TiagoTiago

Olá, Tiago!

Sobre a pronúncia, meus conhecimentos me indicam que a transcrição que mais se adequa é: [luˈiz iˈnäsjʊ ˈlulɐ dä ˈsiʊ̯vɐ]. Sobre a pronúncia da preposição "da", no Brasil pronunciamos [dä].

Retirei o seguinte trecho dessa página: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_front_unrounded_vowel

Most languages have some form of an unrounded open vowel. For languages that only have a single low vowel, the symbol for this vowel <a> may be used because it is the only low vowel whose symbol is part of the basic Latin alphabet. Whenever marked as such, the vowel is closer to a central [ä] than to a front [a].

Por isso considero mais adequado marcar com o diacrítico que diz que a vogal é central.

Tenha um bom dia! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aramaicus (talk • contribs) 19:04, 20 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hello, TiagoTiago.

See here and here. Nice reply in any case. :) RP9 (talk) 22:36, 30 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

The tentacle snake on the poster was actually the original concept of the grabiods. The original one was dry while the one in the movie was slimy. The producers changed it because the grabiods look better when slimy so it looked like that they were covered in nail varnish. - Rockmandrum (talk) 02:56, 10 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi. I see that another user deleted your question from Talk:Lux. Try asking your question at the Science Reference Desk. Article talk pages are not forums for general questions or discussion about the subject of the articles; they are to be used for discussion focused on how to improve the article. The reference desks are the right place to ask for help or information.--Srleffler (talk) 06:44, 12 October 2010 (UTC)Reply

With personal laser pointers and other laser devices being so common nowadays, i expected that such an information would be of interest of some of the people coming to the Lux page. Do you Disagree? --TiagoTiago (talk) 11:08, 12 October 2010 (UTC)Reply

User:Dicklyon deleted your question, with the edit comment "Inappropriate forum-like question; take it to a forum." You could ask him about it.--Srleffler (talk) 07:24, 13 October 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I noticed you participated in discussions on Talk:Texas Instruments signing key controversy in the past and now that there are the keys are restored wanted to get your opinion there of which keys if any should be included in the article. Please respond at Talk:Texas_Instruments_signing_key_controversy#The_keys. Thanks! Dcoetzee 07:00, 12 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

{{adminhelp|This user has contacted me and cannot edit see this. Please help him.}} ----Addihockey10 ^e-mail 06:54, 28 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

According to this link, the IP is a Tor node. For several reasons, we do not allow editing via Tor nodes. If you would like to discuss your situation, please return to #wikipedia-en-unblock and use the "!admin" keyword to get the attention of an admin. You may also submit a request via WP:UTRS. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 13:07, 28 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

Seems my block has been lifted. Please let me know if there is anything else i need to do about this. Thanx. --TiagoTiago (talk) 02:50, 29 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hello, I'm Just Tidying Up. I'm commenting because, at some point in the past, you contributed to the Stalking Cat article or talk page. I recently performed a major rewrite of Stalking Cat, and I am interested to increase further expansion and improvement of the article, with other editors. If you are interested in this topic, please join us at Talk:Stalking_Cat#Major_rewrite. Thank you. Just Tidying Up (talk) 14:56, 7 November 2013 (UTC)Reply

 

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding all edits about, and all pages related to, (a) GamerGate, (b) any gender-related dispute or controversy, (c) people associated with (a) or (b), all broadly construed, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

-- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 17:48, 23 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hello, I wanted to apologize if you felt bitten at all with your recent comment on the Gamergate talk page. I wanted to welcome you, and encourage you to continue to participate in the discussion as we are in sore need of new voices from experienced editors. The issue of bias in the article space is one that we have spent quite some time discussing, but the current article does seem to broadly reflect how the controversy has been reported in reliable sources, with the focus more on the harassment than than any argument about journalistic ethics. But there are certain claims within the article that are not reflected in reliable sources, which is where we are currently focusing our efforts. There are also copy-editing needs, as always, and it seems you have some experience with that. Anyhow, thanks for weighing in, and I hope this initial exchange has not discouraged you from continuing to voice your opinion. ColorOfSuffering (talk) 19:31, 23 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

A few moments after I wrote my comment there I realized it wasn't necessary since other people were already touching on the matter above in the talk page, but by the time I was back to delete it there was already a response, so I left it there. Don't worry, the response didn't bother me. --TiagoTiago (talk) 20:46, 23 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:02, 23 November 2015 (UTC)Reply