "Social Security Death index" to avoid any possible confusion with the German SS. I hope you don't mind. Thank you again.Ftfrk61 (talk) 13:28, 6 March 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Aha, well. Thanks for telling. I wasn't sure if I should forward info from a mailing list, but it didn't seem to be of private matters. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 21:05, 6 March 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. In Immigration to Sweden, you recently added a link to the disambiguation page Romani (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) 11:12, 18 December 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That section has been contentious. It seems reasonable that some of the material could be moved into a footnote, but I think that your decision should be informed by reading a bit of the page history.

The section's length allows everything to be documented and allows the reader to judge the character of that "defense" in Aftonbladet.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 17:23, 7 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I haven't removed anything from the section. I just made a comment. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 15:52, 8 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Right!

I just wanted to explain why that section is long and detailed, and suggest the only way I can think of to shorten it, responding to your comment. Best regards,  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 16:59, 8 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

But basically, events occurring in the last two years get twice as much coverage as events occurring all throughout 20th century. I ask myself whether it's truly warranted. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 01:48, 10 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited Flintheart Glomgold, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Relevant (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) 10:45, 7 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited List of film director and actor collaborations, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Late Autumn (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) 18:42, 16 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi! When you added the entry for "duck" at Indo-European vocabulary last year, you had the spelling as *an@t. Were you perhaps going for H₂? Pokorny has ə, but that was pre-laryngeal theory so I'm not certain if that is still how it is. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 03:31, 4 September 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think I just copied it from an outdated source. If you'd have access to newer research, feel free to change it. Thank you for asking. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 12:23, 4 September 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I see you already did. Well, it looks better now. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 12:24, 4 September 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bobo (Swedish comics), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Spinoff (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) 11:22, 8 February 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jack Davis (cartoonist), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mike Roy (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) 16:51, 17 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Il y a un sorcier à Champignac may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• a separate bonus story added to the end, with the initial one being the seminal work. {clarify}}

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 13:43, 20 November 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, I'm Oglesruins. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! — Preceding undated comment added 00:48, 24 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Quebec comics, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Travelogue (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) 08:57, 23 May 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

And, unlike all the other agents trying to contact you, I am not a bot. :) I'm trying to figure out why that number of "very active editors" that seems so important to everyone is dropping, so I figured I'd try something new and just ask them. I saw that you had a lot of edits around 2006-2007, then it's gradually dropped off. Looks like you're in to comics and languages. Have you just said everything you wanted to say about them? Please, drop by my talk page and tell me about your experience. You might as well tell me about anything you think would improve Wikipedia, while you're there. here's the place. Or, if you prefer keeping your thoughts private, just email me at wllm@wllm.com. Thanks! and best wishes regardless! ,Wil (talk) 05:35, 8 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There's a bunch of garble in the lede of Bamse. I can't fix it because don't know anything about the subject, but I see that you had a lot of input into the article. Please look at my comments at Talk:Bamse#Who's Lille Skutt?. Thanks. Thnidu (talk) 09:40, 7 September 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 13 Demon Street, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Wolf Man. 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) 09:54, 3 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Germanic-speaking Europe, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Romani. 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) 09:44, 23 May 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

i just replied to your question at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:List_of_films_featuring_romances_of_significant_age_disparity#May-December_romances please make any reply an extention of that entry so others can see conversation and hopefully we get others to add more information. Qazwiz (talk) 11:51, 5 June 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for fixing the "diplomat" --> "diplomatist" typo in Jan Romare - that was a brain fart on my part, from reading Swedish sources and thinking partly in Swedish, partly in English.... Most embarrassing, and silly of me. I'm glad you caught it. --bonadea contributions talk 11:28, 9 September 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"Diplomatist" redirected to diplomat, so it might be some rare alternate form or something. Anyway, you're welcome. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 23:22, 10 September 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Buck Danny, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page American comics. 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) 06:23, 8 February 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Dag Vag, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Punk.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 11 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Wakuran! I don't know if the link will work from WT, so I post it here: Here's[4] various editions of Kluge's dictionary available in WP Library. –Austronesier (talk) 13:10, 28 October 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ah, yeah. I managed to log in and look at the 1967 edition, that seemed to be the one cited. No mention of ship-shaped potties. Thanks. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 14:36, 28 October 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

schiften schw. Ztw. Schiff (s. d.) ist aus seiner alten Bed. 'Gefäß' in die engere 'Nachtgeschirr' überführt worden, die Augustin 1795 als studentisch bezeugt. Aus demselben Kreis stammt schiffen 'den Urin lassen', so seit Kindleben 1781 Stud.-Lex. 169. Von da weithin in die Mundarten gedrungen. Auf Übertragung dieser Bed. beruht das junge es schifft 'es regnet'.

Speaking (on WP:RD/L) of surnames and their etymologies — do I remember right that you are an Arnkvist? (Can there be two Swedes with an interest in nihongo? 😜) I have a great-grandfather of that name, from Arnebysätter near Sunne if memory serves. He became a judge in Wisconsin. —Tamfang (talk) 05:25, 21 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry, no. That's someone else. As my surname is rather unique, I'm a bit cautious about sharing it, though. And there are thousands of Swedes with an interest in nihongo. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 10:39, 21 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]