Brūcendmōtung:Williamclayton

US Constitution

I hope you didn't mind, but I created a 'bottom box' template for the American Constitution and its amendments, which I have applied to the excellent work you have been doing, and in the course of it tweaked the article names to fit it. I put them all in a [[Flocc: too. I hope it has not mucked anything up.

The template is {{Grundgesetnes þara GRA‎}}

Hogweard (mōtung) 14:05, 27 Hrēþmōnaþ 2017 (UTC)

Tutorial on Old English's issue

I undid your edits and here's the explantion

There are options [ gw ] [ ȝƿ ] [ ᵹƿ ] [ ᚱᚢᚾ ] at the head of every page, it's working now (for a more than a year time, thanks to PiRSquared17 who fixed it and created the new [ ᵹƿ ] feature). Was it actually that necessary to revert my edits?

I wouldn't have been so bad if you had just reverted edits of pages written only in Old English, but no, these pages have a lot Modern English text on them. Before that anyone could switch to the [ gw ] option and read the whole text with w, but now it's impossible to do it with [ ȝƿ ] or [ ᵹƿ ] 'cause sadly this great function's got one disadvantage: it gets rid of any w or g throughout the whole text, and it doesn't distinguish Old English from Modern English.

I absolutly disagree with your opnion's about Ƿynn. (I'm sure you already know it). It's not Ƿynn that is Functionally Redundant, it's w that has no business in Old English text, uu and w are not the same letter; ƿynn, þorn and p are written differently, just look at them close to eash other in this sentence, do they look the same to you?

"The Default script should be the most accessible to the maximum number of learners" - and it is, with this option any learner can switch their page to [ gw ] and have no problems at all, but that cannot be done in a normal way with [ ȝƿ ] or [ ᵹƿ ] features now. That's the main reason why I undid your edits.

I only wish this page to look as it used to, there are not a lot of resourses that use Ƿynn, most people never use it while working with Old English and I don't see how this tendention could be broken or at least changed in the nearest future.

"the Learning Threshold for Old English"? If from the beginning the learners were introdused to Old English with Ƿynn, there would be no learning threshold, but now with things as they are, most of learners simply go on with using w, some of them would use w and sometimes Ƿynn,less of them maybe would use Ƿynn mostly, but that's too rare. This page could introduce someone to Ƿynn for the first time.

I like your Wiktionary edits, they're insteresting, some of the latest have wonderfull pictures. Thank you for always leaving alternative forms with ƿynn, it makes creating them much easily. I'm sorry we met like this on this resourse.

--Birdofadozentides (mōtung) 09:46, 22 Mǣdmōnaþ 2019 (UTC)