User talk:Sunjaifriþas

Welcome!

Hello, Sunjaifriþas, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help. Need some ideas about what kind of things need doing? Try the Task Center.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Mathglot (talk) 00:16, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Linguistics

Hi, Sunjaifriþas. You noted that you are a linguist, and that interests me, because in general, it seems to me that articles at Wikipedia related to linguistics are some of the most poorly sourced articles of any serious academic topic at Wikipedia. I think part of this may go back to articles that existed roughly pre-2006, when not as much attention was paid to proper sourcing. But I think there's another reason, in that everyone feels like an expert in language, at least their own, based on their native competence, and maybe that's even true to an extent, but Wikipedia doesnt rely on experts, but on citations to reliable sources. We could really use your help in a broad range of articles on linguistics-related topics. Have a look at WP:WikiProject Linguistics, where you might want to "join" and see what stuff they've identified as needing attention. (Join is in scare-quotes, because there's really not any such thing as "joining" a WikiProject; maybe there's a page there somewhere where you can list yourself as a "member", mostly for the benefit of others there, but the bottom line is, you either contribute your time to the WikiProject or you don't, entirely your choice as a volunteer here, and I guess if you do, you're a "member".)

By the way, while we're on the topic of linguistics, may I ask what your interests are? You don't have to answer if you don't wish to, but it would help to know where I might call on you for help at certain articles, as I'm an amateur. For example, I'd like to find more examples from foreign languages at Garden-path sentence; I particularly enjoyed finding and writing up the German example. I'm sure there are plenty of other articles where I could use help, but that's the one that occurred to me. Oh yeah, I also wrote Binnen-I and am interested in gender-neutral issues in linguistics (and plenty more). Mathglot (talk) 00:33, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mathglot: Thanks very much for your input here and elsewhere! The first thing to say is that I am using this as an alternative account for privacy reasons. My usual account, where I undertake more usual sorts of edits, can be linked to my professional identity. While editing in the linguistics topic, I noticed instances of potential WP:COI including promotion (either self-promotion or what looks like people related to, e.g. the biography subject, making edits), undisclosed self-citing, etc. After noticing this for a few years and being uncertain of how to react, I've decided go the WP:BOLD route. I hope on this account to at least be able to flag potential issues related to integrity and COI to the wider community, even if I can't solve the problem myself. It goes without saying, I guess, that if I were identified I would suffer very many negative consequences in my professional life.

For that reason, I'm a little hesitant to specify my interests; if you do call on me for help here, I'll be more than happy to take a look when I can. My interests are pretty varied anyway :)

It's true what you say about the poor sourcing on many linguistics articles. It made me smile to read that we share a theory on people feeling like, and perhaps even being, experts on language due to native competence. It's what I like about linguistics: everybody uses language, so everybody has an opinion! It's also where Wikipedia can make a big contribution, both in terms of creating high-quality articles for curious readers and also helping curious editors learn norms for citations and reliable sources. With continued thanks, Sunjaifriþas (talk) 09:31, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sidebar on Notability, and related policies

This is kind of an offshoot of your comment at Talk:Revivalistics regarding the questionable notability of the topic. My insufficiently informed opinion—let's call it a hunch—is also that the book has borderline WP:Notability. However, have a look at WP:NBOOK, which deals with awards as one path to notability, and point #1 is a very low bar.

Also, please be clear about Wikipedia's definition of Notability which isn't the same as standard usage, and definitely not the same as in academia. Contrast with such Wikipedia terms as WP:FRINGE and WP:BIASED, there's a place for topics or sources that are either, as long as the result is neutral and content represents the WP:DUEWEIGHT of the available reliable sources. Put another way, you can't talk about extraterrestrials in articles on topics about evolution (FRINGE and WP:UNDUE) but you can have an article about Chariots of the Gods? where such topics are not UNDUE, as long as there is sufficient WP:INDEPENDENT, reliable, WP:SECONDARY sourcing demonstrating significant coverage, and there is, hence the existence of that article. Or perhaps closer to your bailiwick, Merritt Ruhlen and Proto-world (not sure where you stand on the latter; hope I haven't stepped on any toes). Mathglot (talk) 01:28, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mathglot: This is extremely helpful, particularly WP:NBOOK! Point #1 is a very low bar indeed considering the informal professional (mal)practice of soliciting positive reviews from associates. This is a factor in the Revivalistics case, but there's little I could do here to demonstrate that and perhaps it wouldn't matter anyway. If I do go for deletion on that page, I will need to make a careful case. But will definitely try fixing things WP:BEFORE! Thanks v much, Sunjaifriþas (talk) 10:03, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]