In a message dated 6/25/2008 2:28:41 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, arromdee@rahul.net writes:
Other than my say-so, do we have a source for the claim that someone born in Detroit, Michigan was born in the United States?
Hiragana is unambiguous. You can look up exactly what it is. When you look it up you get "Tessaiga", not "Tetsusaiga". It doesn't take any interpretation to do so. There are no serious claims that the Japanese version doesn't say "Tessaiga".>>
----------------------------- Then you should have no problem presenting a source which states that.
Will Johnson
**************Gas prices getting you down? Search AOL Autos for fuel-efficient used cars. (http://autos.aol.com/used?ncid=aolaut00050000000007)
On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 1:07 PM, WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 6/25/2008 2:28:41 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, arromdee@rahul.net writes:
Other than my say-so, do we have a source for the claim that someone born in Detroit, Michigan was born in the United States?
Hiragana is unambiguous. You can look up exactly what it is. When you look it up you get "Tessaiga", not "Tetsusaiga". It doesn't take any interpretation to do so. There are no serious claims that the Japanese version doesn't say "Tessaiga".>>
Then you should have no problem presenting a source which states that.
Will Johnson
**************Gas prices getting you down? Search AOL Autos for fuel-efficient used cars. (http://autos.aol.com/used?ncid=aolaut00050000000007) _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
I don't think it requires any undue or novel synthesis to use very simple logic. "A is wholly contained by B", therefore "Anything in A is also in B". Detroit is wholly contained by the US, so anything or anyone in Detroit is also in the US. Anyone making any -other- claim would be the one making an extraordinary claim, and would require extraordinary proof.
On Fri, 4 Jul 2008 WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
Other than my say-so, do we have a source for the claim that someone born in Detroit, Michigan was born in the United States?
Hiragana is unambiguous. You can look up exactly what it is. When you look it up you get "Tessaiga", not "Tetsusaiga". It doesn't take any interpretation to do so. There are no serious claims that the Japanese version doesn't say "Tessaiga".>>
Then you should have no problem presenting a source which states that.
Specific applications of general rules don't need, and except by sheer luck will never have, sources. Examples include:
Adding the numbers 11111111 and 55555555 produces 66666666. Someone born in Detroit, Michigan was born in the United States. The word "apple" is spelled using two vowels. The word "apple" is spelled using a prime number of vowels. The morse code sequence "-- --- ·-· ··· · -·-· --- -·· ·" translates into the letters "MORSE CODE". (Actual Wikipedia example, by the way). The kana sequence used to spell the Japanese name of Inuyasha's sword translates into "Tessaiga", not "Tetsusaiga".
Demanding sources for these is an abuse of Wikipedia policy.
And you're still ignoring common sense. Common sense says that we should not perpetuate mistakes, and "Tetsusaiga" is a mistake by any non-Wikipedia standard. It's true that we have some articles based around names that are mistakes, but in these examples, either -- the mistake is buried in etymology and wouldn't be at all recognized by the average reader, so there's no chance Wikipedia will perpetuate a misconception (nobody's going to look at the word "malaria" and think it's caused by bad air, even though the name derives from a mistaken belief that that was the case) -- the mistake is *so* common that there's no more room for Wikipedia to make it even more common; Wikipedia cannot possibly perpetuate it further than it already is -- the "mistake" was done intentionally.
Tetsusaiga is none of these. It's an unusual case where the mistake is very common, yet the correct name is also widely known, and where the use of the mistake in Wikipedia may actually influence more people to make the mistake. Even if the guideline says we should use the name, this is too obviously a case where the guideline has to be ignored. That's why each guideline has the disclaimer to use common sense and the occasional exception. If it was impossible to ignore guidelines that don't fit strange corner cases, we wouldn't have that.