User talk:Pcastellina

Welcome to Wikimedia Incubator!

At the right there are some important links, and here are some tips and info:

If you haven't created a user page yet, please create one with for example Babel templates on it.
You can select your interface language in your preferences.
If you make articles, templates or categories, don't forget to add a prefix!
If your knowledge of English is good, you can help with translating pages to other languages you know, so more people can understand it!
If you want to translate the interface, please go to Translatewiki.net and follow the instructions.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask them on Incubator:Community Portal.

-- Welcoming Bot 10:11, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Benvenite a Wikimedia Incubator! --Katxis (talk) 14:36, 13 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bibia piemontèisa[edit source]

Hello, User:Pcastellina. We're very happy to have you here at Incubator.

I would like to explain to you, though, what the difference is between Wikibooks and Wikisource. The way we divide these things up is that

Wikibooks is for the creation of new materials. They can be anything you are creating and willing to license freely.
Wikisource is a repository or library for existing information.

If the Piedmontese Bible you are placing here is an already-existing translation, then it should unquestionably be placed in Wikisource, not here. If you are creating your own, new translation, then it's a borderline case. Still, as Bible translations are generally in Wikisource, that's where I'd suggest putting it, because that's where people will look for it.

Please tell me how you'd like to proceed. If your work should be placed in Wikisource, we can export it directly to there, without your having to do a lot of cut-and-paste work.

I look forward to hearing from you. StevenJ81 (talk) (administrator) 13:57, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A couple of other things, if I may:

See my suggested edit at Genesi 1. The advantage to doing things this way is that it is easy to jump down to the footnote and back up. The disadvantage is that the footnotes in Genesis 2 start over at "1", and I don't think there is a way to change that. In this medium, as opposed to in a paper book, I think you are actually better off having every page's footnotes start over. However, if this is an existing translation, and you want your footnote numbers to match those someone would find in a printed text, then you may feel you need to stick with your original approach. If you want to do that, just "undo" my edit—though you'll want to leave [17] out in any case because it belongs to 2:1.^[1]
This having been my Bar Mitzvah reading, I know this particular piece pretty well. The Hebrew at the end of the first paragraph is not יום ראשון ("the first day"), but rather יום אחד ("one day"). Again, if this is an existing translation, you aren`t in a position to change that. But if it's your own translation, consider that. StevenJ81 (talk) 14:51, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

References

↑ There is actually a way to manually create hyperlinks to do the equivalent, while retaining your footnote numbers. But it's awkward and time-consuming. Still, let me know if you want more information.

Dear StevenJ81

Thank you for your much appreciated help. This is my own translation of the Bible in Piedmontese, and I offer it on public domain. I ask my competent readers to correct any mistakes or give suggestions, so it's a kind of cooperative work which will hopefully find it space in the Piedmontes WikipediA (WikiBooks). If tou think it should go in WikiSource, please move it there, directing me to the appropriate address for the continuation of my work. As the material is large, I hope that nothing will be lost. Please do give me all the necessary indications. Thanks a lot also for the translation remark, which I appreciate. I can understand what you mean for "day one", but in Piedmontese it will not sound right. I could say: "Dì Un" instead of "Prim dì", but it will not make much sense, unless I say: "Dì nùmer un". Maybe. Any other advice from you will be welcome.

Kind regards, Paolo Pcastellina (talk) 15:09, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Paolo, keep working here for the moment, while I sort things out. I still think Wikisource, rather than Wikibooks, is the right place to put this ultimately.

Additionally, I think that either Multilingual Wikisource, which is where Piedmontese Wikisource is located, or English Wikisource, can provide resources in terms of templates to use to make your work easier to use. (For example, most Bible versions on English Wikisource have links on the page to go backward and forward without having to go up a level.)

For "one day", the English and Hebrew both have subtones of both "day number one" and "one [single] day". I can't tell you the best way to render that in Piedmontese, of course. I suppose "Di [nùmer] un" would probably be best. I'm mostly sensitive to the fact that the text does not use the word for "first", but the word for "one".

Similarly, days two through five are יום שני, יום שלישי, etc. ("a second day", "a third day", etc.). The definite article ("the" sixth day) does not appear until day six, יום השישי. StevenJ81 (talk) 15:41, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Ooswesthoesbes: If you agree that the better location for this is Wikisource, would you mind doing the honors? The vast majority of the pages are subpages of this page: Wb/pms/Intrada/La Bibia piemontèisa, and probably should be moved to subpages of this page: oldwikisource:La Bibia piemontèisa, with at least the top page categorized as oldwikisource:Category:Piemontèis. (I don't know oldwikisource well enough to know if the subpages would carry that category, too, or would carry a category like "La Bibia piemontèisa" that would be a subcategory of Piemontèis.)

~~There are a couple of pages that are subpages of Wb/pms/Bibia. Paolo, I don't what you want to do with these; they feel like duplicates of items expanded upon elsewhere.~~ StevenJ81 (talk) 16:49, 15 May 2017 (UTC) Those pages deleted. 17:56, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I agree to move those pages where you see them better. If you do the moving, it will be good, because my experience is limited. Just instruct me accordingly. What do you mean for "doing the honors"? Anyway, I did another attempt in the days past, but because of my inexperience I put them on the wrong site. Just delete them and move there my most recent ones. The important thing is that you explain to me things. I must build up experience and all this seems to me now a bit confusing. Be patient with me! Pcastellina (talk) 17:17, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You're doing fine! You haven't done anything to test my patience at all! I just wanted to know what to do with that handful of duplicate pages so that we don't waste anyone's time moving them. I will delete them myself.

You can't do the moving except by a long and tedious process of cut-and-paste, and even at that we would prefer to capture the original edit histories. I also can't do the moving, because I do not have sufficient rights on Wikisource. So I've asked User:Ooswesthoesbes to "do the honors"—meaning to take care of the matter. I asked him for two reasons. First, he has experience both at Incubator and at Wikisource. So he is the right person to confirm (or reject) my opinion as to the best place for your work to be. Second, if Ooswesthoesbes agrees that the work should be on Wikisource, he has sufficient rights in both places to make it happen.

If your work gets moved, I'll try to come over to Wikisource from time to time and to take a look at what you're doing. And in the meantime, keep working here. You're doing a great job so far. StevenJ81 (talk) 17:54, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think Wikisource would be more appropriate, as it also allows for translations (at least several Wikisources do so; most of them being regional languages in which official publications that are under the right license are rare). I'll look into it soon (importing). --OWTB (talk) 13:31, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, OWTB. Paolo, keep working here (making sure all pages start with Wb/pms/Intrada/La Bibia piemontèisa) until OWTB or I tell you otherwise. StevenJ81 (talk) 14:44, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

OK, many thanks. Pcastellina (talk) 14:59, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As transwiki importing isn't the right way to go, I had to request import upload rights. The vote is running now at Wikisource. Keep working here and I'll notify you when the procedure is done :) --OWTB (talk) 09:36, 17 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If it could help, I could slowly move document by document, onto https://wikisource.org/wiki/Main_Page/Piemontèis Pcastellina (talk) 12:16, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dear all, thanks for your interesting discussion, and thanks to Paulin (Pcastellna) for his invaluable work of translation.

I agree that this should go on wikisource, surely not in the wiktionary. So, when you are done, we should remove the pages that went there. Borichèt (talk) 15:48, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Borichèt, Pcastellina: That's the idea. As soon as the work is safely moved to Wikisource, we'll delete it here. As far as I can tell, there is no other content in Wb/pms, so we'll reset it as if it's an empty test—as it will be at that point. In the meantime, though, there's no reason the work can't proceed here. StevenJ81 (talk) 15:29, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Please, observe that, in addition to the material in Wb/pms, there are two pages then ended up in Wt/pms (Wt/pms/Evangeli 'd Maté, Wt/pms/Wb/Evangeli 'd Maté/Maté 1) that should eventually be removed as well. Borichèt (talk) 13:09, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pcastellina, you don't have to move anything. I will take care of this when I've got some more time (probably this weekend or Monday). --OWTB (talk) 14:02, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Le lingue delle Alpi[edit source]

Fa piacere trovare chi si occupa delle lingue delle Alpi. Ne approfitto per farti sapere che Wikimedia Svizzera è capofila nel partecipare ad un bando nel programma Interreg Italia-Svizzera LINGUALP. Le probabilità di avere contributi in danaro sono basse perchè c'è tanta partecipazione al bando, ma sicuramente è una occasione per spronare a fare attenzione a tanti temi interessanti. Dei temi inizialmente proposti, si è deciso di concentrarsi 1) itinerari celtici, la valorizzazione dei luoghi della civiltà dei Galli Insubri; 2) itinerari ladini per cui sono stati già caricati numerosi testi sia in ladino dolomitico che in romancio. Se ci fossimo conosciuti prima, ti avrei chiesto se c'è qualche tema culturale comune tra Piemonte/Val d'Aosta e Vallese che, per rispettare lo spirito del bando, possa avere una valenza di richiamo turistico. Se ti viene in mente qualche cosa, segnalamelo ugualmente, per vedere se anche all'ultimo lo si può includere. Sarebbe lo ripeto un'occasione per far conoscere temi interessanti.--Mizardellorsa (talk) 03:08, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Ho visto solo dopo che ti sei occupato della Val Bregaglia, terra ora che ha scelto come lingua l'italiano, ma storicamente romancia. Se hai amici in zona, con passione per questi argomenti, sarebbe utilissimo contattare. Se poi riesci a dare una mano sui tanti testi di tema biblico disponibili in romancio, faresti una cosa preziosissima.--Mizardellorsa (talk) 03:15, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

P.P.S. Scopro che addirittura sei vissuto tanti anni in Val Bregaglia. Cerchiamo di tenerci in contatto. Inizialmente il progetto Lingualp conteneva una sezione dedicata agli itinerari segantiniani. Poi si era rinunciato per mancanza di appoggi locali nel Maloja. non so se si fa in tempo per recuperare il progetto iniziale. Ma, come prima dicevo i temi di interesse sono tanti. Speriamo di trovare il modo di incontrarci: io abito a Milano e la distanza non è impossibile.--Mizardellorsa (talk) 03:56, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Salve, piacere di conoscerti. Mi interesso di linguistica e di lingue e culture piccole e oppresse. Come piemontese difendo e promuovo la lingua della mia gente e uno dei mezzi che ritengo più importanti (come si è comprovato tale per molte altre lingue minori in tutto il mondo, è la traduzione e diffusione della Bibbia. Sì, sono vissuto in Bregaglia per 25 anni e i miei figli parlano bregagliotto. Ora abito in Inghilterra. Se posso contribuire in qualche modo ai vostri progetti, ben volentieri. A proposito, il bregagliotto può considerarsi un misto fra lombardo alpino e romancio, non solo romancio. A presto. Pcastellina (talk) 06:48, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ti ringrazio della risposta. Mi sono imbarcato nel caricamento delle opere e ladino e in romancio, sapendo fare solo il copia e incolla e capindo quel poco che ogni italofono capisce. Ma soprattutto per le val Bregaglia mi sono venuti molti dubbi. Anche tu mi dici che attualmente ha come lingua ufficiale l'italiano e che l'attuale dialetto è sostanzialmente molto vicino al lombardo. Probabilmente prima la situazione linguistica era diversa. C'è una versione in Bregagliotto del 1586 del Patto delle tre leghe https://it.wikisource.org/wiki/La_charta_de_la_Liga_in_Rvmansz_d%27_Bregalia e si vede che in quel secolo il bregagliotto era ancora vicino al romancio. Trovo però anche un testo raccolto nell'ottocento da Gian Maurizio https://it.wikisource.org/wiki/Pagina:Decurtins_-_R%C3%A4toromanische_chrestomathie,_XI.djvu/16 , ma forse risalente anch'esso al XVI secolo. Gian Maurizio lo trovo traduttore di una pagina della Bibbia di Diodati, https://it.wikisource.org/wiki/Biblia_Versione_di_Diodati ma non capisco in quale dialetto sia. Riesci a darmi qualche indicazione?--Mizardellorsa (talk) 17:54, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pcastellina (talk) 22:46, 25 May 2017 (UTC) Salve. Interessante il testo del Maurizio, non lo conoscevo. Si tratta semplicemente del Bregagliotto standard in versione di Sopraporta (Vicosoprano). Benché l'italiano sia lingua standard in Bregaglia, il bregagliotto è molto comune, parlato in casa ed anche dai giovani, come pure si sente nelle assemblee comunali. Recentemente si sta pubblicando molto sul Bregagliotto. Vedi, per esempio, questo dizionario: http://www.pgi.ch/index.php/pubblicazioni/collana-ricerche/1514-dizionario-bregagliotto Ti do una serie di link sul bregagliotto:[reply]

http://www.labregaglia.ch/?p=79043
http://www.labregaglia.ch/?cat=132
http://www.dejudicibus.it/dizionario/index.php?bregagliotto+bregagliotto
Cerca anche "Bregagliotto" su YouTube.

La Bibia piemontèisa[edit source]

Hi, I imported all the pages to the old wikisource. Any further edits should be done at [1] and [2] :) --OWTB (talk) 11:49, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks, but I found a minor (?) problem: the address https://wikisource.org/wiki/Intrada/La_Bibia_piemontèisa should be rather https://wikisource.org/wiki/La_Bibia_piemontèisa because "Intrada" makes no sense here, as it means "Introduction". The "door" of Piedmontese books is already: https://wikisource.org/wiki/Main_Page/Piemontèis. We do not yet have here our specific Piedmontese portal! Let me know. Pcastellina (talk) 13:12, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That one I missed. Fixing that is not a minor problem though, as it will take some time. However, I don't think it's something that needs an immediate fix, so I'm going to change that over the course of the next few weeks. Just continue your work at Intrada/La B... and I will make sure those pages will get moved this month :) --OWTB (talk) 13:46, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ok thanks. Pcastellina (talk) 15:50, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Another possibility is to change the name of "Intrada" in "Piemontèis", thus making it a useful container of all Piedmontese material, or redirect "intrada" to https://wikisource.org/wiki/Main_Page/Piemontèis - Could it be a possibility? Regards, Pcastellina (talk) 06:15, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't do that. All pages will be included in the Category:Piemontèis. If Piemontèis ever gets its own separate Wikisource domain, the page titles beginning on "Piemontèis/" will be redundant.

I will redirect intrade to the page you suggested. However, I will move all pages starting with "Intrada/" to the title without, as that is the standard on the Old Wikisource. --OWTB (talk) 12:40, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

OK Thanks. Pcastellina (talk) 18:41, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[1] There is actually a way to manually create hyperlinks to do the equivalent, while retaining your footnote numbers. But it's awkward and time-consuming. Still, let me know if you want more information.

[1]