User talk:Mglovesfun/Archives/7

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

ací[edit]

If you get a moment, could you sort out this please. Conrad.Irwin

Done, no worries. Mglovesfun (talk) 08:55, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Thanks a lot. Conrad.Irwin 20:42, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

la-verb-form[edit]

The idea is that you put the form with its macrons into the template's first parameter. (Which you don't seem to have done). Conrad.Irwin 11:14, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

They don't all have macrons, that's the thing. In those cases PAGENAME is of course, correct. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:17, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
Presumably, looking at ēvertō, the ones you just did do. Conrad.Irwin 11:18, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
Indeed but a lot of third conjugation ones won't need a macron (avertere from memory). Mglovesfun (talk) 11:22, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
I've no idea, leave it to EP or he will bite your head off :p. Conrad.Irwin 11:23, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
Hence the message on the template's talk page (smiley). Mglovesfun (talk) 11:25, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Chat, etc.[edit]

Thanks for the pointers. I'm on Freenode chat, often with the same username as here. When are you on, and what's your username there?

Also, if I'm to become admin one day, it would help not to have a block on the log. I'm not sure if voters would let slide the fact that it was only 15 minutes. Anyways, how would one completely expunge the block from the log? --LUUWDA 10:14, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

You cannot purge blocks from the log, but don't worry, having a logged block is not a hinderance to becoming an administrator here. Conrad.Irwin 10:40, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
Especially not a 15 minute block for someone with about 20 edits. Mglovesfun (talk) 20:04, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Native Turkish speaker[edit]

Are you a native speaker of Turkish? If so, it would be nice to add that to your user page. Mglovesfun (talk) 21:20, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I'm. Thanks for warning. I just forgot it.--Stambouliote 21:23, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
Well it was a 'question' not a 'warning' but yeah, sure. Mglovesfun (talk) 21:25, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

User:EncycloPetey[edit]

If you have issues with another user, please discuss them. Your block was immature, and I expect you to take some time to consider a more approrpiate course of action. Conrad.Irwin 23:06, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

90% of us are wrong[edit]

So a vote passes with a consensus of 9-1, which I set up but not really caring which way it went. I warn you, per your previous interactions, if your aim is to push your point of view onto others in spite of their wishes, I will block you for life and appeal to have to desysopped. You don't seem to deny that you're acting against the consensus, you just want to. I left the French Wiktionary after a bureaucrat went on a vandalism spree. If you do the same, I may leave here too. All I can see is that you'l put your opinion over the opinion of a thousand other if you have to. Mglovesfun (talk) 23:00, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Mglovesfun, please relax. Being in the majority does not make you right, which is why democracy is a very bad way to do things. Conrad.Irwin 23:02, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
The reason I left the French Wiktionary was 'how come only admins are allowed to vandalise?'. This is the same thing. The communith as a vote, and one bureaucrat, a cowbot, a maverick, reverts it. Mglovesfun (talk) 23:07, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
EP can't defend his actions, he can only attack others. Basically saying 'if other people voted for something, they're wrong and I'm right'. He says nothing because he has no case. Mglovesfun (talk) 23:09, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
Right, his answer is to revert me, instead of answering. Mglovesfun (talk) 23:14, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Desysopping[edit]

I see that you have let yourself desysoped. I think that is a pity. You are a great admin, and your desysopping does not benefit English Wiktionary. --Dan Polansky 12:06, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

It does allow me to concentrate more on words/terms rather than admin tasks. The English Wiktionary certainly doesn't benefit because I did an enormous amount of reverting/speedy deleting, and now SemperBlotto will end up doing 90% of it (again). I might reapply one day, but I'm enjoying a bit of peaceful editing and simply creating/wikify entries. 91.105.54.107 12:13, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Correct - and now I've got to mark all your entries as patrolled as well. SemperBlotto 12:14, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
FWIW since I'm no longer an admin, I'm no longer an autopatroller under Mglovesfun anyway. You might wanna nominate me (or just do it). 91.105.54.107 12:16, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
I've added you to patrolled.js, if you change IP address, please let us know. (Or even better, use an account). Conrad.Irwin 12:20, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
I'm not abandoning Mglovesfun, I'm just taking a break. 91.105.54.107 12:22, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
I understand. I have so far resisted the temptation of becoming an admin for the fear of becoming too involved outside of mainspace, which I have ended up anway. But it is you who is better off, not English Wiktionary. Your votes under the user account of Mglovesfun are going to be missed. That said, it is your full right to concentrate on mainspace instead of Wiktionary: and User talk:. --Dan Polansky 12:39, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Welcome back. Have fun. Why not register a new name? DCDuring TALK 13:49, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
For what reason? Mglovesfun (talk) 14:40, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
I thought you were going to be participating as an anon. But I see that was just temporary. Never mind. DCDuring TALK 14:51, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Buttons reinstated. SemperBlotto 21:48, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

clair comme de l'eau de roche[edit]

Can you fix up the French formatting here? It's a mess. Cheers. ---> Tooironic 08:37, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

buter-to croak[edit]

To croak also means "to kill" (see the intransitive meaning) in slang, as I assume that "buter" is, in French, a slang word, I think it's correct to place it where I placed. --Rabbie Barns 16:11, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

In which case it's just a question of how do you did. Mglovesfun (talk) 16:15, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Catalan[edit]

I will add some translation in catalan that it is very easy. I have checked some catalan words of your contributions. Keep up the good work!--KRLS 12:39, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Fraxinus[edit]

Jovan , FriedrickMILBarbarossa What with the voices --Sokac121 10:35, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Sorry? Mglovesfun (talk) 10:44, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
Right (guessing based on the URLs) the only rule was "account creation must predate the start of the vote by a week". Those two, as did some of the other 'oppose' votes. Fraxinus was created asfter the start of the vote, so is invalid, all of the other (unless I missed one) predated by one week or more. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:47, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
Btw I don't edit Serbo-Croatian, I don't speak it or read it. It's no more interesting to me that Greek, Arabic or whatever. I'm thinking about this vote, not a vote that doesn't exist. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:58, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Dates of first appointment[edit]

Hi Martin (mind if I call you that?). Did I get these dates right?  — Raifʻhār Doremítzwr ~ (U · T · C) ~ 14:10, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Yes Martin is my name, which I prefer to MG, but that's more universally recognized here. As for dates, no idea, I tried to check my logs but I couldn't find the right one. Mglovesfun (talk) 15:06, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
I see. Well, I took the first appointment date from the previous listing; do you know when exactly you were desysopped? (And why, for that matter?)  — Raifʻhār Doremítzwr ~ (U · T · C) ~ 15:22, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Vandalism?[edit]

Supposed French translations by User:Jackbarron to tail - don't look good to me. SemperBlotto 15:10, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

I saw that. Just need to see which translation tables they are in. It looks like a joke IMO. Mglovesfun (talk) 15:12, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Comparative linguistics[edit]

Sir, there are many reputable scholars doing research done on what is related to what. I recognize they aren't 100% accurate but there are lots of reference works that will say what is related to what (with some degree of certainty). If you're referring to the dies and day correlation, I am only transferring etymological information found at day to that at dies. --71.111.229.19 16:36, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

I don't think anyone can say for sure that it's not related. If anything, I'd remove that information from day. I think comparative linguistics is a bit like astrophysics, almost 100% theory and 0% practice. Mglovesfun (talk) 16:39, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
But, I see no value in reverting again. Mglovesfun (talk) 16:44, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Frequency lists[edit]

Yes, I accidentally forgot to turn off my Greasemonkey filter. But I noticed it and fixed it. Jeremy Jigglypuff Jones 03:35, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Glad to see you back![edit]

I'm glad that you've decided to come back to this site :) Razorflame 20:02, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

{{new io-p form}}[edit]

This template was made to help me know that this one adds a line break after the template, and {{new io-pnl form}} was made to help me know that this one adds a line break before the template...is there any way that you can help me keep it that way please? Razorflame 22:04, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Yes, just write ---- like the rest of us. Mglovesfun (talk) 22:08, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
Before you delete it, you should make sure that it isn't used on any other page because I've been using both templates since at least February or late January. Razorflame 22:11, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
It wasn't, which is unsurprising since 'new' templates should always be substituted. Mglovesfun (talk) 23:14, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Dutch "inflection"[edit]

It didn't look like they were too clear on this in that godforsaken RFD, so I'll try to make it simple. A general adjective in Dutch will have 3 'uninflected' forms (one positive, one comparative, one superlative) and then each of those has an inflected form. The inflected form isn't easy to describe in the context of a form-of entry since it's used in a small variety of grammatical situations. I'll try to remember to make some notes on this in whatever we have on here about Dutch adjectives. — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 17:51, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Clearly if the template had specified this, I would never have nominated it. AFAICT listing all the inflections would be best, whilst explaining them in an appendix with clarity would be an ok second. Mglovesfun (talk) 20:31, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
All the forms should be in the most basic form's entry (which for these would be the positive and uninflected form) but I don't know what our Dutch editors do, so... if our Dutch sections suck it's their fault :D
If you mean like the masculine/feminine/neuter stuff, since the rules are always the same for how their used, I'd prefer something like {{nl-inflected adj}} for the definition line, where "inflected form" links to an appendix that describes their usage. It's not quite like German which has like 4 distinct adjective forms but they all have specific grammatical differences. It's too simplified for it to make sense to list all the possible uses of the inflected form in every entry. There's a .doc file you can get here that (as I recall) explains Dutch inflected adjectives pretty well. — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 21:02, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
I think you've got it spot on. This information has to be on Wiktionary somewhere. You're the first person to recognise that I don't understand the information, simply because it's not explained anyway. Therefore I have to go on other websites like Wikipedia to look this stuff up. Mglovesfun (talk) 21:08, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, I've been too lazy to do grammar appendices since Romanian a few years ago... I think eventually we should have full resources explaining every detail of that kind of stuff. (To those who would argue against that, I've seen tons of dictionaries with appendices with some pretty detailed grammatical info). Unfortunately most of us are too busy doing little stuff, or completely useless crap... so maybe grammatical appendices will catch on and maybe wiktionary will always just be sorta mediocre. — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 18:38, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
I'm too busy doing completely useless stuff would make a good phrasebook entry. Mglovesfun (talk) 20:03, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
Hey, that'd make a good stock example sentence to translate... awesome, I'm stealing it :D — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 20:11, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Occitan and Catalan words[edit]

Hi Mglovesfun. I will try to verify me too the news Occitans and Catalan words. If you have questions about Occitan language you can contact me at the Occitan Wikitionary.Jiròni 18:38, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

kystique[edit]

SemperBlotto uses the phrase all senses for Italian words that are adjectives in which that single word can be used for multiple senses, so I think that it might be good to use all senses here as well? You don't have to, though. This is just a friendly suggestion ;) Razorflame 18:14, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Sorry about that[edit]

I accidentally hit the save page button before I finished creating the page for the Latin verb desilio. My bad. Gl1d3r 15:29, 5 June 2010 (UTC)Gl1d3r

desilio isn't all that well formatted, and with my almost zero knowledge of Latin, I can't help much. See salio for examples of formatting. Mglovesfun (talk) 15:34, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Template:sets[edit]

Hi, Mglovesfun. I see why you deleted the template. The only reason I feel that it may be a better alternative to a list is because each term has a numerical relation and a specific order. Precedent in {{coefficient}}. In any case, sorry for the bother. --Gausie 16:53, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

No bother at all. FWIW I just nominated that for deletion, for the reasons I've been in to. Mglovesfun (talk) 16:59, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

junk drawer[edit]

I've provided an additional piece of evidence in the RfD discussion which I'd like you to consider. bd2412 T 18:08, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Devil's advocate[edit]

I think - without really knowing - that people don't realise how much I play devil's advocate. In real life my tone of voice gives it away and people have problem with it - but there is no tone of voice on here. What's more wiki talk pages are 20 times slower than stuff like MSN and Skype, so the possibilities to misunderstand each other are endless! With that, goodnight. Mglovesfun (talk) 22:26, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

reverting the reversion[edit]

If you have nothing more to say, I'm going to revert your reversion of {{past of}}, {{third-person singular of}} and {{present participle of}} in order to restore their functionalities and continue my work. --Daniel. 23:32, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

As long as it actually works, yes! Mglovesfun (talk) 09:45, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
They're re-reverted and working. The part of "continue my work" includes moving the documentations to the /doc subpages and updating them to inform about some new parameters like |sc= and |tr=. I'll do that later. --Daniel. 10:06, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Zyprer[edit]

What does this edit have an effect the rendered page look the same. Sorry I'm new --Boris 13:06, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Glosses come after the word, context comes before. A gloss is a clarification, while a context is, err... a context. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:20, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

duplicité[edit]

In this French entry that you just made, what sense of duplicity is the first definition? As it looks right now, the first definition looks like a duplicate of the second, but if you add a gloss stating which sense of the word duplicity you mean, that would be very helpful :) Razorflame 15:49, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

We don't have a sense at duplicity meaning "twoness" - does it exist? Anyway, fixed. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:17, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi Martin![edit]

Well, I've just read your introductory page and I'm really sorry about what happened. I sincerely hope you're doing better gradually. I just wanted to let you know the Amical Viquipèdia (a Catalan association) is looking for support towards a Catalan chapter. I've just written how to do it on your Wikipedia page. I wish you a pleasant and sunny summer, hoping everything will improve soon. Take care! Capsot 16:05, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

pleasey please[edit]

I would love your input at "Proposal for (toned) pinyin words" at BP. So far I've gotten very little response. Thanks. ---> Tooironic 08:50, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Sure, to some extent it's because if you don't know Chinese it's very hard to give an opinion, as most users here know mainly the Latin script. I'm always happy to give an honest opinion, though. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:19, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Autriche[edit]

Austria, not ostrich! Mglovesfun (talk) 12:40, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi, Excuse me,but I will say that Autriche is different of Autruche. You can also see in my act a sort of vandalism. --Anas1712 12:47, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Um, so you agree with me? Mglovesfun (talk) 12:49, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

[1][edit]

Bot seems to have made a bit of a mess - are there any similar edits that need checking? Conrad.Irwin 18:25, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Took me a second to find out what was wrong, it's the enter key, right? In reply, err quite possibly, if there were any mistakes I knew of I would have fixed them already. Mglovesfun (talk) 20:30, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

fingerguard[edit]

Is anything to prevent the fingers being trapped and injured; see [2]. As far as Google Books goes, the plural nearly always seems to refer to something relating to traditional battles — archery? Equinox 14:53, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

I created doigtier (Wiktionary:Requested entries:French/d) and translated it as fingerguard, and figured you were the guy for the job. Mglovesfun (talk) 15:27, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

EP's block[edit]

Blocking other admins is not necessarily prohibited, but if you're going to block someone as experienced and respected as EP, then I think you should at least provide some fairly well-documented evidence of your reasons. What exactly was it that he re-added? -Atelaes λάλει ἐμοί 21:45, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Ah, I see it was over this number:numeral debate thing again. There's nothing there which even remotely resembles justification for a block. Conrad's already unblocked him, so I don't have to do that. So I'll just say, first, calm the hell down! I don't know quite why this particular issue pushes your buttons like it does, but it's really not that big of a deal. If you want to get it resolved, then by all means start a BP discussion about it (you haven't), and let's see if we can get it figured out. I know EP would like to see a decision on it, and so would I and a number of others. If there is clear consensus for number, then EP will follow it. The trick is that we haven't yet achieved consensus on the issue, and so all editors are free to do as they wish. -Atelaes λάλει ἐμοί 21:54, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
Because it's one person with a lot of power versus everyone else. Why should one person's opinion count more than 50? Mglovesfun (talk) 21:55, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
Let say I start an entry for a word that has 50 citations on Google Books. EncycloPetey deletes is because he feels like it, everytime I restore it he deletes it. What then? That's what were talking about here, one powerful person versus the entire Wiktionary. Mglovesfun (talk) 21:57, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
By the same token, I could find a non-sysop and delete their entries just for the laugh. Would this be right? Yet, everytime a sysop restore it I could delete it. Mglovesfun (talk) 21:58, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
You seem to be labouring under the impression there is consensus on this issue, something that EncycloPetey denies - could you please link to some evidence to support your viewpoint. Conrad.Irwin 22:01, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
Yes he denies it because it suits him, I've started Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2010-06/Number vs. numeral but I don't know if EP will abide by its results, or just continue to delete things. Mglovesfun (talk) 22:05, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
Wiktionary:Beer parlour/timeline stops at 2008, where are the more recent one? Mglovesfun (talk) 22:06, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
There's no evidence on that page either... They are in the sub-pages, I should probably try and rebuild the timelines at some point, I'm working on something else right at the minute though. On another note, the vote is horribly worded, as it's not clear to anyone exactly what the problem is except that you're upset about it. It might be better styled as "always use number", "always use numeral", "re-open discussion" so that all outcome is proactive. Conrad.Irwin 22:08, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
Wiktionary:Beer_parlour_archive/2010/March#Number versus numeral (again). I elected not to start a vote on the basis it's bad faith when a vote will pass almost unopposed. Mglovesfun (talk) 22:20, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
That conversation does not show clear consensus, let alone anything approaching the 50 to 1 you claim in your rhetoric, EncycloPetey is not even the only one advocating "Numeral". I think a vote on this issue is a good idea. Conrad.Irwin 22:25, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

please stop it...[edit]

You've started two votes, wait for the outcome of those before making pointless edit wars. Conrad.Irwin 23:23, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm tring to push him into answering yes or no on whether he will adhere to the vote, or just delete the categories anyway. Right now, he says it's not "worthwhile" to answer such a question. Mglovesfun (talk) 23:25, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
But you failed to clarify the wording of the vote... He can't lie and tell you he will support the outcome of a vote that no-one even knows what the question will be. Conrad.Irwin 23:26, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
The vote doesn't start for a week. I think if I asked him if an apple is a fruit, he'd say I'd gone mad, the question is off topic and I should ask myself if an apple is a fruit. Mglovesfun (talk) 23:27, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
Probably, yes. I'd find you inanely frustrating if I were EP. Conrad.Irwin 23:29, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
He could speed things up by answering the question. That's what I'd do in his place. Mglovesfun (talk) 23:29, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
But he can't... Obviously the only acceptable answer is "yes", so asking the question in the first place is obviously pointless. It would, however, be very dangerous to say "yes", when it's unknown what the consequences entail. If you are just waiting for him to tell you what you want to hear, you'll be waiting a long time... Conrad.Irwin 23:32, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
(after e/c) Given all the problems we have with votes, I wouldn't promise beforehand to abide by one, either. There are plenty of votes whose results I abide by despite disagreeing with them; but just because a vote is closed as "passed", that doesn't necessarily mean that we have actual consensus in favor of whatever the vote is interpreted to mean. —RuakhTALK 23:33, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
But if a load of terms suddenly met CFI after a vote and someone created them, would you delete them? If your answer is 'I might' knowing the two of you, I'd be surprised. Mglovesfun (talk) 23:36, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
It's a hypothetical question; I'd personally be inclined to ignore any vote that allows the creation of all entries with a hundred repeated letters, for example. There's just no point in asking the question though, it's like saying "are you an alligator hating banana?" - sure the situation might arise when that question needs asking, but trying to guess the right answer is hopeless - it'll depend on the situation. Conrad.Irwin 23:39, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
It's more like "do you oppose murder", where the obvious answer is "yes" but EncycloPetey doesn't want to say yes, and I want to know why he doesn't want to say yes. Mglovesfun (talk) 23:41, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
(after e/c) Allow me to be less circumspect: You, specifically, Mglovesfun, have a history of writing bad votes. On the very topic of number categories, you started a vote with only two options, refused to respond to various editors' questions about it, explicitly stated that whichever option got >50% would win, and then tried to interpret the results beyond what the vote itself specified. I would never promise beforehand to abide by a vote that you started, nor by your interpretation of a vote result.
So despite your literal words, the question you really seem to be asking is "If Mglovesfun claims that a load of terms suddenly meet CFI after a vote, and he creates them, would you delete them?" And my answer is "I might: it depends whether I agree with his claim."
RuakhTALK 23:42, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
100% of my votes are badly written, which is why I ask people to re-read them, but often nobody does. I think the case in question, I never read the talk page of the vote. Furthermore, how is this relevant? Mglovesfun (talk) 23:45, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
I suggest you take some time to re-read the comments above, maybe in an hour or two, or tomorrow to give yourself time to relax and a fresh outlook. The relevance is fairly clear. Conrad.Irwin 23:48, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
(BTW copy the text before hitting enter, that's my tip) I actually don't care what the result is, per Conrad and my own opinion, votes are bothersome and should be avoided. When asking about support from Numeral only two people said they'd support it, I skipped the vote and started creating the categories after the previous vote. What I don't want is someone deleting them - even worse for non admins like <name removed> as they can't restore them. Explain how a no consensus justifies deleting categories? Yeah sure I deleted [[Category:Latin numerals]] simply to make a point, but I did need to make that point. I don't like the idea that
  1. IPs and registered users get blocked for vandalism, but sysops do not. That could refer to a couple of sysops who shall remain nameless. Possibly due to a sysops who deleted a load of my entries on fr: after I nominated an entry of his for deletion (it passed and was kept)
  2. Sysops pushing their POV onto non-sysops because they can simply block them and revert and the non-sysop can't do the same

Why should I care if it's numeral or number? Mglovesfun (talk) 23:50, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Did you ask about supporting Number? If you didn't then you shouldn't take any meaning out of asking the opposite question. The rest of your comments have been made ad nauseum. I wish I could help fix them, but I can't. I'd advise you to maintain the illusion that you care about Number vs. Numeral, if you don't then it looks like this whole charade was an utter farce. Conrad.Irwin 23:56, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
Among other things, you two are just guessing. EP refuses to answer. How is the sign of a good bureaucrat someone who refuses to answer others' questions. So since he won't do it, tell me which of my questions he answered and how. Let me get this right, you're accusing me of impartiality? Mglovesfun (talk) 00:08, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
I'm lost. What interpretations are you trying to make here? FWIW Conrad I don't think you ever understand my arguments, you seem to make related points rather than replying. Mglovesfun (talk) 00:11, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
EP is refusing to answer because I offered to deal with you, so he can get on with building the dictionary (something that he's much better at than I am). No, I'm not accusing you of impartiality though, if you'd like me to, I will accuse you of misrepresenting facts. As I don't really get your replies either, there's clearly something wrong... Conrad.Irwin 00:13, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
# IPs and registered users get blocked for vandalism, but sysops do not. That could refer to a couple of sysops who shall remain nameless. Possibly due to a sysops who deleted a load of my entries on [[:fr:]] after I nominated an entry of his for deletion (it passed and was kept)
# Sysops pushing their POV onto non-sysops because they can simply block them and revert and the non-sysop can't do the same

Which bit don't you understand? That's not sarcastic. Mglovesfun (talk) 00:15, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

It's a bit like saying if someone says to me "I like oranges and I'll murder you if you don't agree" and I get upset with that, why I don't like oranges. Perhaps the phrase is 'bigger issues'. Mglovesfun (talk) 00:17, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
In response to these two questions above, I wrote "your comments have been made ad nauseum. I wish I could help fix them". I understand them fine, just not why they are being wheeled out now. Conrad.Irwin 00:18, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
OK ad nauseam, but not specifically by me. I genuinely do want to know what he's thinking. I'd like him to see "it's for the good of the project". That's what I'd like to hear. I don't see any reason to think he does think that. I don't want a bully for a bureaucrat. I think his simple unwillingness to answer says a lot. Ability to deal with people counts a lot for a bureaucrat, but he calls that "off-topic". I think if he's unable to communicate with other editors that's a reason for him to be de-sysopped. Just read his bleeding talk page. It's all him telling other people that he's right, they're wrong. Mglovesfun (talk) 00:27, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
I think the main problem is that you've rubbed him up the wrong way to a considerable extent, far beyond the point where you are deserving of anything except insults from him. As you would apparently not understand a subtle reference to splinters and planks[3], I would like to make explicit that I regard your communication skills as "crap". Not only do you fail to respect the opinions, and importantly feelings, of those with whom you communicate, you seem incapable of being able to coherently argue your point of view without resorting to cras, disruptive techniques like blocking and deletion. Your continual use of general statements, and hypothetical questions makes it very hard to actually say anything useful. Obviously, I'm just as guilty of the above, but I think I should spell things out as more subtle communication doesn't seem to work. Conrad.Irwin 00:36, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
I'd probably say the same about you. I'd say you're the worst person I know at understand what I right. To me, you seem to shoot off on weird, irrelevant tangents, and I'd guess that's because you don't understand what I write. Right now, you're the worst person I know at trying to understand what I write. I genuinely thought you hadn't understood the two numbered comments I'd made above. That wasn't sarcasm, you do stuff like that on my talk page all the time. Mglovesfun (talk) 00:50, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
Feel free to ask for explanations, and I'll try to provide them, as above. My command of English isn't yet perfect, maybe one day mutual intelligibility will be achievable. Conrad.Irwin 00:53, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
For what it's worth, I don't come to the same conclusions as you looking at EncycloPetey's talk page. Of course there is some "do it my way", but most of that is because the way he suggests is in accordance with what Wiktionary does - he has been here long enough that Wiktionary has been shaped by his opinions, and vice versa. Conrad.Irwin 00:43, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
Maybe what I find interesting (beyond what's already above) is that you don't ask about my motives - or do you already know? Do tell. Mglovesfun (talk) 00:46, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
If you think they're interesting, please explain; even if I have some correct notions - which I'm not convinced I do - other people are sure to benefit. Conrad.Irwin 00:50, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
I was bullied a lot as a child and therefore I take exception to it. Re the previous comment, no I really don't know what you're on about a lot of the time. If I've pissed off a bully I can't say I'm upset about it. I don't want him to think he can push people around without any consequences. And no, I don't think you and I will ever understand each other. I'm sure IRL such a thing couldn't happen, or at least it's never happened to me. I know you generally get frustrated by my examples, and I find people tend to reply to the specific example, rather than the overall point. So, perhaps if I just made a point with no examples, people would prefer that. Mglovesfun (talk) 00:58, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
That man is a bully, and bullies are always cowards, hence why he's hired you as his spokesman instead of answering direct questions. If he can't answer a simple question, then he's not fit to be an admin. Let's see him take a bit of responsibility. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:35, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

ullage[edit]

This needs some help in etymology, xno, fro, and Picardy dialect (according MWOnline. Also see Wiktionary:Feedback#Ulling. DCDuring TALK 14:51, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

I can't help more than what it says there, but oel is definitely one of the variants of eye. Since Picardy is almost never used now, I can't ask anyone (in fact my ex has banned her children from talking Picard at home). Mglovesfun (talk) 18:00, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

oeil[edit]

A misspelling? Really? You should tell CNRTL. DCDuring TALK 18:45, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

The œ ligature doesn't appear on AZERTY keyboards so you'll virtually never seen it on the web. On the French Wikipedia they have a bot to replace oeil -> œil. It actually says nonstandard, which I think is probably right. Mglovesfun (talk) 18:50, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
CNRTL is on the web and they use oeil as main spelling. Wiktionary is on the Web, ergo: ??? DCDuring TALK 19:05, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
Well they use at the start of one line "OEil droit, gauche" Which is a bizarre rendering of Œil, with OE both capitalized instead of Œ. We should probably have anything with œ in it with the -oe- spelling (see coeur, soeur, boeuf) as they're used a lot, but in books they're gonna use œil a lot more. I suspect these spellings (also the much rarer æ ones) will probably die out in the next 50 - 100 years, but they haven't done yet. I'd bring it up on Wiktionary talk:About French where some other issues about classifying words have also come up. Mglovesfun (talk) 21:09, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

symphoniette[edit]

Hello Martin. There has recently come to light uncertainty about the origin of the English musical term sinfonietta. See User talk:SemperBlotto#sinfonietta etymology and the history of sinfonietta for developments thus far. One of the candidates is the French symphoniette, which I've attested from 1872 (see Citations:symphoniette), which is two years prior to the first appearance of Sinfonietta in German and at least twelve before the first appearance of sinfonietta in Italian. Could you create an entry for the French term, including any information you think is pertinent, as well as a translation of that 1872 quotation please? Thanks in advance.  — Raifʻhār Doremítzwr ~ (U · T · C) ~ 17:14, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

This 1895 citation may also be helpful for you with this.  — Raifʻhār Doremítzwr ~ (U · T · C) ~ 23:21, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
I'm guessing it's a small (shorter) symphony, but I don't know the word. I can certainly do a bit of research. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:37, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
Thank you, and yes, I'd imagine that it's synonymous with English's, Italian's, and other languages' usages.  — Raifʻhār Doremítzwr ~ (U · T · C) ~ 14:09, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for creating symphoniette. I've added the 1872 quot. to the entry; could you render a translation of it, please?  — Raifʻhār Doremítzwr ~ (U · T · C) ~ 18:49, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Supes[edit]

Hi. No you're wrong, Supes does exist and is commonly used. See on Google and Superman cartoons, you will find many results. 86.69.154.87 08:41, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Restored, I'll let another admin RFD it if they so wish. Mglovesfun (talk) 14:19, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

délégiférer[edit]

Hi there Mglovesfun. Could you possibly make this entry please? I need to confirm what it means so that I can know if what is written on the Ido Wiktionary about it is right. Thanks, Razorflame 14:17, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

I've never heard of it, I'll see what I can come up with. But not right now, England soccer match. Mglovesfun (talk) 14:20, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
Apparently, the French Wiktionary says this as its' definition: Supprimer des lois. Hope this helps :) Razorflame 14:23, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
Sounds very grand and overthetop. Just the store of thing you'd find in Renaissance French. Mglovesfun (talk) 14:24, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
To delegislate? Equinox 14:26, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
Yes, it means delegislate. Razorflame 14:30, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
Google Books likes it. Done. Mglovesfun (talk) 14:51, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
Great. Now to find a definition for the word delegislate :) Razorflame 18:02, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Well.[edit]

You never did answer my question. bd2412 T 21:47, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Where is it? Mglovesfun (talk) 21:49, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
You suggested I was taking a "screw the reader" approach in seeking to keep combination entries. I asked in response how it harms the reader to have a lexically correct entry in the dictionary. You never answered that question. I'd appreciate an answer. bd2412 T 23:13, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
Well, saying that a black cup is a cup that's black is lexically correct. Undeniably so in fact. But the only reason for me to create that would be for personal satisfaction, not to "help" anyone. Mglovesfun (talk) 23:17, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
I would completely agree that black cup merits no entry, but that's an easy case. How about red wine? How about red blood cell? Or blue whale? Each of these could be dismissed as SOP, why aren't they (or do you think they should be)? How is junk drawer different from tennis racquet and penis envy? We're not limited in size, so why not draw the line in favor of giving the benefit of the doubt to some possible degree of usefulness to a reasonably confused reader? bd2412 T 23:28, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
First of all, you should ask the other editors that wanted to delete junk drawer (see talk:junk drawer) as I can't speak for them. Furthermore
  1. Red wine isn't actually red. Funny that. White wine is even less close to being white. I've never seen white wine that's even close to white
  2. Red blood cells aren't really blood cells that are red.
  3. Blue whale isn't any whale that's blue, it's a specific species. I don't know if any specific species has ever failed RFD like this
  4. Tennis racquet, the tennis tells you what it does, not what it is. Generally the name of the sport in reality says more about size, shape and color than anything else
  5. Penis envy really isn't envy of a penis

Among the best argument in the debate, Michael saying "it's a drawer for junk" (yep it is) and Yair Rand saying that if he keeps an apple in a stationery drawer, that doesn't make stationery drawer idiomatic. Anyway, can we drop this now as it's incredibly uninteresting. Mglovesfun (talk) 23:36, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm surprised that you're not more interested in discussing the subject, as it goes to the core of what a dictionary is. However, I won't trouble you with the topic any further. bd2412 T 23:47, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
My point was (as often happens) that we're just repeating the same things, nothing new is being said. I do get your point - I wouldn't nominate CD player for deletion although it's a player for CDs. There are instances when it would be nice to ignore CFI. Junk drawer isn't a ridiculous entry, but in the end the community said no. Mglovesfun (talk) 09:46, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
I get that. My main point was that supporting the inclusion of such entries does not reflect any kind of "screw the reader" attitude. bd2412 T 19:37, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
Yeah I expressed that poorly. I think I was reacting to other conversations I'd on the same topic with other editors. Consider it retracted. Mglovesfun (talk) 19:41, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, I appreciate that. bd2412 T 19:45, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Caesar[edit]

Persian language is different from arabic. Before Islam ,persians were using Aramaic alphabet. Caesar in Pahalavi Language (ancient Persinan language)is written "Kaysar" with the same pronociation as in Greek. Considering the simultanous surfacing of this title in history with crowning of Tirdad Ashkani AKA Parti(king of Arminia) in Rome by Julius (the Roman empror), I believe that this title was given to Julius by Tirdad Ashkani since Julius bestoed the crown to Tirdad Ashkani.

I'd rather discuss on the "Caesar"'s discussion page. Human6 (talk) 23:53, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Why did you delete it?[edit]

to be onto something

I cannot find the explanation anywhere on wiktionary and it needs to be there. 85.77.186.224 06:10, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

The summary was "Bad entry title: and sum of parts". We don't use the 'to' forms, so I was going to rename it to be onto something, which is be + onto + something. The information should be at onto. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:30, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

calleja[edit]

Hi there. I fixed up the problems that you had with this entry for you :) Razorflame 18:01, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

sorry for my "stupid" edits on the article on the word "æroplane"[edit]

i have learned my lesson, i understand... here is the original message on how i understood when and when not to use Latin ligatures:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Falcon8765#I_am_not_committing_vandalism
but what you are wrong about is, that even though we do not change the spelling to LATIN LIGATURES:
WE need those REDIRECTS!!?!??!?!
because the more possibility in finding the word (with valid spelling of course), the better! :D
regarding the ligatures with the accent, yes they do exist.: http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/ǽ
but they are like OLD FRENCH (ancient) and no one writes like that, i was getting a little fancy/carried away
sorry for my obsession with LIGATURES :/
thnx for understanding
P.S.: congratulations on your adminship :D
序名三 01:17, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
The point is we avoid redirects as they are misleading, for example if ǽroplane redirects to aéroplane, is it a misspelling, and alternative form or what? How do you pronounce it? So if they're valid they should have fully entries, using {{alternative spelling of}} or {{alternative form of}}. Mglovesfun (talk) 09:45, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
I'm not denying that ǽ (otherwise how could we type it) I'm saying has this ever been used in French, especially in a recent word. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:55, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Checking script vs language[edit]

....is an excellent idea. Bravo. This is probably a waste of your time to even ask this, but you are checking grc and el, right? One thing, however; language cleanup might not be the best place for these. Most of them have valid content, and some are even correct as is (I believe wingart is, as I think (not positive) that Crimean Gothic is only attested in Latin script). However, on some of them, we simply lack people with the requisite skill set to correct them. All (or almost all) of our Egyptian entries are in Latin script, which needs to be changed to hieroglyphs, now that they're Unicode encoded, but we don't have anyone who can reliably do this. That being said, they have some good content, and I'd hate to see them all tossed. It might be better to change Category:Requests for language cleanup July to {{attention|lang}}, and perhaps add a special cat to {{wrongscript/box}}. -Atelaes λάλει ἐμοί 14:02, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Not actually my idea but thanks anyway. Nadando (talkcontribs) didn't include Egyptian anyway. {{wrongscript}} allows a month to find the right script, but also for negociation. I don't know anything about Crimean Gothic, I'll start with Wikipedia. Mglovesfun (talk) 14:07, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

Thank you for correcting the name of [4] on the Finnish Wiktionary. Depressing November 16:43, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

throne[edit]

[5] It's the extension of the argument for inclusion of phrases because they're translations of words. The anon who added it was merely ahead of his time.​—msh210 (talk) 17:22, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

It's getting harder to satirize because of all the frivolous stuff we have. Some of the stuff we speedy delete is no more silly than stuff we keep. I guess a feel a little disappointed that the dictionary is becoming less and less of a priority, while the phrasebook is taking over. Paper dictionaries that include phrasebooks don't put it in the main body of text, they put it in an annex. Mglovesfun (talk) 08:58, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

arigatō[edit]

Hello. Regarding this, would you please elaborate on any specific issues that wish to be addressed? Thanks, Bendono 23:59, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

The etymology is way too long, and the two links in the definition like (should use {{ja-def}}?) are redirects. They should either be created or deleted. Mglovesfun (talk) 00:02, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
I think that the etymology is appropriate as is. It was so written in detail because of so many times that people asked the same questions. To someone who already knows the language, much of it is redundant. However, shortening it would be a disservice to people who actually need those details. Without a Notes section, Etymology is the best place for it. As for the definition line, I have replace it with a real definition and moved the kanji up into the POS line. Hopefully this is satisfactory. Regards, Bendono 00:36, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
As for the redirects, if you check the page histories, they did at one point exist. Someone redirected them. This though is a larger problem with Japanese entries as a whole. There is no lemma form, so we need to synchronize between kana, multiple kanji, and rōmaji forms. This in itself is the larger mess. Bendono 00:40, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
It should use standard spacing. Actually it looks a bit like it's been copied from another website. Let's hope I'm wrong. Mglovesfun (talk) 17:11, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

SoP?[edit]

In re: [6]

Sorry, what is "SoP"? Also, the term "feel-good film" is very very popular and in use virtually everywhere in the entertainment world. I'm surprised there isn't an entry for it yet. Nevertheless, if it can't be included as one of the "Derived terms" then is there a place where it can be safely added as a red-linked possible future addition? -- OlEnglish 22:59, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

SoP is Wiktionary jargon for sum of parts (perhaps even more clearly "only sum of parts"). We don't include terms purely in terms of commonness. The fact that you can have feel-good + virtually any noun makes it SoP. In reflection, perhaps add back without linking. Might as well add feel-good music and feel-good song. Mglovesfun (talk) 23:03, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
Ahh I see. True indeed. Ok thanks :) OlEnglish 23:05, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks[edit]

Yes I haven't edited here often since late 2005 and 2006. I have to get up-to-date on templates and formats etc., thanks. I've been going through my dictionaries and even in languages like French and English I find many entries that aren't here yet, and I want to add them to this website soon. Alex 23:15, 3 July 2010 (UTC)