Tartışma:Yunan alfabesi

message: Harfler bölümünün Adı kolonundaki tüm harf bağlantılarını "..._(alfabe)" olarak değiştirmek gerekiyor. --Fedkad 12:40, 6 Aralık 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Harfler

message: Selamlar. Sorun çıkmasın da geçici olarak :Şablon:Yunan alfabesi listesi oluşturdum. Acele iş olduğu için iç bağlantıları bozuktur. Fikirlerinizi alayım. Fenike alfabesini de eklesek mi? Teşekkür ederim. İyi çalışmalar. Takabeg ileti 19:45, 1 Temmuz 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Yunan alfabesi

message: I've reverted CBMIBM again. This is getting ridiculous. The things he pushes into the character list are as blatantly false as they are marginal (if he just wasn't obsessing over them so much.) Now, once and for all: "San" never had a numeric value of 90; at the time it had its place in the alphabetic sequence between Pi and Qoppa, the Ionic numerical system simply didn't exist yet, and by the time the number system developed, San had in fact become "Sampi" (which is essentially the same letter), and stood for 900. Likewise, the idea that "Sho" might have stood in the San position is marked in our source  as pure speculation; the source is explicit in saying that actual current scholarly practice places it elsehwere. Also, Sho hasn't got a number value of "90" either; according to the source, if it had any number value at all, it would have been that of Sampi, i.e. 900, not 90. And, CBMIBM, please stop citing other Wikipedia pages as references, you know full well that they never count as reliable sources. Future Perfect at Sunrise 11:14, 4 Temmuz 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I now only placed Sho as is in other wikis now after reverts, to have its position constant across wikis, to avoid inconsistency between them. 79.162.45.242 11:49, 4 Temmuz 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: :No. That position of Sho is strictly your invention. You placed it there in the other wikis in the first place, so stop citing the other wikis in your support. It goes where current scholarship places it, according to our sources. Future Perfect at Sunrise 11:51, 4 Temmuz 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: ::See this: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sho_%28Buchstabe%29 Explanation: Bactrian Sho=Italian She=Greek San. Because Sho is more peripheral than San, Sho goes after San. 79.162.45.242 11:52, 4 Temmuz 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: :::For the last time, stop citing other wikipedia pages as if they were sources. They are not. Read . Future Perfect at Sunrise 12:02, 4 Temmuz 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: ::::Meanwhile Takabeg requested putting of modern and archaic letters to separate tables, and I did such separation. Now it is done as in English article - this is not citing, this is mirroring of layout solution. Even your source proposes identifying of Sho with San, while your placing of Sho at the end is only temporary solution that contradicts it. I too added citations to provide verifiability wanted by Takabeg in archaic letters. 79.162.45.242 12:10, 4 Temmuz 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: :::::Ben hiç talep etmemiştim:)) Bazı arkadaşlarımız istemiştir böyle ayrı talboyu. Şimdi ayrı tablonun oluşturulması çözüm için daha güzel yolu olduğunu düşünmüyorum. Geçici olarak eski harfler tablosundaki ayrıntlı meseleyi bir kenara koyarak Fenike alfabesini de ekleyebilir misiniz? (I've never requested:)) But some of our firends reguested such a table. Now I think these separated talbes might be better way for the solution. Shall we temporally put away the details in archaic lettes away can you add Phoenician alphabet too?) Merci. Takabeg ileti 13:53, 4 Temmuz 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: ::::::I am not skilled in Phoenician as in Greek, because I focus mainly on Greek as first ever script capable of both vowel and consonant writing. 79.162.45.242 16:50, 4 Temmuz 2008 (UTC)
I am glad that someone repaired article after those vandalisms:
*http://tr.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Yunan_alfabesi&action=historysubmit&diff=7551119&oldid=7520204
*http://tr.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Yunan_alfabesi&action=historysubmit&diff=7468771&oldid=7330312
thread_title:  Reverted again 

message: This source states: http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/wg2/docs/n2411.pdf
"No Bactrian abecedary has been found to date. Greek letters have numeric values based on their alphabetical orders. It is conceivable that SHO could be identified with the archaic Greek letter SAN, which has a value of 90; but no Bactrian text with that number has been yet discovered.
 SAN has not been separately encoded in the UCS, although its descendant, SAMPI, has been. (SAN looks rather different from SAMPI, and it is possible that it should be encoded as well for purposes of representing archaic Greek text, in the same way that ARCHAIC KOPPA and KOPPA have been disunified.) If SHO were identified with SAN, it should be ordered – alphabetically – after PI (80) and before KOPPA (90)."
This source had minor error of assigning 900 to San - corrected in citation - which San because of placing it between Pi and Qoppa, must have correct value 90. 91.94.1.61 13:41, 5 Temmuz 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Contradiction in source