User talk:Kephir

Definition from Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Jump to: navigation, search
Start a new discussion


Thread titleRepliesLast modified
re:Vilamovian220:18, 27 July 2014
"this-and-that user acts purely on their whim and is evil"516:07, 27 July 2014
Gadget "LegacyScripts"413:51, 27 July 2014
błyskać714:21, 26 July 2014
Translation editor312:16, 9 July 2014
I learned a new trick from you today, but it is giving an error409:07, 4 July 2014
Reverted your change to Module:zh123:51, 1 July 2014
"I have no idea what I'm doing"714:47, 22 June 2014
Unicode 7.0 additions (Thanks!)021:13, 21 June 2014
"Translations" instead of "definitions"906:09, 17 June 2014
Kraków‎116:21, 13 June 2014
redirects415:48, 13 June 2014
Thank you118:01, 4 June 2014
thank you for destroying the CJK tables815:46, 31 May 2014
Exporting tables directly218:50, 16 May 2014
Module:links/templates203:23, 7 May 2014
"The Logician®"216:29, 28 April 2014
Bug in translation fixing tool115:21, 27 April 2014
Smalcjusz305:25, 27 April 2014
Template:Braille201:00, 25 April 2014
First page
First page
Previous page
Previous page
Last page
Last page


Where was this discussion you speak of? ->

"Członkowie Akademyj – Accademia Wilamowicziana zalecają stosowanie (w publikacjach pisanych w języku angielskim) następujących słów: rzeczownika Wymysorys (‘etnolekt wilamowski’) i przymiotnika Wilamowicean w odniesieniu do języka i kultury Wilamowic".

(Members of the Akademyj-Accademia Wilamowicziana recommend the use of (in publications written in English) of the following words: noun Wymysorys ('etnolekt categories ') and the adjective Wilamowicean in regards to the language and culture of Wilamowice.)

SPL908455, Henryk (talk)14:21, 27 July 2014

Discussion on Wiktionary.

Keφr14:48, 27 July 2014

No cóż, muszę przyznać, wygłupiłem się.

SPL908455, Henryk (talk)20:18, 27 July 2014

"this-and-that user acts purely on their whim and is evil"

First off, your hatting of my comments was highly inappropriate. I have undone it.

Second off, there are three problems I have with the admins on this project

  1. They remove a lot of content, some of which I wouldn't remove
  2. They don't explain their reverts of other editors (Case in point: Oso. It took me three comments to get Ungoliant to say "It's a common noun", and six or seven more to get somebody to say why it's a common noun. Ungoliant should've said that it's a common noun and why either in his edit summary, or in response to the first comment on his page)
  3. They let personal feelings get in the way of editing (Case in point: Mglovesfun and his sarcastic comments)
Purplebackpack8920:16, 25 July 2014

Your vote "rationale" was "highly inappropriate". What did you expect when you started it with a childish and self-defeating ad hominem?

As for the rest,

  1. Then explain why. You have never done that.
  2. Being an autopatrolled user, you are supposed to already know what a common noun is. This is one of the most basic basics. You could have looked up the difference when two editors told you "Oso" is a common noun. Instead you ran around shouting "USER WITH AN AGENDA!". Pathetic.
  3. Hello, pot. My name is kettle. How is it going?

Also, stop randomly jumping accounts for no reason, it makes it harder to review your "contributions", for lack of a better word. If you do not, I will probably block one of them. Abusive users should not have the privilege to use multiple accounts.

Though if it depended on me alone, both would be long indeffed with no talk page access. I am quite convinced that literally nobody here would miss you if I made that happen now. Get unbanned on w:simple: and I may change my mind about you. Protip: saying "the ban is so unfair" or "come on, it has been a year already" is not going to cut it. Or are they too a part of a vast cabal against you?

Keφr21:12, 25 July 2014

There IS a reason why I use green account sometimes and yellow account others. I use yellow account from my home desktop and laptop, and green account from elsewhere. This violates no policy here (or on Wikipedia), but if you want to whine about it on Beer Parlour, go ahead and waste the both of ours' times.

I have explained why I believe that content shouldn't be removed, many times. Usually it boils down to "leaving this does no harm" or "this should be fixed rather than deleted". You have ignored my comments.

As for you threatening to indef me, your attempt to do that was embarrassing (most of the diffs you provided violated no policy), and was closed as disruptive. I would advise you not to go down that road again so soon.

Purplebackpack8921:51, 25 July 2014

Some people here do not hold easily gameable policies in much regard. If you cannot act reasonably without a written policy explicitly telling you to do that, you are not going to have an easy time here.

Unnecessary maintenance burden is a harm. Not a big harm, it has to be weighted against other harms, but it is a harm nevertheless. We keep that in mind without necessarily repeating it every time.

So I guess you want to keep turning every debate into a combat, shouting "keep because this user is evil" until it becomes so embarrassing to yourself that we have no choice but to expel you. So be it. Thought that kind of flies in the face of regarding time as a precious resource, right?

End of topic.

Keφr16:21, 26 July 2014

Not end of topic, buddy. If you think that I respond "keep because this user is evil", you clearly haven't looked at my contributions. In greater than 90% of the votes I make, I make no mention of the nominator. And keep in mind that I don't vote in RfDs as often as you or many other people on this project.

But you also have to consider why I think that. I have been baited and hounded by you and other editors for quite some time now. You are looking for any excuse (however tenuous) to have me indeffed. You claim I'm as bad at personalizing things as you are. But that's not true for two reasons: a) I don't comb through every single contribution you've made; and b) you are trying to get me run off this project, and I'm not trying to get you run off this project.

It's pretty clear that it is unproductive for you to interact with me. I would strongly suggest you voluntarily stop interacting with interacting with me on any level. If you don't, I WILL have to request an interaction ban.

Purplebackpack8916:47, 26 July 2014

We do not practice "interaction bans" here. And if you manage to infuriate people without even intending to do so, all the more reason to get rid of you.

Keφr16:07, 27 July 2014

Gadget "LegacyScripts"

Hi Kephir,

What is the purpose of the "LegacyScripts" gadget (definition). The listed script page (MediaWiki:Gadget-legacy.js) does not exist.

Also, I think you added [wgNamespaceNumber & ~1] by accident (edit), right?

Krinkle (talk)04:53, 16 April 2014

I planned to move most customisation scripts from MediaWiki:Common.js into there, and then start converting them into proper gadgets. Then I thought that maybe I should not rush so much, maybe I should start a discussion on WT:GP/WT:BP first, and in the end I never got around to do anything.

And yes, it was an accident.

Keφr10:26, 16 April 2014

I was going to ask the same thing. Can it be removed now or do you still intend to implement something like that?

Helder.wiki12:44, 25 July 2014

I do. Thanks for reminding me. I will ask people at WT:GP.

Keφr12:57, 25 July 2014

Fore future reference, the discussion is at Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/July#Updating legacy scripts.

Helder.wiki13:51, 27 July 2014

When I came across this word, it was combined with "eyes". Is there a sense missing?

CodeCat13:42, 26 July 2014

"błyskać eyes"? I have no idea what it could mean.

Keφr13:46, 26 July 2014

Well the Polish word for eyes anyway.

Here: "(name) błyska z oczu"

CodeCat13:47, 26 July 2014

No, I do not think there is any additional meaning here.

Keφr13:49, 26 July 2014

Then what could the person have meant with that sentence? "Flashing with the eyes" seems like "blinking"...

CodeCat13:53, 26 July 2014

Ah! błyskać oczami/oczyma surely can mean "to blink". But I think the verb is not used in this meaning outside that phrase.

But this is not what is written here. It says "[it] flashes/twinkles from [their] eyes". I need more context to understand this, but this seems like some kind of figurative phrase, related to the "the eyes are the windows to the soul" metaphor.

Keφr14:04, 26 July 2014

Translation editor

Does the translation editor also accept {{t-needed}} as input?

CodeCat11:55, 9 July 2014

No. Should it?

Keφr12:04, 9 July 2014

If we want to migrate away from the old templates, yes.

CodeCat12:09, 9 July 2014

Meh. The markup added to the page is still {{t-needed|...}}. We may safely delete Template:trreq at this point (or redirect it to Template:t-needed), I think nothing uses it any more. "{{trreq}}" is just an arbitrary string. Though it may be confusing for some.

Keφr12:16, 9 July 2014

I learned a new trick from you today, but it is giving an error

What am I doing wrong here?

Vahag (talk)07:13, 4 July 2014

{{{page}}} is not a number.

Keφr07:31, 4 July 2014

Thank you. While we're on the subject, do you know if it is possible to link to a specific page in a flash book like this one?

Vahag (talk)07:57, 4 July 2014

I examined the viewer thoroughly and found no such functionality in it, even undocumented. But I also noticed that for this particular book, individual pages are stored under URLs of the form{{{number}}}.swf — so at least you can link to that. Still right-clicking the viewer and downloading the PDF seems better. Good thing you can do that.

You really should not expect a silver bullet here, though.

Keφr08:35, 4 July 2014

Thanks. The silver bullet is uploading it to, which I shall do presently.

Vahag (talk)09:07, 4 July 2014

Reverted your change to Module:zh

Hi mate. I had to revert your change to Module:zh. It was causing module errors in the zh-new template. What are you trying to do?

JamesjiaoTC23:45, 1 July 2014

Ah I see the topic in Grease Pit. Will post there.

JamesjiaoTC23:51, 1 July 2014

"I have no idea what I'm doing"

Neither do I when it comes to that script... I wonder what your edit was intended to do?

CodeCat13:21, 22 June 2014

Make the script work when the translation table contains entries using {{ttbc}}. Fortunately, it worked as intended.

Keφr13:23, 22 June 2014

What about the undo feature? Also, we still haven't added support for those two proposed replacement templates...

CodeCat13:25, 22 June 2014

{{t-check}} seems to work fine without any changes. {{t-needed}}… I am yet to figure out. What undo feature?

Keφr13:29, 22 June 2014

The translation editor has an undo feature. When making changes you have to make sure it puts things back where they should be.

CodeCat13:39, 22 June 2014

Also, the editor needs to produce output using the new templates, while still understanding the old ones alongside the new. That's the part where I got stuck.

CodeCat13:43, 22 June 2014
Edited by author.
Last edit: 14:47, 22 June 2014

I think it works now. New translation requests will use {{t-needed}}, the script will recognise lines using {{ttbc}}, and will correctly remove correct usages of both {{trreq}} and {{t-needed}} (and some incorrect ones). I have kept {{trreq}} as the magic string the user has to type as the translation, not to break users' habits. I am still not quite sure what exactly my changes did. Please test.

I must say, that script is a giant pile of hacks, and needs to be rewritten from scratch. It simply cannot be maintained as it is for much longer.

Keφr14:27, 22 June 2014

Unicode 7.0 additions (Thanks!)

Just posting a big "thanks!" here for you Unicode 7.0 additions to Appendix:Unicode that you did recently. Good work! :)

Bumm13 (talk)21:13, 21 June 2014

"Translations" instead of "definitions"

We really should bring this up together, both of us. I see this a major problem with this dictionary. First off, anyone could just simply go to Google Translate or a similarly simple website to find out that the word jég in Hungarian simply means "ice". This is a problem. I'm not against one word definitions, when they are necessary. Although, I am not supportive of just saying:

"# ice" as the definition.

Really, any 3 year old could write that the definition is "ice". You don't even have to know English at all to be able to translate that word. And even I, when I look at definitions like this, I do not at all trust them. Seriously, how on earth do I know that jég only means "ice". It looks so unprofessional, because there is no capital letter at the beginning of the sentence, and no period at the end. So it's hard to trust something as lazy as this.

We need to stop being lazy, and start making real definitions. I protest, capitals at the beginning of all definitions, no matter what, unless there is some exceptionally good reason not to. Same goes for periods at the end of them. I'm also against the gloss thing. We should just put all that stuff in the definition sentence. I came here to see professional etymologies, definitions, and language separations. Also, for nouns that are countable, for instance a word that means "apple" we should say "An apple.", not lazily say "apple" like a freaking 3 year old. Of course, we should not write the English definition for "ice" for a word that simply means "ice" but we should definitely just use capital letter at beginning and period at the end in all cases in all definitions in ALL languages. I don't want people who come to this site to think we are an online translator/English dictionary. I want them to think we are a dictionary for all words in all languages. By doing what we do now, we are not following our motto, are we? This is done out of pure laziness. All who are with me? Are you, Kephir? Let's protest!

Ready Steady Yeti (talk)20:31, 14 June 2014

But: "apple" doesn't mean "an apple" -- otherwise there would be no purpose in the word "an". So to translate "apple" into a word meaning "an apple" (and not just "apple") is not even accurate.

Equinox 20:55, 14 June 2014


Okay, I did actually read. And actually I could not care less about lack of capital letters: in fact, I would rather have regular definitions be initial-lowercase. What I do dislike is inconsistency, ambiguous translations, definitions which do not convey nuance, and ones implying exact correspondence between words where there is none. You gave "apple" as an example. You mean the fruit or the tree? Many languages have separate words for the two; changing the definition from "apple" to "An apple." does not help the reader notice that at all. There is also the issue of how different languages convey (in)definiteness, to which Equinox referred.

And I do not understand how initial-lowercase definitions are contrary to our motto. The motto can be realised in a lot of ways.

Keφr09:14, 15 June 2014

Well ELE never actually said that we couldn't use capital letter at the beginning and period at the end, did it? So why does it keep getting "rollbacked" by User:Panda10?

Ready Steady Yeti (talk)13:36, 15 June 2014

Go ask them. Or ask at WT:BP. You chose the wrong place to complain.

Keφr15:17, 15 June 2014

I can understand why you were reverted at jég: a single noun isn't a sentence (where's the verb?), so capitalizing it and adding a period just makes it look odd.

Chuck Entz (talk)15:17, 15 June 2014

On the other hand, since in English we make one word definitions with a capital and a period, it makes the "# ice" thing look like an idiot wrote it. Am I the only one here who wants this site to be better and different than Google Translate as far as definitions go? On Google Translate, I can enter the word "jég" into it and it will give me the word "ice" in Hungarian. So we should give more than that and say "Ice.". I don't know what the real problem is. Maybe I'm just a perfectionist but I think our definitions (not translations, notice I said definitions again, this is a dictionary, we should not use translations to replace definitions), should look professional. They should always have a capital at the beginning and a period at the end. I think we should have bots go and re-do all the stuff that isn't like this. With ELE looking this childish, I say ELE might as well have the same content as бабнику, which I tagged for deletion myself, and the page's content seems to be the logic of the site now, content was "llll do it for the man".

Ready Steady Yeti (talk)18:58, 15 June 2014

yes, you are the only one. everyone here is part of a massive conspiracy to discredit the wiki concept by making this dictionary as crappy as possible. preferably even worse than machine translation.

why is "Ice." better than "ice"? both convey exactly the same information. i could support changing definition style for the sake of consistency between languages, but this is hardly the most important thing in the world. how is mechanically changing capitalisation going to better anything?

Keφr19:46, 15 June 2014

Thanks for that. Can you also explain the -ów‎ bit, if possible, please?

 — I.S.M.E.T.A.20:35, 12 June 2014

w:Kraków#Etymology calls this an "archaic possessive form". Given this vagueness and weak sourcing, I would take it with a grain of salt (note, however, *-ovъ). In modern language, -ów is a common genitive plural suffix (genitive case fulfilling the possessive role), hence it can be understood as "[the town] of the Kraks (servants/descendants/etc. of Krak)". In our Proto-Slavic noun declension tables, however, the genitive plural suffix tends to be *-ъ (and the genitive dual *-u). I would love to see why this is so, how it compares to other contemporary Slavic languages, and how -ów came into being.

I have been hardly seeing you lately. Busy in real life? Fine by me if you do not want to elaborate on it too much, just wondering whether you expect to keep coming here.

Keφr21:29, 12 June 2014

WT:redirects is a redlink and therefor makes me question your deletion based on a non-existent policy. The point of having such terms, which are apparently allowed based on the shut up and red herring examples linked in the other policy you cited as a deletion reason, WT:SOP, is to improve search features and make the word or, in this case, initialism easier to find. Since, WT:redirects is not a policy, and since WT:SOP suggests that these sum-of-parts terms are allowed (it links two of them), I'm requesting that you restore these two redirects. Thank you.

Technical 13 (talk)13:23, 13 June 2014

Redlink no longer. (I forgot this namespace is case-sensitive too.) And no, "If I Recall Correctly" is nothing like red herring or shut up, because red herring ≠ "a herring that is red" and shut up ≠ "shut by moving upwards". While the meaning of "If I Recall Correctly" is transparently derived from its individual words.

Keφr13:30, 13 June 2014

red herring most certainly is a "herring that is red" - "A smoke-cured and salt-brined herring strong enough to turn the flesh red" = "a herring with red flesh" and shut up is to move ones lower jaw in an upward motion shutting there mouth, their for, shutting their mouth by moving their jaw in an upward motion. I'm not convinced WT:SOP applies at all. Since it is a redirect to an initialism, and initialisms aren't disallowed, then the full expansion of that initialism should be a redirect to the initialism itself. Even your WT:redirects#Redirecting between different forms of idioms says that this is allowed. "For longer phrases where there is little or no chance of the entry title being valid for another language, redirects are allowable. For example, burn his fingers or burning one's fingers should redirect to the pronoun-neutral and uninflected form burn one's fingers."

Technical 13 (talk)13:47, 13 June 2014

"If I Recall Correctly" is not an alternative form of an acronym/initialism/whatever, it is a regular English phrase, whose only meaning is completely transparent. We have no entry for "I am not a lawyer" either. While meanings of initialisms are not obviously derived from their letters. While red herring may refer to actual herrings with red flesh, it also has a figurative meaning, which is not obvious. "Does not equal" does not mean "there is no relation at all". And right now I am going to tell you to shut up, by which I mean I want you to stop typing into this page, which has nothing to do with anyone's mouth. I think.

Keφr14:02, 13 June 2014

It's an alternative form of IIRC. I can see that I'm getting no-where here. I apologize for wasting your time and will raise this topic elsewhere. Topic raised at RfD.

Technical 13 (talk)15:28, 13 June 2014
Thank you 001.jpg

Thanks for nominating me to be autopatrolled. I'll try my best to make good entries and hope one of it will be in the word of the day.

Malaysiaboy (talk)09:54, 4 June 2014

Oh, routine stuff. You should take a look at WT:FWOTDN. Have fun.

Keφr11:23, 4 June 2014

thank you for destroying the CJK tables

I went painstakingly through them all to make sure they used {{unihan line}} so you could actually see the characters. Now that you use the module, all people will see (including me) is squares.

Liliana 09:26, 30 May 2014

It works for me.

The "all people" claim may be an exaggeration.

The module apparently picks the "Hans" script instead of "Hani". Maybe this is the issue?

Keφr09:33, 30 May 2014

They shouldn't use Hans. They are not specifically Simplified Chinese.

Liliana 09:38, 30 May 2014

They are Hani now. Can you see them (after purging)?

Keφr09:52, 30 May 2014


Liliana 11:08, 30 May 2014

Then we seem to have a problem with Hans. Either get rid of it or fix the stylesheet.

Keφr18:37, 30 May 2014

Exporting tables directly

If you want to use table data from another module, like at Module:form of, then it's a good idea to add in a comment in the module which other modules use it. That way, it's easier to change later. Functions can be tracked if needed to rename them, but tables can't.

CodeCat18:44, 16 May 2014

Actually, they can:

export.whatever = nil
setmetatable(export, {
	__index = function (self, key)
		if key == 'whatever' then
			return whatever

But I agree, annotating these is a good idea.

Keφr18:48, 16 May 2014

That code snippet would be very useful to preserve on Category:Template tracking!

CodeCat18:50, 16 May 2014


In Module:links/templates, on line 52, could you add this bit? "or require("Module:etymology language/data").getLanguageByCode(lang)"?

DerekWinters (talk)23:09, 6 May 2014

Also, I'm not certain if anything else may need to be changed in the module, so do as you wish.

DerekWinters (talk)23:10, 6 May 2014

I could, but this would be nonsensical. There is no getLanguageByCode function in Module:etymology language/data. And etymology-only languages are by definition etymology-only, they have no entries of their own which can be linked to.

Keφr03:23, 7 May 2014

"The Logician®"

Who the hell is "The Logician®"? And isn't it a bad idea to vote on spite? I know you didn't, but I can't help but feeling your edit-summary was a low-level dig at me or somebody else

Purplebackpack89 (Notes Taken) (Locker)02:44, 28 April 2014

I cannot accept responsibility for your feelings. Perhaps you might consider lying down until the feeling goes away.

Keφr12:34, 28 April 2014

Perhaps you might consider that low-level digs like the logician are unproductive at best and personal attacks at worst.

Purplebackpack89 (Notes Taken) (Locker)16:29, 28 April 2014

Bug in translation fixing tool

It seems that it's still using language templates, even though they've long been deprecated. See per annum for example.

CodeCat12:11, 27 April 2014

No, it does not. I think I typed {{subst:fi}} manually out of habit. Sigh. And it was me who created {{\}} as a replacement…

Keφr15:21, 27 April 2014

Hi Keφr. Thanks for correcting my pronunciation. Could you also check Smalc and Szmalc for any errors, please? Thanks for your time.

 — I.S.M.E.T.A.01:55, 27 April 2014

Done. I am not quite convinced, however, that they should be labelled as "alternative forms". While they seem to be mostly used interchangeably in reference to one specific person, they would be considered distinct as surnames of contemporary people. (Though Smalcjusz may actually only refer to that one person, like w:pl:Kartezjusz and w:pl:Galileusz.)

Keφr04:55, 27 April 2014

Thanks for correcting Szmalc. My guess is that Szmalc is intended to imitate the German Schmalz whereas Smalcjusz is intended to imitate the Latin Smalcius. Would you agree? How ought this to be reflected in the entries? And if Szmalc and Smalcjusz shouldn't be labelled as "alternative forms", how should they be labelled, especially in light of the interchangeability you note?

 — I.S.M.E.T.A.05:09, 27 April 2014

That is also my guess. Not sure, really; I would probably define them all simply as surnames, and simply add a link from each to the Wikipedia article about the person.

Keφr05:25, 27 April 2014

"migrated to Module:labels/data". Your butt.

kc_kennylau (talk)17:53, 24 April 2014

How dareſt þou ſpeake ſuch foul language to an adminiſtrator?!

Fixed. Not ſure how I failed to notice this one.

Keφr18:43, 24 April 2014

Thanks! :)

kc_kennylau (talk)01:00, 25 April 2014
First page
First page
Previous page
Previous page
Last page
Last page