Requested move edit
- The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: no consensus to move the page, per the discussion below. The text of the article should be changed as necessary. Dekimasuよ! 22:41, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
Kamatz → Qamatz – It is spelled Qamatz throughout the article. I would have done this myself, but I was afraid that there was a reason why the article was called Kamatz (with redirect from Qamatz) even though it's not spelled that way in the article. ubiquity (talk) 15:27, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
- Qamatz is an outdated way of Hebrew-English transliteration and current schemes prefer K, see Romanization of Hebrew. According to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Hebrew) k is prefered and an "avoid q" remark was given, so we should change article grammar, not the heading. DGtal (talk) 09:14, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
Qaamaats has the sound of an R-controlled vowel? Seriously??? edit
I don't know who is responsible for suggesting that qaamaats has the sound of an R-controlled vowel ("a" as in "far"!), but if they have a degree in any area of phonolgy, phonemics, or linguistics, they should return it for a full refund. That is about as far-fetched a proposition as anything I have ever heard. Far-fetched, as in "impossible". It's so absurd it isn't even laughable. This needs to be revised to reflect a plausible pronunciation, i.e. one that isn't absurd on its face. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.191.109.32 (talk) 20:08, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
No References edit
This article has no references and as such does not qualify as an encyclopedic article. Therefore I am erasing it until such time as an article with valid references can be constructed to replace it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.191.109.32 (talk) 17:20, 14 June 2015 (UTC)