User talk:Bagworm/archive2

• Your edits, due to the fact that you confused the singular and plural forms of certain nouns, didn't clarify things, I am afraid. I've read and edited the article again, corrected some mistakes made by previous editors that you pointed out to me. See the new version. --Badvibes101 (talk) 15:02, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• I corrected the bit about HNR - haiku connection (I admit that my previous edit was a bit ambiguous.)

Re: ushin/mushin - well, to be honest with you, not too many people in the English-speaking countries know what it is. You see, Wiki is for common people rather than for specialists like you and me. Of course, we could explain the whole unshin/mushin thing in the article, but we mustn't forget that the article is actually about haiku, and not about haikai. I believe the word 'popular' explains it finely. What do you think? --Badvibes101 (talk) 21:30, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair point, I guess. I may introduce it in

Hello...didn't mean to step on any toes by re-editing over SPQR. He and I have met recently at Dutch(etnic Group). He and I both speak dialects of Flemish. But, I am a Native speaker of American English while Flemish is my birth tongue. I believe English may be new to SPQR. Your explanation was "right on" I saw that he had changed your meaning and tried to help. Rather than change it back, I alterred it , just a bit, in order to clarify. I think it reads better and clearer now. Take care.--Buster7 (talk) 19:41, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I had to comment on your statement about Haiku Ireland being the 'main national society' that you had made on the Haiku Discussion page. In my view, which is the view of an insider, this is less than fair. Quoting your opinion, as well as my reply, below.

I've reinstated Haiku Ireland, as it is the main national society (the IHS is a more recent affair)
--

talk

) 00:11, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Begging your pardon, Haiku Ireland is NOT the main national society. This little I know having been on the Irish haiku scene for quite a while. The IHS has been formed in 2006, i.e. exactly a year later than Haiku Ireland (founded in 2005). However the IHS now has about 50 IRISH members, while Haiku Ireland have only about 15. The latter have added some of their foreign correspondents as members, which, of course, increased the number of participants - to about 20. Still the IHS is a much bigger society. Both societies are active at promoting haiku nationally and internationally, so both of them deserve to be on the list. --Badvibes101 (talk) 22:09, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

More info on the two haiku societies in Ireland here: [1]. --Badvibes101 (talk) 09:59, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It seems we both have the same problem with an other editor...lack of response. re: User:Neutrality. Mine is in regards to a random article, Sombrero, I edited and now I'm stuck. I have a valid point but do not wish to get involved with wasted time on a minute subject. I'd like to just move on but my wifes Mexican Culture won't let me. Thanks for letting me vent!!--Buster7 (talk) 13:26, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think that your points are incorrect. "Cities" has a broad definition - think "settlements". According to the scope of the cities project: ""Cities" include municipalities and other civil divisions, including cities, towns, villages, hamlets, townships, unincorporated communities, sections of municipalities, and neighborhoods." It's a broad definition and I'd argue that it's TOO broad. However, as it is, Kinsale and the other Irish places I tagged are certainly within the scope and they are of much more note than some (Kinsale in particular has an historic importance and Tallaght has town planning interest). Have a look at the project lists. Glendalough is debatable if it really is uninhabited - should the project include abandoned settlements? Another point is that the project is heavily US-centric, which is not what wiki is about. I intend to reinstate the tags unless you object - if you do then it should become a project consensus decision, not one for individuals to quarrel about. Views? Folks at 137 (talk) 23:12, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Misnamed? Yes. But remember that english Wiki has a largely US flavour, and, in the US, "city" has a looser definition and, worldwide, it has differing official definitions. (It's also a nice, short word.) Check it out, I've raised the scope issue on the project's main talk page. The selection of places that I tag can be scattergun, often just places I know, so don't assume that some sort of relative judgement is always in play, although I have worked through a list of "megacities" and the largest UK towns/ cities. Glendalough? Only if abandoned settlements are acceptable by the project. I don't think that the special monastic nature rules it in or out. (But it probably includes it in one of the religious projects, I'll check.) Folks at 137 (talk) 06:30, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tag - Holler back on my talk if you canWarren Fish (talk) 01:30, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Bagworm. You have new messages at Robertgreer's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Thanks, and done!ChocolateBlender (talk) 14:31, 6 October 2008 (UTC)ChocolateBlender[reply]

Please help revert subtle vandalism as on Rhubarb. 66.251.199.141 has done numerous edits inserting fake references Giannini et al and unfounded fake claims. This address has to be blocked. 70.137.179.88 (talk) 18:52, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to delist this article from being a GA soon. It was promoted it 2 years ago, but it no longer fits the more stringent criteria. You seem to be the only regualr current editor there, so please let me know on the reassessment page if you disagree or plan to do the needed (large) improvments, then i'll wait longer. thanks! :-)

Following our discussion about Glendalough, I raised the topic on the WPCities talk page. Abandoned settlements are excluded, so that's settled. I've proposed an "extinct settlements" project proposal. Please have a look at the proposal for a new project (ExtinctSettlments) and add your vote and/or views. Folks at 137 (talk) 19:24, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Two things to note about this page:

1. The formulation of waka as a "genre" of Japanese poetry.

a. The word genre, when taken into the field of literary studies, refers not just to form (tanka, sedoka...) but also implies thematic cohesion of pieces (e.g. warrior ballads, love songs, etc.).

b. Since "waka" literally means "Japanese poetry" it cannot by default just be a genre.

2. You site many valuable sources such as Brower&Miner, Cranston and McCullough, but where did you get that:

a. waka is a "genre"?

b. it only refers to tanka now? (E.g. Choka was still written in late Heian, cf. Nun Abutsu for instance.)

Based on the above-listed premises I suggest changing the formulation a bit:

Waka (lit. "Japanese poetry"和歌) is a generic term that comprises several forms of traditional Japanese poetry.... The name presupposes its distinct identity from kanshi漢詩, i.e. "poetry in classical Chinese". In modernity, it is also contrasted with poems in Japanese written according to the Western poetic forms.

[or something like that.]

Hope this helps, Shooklyn —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shooklyn (talk • contribs) 09:07, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Moving this discussion to Talk:Waka (poetry)

The restrictions on posting links to external pages include "Except for a link to an official page of the article's subject.." - additionally the linked page in Facebook is non-commercial, it was a general page about Rooibos with videos and info from multiple sources. Finally, Facebook pages don't generally benefit from link popularity since they are typically found through Facebook, so your comment there made no sense. 151.199.18.194 (talk) 17:44, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]