User talk:TheDaveRoss/Archive-2008-May

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

Velar[edit]

Hello,

I added an HTML break to the velar article between the Spanish and the Swedish section. Without that the Swedish section floats to the right of the Spanish conjugation table. Perhaps something to take into account for the splendid TheDaveRossBot. Good luck!

--Jan, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Spanish template cleanup[edit]

I've been cleaning up and standardizing the Spanish verb conjugation templates. I'm moving verbs away from your 'abrir' and 'escribir' templates because the standard 'ir' template is now robust enough to accomodate ir verbs that have irregular past participles. The reason for this is that dictionaries don't categorize spanish verbs as having a completely different conjugation pattern (different model verb and therefore here a different tempalte) if they only vary in the pp. That way we'll have less templates but that are more robust as well (I'm also making them robust enough to handle reflexive verbs). Let me know if you have any comments. -Bequw

template:en-noun and regular possessive forms of modern English nouns[edit]

There is currently an active vote at [[1]] regarding whether regular possessive forms of modern English nouns should have their own entries or not. As part of this it has been suggested that the {{en-noun}} template might be modified to show the possessive forms in the inflection line of modern English noun entries (irrespective of the outcome of the vote). Your comments and/or votes are welcome until the end of the vote on 5th August 2007. You are receiving this note as you have edited template:en-noun and/or template talk:en-noun Thryduulf 17:27, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Your Username[edit]

Just out of interest has your user got anything to do with Davros from Dr Who?--Williamsayers79 08:10, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Nope, it has everything to do with my name being "Dave Ross" :) - TheDaveRoss 00:26, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

dot one's i's and cross one's t's[edit]

On the deletion log of dot one's i's and cross one's t's, it appears you deleted the page as per RFV. Now, I'm quite sure I've seen reference to this phrase on "Looney Tunes", "Charlie Brown", and sitcoms from AU, GB, & US. I find it most often used in the forms, "Don't forget to dot your i's and cross your t's." or "I'm just dotting my i's and crossing my t's.". The context involved is usually in filling out application forms. The meaning is to double-check what one has written with specific attention to detail. I use the term with US and AU nationals all the time with complete comprehension. The reason I listed cartoons was to note how often the term is parodied to "dot one's eyes...". The orgin lies in indistinct handwritten forms of letters &emdash mostly cursive. Often in cursive, "bi" = "lr", "ci" = "a", "ii" = "u", "ir" = "r" & "iv" = "w" if the i's aren't dotted. Often in print, "t" = "l" if the t's aren't crossed. Printing errors might be far less common than in the last century and the printed word may have largely superceded handwriting, but this term is still used & understood in the Anglophonie as it has for at least half a century. I don't know how to open your RFV, but I request that you reconsider that this term does in fact pass CFI. If you disagree, can you please explain how I should check "Google Books", &c. Thecurran 07:52, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Spanish "second person" verb forms[edit]

Hi. User:TheDaveBot added many entries that call Spanish third person verb forms "Latin American second person" verb forms. Was that bot run approved somewhere? I'd like to read the discussion. Rod (A. Smith) 03:37, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

acecho[edit]

Is acecho Spanish (and not English)? (You can respond here; I'll check back for a little while.)—msh210 23:53, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it is Spanish, first person singular form in the present indicative of acechar, "to spy". - TheDaveRoss 00:48, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
Thank you. That's fixed now.—msh210 03:45, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Accidental blanking[edit]

You may want to revert this blanking. Rod (A. Smith) 02:15, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Hmm. Never mind. The diffing engine seems goofy. Rod (A. Smith) 02:18, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

template:en-noun[edit]

I'm not sure what the edit was for, but I'm fairly sure capitalizing the "O" of "Only" is not a very good idea. Circeus 02:06, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

4/20[edit]

Regarding Special:Undelete/4/20, he may not have formatted it well, but that "4/20" or "4:20" thing is really used a lot as code for marijuana. I think it should have been cleaned up instead of deleted. See, f.e. w:420 (cannabis culture). Mutante 02:35, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

In response to your question[edit]

The classical Chinese characters which I have added should be viewable in Mojikyo fonts or in the look-up at http://www.chinalanguage.com/dictionaries/ccdict/view.php . Apple1976 22:43, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

WT:PREFS arabic alphabet[edit]

There are several characters which I cannot click in the "special characters in the search field" box. - TheDaveRoss 17:17, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Check the section name in MediaWiki:Edittools... --Connel MacKenzie 18:50, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
Seems to have started working randomly, I'll fiddle around and see if I can figure out what it was. Thanks - TheDaveRoss 19:30, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
Hippietrail was having problems with these a while back, although I don't know if a solution was ever figured out. You may want to get in touch with them. -Atelaes λάλει ἐμοί 19:47, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

feedback.js[edit]

Hello TheDaveRoss,
I have done those changes, thanks for writing me!

  1. For what is the comment indx number needed? Consider that we have a somewhat different list on other wikis!
  2. Does &date=2008-02-25 still work? Also in submit mode, as we do not use UTC on other wikis?
  3. Links that do not work, yet:
    1. http://tools.wikimedia.de/~daveross/feedback.php?mode=view&lang=de&wiki=wiktionary
    2. http://tools.wikimedia.de/~daveross/feedback.php?mode=view&lang=de&wiki=wiktionary&date=2008-02-25
    3. http://tools.wikimedia.de/~daveross/feedback.php?mode=view&lang=als&wiki=wiki or now ...=wikipedia?
    4. http://tools.wikimedia.de/~daveross/feedback.php?mode=view&page=Koran
    5. http://tools.wikimedia.de/~daveross/feedback.php?mode=view&page=Koran&comment=Good (+c_indx?)
    6. http://tools.wikimedia.de/~daveross/feedback.php?mode=view&comment=Bad (all pages rated as "Bad" etc.)
    7. http://tools.wikimedia.de/~daveross/feedback.php?mode=view&page=idle&revid=3615504 (a former revID, not the current)

Best regards, Melancholie 09:05, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

You wrote that "several of the parameters which the old page and database were requiring will be generated by the PHP using referrer data"! Did you consider that Opera and Firefox (and Mozilla) are able to not send any referrer? For example, my web browser does not send any referrer to anybody ;-) So, would I be able to still vote then?
This project certainly will prove helpful, it already does so! Feedback is an important thing in life ;-) --- Best regards, Melancholie 22:22, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
P.s.: Shall I send you wiki=wikipedia from als.wp? Until now it is wiki, only! --Melancholie 22:25, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
We send you the comment the same way as the pageTitles! Both with encodeURI(), both with the same script (not different at all from yours in this point), see
As it works on /~cmackenzie/ it seems to be a server-side thing!?
BTW: Your new parameters (links, wikis) do not seem to work, see [2] and [3] (error message: Failed to select data. query: SELECT * FROM `feedback` (lang='als' OR lang='de') ORDER BY id DESC)
BTW [Sorry if I should browbeat you with this]: The links above do not work properly, yet (on /~cmackenzie/ they do). All wikis are shown in one table, cannot refer to one single page's results, yet. --- With very best regards, Melancholie 14:01, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Now &langs and &wikis do work pretty well, thanks :-) Did you test my ÄäÖöÜüß-Test links above? One is for de, one for en. After clicking, you can see there that in the Page column everything is OK, but in the Comment column the same umlaut letters are shown wrong! As both strings are sent by the link(s) above the same way and the same time and one gets good and the other bad, I still guess it's a server-side issue ;-) --- Best regards, and thanks for your efforts, Melancholie 22:37, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Looks nice, so far :-) Before adding &date(s)=2008-02-27, the parameter "page" (&page(s)=entry(,Article)) would be great, as we are backlinking every article on de.wikt for logged in users e.g. --- Greetings, Melancholie 02:27, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
Yes, exactly! Either &page= or &pages= would be very great :-) Furthermore &comments= would be a good thing (for filtering good from bad articles). &revids= (see above) is something that can wait like &dates=, I would say. --- Best regards, Melancholie 02:37, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Hello Dave, a minor note (before I forget this ;-) When implementing the page/comment counter thing: The counter has to be reset for every new revid, of course! Did you see that the Italian Wiktionary is using the feedback feature too, already? :-) --- Very best regards, Melancholie 16:52, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Request for new DaveBot format[edit]

I realize this bot has not been active for some time, but I would like to put in a request before it is used again:

Could you change the bot to use the standardized templates: Template:es-verb-form and Template:es-verb form of? The current categorization for verb forms would be greatly improved with the use of these templates, and it would prevent a lot of work in the future (we won't need to use bots to make changes). These two templates are for the inflection line and definition line respectively.

If you do not like the way the definition line template renders, it can be changed; however, it is important than new pages begin implementing this format (or some variant), as it addresses most of the problems with the older format and is easier to maintain. An example of a verb which uses these templates for its forms is ir (any of its forms will serve as an example).

De-spanking[edit]

I must admit I am getting a little sick of it. Thanks for joining in.. Jcwf 03:56, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

The funny thing is that apart from the examples his stuff is pretty accurate, although clearly of a Flemish signatue. He sometimes uses words I would not or in a way I would not, but then I am a Northener. Jcwf 04:46, 9 March 2008 (UTC)


re: gimp and scat[edit]

About scat, yeah, I did make a mistake there and highlight more than intended, thanks for catching that.

As for gimp, there were only two cites, neither of which provided anything close to substantiation for the sense they were listed for. An wha will lace my middle gimp; gimp appears to be a noun in that usage, and in the other usage the context suggests much license was taken with the language, and it still doesn't support the sense well. Please also read the top of the RfV page, if insufficient evidence is found the RfVed content is to be removed. - TheDaveRoss 18:29, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

No, no. Go read the poem, it's a great cite. The context is clear. "lace my middle gimp" = "bind, squish my waist thin". More good cites needed for other Scot. senses, but they're all verifiable. Since I was the one who put this into RFV, i get to state my intention. I was looking for citation help, not expungement. There are several other entries today where you've made a judgment call as to "passed" or "failed" where it was ambiguous and unsettled at best. Just because there's no closure doesn't mean we need to destroy information. "Clearly failed" is one thing. Unilateral interpretation of a discussion you didn't participate in is another.
Listen, I definitely understand wanting to remove the ugly tags and finish the processes that were begun. I'm endlessly frustrated that nothing ever gets closure. However, when it's not really 'failed' you can't say 'failed'. -- Thisis0 18:39, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
The context is most certainly not clear, and even if it were, one cite isn't sufficient, two cites isn't sufficient, three clear examples of usage is what we look for. The backlog is such that I can't re-investigate 6 month old RfVs, I simply look at the presented evidence, and if the RfV was not successfully defended the content is removed. If the example given was clearly an example of the sense from a well known work it is one thing, but it was an ambiguous example from a relatively unknown work, hence the content was and should have been removed. If you can find three quality citations which clearly show this usage I encourage you to do so, and then the content can be re-added. If not, please do not revert or re-add the content which was removed due to failed RfVs. This is a bad thing. If you think that is a bad policy please discuss the policy, it is the current policy, and so it is the one I will work by. - TheDaveRoss 18:45, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Ok, smartypants. I tagged and added this rfv, looking for citational support for rare dialectical definitions that indeed were in other dictionaries. My entry went COMPLETELY ignored for over six months, at which point a few thoughts were offered, and a contributor found a few cites for one of the dialectical senses. This was not a procedural case of wanting content removed. This was an attempt to add quality and depth to verifiable content. You cannot in good faith come along with a battle axe to a process you were not interested in. Things here are most often simply not black-and-white enough to say "well, gawrsh, at the top of the page it says I should delete this stuff, so I'm a-gonna." You have to use intelligence in wielding your guillotine. RFV has been variously used for questioning etymologies, combining senses, and all sorts of things that a person must look at with some degree of intelligence while applying "policy" several months later. You do not get to tell me I cannot revert any detestably stubborn actions on your part. You cannot make me afraid of seeking help at RFV in citing rare words, in the fear that a "policy prince" will come along at the end of an ambiguous discussion and thwack the whole entry. You are in error and telling me I'm "not allowed to challenge you" will incur an even more staunch opposition. -- Thisis0 21:56, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
I think that gimp had clocked out, having been entered into RfV in October 2007, I believe. I don't think we have a policy of easier standards for dialect (as I think we do for Scots English or Scottish English, BTW). I would certainly want the citations to be in citation space under an appropriate header. DCDuring TALK 19:01, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
The possible alternative language name is Scots. Also see w:Scots. DCDuring TALK 19:06, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Not sure why the name calling is necessary, nor the remarks about 'rare words' or the insinuations that I am a yokel. For future reference, use {rfq} if you are just looking for additional quotations, {rfv} is for cases where you are unsure if a sense or entire word is accurate or extant. If you list something, keep track of it, because the people cleaning up at the far end aren't supposed to do the investigation over, they are supposed to look if any conclusion was drawn and, if not, remove the questionable content. That is the way it goes, I again refer you to the top of the RfV page, which you know so much about and of which I am ignorant. It says
"If insufficient evidence is found, it will be archived to the talk page of the entry in question with a note saying it failed RFV, for future reference in case new evidence emerges. Then the disputed sense will be removed or the disputed entry will be sent to be deleted with a note saying it failed RFV, whichever is applicable. (If it seems to be a protologism, it will be added to the list of protologisms.)"
Which I think is abundantly clear. I didn't anywhere say you 'weren't allowed to challenge' me, I said that you shouldn't revert the changes made due to a closed RfV. You can certainly re-add RfVfailed material, if you can find citations for that material. If not, it should remain removed, as it has been found to not meet the CFI. I think that this is pretty straight forward, and you don't have to take my word for it, read the top of the RfV page. I am going to pass the re-removal of 'democracy' and 'gimp' material to a different admin, since at this point there is a conflict of interest. I will ask again, do not remove content removed due to RfV failure without the CFI quality evidence required by the RfV process, it will get you blocked as vandalism eventually (not a threat, just a warning). - TheDaveRoss 00:09, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
1) Remarks about 'rare words' were appropriate and in reference to the words YOU WANT TO ERASE. Why are you acting like you take offense at that phrase now? Does it make you feel like your case is stronger padding it with additional unrelated attacks?
2) Guess I learned my lesson about asking extra questions about a word in RFV or requesting citation support to make the entry better, 'cause someone will eventually come along and just axe them entirely from the project. I'll make sure to do nothing that requires any reading, interpretation, or discernment there, because there is a policy that allows unilateral, non-discerning thwacking. I say to you that these entries did not fail. I put gimp there myself and now I know at least part of my interest should have gone to RFQ. You have demonstrated to me today that you A) make poor judgments about "pass" or "fail" in ambiguous unclosed discussions. B) make careless errors including selecting too much text and not double checking. and adding a /nowiki block of deleted text on the top of a completely unrelated even older RFV archive with no explanation. C) Run and tattle and raise the vandalism flag. Please, look again at all of this. The answers are not in citing policy blindly. -- Thisis0 03:10, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

RFV discussions[edit]

Hi, thanks for working on RFV, it's a long and thankless job...

When you're closing RFVs, could you store the discussion somewhere, somehow? It looks like you're just deleting sections. I assumed you were moving them to Talk pages and got confused earlier. From what I understand of Connel's archiver bot, if you just strike the section head in RFV, the bot will delete the section and paste an archive link to the Talk page. If discussion starts up again, it's helpful to see what was said earlier. Cynewulf 04:53, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Not sure what the above is in reference to, but let me also say thanks both for the closing work, and for archiving the discussions to the talk page (which as far as I'm aware is what you've been doing). Cheers, -- Visviva 05:17, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
democracy in this case, I didn't see where this [4] went. Sigh, looking beyond this one event I see lots of cases where the discussion did get saved. Sorry to bother you, keep up the good work. (With Connel's archiver bot now I'm feeling a bit less burned-out about closing RFVs) Cynewulf 05:25, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

go[edit]

Arggggh. I had just gotten around to citing the senses of go as you were deleting them. See citations:go. What should I do? Insert reworded senses or wait for you to revert. You were right to delete. They'd been sitting around for a long time, but we don't have nearly enough senses for go (and many other common words). The trouble with such words is that they are time-consuming to cite. It took me 90 minutes or so. DCDuring TALK 00:24, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for getting back to me so fast. I'll think about this and address it tomorrow. With the scores of subsenses that big dictionaries have, I really wish we had an accepted format for senses and subsenses and for ordering senses so that we could compare our senses with each other and with those of other dictionaries. And thanks for doing the RfV and RfD cleanup. DCDuring TALK 00:40, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Wuag deleted[edit]

LAME MAN THAT IS SO A WORD PEOPLE SHOULD KNOW ABOUT IT!!!!!!!

Citation format[edit]

We don't italicize citations; we only italicize invented example sentences and titles of sources. --EncycloPetey 22:54, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

See WT:QUOTE, which summarizes what is agreed upon. There are only a few points in the "policy" that aren't fully agreed upon, such as the form of punctuation that should follow the date and how to format location within a source (page numbers and such), but otherwise it's fairly accepted and had considerable discussion twice in the past. --EncycloPetey 03:18, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

grabable[edit]

I think this also has a computing meaning - able to be manipulated by that little hand that appears instead of a cursor in some applications (haven't looked for proof though.) SemperBlotto 22:56, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Two words[edit]

The reason which I've become so angry on here (and needed to take a long break to keep my cool) can be summed up in two words: I'm mutilated (or 'circumcised' as the medical industry likes to spin it).

stretch limo[edit]

Hi. Thanks. I mean it. There I was, struggling to understand how to put a pic into the entry and ...lo and behold.. it suddenly appears as if by magic! ;-) -- Algrif 17:06, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

billiard table[edit]

Isn't a billiard table used for billiards or snooker? It's much bigger than a pool table. SemperBlotto 17:08, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Excuse me entering another's talk page, but I've seen professional pool played on a billiard table in UK. -- Algrif 17:15, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
A quick read on wikipedia leads me to believe that all three games (pool/pocket billiards, billiards and snooker) are played on tables called billiards tables, pool and snooker are just played on specific variations of the billiard table. So I guess the definition needs a retooling. - TheDaveRoss 17:17, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
Perhaps I'm confused - the only pool table that I've ever seen is about six feet long and operated with a coin (in pubs). SemperBlotto 17:22, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
Apparently size doesn't matter, as long as the dimensions are length = 2*width. There are tournament regulation sizes and standard sizes for each game...but they are all still billiard tables. - TheDaveRoss 17:26, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Trans tables[edit]

Hi Dave, I am monitoring Category:Translation table header lacks gloss and noticed that you've been creating trans tables in a lot of entries. Could you add the gloss at the same time? Also, if there are multiple senses and the translations are not divided, a single trans table does not make sense, someone will have to change it to checktrans and ttbc. Thanks. --Panda10 21:15, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

A) "There are multiple senses and I do not know the meanings of the translations": In this case a checktrans-top should be added instead of trans-top and each translation should be surrounded with ttbc. Also, I was told, it would be helpful to add a new trans table for each sense, even if the trans tables are empty. B) "There is only one sense and when there is only one sense the gloss is not necessary." You're right, somewhere it is written that it is not necessary. But... 1) If ever a second sense will be added and the trans table does not have a gloss, we will end up with checktrans and ttbc for all existing translations because we won't know which sense the translations belong to. 2) I believe - and I may be wrong - tbot uses the gloss when it creates a new entry using the translation. 3) A minor thing perhaps, but the lack of gloss will increase the number of entries in Category:Translation table header lacks gloss. Ok, so none of these are major issues, but I tried anyway. :-)) Thanks. --Panda10 21:40, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

apology[edit]

hey, man. it might be old news, but I wanted to let you know I'm sorry for overreacting about scat, gimp, and democracy. I got frustrated by what looked like carelessness and blitzkrieg-ing, but it was really you kicking some butt at a largely thankless task. Please accept that I am sorry for the emotional content, the name-calling, and the lack of perspective on my part. -- Thisis0 19:59, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

color blindness[edit]

Cheers for catching that - I'm not sure what happened! Thryduulf 22:43, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Maine Coon[edit]

Hi, please remove the viewsource, I will help edit the cat article. Please see my User for the list I am working on, thank you. WritersCramp 16:43, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Confusion?[edit]

Re: User talk:Atelaes 17:01, 23 March 2008. 1) "the vicious admin" does not appear to be in my communications file. Did Atelaes block two or more of us on 23 Mar for ignoring his authoritah (Cartman May 20, 1998) or is he confused? 2) Are you going to deal with the anemic phlegm? Thank you.--Memdmarti 00:13, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

User:SorenSorensen[edit]

You have welcomed this user with "thank you for your contributions". All his contributions here (one entry only, but repeatedly) was deleted first by me, then by Semper, then by me again as spamvertising. This user's only contribution on all the WM projects is for one term, the same spam term. --EncycloPetey 21:34, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

OK. Thanks. --EncycloPetey 21:47, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

g0y[edit]

how was g0y nonsense and gibberish? I provided a references and also a link to the wikipedia article, a simple google search will show you the term is in wide use. The g0y community purposefully spells it with a zero and not an O, that does not make is gibberish. Would you reconsider?70.1.209.112 02:47, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

you can answer here since i haven't an account.

Butting in to answer: I don't think it meets our criteria for inclusion WT:CFI based on my research. I could not find usage in books, scholarly article, or news. The usage in usenet groups is obscure as to meaning. If you would like, I could work with you to try to make an entry that would be likely to meet of CFI, if that is possible. Contact me at my talk page. DCDuring TALK 17:12, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

DaveBot reborn[edit]

Hi TDR, would you consider giving me your bot code? I'd be interested in running TheDaveBot on KeeneBot2, as Spanish is one of the languages which could definitely profit from having a bot, and there's tonnes of new verbs been added since your bot last ran. of course, I'll probably change the code a bit to smooth things out, but I'd be happy to take the reins on it. Keene2 18:51, 4 April 2008 (UTC)