Talk:Neapolitan

Untitled
Ciao, how can I help you? I suppose you have problems with the structure of the book. Btw. if you would like to register it is easier to attribute your work to you and admins will know that who is working is a reliable person. Without login we only see a number and therefore check out every added page. - For all other people reading this page: this book is being initiated on the napulitano-discussion group - so it will take some time to build it up. Ciao! --SabineCretella 06:20, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

yes i am registered, every now and then i become loged out.

the list i made and you fixed will be the headings for the table of contents.

anything you would like to add, would be helpful. --Espo111 22:44, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

help!
PLEASE ADD TO THIS! I am one person and it is not my native language.

--Espo111 01:20, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

Questions
Hello, I'm glad this project has begun. I think there are some basic things we should work out before we get too far along though. Orthographically, I tend to prefer the "j" to the "i" (nuje v. nuie, serraje v. serraie), thoughts? Also, what do we do about all the variable conjugations/spellings/usages endemic to the language? I don't want arbitrary decisions made with the losers just falling by the wayside, but having too many variants can be confusing to the newcomer. Perhaps some mix can be accommodated (the way many Italian texts include both devo and debbo)? I personally enjoy the lack of standardization in Neapolitan, but it can be frustrating. Sabine (if you're reading this), is there any "easy" way to copy the Neapolitan material from the Italian wiktionary over to this? Or is it better to just wait for a nap.wiktionary.org to get going and do it there? One big problem is that all that material is in Italian.... E. abu Filumena 06:43, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

i agree to use "j" instead of "i" and as for the other spellings, i think we should use spellings    that most often appear in the 18th and 19th century literature, also what is being used in and around napule today, and where there is no consensus, list all forms with notes. we discuss a lot of that in the http://groups.yahoo.com/group/napulitano/ --Espo111 16:53, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

As for linking material please hold on for a moment - Ultimate Wiktionary should start soon and from here it will be easy to add translations into EN + link it directly. At this stage, to my opinion, it does not make sense to create a neapolitan wiktionary as it would only double admin work and "copy work". Thank you! --SabineCretella 13:32, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

PLEASE LEAVE THE LINK TO MY WEBSITE WWW.NAPULITANO.ORG ON THIS WIKIBOOK I STARTED THIS BOOK FOR THAT WEBSITE, AND I DON'T APPRECIATE IT BEING REMOVED --Espo111 21:29, 22 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I did not remove the link from the page, but it is not generally considered proper on wikibooks to use a wikibook as means of advertising, which is one way the link to your page could be understood. The "correct" way to issue credits would usually be to have a separate page for them, or to list them on the talk page (here). Kellen T 22:21, 22 August 2005 (UTC)


 * how is a website that serves as a center for the neapolitan language with NO ads whatsoever (and is being run out of pocket) considered improper? i started this page here for the site, but if you dont want my help, i will leave, and let this book die.--Espo111 22:50, 22 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Hello Frank, I'm not sure why you are being so aggressive, but I'd have to concur that the front page is not the place for this kind of self-promotion. I did include your page in the references page.  I do not know how removing the front page link is in any way by way of saying that your assistance is not wanted.  If you do indeed feel that way, then I wish you well and will do what I can to keep this book alive myself along with whosoever else wishes throw in, as is the spirit of the wiki projects.E. abu Filumena 23:59, 22 August 2005 (UTC)


 * The issue is not if the site itself has ads, nor if the book was originally started for your site, but that wikibooks/wikipedia/etc are considered collective endeavors and that an attribution to a specific entity doesn't reflect this (even if you are currently the only contributor). This is not a personal attack in any way, and I have nothing vested in the link to your site. In fact, your site does look like a very helpful resource, and I think it fits into the wikibooks scheme in that sense; as a resource. I hope you do not leave based on this since you seem to be doing good work, but please recognize that the future of this wikibook extends beyond the scope of your personal project. Kellen T 01:19, 23 August 2005 (UTC)


 * The site is now linked to on the "sites" subpage, I don't think more attribution than that is necessary. Just because the wikibook was intended to accompany your site doesn't mean you are given the right to brand it. I created (well, resurrected) the Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas wikibook with the sole purpose of it being a guide for and by GameFAQs users, but I never labelled it as such. Anyway I hope this unfortunate misunderstanding is over now. I've blocked the blanking vandal for now, so hopefully you can edit in peace. :) GarrettTalk 03:43, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

Blanking and threat
At 02:03 UTC, 23 August 2005 Espo111 replaced this page with this :

well i thought i could help people, but i should have realized wiki is just ignorant people with egos. I guess i will have to create through other means, away from wiki. and i will do whatever i can to kill this book, including vandalism. i shoud have known this would happen as you were the guy who erased all the other stuff we napulitane contributed to the wikipedia article. and my site is less than a week old, so no its not useful yet, thanks for pointing it out strunz. i had hoped for help here, instead of just being erased.
 * I'm sorry you feel that way, I wish you luck in your endeavors. I believe your comment about your page "not being useful" is in regards to the "under construction as of aug. 2005" on the resource page, I copied that directly from the wikipedia Neapolitan language page where you  described it as such.E. abu Filumena 03:23, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
 * What's the previous history with this fellow? He seemed thankful for your efforts on your wikipedia talk page. And did he delete himself? Kellen T 06:00, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
 * He seems to have deleted his website as well. Weird. Talk about overreacting... Kellen T 07:24, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, I'm fairly certain he deleted himself, 67.174.17.85 would seem to be him. I'm not entirely sure what's going on.  I've had some limited contact with him before as we tend to work on similar sorts of entries.  He's been going around purging all the links to this page that he is able to as well.  I had noticed that his site was down, initially he had just removed the link to the wikibook. Huh.E. abu Filumena 07:27, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Do you think he just misunderstood what was going on? Or is he actually pissed that he can't brand the book with his website? Kellen T 18:32, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
 * He for sure misunderstood - it is not easy to contribute to the wikimedia projects - many things can be misunderstood. I'll try to mediate. --SabineCretella 08:19, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

no i did not misunderstand, and no i did not over react, i can tell when i am not wanted by idiots all i wanted was to keep my link on the page to increase traffic to the wikibook, and your "useless comment" pissed me off. I started this book and it was over run and stolen, i started the wikipedia neapolitan article way back, and that was stolen as well, mostly by the same people. you guys can have the book, but i wont promote it, in fact i will discourage it as yet another reason why wikipedia is pure amateur. I finally took the advice of all my professors, and department at school and stopped using wikipedia. it is not nor will ever be credible and academic. And when i get my own students, i will fail anyone caught using any scrap of information derived from wikipedia. and by me posting this just proves you guys are clueless.

so as the old ladies used to say "a fa napule!"


 * nonononono... you have blown this completely out of proportion.
 * YOU own the content, but WE own the server so WE make the rules. Since our genus in 2002(?) we've had the rule that you may NOT have ANY project promote one linked-to website above another. Our house, our rules, simple enough.
 * I wish you the best of luck with your academic future, but I must warn you that if you fail a student solely because they reference a Wikimedia project you'll end up like that pro-Communist guy in Regina who failed students who chose the anti-Communist perspective for their essays; in other words, you'll end up in deep **** with those nasty uni bigwigs.
 * I do hope you reconsider this. It's only a minor thing, I don't see why you have to write us off completely just because we won't let you pimp your website on the book's main page.
 * Please reconsider, please. GarrettTalk 02:53, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
 * pimp an academic website..... and thats the problem with wikipedia, thanks for pointing it out and validating my point. And thanks for the “warning” but if I would fail my student for using a verified-non academic source (i.e. wiki-whatever), that is non credible and not academically reviewed, then I am just doing what MY professors have warned me about already for that last year and a half. And you are correct, you own the server, and the right to make the rules, rules that are anti-elitist and stating that content “owned” by the community, thus being purely communist in nature. perspective is acceptable, using a non credible source is another. All I am saying is that I am an academic and have simply been awakened by the lack of wiki-credibility by this “completely blown out of proportion” incident. And this incident was simply the “last straw” on wikimedia, thus verifying the old saying “you get what you pay for”
 * Yes we are very anti-elitist, perhaps too much so, but the solutions have so far escaped our grasp. That is the root of the problem with the lack of credibility. There is currently a drive on WP to reference every detail in every article, but that might take some time to occur because we cannot attract a large enough number of academics to add those references in the first place.
 * I'm glad you've put some serious thought into this, but on most of your points "we'll have to agree to disagree" I'm afraid. :)
 * As for "you get what you pay for"... credibility aside, consider this: our goal has always been to make information freely available to the masses; when I can come here and find a bizarrely delicious recipe for banana curry, or a game guide that lets me play from start to finish and find all of its secrets, or do a search on Wikipedia and actually find out what this Scott Maslen guy's first acting job was, all without a single ad of any form to make sure I pay for the privelage of reading, have we not already succeeded in our quest...? Well, that is something each visitor must decide for themselves. GarrettTalk 04:49, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

you see, academics dont look to "find out what Scott Maslen guy's first acting job was" and "the linguistics of the neapolitan language" from the same source, its like going shopping for toilet paper and diamond rings at wal mart, they just dont go together. and academics ARE elitist because they DESERVE to be, all the schooling and taking the time to do things correctly is what gives them the right. dont get me wrong, wikipedia has a place in the world, that is not my argument. It just has no place in critical research. want a solution? become elitist, thats the only way. real academics and "arm-chair scholars" will never co-exist, sorry, thats just how it is.


 * You contributed KNOWING that your work would be editable by anybody, logged, and under the GFDL. If you don't like what that means then get the fuck out and run your own closed wiki instead of wasting our time dealing with your childish nonsense. Kellen T 19:25, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

you get out, you dont own the site either, if you want that information there rewrite yourself. I have to right to edit what i wrote, I am not sure it is correct so i removed it. swearing is a reportable offence, maybe you are the little child here. So leave it out or i will ask you be moderated and maybe banned.

Fine you know what, fine, i will do what you you, (i would repeat but i don't need to use vulgar language unlike a wikpedian), I will leave and this book will add to the millions of error filled, half-finished useless wikipages. I started this, i promoted it, i corrected the errors, i did most of the work to start this book, and then a couple if academic-wannabes (mostly Kellen -good neapolian name btw) came along and ruined it. you can keep my half finished contributions -the real information will be completed by real academics, and be placed elswhere -where idiots (like some found here) cannot ruin it. you can keep your joke of a site and the error-filled information it contains. wiki will never be taken seriously by the academic world as long as people like kellen and Cspurrier are allowed to contribute or later losers--Espo111 21:14, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Read my responses to your statements above. If you do that you will clearly see that I have zero interest in Neapolitan, and have never added or removed anything to its pages. I did not remove the link to your page, but gently explained why it was inappropriate. I have an overall interest in wikibooks and in people who understand its policies (and that they are for the general good). People who are destructive to wikibooks (yes, even to content they themselves generated) are not welcome. Kellen T 22:37, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Is it "'nu foto" to say I picture? I always said "'na foto" and always heard people saying it that way.