User talk:SemperBlotto

NOTE: Conversations between third parties on my talk page are liable to deletion - talk amongst yourselves, not on my talk page.

Archives

• 2005 2006
• 2007 2008
• 2009 2010
• 2011 2012

This is a Wiktionary user page. If you find this page on any site other than Wiktionary, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated, and that the user this page belongs to may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wiktionary itself. The original page is located at http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/User_talk:SemperBlotto.

---

Template:de-noun

The template is more or less in its final form now. I've added documentation to it as well. I hope it's helpful! —CodeCat 16:28, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

• OK. I'll see what changes I need to make to my bot that generates noun forms. SemperBlotto (talk) 16:56, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

unblocking user: Venomxx

user:Venomxx, currently blocked indefinitely by you, has asked me on my enwp talk page to request you to unblock them. It was me who gave them the first welcome message there and had discussions with each other. I have been watching their contributions their. I also saw their discussions here with the user who gave them the welcome message here.

Though their initial edits were unconstructive, I don't think that this user is a troll. Could you please consider unblocking them as they are just unfamiliar with the policies. This user can be a potential good faith editor. It would be great if someone can adopt them. Regards. (edited from mobile)Vanischenum^Talk 17:53, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

• OK. I'll unblock him, see if he does anything useful or just treats us like a social networking site. SemperBlotto (talk) 19:40, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you so much. I hope they would become a great editor. Many thanks!···Vanischenu (alt) 07:13, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

H.P.L.D.

I am rather new at this and eager to learn from my mistakes. Why was H.P.L.D. deleted? What could I add, dispose of or change? Cathbhadh III (talk) 13:12, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

• I can't see any evidence that this was ever created or deleted. Also please don't start a new section in the middle of an earlier one. I have moved this to the end. SemperBlotto (talk) 13:18, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

An Appeal

My new user page was deleted by you, SemperBlotto, with a note suggesting that I have not contributed and that I must first contribute before getting a user page. Please be advised that I have used the dictionary considerably and I especially like the Greek and Latin etymology. I have been contributing to Wikipedia for quite some time while using the user name RCNesland. Although I have not left notes with Wiktionary I believe I am elgeble to have a user page here. When I enter Wiktionary, my user name appears in red towards the right at the top of the page. When I click it it opens the Create Page on Wiktionary. I suggest that you undo the delete on my user page. I do not want to act counter to you. Sincerely; RCNesland RCNesland (talk) 17:18, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

• The purpose of a User page on Wiktionary is to allow a contributor to show what expertise he has, and to show what languages he speaks and to what level. Similarly, a User talk page is for other users to talk to a user about his contributions, or to ask questions about words that he might know about (because of the contents of his user page). So, if you haven't made any contributions, you don't need a user page, and it is unlikely that another user would have created your user talk page. Feel free to contribute! SemperBlotto (talk) 17:24, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

• • Thank you for your reply. I will respect your wishes concerning the above. I am an avid student of Latin and here is a short poem.

• • • Animula vagula blandula

   Animula Vagula Blandula
    Hospes comes que corporis,
     Que nunc abibis in loca,
      Palidula rigida nudula,
       Nec ut solis dabis ioca.

        Bon Voyage.  RCNesland (talk) 18:11, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

• Cheers. I have added a few Latin adjectives that we were missing. Not sure about blandulus though. SemperBlotto (talk) 20:13, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Primetime

Hey Jeff, how's life? Good to see you still going strong here. I'm not returning, just posting to mention User:Primetime. Many of his edits and new entries are still unchanged after six years. Things like xanthism were blatant copyvios from Merriam Websters. Regards, — Vildricianus 04:53, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

• Hi there. There is so much to do that I can't do it all. I much prefer adding new material to cleaning up old rubbish. If Merriam Webster haven't complained after six years then they probably don't care. Cheers. SemperBlotto (talk) 08:08, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

intertwangled

I can't see what was on the page you deleted, but this is a real word and can be seen in a Google Books search. Equinox ◑ 15:30, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

• I can see two hits on Google books. Maybe it's a protologism. The definition was fairly rubbish anyway. Maybe it will come back in the future. SemperBlotto (talk) 15:35, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

German

Quite frankly, sometimes I wish you'd edit rather Asturian and not German. -- Gauss (talk) 22:38, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

• I found, when I was building the Italian content, that the best way of stopping people adding bad entries was to add good ones first. SemperBlotto (talk) 22:40, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

  Right ... apply this to the Asturian content, and note that I am totally incompetent to add anything there. -- Gauss (talk) 02:18, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

  The German words that I am contemplating adding are now in my sandbox. You might like to add any that you think I will have trouble with. I have no current plans to tackle Asturian. SemperBlotto (talk) 08:26, 5 January 2013 (UTC) - p.s. Because they were scraped from a website, some capitalisation will be wrong.

  I find it quite unpredictable which words you're going to mess up. No entries are better than bad entries. I am relatively certain that you would have blocked someone with a comparable number of bad entries in a language familiar to you but ... I simply won't look at your entries any more: You know your error rate and you cannot expect people to clean up after you. It is standard practice to discourage people from editing in a language they are not familiar with, I tried and failed. -- Gauss (talk) 16:57, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Would you mind reading edit summaries before reverting my corrections of your errors? That way it would not be necessary to correct your mistakes twice. Thank you. -- Gauss (talk) 17:04, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Def

In sharia lawy you replaced the definition with an alternative tag. But this comparison shows that sharia law is used more frequently. Does alternate form policy apply here? Pass a Method (talk) 18:00, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

• I believe that shari'a is the "correct" form, but if you want to put the two forms the other way round, I wouldn't object. SemperBlotto (talk) 18:03, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

  Is it ok to keep both? Pass a Method (talk) 18:40, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

  Do whatever you think best, but maintain some sort of link between the two. SemperBlotto (talk) 18:42, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

German inflection

When in doubt about German inflection, you can check the inflection at http://www.duden.de. For instance, http://www.duden.de/rechtschreibung/Toxizitaet shows the inflection of "To­xi­zi­tät" in the "Grammatik" section. --Dan Polansky (talk) 12:11, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

By the way, I think your systematic approach is going to significantly boost the presence of German in English Wiktionary, which is great. --Dan Polansky (talk) 12:14, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

• Thanks. I haven't really got to grips with our "de-decl-noun..." templates yet - that's why I normally leave that section for others to fill. But I'm still of my German learning curve. SemperBlotto (talk) 12:16, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
  • p.s. The Toxizität error was just a copy/paste cockup. SemperBlotto (talk) 12:19, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
    • Copy-paste cockup: I should have thought so. --Dan Polansky (talk) 12:21, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

• My biggest problem, in any language, is poor eyesight. In German, particularly, I sometimes miss those two little dots over some vowels (there's probably a word for them). My method, in case you were wondering, is the same in any language. I find some fairly large text (in this case the German Wikipedia page for hydrogen) and wikify all the words - I then sort all red links. Normally I ignore capitalised words, but can't do that for German. Loads more to come. SemperBlotto (talk) 12:27, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
  • "I find some fairly large text ... sort all red links.": I thought so. I think it is a great method. It justifies all those inflected-form pages, to me anyway.
  • "there's probably a word for them": umlaut ("The diacritical mark ( ¨ ) placed over a vowel,"). --Dan Polansky (talk) 12:31, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
• Regarding declension tables... If you're not sure what the inflection is, you can add {{rfinfl}} to the entry. For example {{rfinfl|de|noun}} will put the entry in a category so that other editors know it still needs a declension table. —CodeCat 13:26, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Ok

Thanks for the tip. Venomxx (talk) 19:39, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Term "whitey"

Hello! You reverted additions I made to "whitey" per the following:

1. (African-American and Asian-American vernacular English, pejorative, derogatory, ethnic slur) A white person.

I added "Asian-American" and "ethnic slur." I am not sure why this was reverted?

Thank you.

• I didn't think it was correct. SemperBlotto (talk) 20:03, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Eigenwärme

Wärme means heat, so do you think this should really mean body heat (the energy generated by the body) instead? —CodeCat 17:03, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

• Probably. The sentence I extracted was :- In der Raumfahrt kühlt flüssiges Helium Infrarotteleskope und die hochempfindlichen Infrarotkameras in Weltraumteleskopen, die nur nahe dem Absoluten Nullpunkt ohne zu stark störende Eigenwärme arbeiten können.

• • Feel free to correct or improve any of my German entries. SemperBlotto (talk) 17:09, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
    • I don't know how to correct it though as I'm not that good with German. But in Dutch eigenwarmte means "one's own heat" which could be both body heat and just heat in general generated from within. For example the word could be used to refer to geothermal heat generated by the Earth, as opposed to heat radiated from the sun. —CodeCat 17:19, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
      • OK. I've tried to improve it. It would be nice to find some simpler sentences using the term. SemperBlotto (talk) 17:22, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

in

Hi, can you please delete all the inflected form of German in, such as "ine"? They don't exist, because the adjective is only used predicatively. Longtrend (talk) 19:57, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

• Done. SemperBlotto (talk) 20:02, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

shmoo

This is not only a protologism since this word is largely known (see it on Wikipedia). 86.69.154.73 17:40, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

• Presumably "largely known" only in the US. I've cleaned it up a bit. SemperBlotto (talk) 17:45, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
  • I am not writing nonsense, the linguist Henry Allan Gleason gave this as an example to illustrate the fact that such invented plurals have little chance to be adopted by most speakers. 81.185.159.40 20:08, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

gesundheitsschädlich

Hi SemperBlotto

Could you look here?--thanks--George^Animal. 16:57, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

• Looks reasonable to me, but I'm only a de-1. SemperBlotto (talk) 17:01, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Assuefazione

The Italian term "assuefazione" does not mean either "habit" nor "addiction". It denotes the acquisition of tolerance to the effects of something, typically (but not necessarily) a drug. You can become "assuefatto" to praise for instance, in case you receive so much of it that you become 'desensitized' to it.

• See [1]. SemperBlotto (talk) 08:07, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

desk rage

Next time if you want not to cause me a desk rage fit :) please let the time to create a consistent definition. Kind regards

• Why not use "Show preview" until you have got it right. Then save it once. SemperBlotto (talk) 16:34, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Since you are so fast next time I'll do it--Pierpao (talk) 16:37, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

vetitum

Vetitum and the other forms vetitus, vetiturus, etc. are perfectly good Latin words, and should not have been deleted.

--Jtle515 (talk) 22:59, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

• They were deleted because their content was totally wrong. Good entries now created. SemperBlotto (talk) 08:19, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

• • Cool, thanks. --Jtle515 (talk) 07:12, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Collective nouns

Please stop undoing my addition of collective nouns.

Here is a link to a source so you know i didn't make these up:

http://www.english-for-students.com/Collective-Nouns-1.html

You can also check out "A Cache of Jewels" by Ruth Heller

http://www.english-for-students.com/Collective-Nouns-1.html

Unreliable source. Just because you didn't make them up doesn't mean some else didn't! Mglovesfun (talk) 22:17, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Please note that they are listed on the glossary of collective nouns in wiktionary (not added by me).

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Appendix:Glossary_of_collective_nouns_by_collective_term

And some brief searching will confirm them. For example, here's a nuewspaper article using the term mutation of thrushes....

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=hQpIAAAAIBAJ&sjid=dAANAAAAIBAJ&pg=6098,1214185&dq=mutation-of-thrushes&hl=en

and another

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=BnEUAAAAIBAJ&sjid=-AEEAAAAIBAJ&pg=7504,608933&dq=mutation-of-thrushes&hl=en

and you'll find dozens with a brief look for all of these items

• Every single one of those is a mention, not an actual use. You need to find a text where the word is used naturally in a sentence, without having to define what it means. SemperBlotto (talk) 22:44, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Superfluity on nuns

You might want to check out these newspaper links, for instance, for various articles that have used a superfluity as a plural of nuns. using a similar search will reveal a similar number of uses for the other terms i added. i checked carefully before doing so, to avoid nonsense terms. hope this is satisfactory:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&tbo=d&gl=us&tbs=ar:1&tbm=nws&spell=1&q=%22superfluity+of+nuns%22&sa=X&ei=tLQBUafDDuWN0QGUqoAI&ved=0CC4QBSgA&biw=1280&bih=815

• Zero hits. SemperBlotto (talk) 22:45, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Odd. I see a few hits, but they are all mentions, not uses, as you (SB) pointed out above. Equinox ◑ 22:48, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Wiktionary:Votes/2012-12/New favicon

Hello. This is a message to inform you that the options in this vote were modified after you cast your vote, and it is now possible to oppose a certain favicon. Your input is welcome in my honest attempts to have this vote best convey the community's wishes and, of course, to avoid allegations of holding a fraudulent vote. Thanks —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 02:58, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

methylumbelliferone

Hello you. WP links this word to two compounds: 4-methylumbelliferone (hymecromone) and 7-O-methylumbelliferone (herniarin), the latter described as a "methoxy analogue of umbelliferone". So what is a methylumbelliferone in general? There might also be methoxyumbelliferone but I see precious little in Google Books. Equinox ◑ 03:00, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

(If I may answer too?) The number in front is the number of the carbon atom that the "methyl" subgroup is attached to. So if you look at it collectively, you have molecules with the same general structure, but with the subgroup in differing places. Presumably, they have similar properties to one another, but aren't quite identical. —CodeCat 03:13, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Right, thanks. So how can we usefully define this? e.g. "An umbelliferone with a methyl subgroup attached to a (specified?) carbon atom"? As you are probably aware, I'm no chemist; I just like words. Equinox ◑ 03:17, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

We already have an entry for umbelliferone, and the Wikipedia article about it says that it's the name of a specific compound. So methylumbelliferone would be a new compound (technically a class of compounds), derived from it by attaching a methyl group somewhere. See w:Umbelliferone#Derivatives of umbelliferone for more. On the other hand, I'm not sure if it would be an idiomatic word, because methyl- is a regular prefix in chemistry and has a predictable meaning. —CodeCat 03:37, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

We can include any that are attestable. In English, where there isn't a hyphen or space, it's not necessarily clear where the break is (at least in theory). Equinox ◑ 03:41, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

The danger with that is that there may well be thousands of attestable combinations (especially since they tend to appear in papers and journals, which are durably archived!), all of which have perfectly predictable meanings within chemistry. For example, a chemist who has never heard of 2,2,4-trimethylpentane can nonetheless reconstruct the exact molecule from the word. —CodeCat 03:44, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Well, I'm not sure it's within our remit to include forms with numbers (like your 2,2,4). If there's a legit word for a chemical compound and it happens to be very long and made up of lots of methyls and nitros then I don't see that we should discriminate against it. Equinox ◑ 03:47, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

The numbers are part of the name, though. Without the numbers it's not a complete name, a bit like saying Washington but not saying whether you mean D.C. or the state, or saying only your street in an address but not the house number. I still don't think it is idiomatic. Our sense of idiomaticity is generally whether something can be understood from the parts. In chemistry, umbelliferone is idiomatic, but methylumbelliferone is not, because a chemist who knows methyl (which every chemist will!) and umbelliferone will know what methylumbelliferone is. So I don't think such combinations should be included unless they are ambiguous but refer implicitly to one specific type, in the same way that fried egg refers to an egg fried in a particular way, not an egg that is fried in general. Alternatively, if we can find attestations outside the field of chemistry, I think they could be included, but not within chemistry. —CodeCat 03:55, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

OK (having finally woken up). Personally, I don't like including chemical terms with numbers and/or Greek letters. In this case, I would define it as "Any of several methyl derivatives of umbelliferone.". To a chemist, it is definitely sum of parts but, unlike ethyl acetate and the like , it is a single word - so is allowable. SemperBlotto (talk) 08:01, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Good lord, you are regular as clockwork. I have often seen you vanish at 23:00 but I have rarely been around at 08:00 to see your reappearance. Anyway please create this entry before any maniacal decisions are made about numerical formulae. Equinox ◑ 08:06, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

bedeutend

Can you please delete bedeutendstenen and all the other "superlative" forms of bedeutend? The form you put in the template was wrong ("bedeutendsten" instead of "bedeutendst"). Longtrend (talk) 19:06, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

• Done. Thanks for spotting it. SemperBlotto (talk) 22:14, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

annūuntiō

A few years back, your bot created entries for all of this verb's inflected forms (see Special:WhatLinksHere/annuuntio); but since the lemma entry is still a redlink, they're not very useful yet. So, when you have a chance, could you create the lemma entry as well?

Thanks in advance!
—Ruakh_TALK 05:51, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

I don't think it's a real word, just a typo for annuntio. I reckon all the bot-created forms ought to be deleted. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 05:59, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Ah. Is the same true of ēmūniiō, superssēminō, and candesō? (And perhaps excambiō, which was deleted, but whose inflected forms remain?) —Ruakh_TALK 06:11, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Yup. All of them are mistakes and wholly unattested, including excambio. (This is an unexpected benefit of WantedPages!) I just zapped the *emuniio forms, but it's rather tedious, so if you have a faster way of killing all these off, I'd really appreciate it. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 06:25, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

I shall have to do it manually - unless someone knows how to bend the nuke system. SemperBlotto (talk) 08:14, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! —Ruakh_TALK 06:16, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

posco

I was recently looking at posco, and I noticed it's listed without passive forms. This is incorrect; see Seneca's Thyestes, 242-43: "Tantalum et Pelopem aspice; / ad haec manus exempla poscuntur meae." So it may not have all the passive forms, but it certainly has some. I'm not familiar enough with the Latin templates to know how to fix this, though. Could you help out? Thanks! --Jtle515 (talk) 07:26, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

• The Latin templates are a nightmare. It might be best just to add a note. SemperBlotto (talk) 11:48, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

German entries

Hi SemperBlotto. I checked some of your recent German entries and I found several wrong genitives or plurals. If you are not a native speaker, you might want to check some sources before adding an entry, for example [2] --Zeitlupe (talk) 11:45, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

• OK. By the way the Duden entry for Atemlüfte seems to say it is also the genitive. SemperBlotto (talk) 11:55, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

For nouns with female gender, the genitive is always the same as the nominative. --Zeitlupe (talk) 11:58, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

So I can't even trust Duden? SemperBlotto (talk) 11:59, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

You can. I guess you meant genitive plural, I referred to genitive singular. --Zeitlupe (talk) 12:07, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

German compound words

You created a large number of entries for German compound words recently. Please note that in German, compound words are used very frequently but as far as I understand the consensus has been so far that not every compound word meets the criteria for inclusion (this is how all German dictionaries handle it, otherwise there would be an exponential explosion of entries because you can build new compound words from almost any components). For example Ernährungssicherung ("food security") has no additional meaning that cannot be derived from the components and therefore should not have an entry as well as the English word "food security" does not meet the criteria for inclusion. --Zeitlupe (talk) 08:43, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

• I only add words that I come across in the real world (well, German Wikipedia). Our criteria is very different from other dictionaries - "all words in all languages". But, even so, I don't add all the compound words that I see - only the ones that have some sort of extra meaning, or that seem to be very frequent. SemperBlotto (talk) 09:25, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
• p.s. dict.cc has an entry for Ernährungssicherung, and also, in English "food security" is two words, not one (but see w:Food security). SemperBlotto (talk) 09:42, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Wikinews

Why did you delete the dictionary entry for Wikinews? Apparently last time it was deleted because Wiktionary was also deleted. King jakob c (talk) 15:24, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

• Somebody (not me) made the decision that we don't have dictionary entries for such things. SemperBlotto (talk) 15:26, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
  • See talk:Wikinews: there was a discussion for deletion on the grounds that we don't have such things, but that proposal failed (i.e. the entry was kept), and the entry was sent to Requests for verification instead to seek citations to prove the word is used. It failed that request so was deleted.​—msh210℠ (talk) 15:29, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

kinesthetics

Hi SemperBlotto!

1. kinesthetic is used as an adjective of kinesthetics, kinesthesia, kinesthesis, kinaesthesia, kinaesthesis, ... (But is it a "related term"?)
2. kinaesthetics is ident with kinesthetics (only different orthography). I did not know where/how to add this, and so I put it in the "related terms" section.
3. kinaesthesiology and/or kinesthesiology are related terms (Synonyms?!) - composita of kineō & aisthēsis both with the same meaning like kinesthetics and kinaesthetics
4. "The ability to feel movements of the limbs and body. Referred by some people as the sixth sense." <<< This is the definition of kinesthesis but not of Kinesthetics!
5. This would be a definition for kinesthetics: "Kinesthetics is the study of body motion, and of the perception (both conscious and unconscious) of one's own body motions."

perhaps you are interested in this:

• http://bastian.kinaesthetics.co.at/kinaesthesis.jpg
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinaesthetics
• http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kin%C3%A4sthetik
• http://www.wirtschaft.bfh.ch/nc/de/weiterbildung/veranstaltungen_details.html?kursid=1399&cHash=dac54ce7a4

I think it's important to add these points, because the terms kinaesthesiology/kinesthesiology are often mixed-up with kinesiology
with best regards
Moveo ergo sum.

• Well, I would say that all words that begin with "kinesth" or "kinaesth" must be related to each other. The two spellings of each word are "Alternative forms" - choose one as the main entry and add a ===Alternative forms=== section near the top. Define the other one as {{alternative form of|whatever}}. As to which ones are derived from any other would need research - which one was used first. I would not put a ====Related terms==== section in the alternative form's entry. Hope that helps. SemperBlotto (talk) 17:46, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
• See kinaesthetics, kinesthetics

- Bene, I'll check it - I answer in some days! --Moveo ergo sum (talk) 19:01, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

guigner

Do you remember where you got this from (the tree sense)? Normally a guigne-tree would be a guignier. Ƿidsiþ 14:53, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

• French Wiktionary has guigner as "Arbre qui porte les guignes."; it only has guignier as an Old French verb. SemperBlotto (talk) 17:14, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

I suppose the -i- disappears before -gn- because /ɡi.ɲe/, /ɡi.ɲje/ are pretty much identical. My guess is it was guignier then the almost silent -i- got dropped. Mglovesfun (talk) 14:57, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

That entry probably needs two etymology sections, though. —CodeCat 15:02, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Yes; guignier is perfectly real, of the first 50 Google Books results for "le guignier", all are from 1760 to 1870 (a few are without date). Mglovesfun (talk) 15:09, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Vedle as idiom

i just wanted to ask why my addition of "jsi uplně vedle" as meaning "you're completely wrong" didn't fit. Jackhutchens (talk) 14:12, 6 February 2013 (UTC)jackhutchens

• ===Idiomatic=== is not one of our standard section names. SemperBlotto (talk) 15:02, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

User:Waddell

Wonderfool? Luciferwildcat? Mglovesfun (talk) 14:48, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

• It doesn't matter. The user has retired. ¡viva la Pepa! --Waddell (talk) 14:55, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

eutectoid - disputed definition

Hi, since this is a quite technical term, I thought maybe I'd bring it up with you directly. The original listings for eutectoid refer to it as "of or pertaining to eutectic". Speaking as a metallurgist, this to me is specifically wrong.

A eutectic reaction involves liquid freezing to two solids on cooling, while in a eutectoid reaction the liquid is replaced by a different solid phase.

The OED does not contain a definition matching the original, only the one I understand.

I have added definitions matching my understanding, but have not deleted the original just in case you can point to this other usage.--Alloy730 (talk) 08:09, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

• Well, in Google book search, I can see usages such as "the initial portions to freeze contained lamellar eutectoid and proeutectoid FeAl,", "The structure of steel on slow cooling changes into ferrite and pearlite for hypo eutectoid steel, pearlite for eutectoid steel and...". These usages seem to refer to the alloy/mixture, rather than to the reaction. SemperBlotto (talk) 08:17, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
• OK, I can understand how it could have been confusing, but these statements refer to the room temperature product of solid state (eutectoid) reaction at temperatures way below the liquid state. The "initial portions to freeze" is not describing what is happening as it is freezing, rather it is describing how we can use the final appearance at room temperature to infer which tiny volumes froze first. There does also happen to be a eutectic reaction in the Fe-C system, but the composition of this is such that it never occurs during solidification of steels. Unfortunately metallurgists often tend to use eutectoid and the related words like eutectic, peritectic, etc as nouns referring variously to:
  • the reaction itself,
  • the microscopic structure that results from the reaction, or
  • the composition at which the reaction occurs.

I light of this, I will remove the original definitions.--Alloy730 (talk) 12:12, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Feeder school

Hi - could you please explain why you deleted this for the reason "nah" rather than submitting it to Wiktionary:Requests for deletion? Sandstein (talk) 09:36, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

• Poor definition. Wrong capitalization. A better entry now exists at feeder school. SemperBlotto (talk) 10:50, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Well, who's to say that the present version is better? You could also just have moved and edited the article instead of deleting it, no? Sandstein (talk) 14:10, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank you

For your comment at Talk:Bamboo Curtain. I'm done for now, and probably won't be back until a long time. Ciao. Bennylin (talk) 20:10, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Template:it-adj

It doesn't categorize entries into Category:Italian adjectives. DCDuring TALK 01:52, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

• I can see the problem (in the module). I'll fix it after breakfast. SemperBlotto (talk) 08:31, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
  • Fixed (after porridge!). SemperBlotto (talk) 09:17, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
    • I'm sure there'll lots of Lua teething problems. That should have been an easy one. DCDuring TALK 11:48, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

• Well, most of my problems were due to testing on the test Wiki - a strange environment where everything is different to our own one. But I should have spotted the missing cat. SemperBlotto (talk) 11:51, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Script errors

A few pages are triggering script errors, and are listed in Category:Pages with script errors. Could you have a look? —CodeCat 22:05, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

• Well, that was useful. It shows how good it is to have error checking in templates for the first time. I fixed all but one (a verb that will need a longer look) - tomorrow. SemperBlotto (talk) 22:27, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Your sandbox A-Z

You probably got the idea, but having gradually "antiblued" your sandbox A-Z, I have filled in practically all of the entries that had articles on Wikipedia. The rest will be a bit trickier. Equinox ◑ 22:14, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

• Yes, I saw all your valiant efforts. Good work. SemperBlotto (talk) 22:28, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Template:it-noun

Plural should still be in bold, shouldn't it? I'd imagine it's it-head that needs modifying. I've not looked into modules yet so to be honest I don't know. Mglovesfun (talk) 20:36, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

I agree. I raised this at Module talk:it-head, but Semper never responded. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 21:02, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Fixed. (I didn't respond because the module wasn't on my watchlist, so I didn't see it.) SemperBlotto (talk) 22:08, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Advice on a Block

The block in question was of Rexhammock (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • page moves • block user • block log • active blocks), who created a user page with a link to the website of the company he owns. This struck me as spamming, so I deleted the page and blocked him permanently. Looking more closely at the text of the page, and at his one well-intentioned, but wrong, contribution, though, I think I over-reacted. The link to his own web-site was definitely inappropriate and the deletion was justified, but I'm not so sure it was intended as spam. I think I should shorten the block, but I'm not certain how much. I have no problem with publicly admitting when I make a mistake, so my only concern is doing this right. What would you advise? Chuck Entz (talk) 03:05, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

• As an experiment, I have unblocked him. We can always block him again if he repeats his actions. (anyway, I'm sure he will never be an actual contributer) Cheers. SemperBlotto (talk) 08:12, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

{{also}}

A lot of German nouns seem to be spelled the same way as their English equivalents but, are, of course capitalised. Please be sure to use {{also}} so that people who mistakenly enter the term capitalised in the search bar, thinking us to be Wikipedia, get slightly less confused. Thankee —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 18:47, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

• I remember to do this most of the time. I'm sure somebody clever could get a bot to do it though - there must be thousands missing (with and without accents etc). SemperBlotto (talk) 18:52, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

  Agree, should be a bot job. 'Til then... —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 19:36, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

uerus

Wiktionary:About Latin#Prefer V for consonantal form, but prefer U for the vowel form, I was going to delete this until I saw the number of inflected forms. Wiktionary:CFI#Language-specific issues says that WT:ALA can be implemented without contradicting CFI. Mglovesfun (talk) 18:29, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

• Well, verus is there as the prime version of the word. But I added uerus because I came upon it in the real world. Personally, I think that the real world takes preference over CFI. Will people come across it and wonder what it means? If so, we should include it. SemperBlotto (talk) 22:10, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Query concerning a revert you made

Hmm are you sure about this revert of yours? The edit looks fine to me, tho I am no wiktionarian and I wouldn't be surprised if the issue was right in front of me and I was missing it :D Cheers, Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 12:56, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Anti-wiki automated reversions on -gasm

• The suffix page -gasm missed a link to its derived-terms category, so I added it (as well as a one-line example) with my complete addition provided as the edit summary: [3]
• The article for orgasm had no link to its own suffix -gasm, so just I added it with my complete addition as edit summary: [4]

Yet you have immediately reverted both[5][6], clearly without reading the summary or the diff. It's just anti-wiki. 62.147.26.218 13:02, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Mglovesfun already reverted the reversions. I kind of agree that you were out of line on this one Semper. I think your judgement may be clouded a bit when you see an IP making an edit to a sensitive term... —CodeCat 14:47, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks much for help with chargemaster

Thank you for your help at new entry, chargemaster, much appreciated. I've replied to your comment, at Talk:chargemaster. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 01:13, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Re: Hi

Hi, and thanks for the advice. Could you point out an example regarding the style you've mentioned? Thanks --Mecanismo (talk) 16:21, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

• Thanks, I'll take a look. --Mecanismo (talk) 16:23, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Pączek

Is it this thing? If it is it's a pączek /ˈpɔnt͡ʂɛk/ (plural "pączki" /ˈpɔnt͡ʂki/. cheers Hoodinski (talk) 13:16, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

• Thanks - yes, that's it!. SemperBlotto (talk) 14:22, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Userfy

Hello, SemperBlotto. I have a question and (conditionally) a request. First, does Wiktionary "userfy" – that is, restore previously deleted pages in user space – the way Wikipedia sometimes does? The reason I ask is, Transwiki:List of Ainu terms was apparently deleted in 2009 because it duplicated w:List of Ainu terms, but the Wikipedia list is currently being discussed for deletion. I notice that there are red links to some Ainu words on Wiktionary, for example at father. It seems to me that these words fit Wiktionary's mandate rather than Wikipedia's.

Thus the request: Could you restore the old Transwiki to my user space? I would then be willing to work through the list and create pages for each term. I don't speak Ainu, but I work in Japan and I imagine I can find a Japanese-Ainu dictionary in my university's library. Barring that, what would you think about me asking Wikipedia admins to transwiki the page again? Thanks as always for your help. Cnilep (talk) 03:55, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

• I have copied (most of) it to User:Cnilep/Ainu. SemperBlotto (talk) 08:10, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Feminine plural adjective forms

If you look at diff, for some reason {{feminine of|calmo#Adjective|calmo}} doesn't work (but why?) Further problems, it's the feminine plural, and the #Adjective tag could lead to the wrong adjective section, calmo#Adjective actually leads to Galician. Anyway I'm sure you know all this, so basically, can SemperBlottoBot run through these? It should be doable by MglovesfunBot if not, as the syntax is pretty easy for a bot to spot. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:32, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

• Hmm. I thought you meant it was a bot problem - it's not. This was added manually by User:Barmar (no longer with us). I don't know how many others of this kind there are. You could probably fix it easier and much faster than I could. SemperBlotto (talk) 11:49, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

I did mean that, so I'm wrong? Yes easy pretty easy to fix, finding all the entries is the hard part. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:59, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Tomorrow, nudge me if I forget, please. Mglovesfun (talk) 19:50, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

You didn't seem to need the nudge. It looks like they were all created by the late-lamented Barmar. SemperBlotto (talk) 15:18, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Miyo

Hello, I don't understand why you have delete this page so quickly. I'm doing a workshop with new editors and a participant see there was a probleme with her new article. I think it was because of an error on the language code, but we haven't had the time to fix it. Can you undelete it? Guillaume WA (talk) 10:36, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

• It was totally incomprehensible. Please use "Show preview", and get it right before saving. SemperBlotto (talk) 10:39, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
  • Some new editors make some mistakes and forget to use "Show preview", it is not a reason to delete their article before they have the time to fix it. Thank you for the undelete. Guillaume WA (talk) 10:47, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

English phrasal verb categories

How can we get a reference to the particle into the text of the category? I have in mind something like Category:English phrasal verbs with particle (aback). DCDuring TALK 14:02, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

• I see what you have done to the category. I have done something similar to aback (added a ====See also==== section). Is that what you meant, or did you want your changes to the category implemented on all the others? SemperBlotto (talk) 15:53, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

  I've just created a category boilerplate template and have deployed it on the categories with particles beginning with a to make sure that it did what I wanted. Feel free to make any changes including the header you recommend - it would look better.

I was imagining that Lua/Scribunto could make it a little quicker by extracting the particle from the category name, but, on reflection, that doesn't seem worth it unless it is a simple practice program for someone. It might be useful to get some views from our phrasal verb contributors and advocates before bothering with much further deployment in case there is some significant and easy to implement further advantage to a Lua/Scribunto approach. I can't think of what that might be, but perhaps others can. DCDuring TALK 16:47, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

I'll try to give it some thought soonish. We also need to check that the words linked to all have an adverb section. (I'll add one to against). SemperBlotto (talk) 16:50, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Do you think that such categories would also be useful for Dutch and German? They are called separable verbs there, but they're the same thing. —CodeCat 16:54, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure why English and Dutch would need to share the same name. If the community of students of a particular knowledge call something X, we seem to accommodate that usually, even with PoS names. Mutual 'see also' references at the top-level category, eg Category:Phrasal verbs, should be sufficient, no? DCDuring TALK 17:06, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

What I mean is whether it would be useful to subdivide Category:Dutch separable verbs by the separable part, like the category above does for English. Also, Dutch distinguishes separable and prefixed verbs, so what about the latter? —CodeCat 18:28, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

I am completely ignorant of Dutch grammar and have the most limited knowledge of German grammar. I have a limited understanding of linguistic theory. All I have a few grammar references and books on semantics and idioms, and nothing theoretical on phrasal verbs, even in English. I am very poorly positioned to opine. DCDuring TALK 19:59, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Etymologically, Dutch/German separable verbs are completely requivalent, and they may occasionally even be calqued from each other. For example, if I were to calque give up into Dutch I'd use opgeven. The only difference is really that English has a different syntax, where the placement of the adverb is more rigid. In both it may have intervening words too, but in Dutch it sometimes appears before and sometimes after the verb. —CodeCat 20:45, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

See top of page. SemperBlotto (talk) 20:20, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Hindi meaning of chod

You deleted the Hindi meaning of chod. AFIK, the meaning is true. Please explain.--Auric (talk) 18:56, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Easy, Hindi uses Devanagari script, not Latin. Mglovesfun (talk) 18:57, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't quite follow. The meaning is the same as चोद, only using Latin script. Why couldn't it be kept?--Auric (talk) 02:20, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

See WT:AHI. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 02:25, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

FYI

I blocked WF's latest: Happymom78 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • page moves • block user • block log • active blocks). I usually wait for you to weigh in, but he was running his bot and it was getting out of hand- at eight pages per minute, Recent Changes fills up fast. Chuck Entz (talk) 00:33, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Speedup

I added the business definition back. This is already in Merriam-Webster, see here: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/speedup

You can find it used in contemporary literature in these examples:

http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/1931:overworked-america-the-great-speedup http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2011/06/speed-up-american-workers-long-hours

Primalchaos (talk) 05:19, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Without addressing the merits of the entry, "these examples" are the same article (word-for-word) posted at two different web sites. We only accept durably archived sources for evidence of use, and other dictionaries are nothing but circumstantial evidence as far as our Criteria for Inclusion are concerned, so your evidence probably adds up to nothing (depending on whether the Mother Jones article also appeared in print, in which case it would be one of the three citations needed). Chuck Entz (talk) 05:43, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Monddood

Monddood does not equal dumbstruck (at least not as defined in the article itself), though the latter's meaning can be part of the former's. Mouthdead is much more a political term, used when harrassment or procedures or accusation are used to make someone unable to voice their vision, now or ever. Not necessarily because they themselves are shocked, but because they've lost credibility or physically ("cut the camera") are made unable to make themselves heard. 145.74.117.60 12:09, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

• OK - but mouthdead does not seem to be an English term. SemperBlotto (talk) 12:11, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

I am aware of that. I couldn't find any guide on what to do if a non-English word (seemingly) has no English equivalent (I also wish to create a page for karaktermoord - "charactermurder" which faces the same problem), so I tried something that seemed good and could be easily fixed if not. Is there a guideline for this problem? 145.74.117.60 12:14, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes - we supply a description instead of a translation. (and your example sentence should be in Dutch, rather than in English.) SemperBlotto (talk) 12:16, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

p.s. See also character assassination.

I was rewriting the sentence as per the example on volksmond when you edited, so sorry for that mess-up. And I'll fix the description. Also, thanks for the heads up on character assassination! 145.74.117.60 12:22, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Italian corpus

I noticed recently that a lot of the words in Dante are redlinks here, especially apocopic forms and other poetic oddities. As a well-known work, everything in Dante passes the CFI, so if you are indeed back to Italian as your recent contribs suggest, you might be interested in working through the Inferno, perhaps. Grazie mille! —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 16:47, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

• Working on Wiktionary I am, of course, already familiar with the outer circles. (I'll have a look at it.wikisource soonish). SemperBlotto (talk) 16:50, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

volgepropt

Hello there! Thanks for your patience in correcting my mistakes. I was trying to insert link to Dutch wiktionary entry of the same word (http://nl.wiktionary.org/wiki/volgepropt). Am I doing something wrong? Anceurs (talk) 17:58, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

• You don't need to. We have bots that do it for you automagically. SemperBlotto (talk) 18:00, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Or, if you do [[nl:{{subst:PAGENAME}}]] it can't go wrong. All the same, just let a bot do it. Mglovesfun (talk) 18:02, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

revert

hello, i have reverted your edit 109.66.96.77 14:40, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

• And someone else has reverted it back again. SemperBlotto (talk) 15:29, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
  • I'm not taking any particular stance on the issue, I just removed it because it's currently under dispute. —CodeCat 15:58, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Italian apocopic forms

We categorize these as nouns, verbs (etc.) don't we? If not, why not? Mglovesfun (talk) 17:32, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

• Yes, I saw your Hmm - I'll raise you a ho hum. I'm correcting them now. They are all from Dante's Inferno - and there are loads to come (and very boring it is). SemperBlotto (talk) 17:34, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

eindampft

Hi, can you please delete eindampft and all its derived forms? They don't exist. The actual past participle (and adjective) of eindampfen is eingedampft. (BTW, the form eindampft does exist, however only as a finite form: it's the 3rd person singular/2nd person plural present indicative form of eindampfen in subclauses.) Longtrend (talk) 18:51, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

• OK. But I've converted eindampft into a verb form entry. (Correct it if not quite right) SemperBlotto (talk) 19:00, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

userpage

Why did you delete my userpage? Isn't editing another person's userpage considered automatic vandalism? Nicole Sharp (talk) 05:06, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

If I may butt in— Wiktionary has stricter policies on userpages that many other wikis (e.g., most userboxes are banned), and some Wiktionarians prefer that newcomers contribute to the project before creating userpages. SemperBlotto is the most prolific patroller of Recent Changes, and your userpage had exactly the same form as those that spambots have been creating lately, namely, "personal details, and a [...] link said to be [...] the user's home page". The deletion was, therefore, probably either an honest mistake, or a conscious enforcement of the (far from unanimously agreed-to, but not totally-out-of-line) guideline that people should edit the project first before setting up userpages. I've restored the old revision of your page for you. - -sche (discuss) 06:21, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, glad to hear it wasn't malicious! I've contributed to Wiktionary in the past but I have a new account. I definitely understand the need to fight spam; I put a link to my Wikiversity profile (where I am currently most active), and my external homepage has a .edu domain which is a controlled domain (only available to individuals at accredited educational institutions) so shouldn't have raised any flags. Though I would think it better for users to create userpages before making edits so that way other users can see their information or credentials if the edits seem controversial. Nicole Sharp (talk) 06:46, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

deleting my page?

Hi SemperBlotto,

I am wondering why you deleted the gumby page '07:25, 31 March 2013 SemperBlotto (Talk | contribs) deleted page gumby (totally wrong)'. I don't know why you have said it is "totally wrong" (I put references in etc). What is your reasoning here? I am not sure where you live, but where I live, this term is frequently used (usually by the younger generation) as an alternative to 'idiot'. Can you explain why exactly you took this page off? Pluto888 (talk) 08:56, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

• You said it was an adjective, but all your example sentences used it as a noun. You said the comparative was gumbyer; this is highly unlikely - I should expect it to be gumbier. You gave three so-called definitions that were nothing of the kind (look at a dictionary to see what a definition actually looks like). I thought it was not worth correcting, so deleted it. SemperBlotto (talk) 09:01, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
• Hi...ohhh okay, I see...I actually copied a template in from another page because I wasn't sre of the format and I forgot to change a few things...and I have no idea why the comparative things etc came up. Definitions in dictionaried come up differently for each...some don't feature the etymology etc, and slang words tend to have short, simple definitions ??? Pluto888 (talk) 19:58, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

coy

Hi there, just noticed that you reverted my edit on the page coy, where I added the sense of 'coy' as being an abbreviation of 'company'. Was this an accident, or did I make some sort of mistake? Thanks. 203.208.102.165 13:40, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

• I couldn't see any evidence for it. Some dictionaries give Coy. (with a dot) as a military abbreviation for company. SemperBlotto (talk) 14:30, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

sheng nu

Hi SemperBlotto. I'm feeling a bit discouraged over the RFV regarding sheng nu. You and two others had talked about "conveying meaning" and "use-mention distinction" so I changed it to Chinese. It was reverted and I was met with, "Ugh I changed it back to English... Are you trying to getting this entry speedily deleted? I reverted and removed the Chinese characters because English doesn't use Chinese characters." I was a little surprised that this was an administrator talking to me, especially someone who openly acknowledged they were a newcomer and unfamiliar with the procedures. The Chinese characters were eventually added back with out incident. I was told by another administrator that my contributions "Seems like POV pushing." Despite having added numerous references prior to that comment being made. The same admin used the rollback tool to revert my edits, something the Wikimedia foundation classifies as an advanced tool used to revert "obvious vandalism". Feeling like every edit I make is wrong, and that I have some sort of radical agenda associated with it, and I'm reverted as a vandal, while others make contrasting edits to the discussion with out being reverted. Obviously I'm trying to not take it personally, but I think any person who's been trying to genuinely contribute, who has been a long-time experienced Wikipedia editor, would know enough and recognize the situation as frustrating. Mkdw (talk) 08:33, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

• It is quite simple really. You need to show that this is a term in some language. Obviously it is not Chinese, because Chinese does not use the Latin alphabet. So you need to show that it is English. All you need to do is to provide some usages in English language texts that use the term naturally, just like they would use the word "cat" or "maiden aunt" etc - i.e. in simple text (not in quotes, italics etc) and without an accompanying definition or description of what the term means. I would recommend adding a citations page (or using inline citations), rather than a list of references - so that people don't have to follow lots of different links to see the text. SemperBlotto (talk) 09:16, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

• Okay, would, "Contrary to the assumption that sheng nu are somehow pioneers for a new, more liberated generation of Chinese women, she found that most remain keen to get married." and "Sheng Nu want to walk down the aisle as much as anyone, but this growing class of highly-educated, high-earners also want to get marriage right." be an example? Also, I wonder if "leftover woman" should have its own entry considering it seems to be used more regularly with out quotes than its 'sheng nu' counterpart? Any advice regarding resolving the POV pushing direction of the discussion? Done my best to provide sources that support the definition and etymology. Mkdw (talk) 09:29, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

The sentence "Over the past few years, China’s government and media have expressed growing concern over the phenomenon of the sheng nu – literally, “leftover women” – who remain unmarried despite having a good education and high-flying jobs." would be unacceptable (because of the explanation).

The sentence "Contrary to the assumption that sheng nu are somehow pioneers for a new, more liberated generation of Chinese women, she found that most remain keen to get married.", by itself, would have been acceptable. But many will argue that it has only been used naturally because of the previous definition in the same text.

consensum

There is an entry for a supposed Latin noun consensum (agreement), which doesn't exist. The noun consensus is fourth declension, which means that the accusative form is consensus, just like the nominative.

There is a part participle/adjective consensus (agreed) which has the neuter nominative and accusative form consensum, also the masculine accusative. The entry could be corrected simply by changing the label Noun to Adjective.

If you look at the linked French article, you will see that there consensum is correctly labelled as an adjective.

• But we did not have an adjective (or participle) entry for consensus. I have added an adjective entry. Feel free to make an corrections (properly) yourself. SemperBlotto (talk) 08:55, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure I could do it properly, as it looks very strange in the editing window. My point is that there is NO noun consensum, so that part should be removed completely. Thanks for adding the adjective.

• I'm busy with other things at the moment. You might have more luck with another Latin contributor (use the babel system, noting that I'm only an la-1). SemperBlotto (talk) 09:43, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

I managed it myself after all.

Vaginismus

Hello, the previous edit was not vandalism, it was just addition of new etymology and numbering correcture. 141.136.222.121 15:27, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

• If I thought it was vandalism, you would have been blocked. I just can't find any confirmation of your definition. Feel free to add evidence (a quote from Google book search, for instance). SemperBlotto (talk) 15:30, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Orogenous zone

Thanks for helping with this entry, SemperBlotto. As an infrequent contributor, I often stumble over formatting issues and look to other analogous entries for guidance. I see that my model here included some inappropriate formatting. I appreciate your willingness to fix things like that in such a constructive manner! P Aculeius (talk) 11:23, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Should

I think Tripitaka should exist if (i.e.) Torah exists. Don't you think? Pass a Method (talk) 13:21, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

• Lowercase, with a dot under the t. SemperBlotto (talk) 13:24, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Religionfacts.com and thefreedictionary spell them uppercase without dots. I will re-add the entry if u dont further object. Pass a Method (talk) 14:02, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Wrong conjugated form

Hello SemperBlotto, I contact you after discussing with Mglovesfun (sorry for the French at the beginning of the discussion). So I will "translate" for you. Your bot created some wrong conjugated pages. For example, your bot created the conjugated page of the verb débarasser which is a mispelling (correct spelling is débarrasser). So, you bot should delete the "wrong pages". To know which pages are concerned, you can use this huge page. This page lists the page in French that you have and that we do not have on French Wiktionary. If you search verb form (for example, you can search the string "asses" to find most of the verbs on this page). And after, you have to check why we do not have these pages on French Wiktionary. For most of them, this is because there a mistake in the conjugation. If you need some help, do not hesitate to contact me. Pamputt (talk) 18:29, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

• I have deleted the inflected form of this misspelling (my bot is not a sysop so can't do it itself). That big page is just too unwieldy (and is on the "wrong" wiki). If we could break it down and move it here, that would make it easier to use. SemperBlotto (talk) 19:48, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

There are also the conjugated forms of râtisser which are "wrong". For the huge page, I guess who can import it here and modify it as you want. Pamputt (talk) 19:55, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Precision: for râtisser, this spelling is not correct. The correct one is ratisser. So you should also modify your article râtisser. Pamputt (talk) 19:56, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Plenty of hits for râtisser - see Le Parisien as an example. SemperBlotto (talk) 21:43, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

It is a common misspelling. That is the reason why we have an article on French Wiktionary to explain that. But it is always a mistake. For example, you can see these two dictionaries. Pamputt (talk) 07:11, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Talk:râtisser, it very narrowly passed RFD on the grounds it might be a rare alternative spelling rather than a misspelling. So the conjugated forms are valid as the page stands. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:14, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

omonimo

Namesake (female) is given as a masculine noun, looks suspicious to me. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:12, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

• Fixed. Thanks for spotting it. SemperBlotto (talk) 11:19, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
• P.s. Does three and a third million merit a mention? SemperBlotto (talk) 11:27, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Latin verbs

Hello, I'm coming from da.wiktionary, and I've just started inserting Latin verbs to this wiktionary. So far, I've made 3 pages with conjugation - esse, stare and facere. I was wondering whether it's correct to use the present active infinitive - like I've done - or to use the first-person singular present active indicative - like many dictionaries - as headword. Until now, da.wiktionary didn't contain any Latin verbs with conjugations, so we don't really have a standard to follow.

So I'm going to ask you: Which form is correct to use/would you recommend to use? Personally, I find it slightly strange to use the indicative as headword while e.g. the Romance languages doesn't, especially when you refer to Latin indicative from a Romance infinitive. On the other hand, the use of the present indicative as headword is conventional. Sincerely, --87.63.114.210 18:34, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

• Yes, like most Latin dictionaries we use the first-person-singular as the lemma. You might like to read Wiktionary:About Latin. SemperBlotto (talk) 18:42, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
• I think you may want to discuss this with the editors at Danish Wiktionary. Here, we have made a certain choice for certain reasons, but over there you might decide to make a different choice because you think other reasons (like using the infinitive in Romance languages) make more sense. —CodeCat 19:00, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

quark theory not sum of parts

See talk:quark theory. Nicole Sharp (talk) 14:41, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Vaginismus

Hello, I noticed that you undid one of previous edits of this article. The edit was not unconstructive; it represents a slang term, which was annotated. 141.136.248.140 16:06, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

• No such evidence has been provided. And we have asked for it several times. SemperBlotto (talk) 16:09, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

caffelatti

Has been added to Special:UncategorizedPages. Should either use {{misspelling of}} or go back to its previous format {{plural of|caffelatte}}. Caffelatte may need attention too. Thank you, Mglovesfun (talk) 18:48, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

• Couldn't find much evidence for it. Deleted. Other one fixed. SemperBlotto (talk) 18:53, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

sereis and others

I noticed that your bot added new entries that use "infl" as the template. That template has been deprecated for a long time, it should be "head" instead. Could you fix your bot? —CodeCat 18:41, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

• Sorry. That one was added manually by me (not the bot). I have fixed my saved piece of code. SemperBlotto (talk) 21:05, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

concedo : con- + cedo

In the Latin entry of en:concedo, the definition is indiscernible from en:cedo. Which is in comparison to en:consensus: con- + sentio. Shall I augment the entry?

Gdbf137 (talk) 22:00, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

• Whatever you think best. SemperBlotto (talk) 07:00, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Portuguese verbs ending in -air

Semperblottobot is creating the second-person singular and third-person plural future subjunctive incorrectly. For example: decíres, decírem (both missing an <a> before the <í>). The conjugation tables are correct. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 03:50, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

• Thanks for spotting that. Fixed. SemperBlotto (talk) 07:08, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
  • To avoid this kind of problem, I have converted Module:nl-verb and Module:ca-verb so that they export the table itself in a format that a bot can read. That way, the bot no longer has to duplicate all the conjugation code of the template/module, but can just use the output of the template itself. While I did this in a module, it should be possible to do this with a template as well. The template could changed so that it outputs the forms in a different format when an additional bot=1 parameter is provided. Unfortunately the Portuguese templates are really complicated so I'm not sure if I would be able to do this. —CodeCat 14:03, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

left arm and/or left-arm

I notice we have left arm orthodox and left arm unorthodox but not left arm/left-arm. I think left arm and right arm are idiomatic because the refer to bowling left-handed (or right-handed). But I think left arm orthodox and left arm unorthodox and the right arm equivalents should go, to be replaced by left arm and right arm, with appropriate senses at fast, medium, orthodox and unorthodox. Thoughts? Mglovesfun (talk) 13:38, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

• Yes. They are SoP. I'll add it to my list. SemperBlotto (talk) 13:55, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

XK

Sorry if I write you only now, but I now saw it. I think my page wasn't an error. On the other hand, I saw several pages about slang words. --Tn4196 (talk) 14:38, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

• OK. I have reinstated it and tidied it up. SemperBlotto (talk) 15:08, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Your ears may be burning.

See [[Thread:User talk:CodeCat/"Badly formatted".]], please.​—msh210℠ (talk) 05:21, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

paradeiro

Just want to check — was there a good reason for using {{head}}? (I made this change.) —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 21:39, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Renaming information request

You have been identified as someone who does a large number of renames. If you could visit meta:Rename practices and explain your renaming practices and policy, we would appreciate the effort. We are making this request to help us better understand local renaming practices as we work towards SUL finalization. Thank you for your time and feel free to contact me if you have any questions. MBisanz (talk) 23:10, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

flood flag?

Hi, can you give this account a flood flag so RecentChanges doesn't get clogged up, please. --Dropoff point (talk) 21:16, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

• In your dreams. SemperBlotto (talk) 21:22, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Forced user renames coming soon for SUL

Hi, sorry for writing in English. I'm writing to ask you, as a bureaucrat of this wiki, to translate and review the notification that will be sent to all users, also on this wiki, who will be forced to change their user name on May 27 and will probably need your help with renames. You may also want to help with the pages m:Rename practices and m:Global rename policy. Thank you, Nemo 13:09, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Lo siento

I am sorry for being so snobby and insulting. The best excuse I can offer is that I was feeling extra lazy that day, and I wanted to justify it, but any alleged conspicuity is still subjective. Your contributions are pretty valuable here for everybody. --Æ&Œ (talk) 17:11, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

• No prob. Basically, I don't give a toss what other people think of me - I just do what I want. SemperBlotto (talk)

rapetard

You wanna help with formatting?--109.232.72.49 06:02, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

• See Wiktionary:Entry layout explained. SemperBlotto (talk) 07:09, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Other Polish pastries

Hi there. Was it something like this? Hoodinski (talk) 12:50, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

• No. It looked nothing like that. And I should have said that it was more like bread than cake. SemperBlotto (talk) 13:29, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Hmm- I'm puzzled. The only two Polish pastries wtith poppy seed I know are kutia and makowiec. I supposed it might've been a kołacz. Hoodinski (talk) 12:15, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
    • Silly me:D. I had one yesterday with grain coffee. It's a drożdżówka z makiem- poppy-seed bun. And it's good stuff:). Hoodinski (talk) 10:42, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
      • Righto. Keep yourself well-fed;). Hoodinski (talk) 12:14, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

babbino

Was looking up the meaning of babbino as in the aria O mio babbino caro and we don't have it. Not sure what to define it as, {{diminutive of|babbo}} is correct but I'm not sure if that would be better in the etymology rather than in the definition. Mglovesfun (talk) 19:14, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Problem with Italian uncountable nouns

The template {{it-noun}} currently has no (documented) way to show uncountable nouns. It shows a script error if the plural ending is missing, but there is no way to say "there is no plural". A new user found this out at Wiktionary:Information desk#Visciolata. Could you add it to the module please? —CodeCat 21:10, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

I think you may have been premature to just revert the edit in question. I'm having trouble finding enough cites, and I'm not sure about capitalization, but there does seem to be a wine of that name made with grapes and sour cherries- they weren't completely wrong, they just made the mistake of assuming that theirs was the only sense. As for countability, I'm sure it's one of those things that's normally a mass noun, but can be plural if you're talking about different versions, such as made in different places or different years. I don't know how Italian handles such cases, though.Chuck Entz (talk) 22:17, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

I am pretty sure that ALL Italian nouns are grammatically countable. Some, especially foreign loanwords such as bar or words ending in a stressed vowel such as gioventù have no separate plural. SemperBlotto (talk) 06:40, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm not a big fan of inv. I don't know enough about Italian to make a highly informed comment, but I'd prefer to say that the plural of varietà is varietà, in the same way that in French, the plural of bois is bois, but it does have a plural. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:45, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes, that's fine. You can even use the existing {{it-noun}} that way, specifying the singular as the plural. p.s. Normally, the way you can tell if the word is singular or plural is to look at the particle e.g. "lo stop" (the bus-stop) or "gli stop" (the bus-stops). SemperBlotto (talk) 10:49, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Template:it-pron

As you can see, I've 'cheated' a bit with stesso, using {{it-adj}} for the pronoun section. That's because they inflect the same as there's already an adjective section in the entry. Surely {{it-pron}} would be a good thing? I've set up {{fr-pron}} so that both gender and inflection aren't mandatory, could we do the same with it-pron? I would create it myself but you might want to write a Lua version, and I can't do that. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:47, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

• Yes. I'm nearing the end of my current Portuguese outing. I'll create it soonish. SemperBlotto (talk) 10:52, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

• In {{fr-pron}}, what is {1} supposed to do? See the system sandbox. SemperBlotto (talk) 17:35, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
  • and how do you specify the plural of an mf pronoun? (see 2nd item)

User:WAR ON TERROR(KING HENRY AND QUEEN TAYLOR)

Hi! I'm from the English Wikipedia and am trying to deal with some crosswiki abuse, but I cannot see deleted content here. Does this editor seem to be [7]? --Rschen7754 07:59, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

• Looks very much like it (I can't do ip checks). SemperBlotto (talk) 08:03, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Spanish

Hey Jeff. Perhaps after Portuguese you might consider working with Spanish. There's still lots missing. --Outtogether (talk) 08:21, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

• Actually, I'm considering a mass delete of all Spanish and all Asturian words. SemperBlotto (talk) 08:28, 18 May 2013 (UTC)