User talk:

Definition from Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Jump to: navigation, search


Hello, and welcome to Wiktionary! We notice that you're making changes anonymously. Although this is perfectly all right, we'd like to encourage you to take the time to create an account and sign in to it when editing - it's free and easy. A number of good reasons to do so are listed at Wiktionary:Why create an account?.

Please note that we are not Wikipedia. If you have edited there, it won't be very difficult for you to find your way here, but there are a number of differences. For example, Wiktionary is case-sensitive: Kind (German) is not the same as kind (English, Danish, Dutch etc.) Also note that Wiktionary never uses parenthetic disambiguation, so where Wikipedia might have separate articles on Mercury (planet), Mercury (element), and Mercury (mythology), Wiktionary will only have one entry on Mercury which addresses proper noun uses, and an entry on mercury which addresses regular noun uses.

Here are a few good links for newcomers:

Questionable entries will be listed for verification, and, if they fail that process, will be deleted. Also, keep in mind our copyright policies: don't copy material from copyrighted sources here. Such additions will be deleted on sight. Submissions from IP addresses unfortunately are looked at more closely, so please take a minute to create an account. (Remember to enable "cookies"!)

If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question in the appropriate discussion room or ask me on my talk page.

Enjoy your stay at Wiktionary! Ready Steady Yeti (talk) 06:55, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Wrong antonyms[edit]

"Compliable" and "violable" are in no way antonyms. Stop re-adding this wrong material please. Equinox 13:50, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

If your saying ""compliable" and "violable" are not antonyms" is correct, terms "comply" and "violate" are not antonyms? As well, "accept" and "refuse" are not antonyms? -- 18:35, 28 June 2014 (time of Japan)
"Comply" and "violate" are not antonyms, grammatically: you comply with something, but you violate something (no with). But anyway, that does not prove anything about "compliable" and "violable", because those words are more restricted and different. "Accept" and "refuse" are antonyms. Equinox 11:13, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

-eru form of yodan verbs is the realis, not the irrealis[edit]

The realis form of a verb is the 已然形 (or sometimes labeled the 仮定形). The irrealis form of a verb is the 未然形. I have fixed your edit at 読める.

Please note too that entries for verb forms should be stub entries pointing to the lemma form, unless that verb form has idiomatic senses that are separate from and independent of its lemma. 読める does not have any senses independent of 読む aside from the realis senses inherent in the conjugation, and as such, the 読める entry should be a stub pointing to 読む. The senses at 読める that are not currently also at 読む (predict, for instance) should be added to the 読む entry. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 18:12, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Excessive synonyms[edit]

I notice you've been adding tons of synonyms in both Japanese and English entries. I'm afraid that several of your additions have been incorrect, and I have removed them accordingly. For instance, you added 左右される (sayū sareru, to be influenced, to be controlled) to the translation table in the limited entry. This is far too much of a stretch in meaning, so I have removed that from the table. Please be more judicious when adding material. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 18:15, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

You also listed 平らげる (tairageru, to subdue, to subjugate) as a translation of pacify. This is also far too much of a stretch in meaning, so I have removed this as well. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 18:46, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Japanese parts of speech[edit]

I noticed on the 有資格 and 無条件 entries that you've added adjective senses. When doing so, please be aware of whether the term is commonly used as a pure -na adjective or as a noun with no to make it an adnominal, and add usage notes explaining this. You marked 無条件 as a no-type adnominal in the part-of-speech header, but then you confusingly used {{ja-na}} for the inflection.

Also, when adding synonyms to terms with multiple meanings, use {{sense}} to explain which synonym goes with which sense. Have a look at the 無条件 entry now for an example. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 18:40, 27 June 2014 (UTC)


"irrevivably" is barely a word; at least it's very strange and rare. You've done a lot of changes like this. Please take more care. Equinox 10:39, 27 August 2014 (UTC)


Breaking and destroying are not usually the same thing. If you break a musical box, it doesn't work any more, and can't play music. If you destroy a musical box, it's completely gone: maybe you burned it to ashes, for example. Equinox 10:31, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

This is the discussion page for an anonymous user who has not created an account yet or who does not use it. We therefore have to use the numerical IP address to identify him/her. Such an IP address can be shared by several users. If you are an anonymous user and feel that irrelevant comments have been directed at you, please create an account to avoid future confusion with other anonymous users.

RIR WHOIS lookup: America Europe Africa Asia-Pacific Latin America/Caribbean