User talk:Romanophile

Definition from Wiktionary, the free dictionary
(Redirected from User talk:Æ&Œ)
Jump to: navigation, search
First persona : User:Pilcrow


WARNING: side‐effects of reading this archive include
dizziness, vomiting, nausea, diarrhœa, and may complicate pregnancy.
Keep out of reach of children.

Second persona: User:Æ&Œ

Current: User:Romanophile


Welcome to the discussion page of Romanophile. You may also refer to me as ‘Seth,’ my real name

Good language vs. bad language[edit]

There is a big continuum of what is considered good language. One on side there are those who think that only what is specifically laid out in grammars is good, and that terms not found in dictionaries don’texist. These people are usually uninvolved in linguistics.

Then on the other side there are the hippies, usually people involved in sociolinguistics, who think that everything a person uses is correct. You could incorporate farts into your phonemic inventory and they would say “of course it’s correct, it’s just Romanophile’s English”.

As for your Portuguese, your spelling skills are above the Brazilian average, and your vocabulary is pretty good, but your grammar still needs improvement. — Ungoliant (falai) 02:31, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for the feedback. If you can specify which tendencies that I need to fix, I would be very grateful. --Romanophile (talk) 03:49, 6 May 2015 (UTC)


Please stop thanking me for perfectly ordinary edits. It's annoying. SemperBlotto (talk) 10:29, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Oh damn! Sorry, I’ll cut that out. --Romanophile (talk) 10:30, 8 May 2015 (UTC)


You're welcome. --Daniel 05:47, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

These should give me ideas for entries to create. I actually used one of your palindromes here: [1]. Admittedly, it’s not an excellent example of a usage, but I could hardly resist. --Romanophile (talk) 05:50, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
That's a classic! That phrase "Socorram-me, subi no ônibus em Marrocos!" seems to be the most popular palindrome here in Brazil for some reason. --Daniel 05:56, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

I think I improved/matured on Simple English wiktionary[edit]

[2], on Simple English wiktionary I've managed to edit for a while now without having significant problems. When I was criticized for making mistakes by editors, I immediately changed to what they wanted me to do, instead of insisting on my own way. Do my contributions there look better than my ones here to you? PaulBustion87 (talk) 10:13, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

I’m not very familiar with simple English or the policies (assuming that there are any) over there, but from the recent edits that I’ve seen, I do notice a few inconsistencies between your modifications and those of the (assuming again) regulars. For starters, the defs read more like something from a normal dictionary than ones for Simple English. ‘A circumcision is’ would be redundant here, but there it’s obligatory. I can’t say much else there. Irrespective of that, I do have some general advice: You need to avoid burning bridges; just take a break. I myself would feel pretty embarrassed if I claimed that I was leaving only to come crawling back in a few hours. If you are going to make some potentially questionable edits, it’s best to make but a few of them (if any), or simply contact a administrator to discuss it in advance. The safest way to avoid becoming obstructed is to simply go with the flow. If you dislike a practice, you can discuss it and maybe it will be permuted, or maybe you will learn why the current one is superior and agree to it. --Romanophile (talk) 10:56, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
Actually even though Equinox and Dan Polansky got angry at me, they are both against BoBoMisiu's effort to add four new definitions to the term pedophilia, that was something I agreed with those two gentlemen on. I was arguing against BoBoMisiu when I was on here just as much as they have. So not all my editing was against the flow. PaulBustion87 (talk) 11:15, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
I’m not saying that all of your practices are inconsistent. --Romanophile (talk) 11:23, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
I think I've learned my lesson. I'm going to be editing in a constructive way that usually goes with the flow and when its against the flow doesn't challenge it excessively from now on.PaulBustion87 (talk) 18:58, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
Do you think my editing so far here this time right now has been an improvement when compared to before?PaulBustion87 (talk) 23:18, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
It doesn’t seem like you have done very much in this time period, so I can’t make a valorous judgement. --Romanophile (talk) 06:30, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
Well, I've dropped my insistence on my viewpoints now. For example, Equinox criticized me for insisting that only men could be rapists, in my latest edit to the rape entry, I made it more clear that women could also be rapists, [3]. I also in the pedophilia entry was criticized by Equinox for arguing on focusing on the medical definition of the term, which is sexual attraction by adults either to only prepubescent children or to both prepubescent and early pubescent children, and he said I should focus on real world use, which views it as sex against any child under some arbitrary chronological age, such as 15 years or 18 years, and I gave up pushing my viewpoint and decided to focus on real world use and removed the medical definition, [4]. I also was criticized for being hyper-specific in my editing by Equinox, and I dropped my hyper specific insistence on terms like "mostly or only" and "primarily or exclusively" in the geronotophilia, hebephilia, and teliophilia entries, [5], [6], [7]. I also dropped my hyper specific wording from the British Empire and Anglo-Egyptian Sudan entries. [8], [9]. Are those improvements? PaulBustion87 (talk) 18:32, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

shush doesn't rhyme with plush etc[edit]

I don't know IPA, so don't know how to correct it, but shush sounds something more like push to me. I'll see if I can do it properly. SemperBlotto (talk) 15:36, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

I've always pronounced shush so that it rhymes with plush. Perhaps there is regional variation in pronunciation? -Cloudcuckoolander (talk) 17:05, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
In RP, the version that rhymes with "plush" is /ʃʌʃ/ and the other one is /ʃʊʃ/. Equinox 20:25, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

"Just quit pestering Kephir"[edit]

Kephir does things questionable from time to time and it is perfectly acceptable for me or anybody else to say so, certainly without being blocked and probably without those edits being labeled as vandalism. IMO, Kephir's labeling of my edits to his page as vandalism is disruptive, and his blocks of me primarily on the basis of commenting there are unacceptable. Purplebackpack89 17:35, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

I don’t think that he finds much valour in your opinions, and if you know that he doesn’t care about your opinions, repeatedly beating him over the head with them is just going to piss him off. It’s like listening to advertisements. If you still think that his ‘misbehaviour’ merits discussion, don’t bring it up with him; bring it up with some other administrator—privately, if you can. If you can’t make nice with him, then the best course of action is to simply minimize your interactions with him as much as possible. I hope that you will learn to respect his boundaries in the future. --Romanophile (talk) 04:09, 21 May 2015 (UTC)