User talk:Romanophile

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



Welcome to the discussion page of Æ&Œ. Users may also refer to him as ‘Seth.’


Please don't go. I know what it's like to feel unwelcome at times. But I think that if we let incivility drive us away, then the responsible parties will never have to acknowledge the impact of their behaviour, and nothing will change. -Cloudcuckoolander (talk) 09:47, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

I have also felt unwelcome at times and you have inspired me to take the same route as yourself. Pass a Method (talk) 12:21, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
Why? You’ll just come crawling back up here everyday. --Æ&Œ (talk) 03:40, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
Ah, as I expected, I was going to be unblocked. No matter how miserable I feel, I’m probably doomed to being eternally committed to this project, quite honestly. I do appreciate your sentiments, though. —Æ&Œ (talk) 03:40, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
I might. But i defninitely want to get rid of my current account. I tried a name change but was flopped. So i might as well go for a complete disposal. Pass a Method (talk) 15:43, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
No, Kephir is just being arrogant today. You should be able to reapply for a fresh username. --Romanophile (talk) 15:45, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
Can you speak to Kephir for me please? I attempted to reason with him to no avail. Pass a Method (talk) 15:51, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
I haven't had any problems with you at all so I would be sad to see you go. *hug* —CodeCat 15:56, 29 September 2014 (UTC)


There seems to be an aversion to including more requests in the English request section. People think of the request section as a place to solicit words that people actually desire to know. It’s not supposed to be a to‐do list that lets the users know which valid words are not yet included. I’m tempted to quit requesting words, and since it’s improbable that the page will ever really be cleaned up, the action may be long‐term. Plus, I dislike English, so requesting more English words is illogic. --Romanophile (talk) 01:08, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

headword PoS[edit]

When adding {{head}}, could you also include the second parameter for the part of speech? —CodeCat 14:54, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

Before I do this, can you tell me for certain that this is the common practice here? Because I myself don’t recall this being mandatory. --Romanophile (talk) 15:10, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
It became recommended practice ever since {{head}} categorises into lemmas and non-lemmas. This is done based on the specified category, so it's desirable to always have a category. —CodeCat 15:13, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
O.K., I fixed the heads now. You can check them to be sure, if you wish. --Romanophile (talk) 15:22, 21 November 2014 (UTC)



Please note that Russian IPA require a word stress as a minimum and not all words are pronounced regularly, so a better knowledge of Russian phonology is required. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 09:42, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

O.K. My pronunciation additions were more like test edits, which is why I only made a couple of them. --Romanophile (talk) 15:07, 22 November 2014 (UTC)


What was that about? Keφr 12:41, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

1. Test edits to see if anybody would soon notice my vandalism. I thought that if I vandalised articles that only I worked on, nobody would (soon) notice.
2. Boredom and lack of respect for the community. --Romanophile (talk) 13:20, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
1. Since you're not an autopatroller (for good reason, apparently), all your edits are listed in Recent changes as needing to be patrolled. That means those of us who patrol recent changes will see it, if we have time to check thoroughly.
2. How about respect for the people who use the dictionary?
If you're tired of contributing, take a break- don't take it out on the dictionary. I routinely block people for doing what you did there. Chuck Entz (talk) 14:52, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
I thought that I was one already, but that’s O.K. Even if I never vandalised, I feel more secure when somebody else is reviewing my edits. As for respecting our readers…hmm, I could, but I don’t expect people to read the entries that I create. I create them because I feel that the project is incomplete and that they must be documented somewhere. But to answer your question, I’m not going to obstinately argue for my right to vandalize, so you could say that yes I will ‘respect’ the readers in this fashion. --Romanophile (talk) 16:39, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
That'll teach me to post messages when I'm in a hurry. You actually are an autopatroller. Your edit showed up because an IP marked it for deletion: people do read your entries. Even if you add entries for your own reasons (which is perfectly ok), what you did was completely against those, too. Whether you respect the community or not, whether you respect the readers or not, have some respect for the dictionary and for what you're doing- if you're not going to do it right, don't do it. Chuck Entz (talk) 14:05, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Scots Wiktionary[edit]

I don't know too much about the Incubator, but I see that you had made some edits to the Scots Wiktionary there. I want to ask you if you know why entries there are all written mostly in English? I mean it even has the word "English", "Etymology", "the", and other things, that are not used in Scots. The term for English in Scots is Inglis. So why? Is it a rule on Incubator to write in English first for all the stuff besides definitions themselves, or is it just ignorance of the language by users? Rædi Stædi Yæti {-skriv til mig-} 04:29, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

What? I don’t recall editing there, neither anonymously nor under an account. Can I have a link to these edits? --Romanophile (talk) 05:31, 15 December 2014 (UTC) Rædi Stædi Yæti {-skriv til mig-} 05:34, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
I don’t recall making this strange edit, but maybe my memory is serving me poorly again. I’ve never seen anybody create a page by reversion, which is very strange. And I cannot I find any other contributions by the I.P. that I (supposedly) reverted. The fact that this account has only one edit, which is old, and that it was a reversion should indicate that I never had any serious interest in this project. My knowledge of Scots is limited at best. --Romanophile (talk) 05:47, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
I just looked at the history of our noo and found an identical edit there, which indicates that my edit was imported. The entry was imported from English Wiktionary. --Romanophile (talk) 05:50, 15 December 2014 (UTC)