User talk:Attys

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

[edit]

[1] - Latin entries should be without macrons, on ; see Wiktionary:About Latin --Ivan Štambuk 13:06, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

captiuus[edit]

Regarding captiuus, you may want to catch a glimpse of our policy about spelling Latin words. The uſer hight Bogorm converſation 10:50, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Latin verb forms[edit]

Have a look at {{la-verb-form}}. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:06, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

misero[edit]

Vale! Would you like to add a Latin entry here (noun, adjective and verb) - we only have the Italian word. Cheers SemperBlotto 13:45, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

  • Thanks. I was thinking it was a form of the noun miser meaning a wretched person, or the verb mitto / mittere meaning to throw etc. Keep up the good work. Cheers. SemperBlotto 14:22, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

nihilum[edit]

The content of the previously deleted version was just "I am nihilum . . .". No need for the talk page. SemperBlotto 17:44, 15 May 2010 (UTC) p.s. I have wikified the English translation.

Templates[edit]

Note for future reference, it is best not to add deprecated templates like {{ladecl1&2}} to your entries under the inflection header because they will eventually be removed anyway, since we do not use them any longer; neither do we use custom made notes of this type (explaining declension). It would also be good if you could link relevant words pertaining to the definition as well, in order to aid navigation, e.g. [2] with the double square brackets surrounding the word. It doesn't seem particularly useful to 'comment out' the alternative spellings header like in [3] if no alternative form exists. Thank you for your contributions and I hope you continue to add to Latin. Caladon 17:42, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

See for example albus where {{ladecl1&2}} isn't used, where {{la-decl-1&2}} is used for the declension but nothing else. Choosing one of your entries, for daedalus I would just omit {{ladecl1&2}}, which is above {{la-decl-1&2}} because we don't use these any more and they don't really add anything. Caladon 07:39, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Inflected forms[edit]

Please do not add these. We will (eventually) be using bots to autmoatically generate these pages. The pages you have added are incomplete and not formatted correctly. Further, the existence of the page will prevent a bot from creating it later, so your additions will all have to be repaired manually by other editors. --EncycloPetey 13:43, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Well, I am sorry to be an inconvenience, but I copied the format, almost exactly, from existing entries of Latin inflected forms. So, consider it error propagation. If you, or anyone, could tell me specifically what is wrong with the pages, I will gladly rectify them myself.
Anyhow, I am somewhat experienced with Perl, and I would be willing to help code the bots, if any additional help is needed. Attys 07:52, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
Which entries did you copy? There are some that need to be corrected. The forms of the adjective albus are done correctly for a first and second declension regular adjective, but pointing out the "right" way can be tricky since the inflection pattern often varies with different parts of speech or declension patterns.
Most of the entries I've seen that you did are very, very wrong, with one or more serious errors. On pilaris, you left out the definition. Your inflection line for daphnon is formatted incorrectly, since it uses a stem-and-suffix approach that hasn't been used here for years. Your links in the table for danisticus and damnosus are wrong, but for different reasons. The former links to pages with macrons (which shouldn't exist), while the latter neglects to show the macrons in the table. I have the strong impression that you haven't read any of the template documentation.
And that's just some of the problems. Your entries for some inflected forms like portae include a section for "Etymology 1", even though there is only one etymology. you also used the {{term}} template incorrectly by including a hash to a language section and labelled the part of speech as Adjective when it's actually a noun. I don't have the time to keep up with the rapid propogation of your errors because each edit seems to introduce new errors. A play-by-play critique would take too much time. --EncycloPetey 15:39, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
The following have been fixed: pilaris, damnosus, portae. I looked over the links in danisticus. I see: danista, danistica, danisticum, lend#English, and money#English.
As for daphnon, I explained the lack of proper inflection in the talk page.
I believe your initial question is a rhetorical device; as a response, I will simply issue a recognition of carelessness on my part (although earlier errors were in fact a result of my using outdated entries). I have briefly read, but by no means committed to memory, the template documentation. I will revisit it, along with the guidelines, in order that I avoid such mistakes in the future. I thank you for your explanation and time.
Finally, I offer personally to delete all inflected form pages that I have created, in order to save you or others the trouble of reviewing them. Attys 17:23, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Copy vio[edit]

Systematically adding entries from a copyrighted source is a violation of their copyright. --EncycloPetey 18:01, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

It also appears that you still have not looked at the documentation for the inflection table templates, as you have added the incorrect syntax in most of them for the many pages you created today. --EncycloPetey 18:11, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

I require a legal definition of "systematically" if I am to cease such violation.
I suppose you are referring to the use of two parameters when the stem has a macron. I didn't see that the template generated hyperlinks until now, so I see the problem. Attys 18:20, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
No, you will cease violation of copyright or be banned from Wiktionary permanently. Wiktionary needs no lawsuits. You have been blocked for one week (for now). If you persist in vioating copyright, you will be blocked indefinitely. --EncycloPetey 18:32, 22 June 2010 (UTC)