User talk:Wytukaze/Boring now

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

Hi there. You don't need to record your contributions (unless you want to) - they are all available by hitting the "my contributions" button at the top of the screen. Cheers. SemperBlotto 14:38, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Rhymes[edit]

Hi, thanks for filling in the Rhymes:English:-ægd page. There is a strict format for these pages. Please see the changes I have made, including the comments (click "edit" to read these). — Paul G 15:41, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

No need to mark the words as rfd as none of them existed (you only linked to them, and the links were all red, meaning the words hadn't been defined yet).
Note that rhymes are listed in alphabetical order to avoid repetitions. — Paul G 15:47, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Hovercraft[edit]

Yeah, I dont know when to give up ;p

The option I'd generally go to next would be going to modern Greek. The dictionary I use lists χόβερκραφτ, which is less than helpful, but also αεροστρωματόχημα in scare quotes, which is actually pretty stylin! I could see neolatins speaking of aërostromatochemata, though according to google, nobody does. Actually the greeks seem to use αερόστρωμνο rather—*aerostromnum? (Both words seem to come from roots meaning "air bedding"...) —Muke Tever 02:59, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Logical use of words, I suppose. Though, *-stromnum seems a bit weird. Would they translate it, I wonder? *Aeropulvinum, perhaps? This is getting into the "original research" issue a bit, but what do you do when the word just doesn't exist? I'm still not happy with Romans talking about flying skiffs, but an air pillow? Why not. :P --Wytukaze 02:04, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
When a word just doesnt exist, one doesn't put it in the dictionary ;) But if needing to write about it, one can just describe it briefly. A lot of the examples you see from neo-Latin lexica seem to be like that: for vodka I saw "valida potio Slavica" (lit. "strong Slavic drink"), for example. —Muke Tever 14:24, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Well, yes, I meant if you needed to describe it. You'd presumably have to use a wording that would be comprehensible to the native speaker. --Wytukaze 15:12, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

"Bad" templates[edit]

What you call "bad" templates are what others call essential to interoperate between the various wiktionary projects. The fact that the English Wiktionary is unstructured does not follow up on its own decissions makes it an impossible project. It is such a waste. GerardM 07:10, 10 May 2005 (UTC)

The reason they are 'bad' templates is because if one clicks the "[edit]" link to the right of the section with such a template used as a header, one is sent to the editing page for the template not for the section. Also, please note it was not entirely my decision; please see the relevant discussion on Wiktionary:Requests for Cleanup. --Wytukaze 11:35, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
It is an old argument and the upshot is not that what you do is one of the reasons why I spend little time on the en:wiktionary. The fact that some have discussed this and think it a bad idea does not make for cooperation. Trivial technical arguments stand in the way of cooperation. The big failure of ALL the wiktionaries is that they are so devided and do not build on each others strength. GerardM 11:48, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
I'm sorry, I'm not sure I follow what you're saying. Are you arguing that because en: uses a different method of creating headers (on the basis of ease of use, i.e. editing) that this somehow ruins cooperation between wiktionaries? Surely interwiki links are all that matters here? Or, if it is the templates themselves, the format "=={{template}}==" would be acceptable. The reasoning behind removing templates that add the headers themselves is that you cannot then edit the sections individually, only the articles directly. --Wytukaze 11:54, 10 May 2005 (UTC)

English regular verb inflection templates[edit]

Template:en-infl-reg-vowel turned out to be insufficient and too simplistic. I did some more research and came up with a set of six templates, which is now listed at WT:I2T, and which I hope covers all regular verb inflections. Enjoy. Uncle G 20:37, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

Onomatopoeia category/template?[edit]

Wytukaze, when you have a chance, could you please have a look at Category:Onomatopoeia? Putting the tag in to words such as flip and grumble correctly adds the words to the category, but fails to add a working link to the category from the entry. Also, do we have an onomatopoeia template, yet? If so, what is it called? If not, shall we make one? Thanks! —Dvortygirl 06:31, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

I'll go look at it now, and if we don't happen to have a template, what do you envision us needing it for? --Wytukaze 11:40, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
Okay, if you meant that the category link was appearing as a red link in the article (which was the only error I could see), that was merely because the category page itself didn't have any text in it. If the link still appears red, refresh your cache. Incidentally, I wasn't aware that flip could be regarded as an onomatopoeion, care to enlighten me?
('Onomatopoeion' appears to not be a word, which is strange because many around me use it. My references suggest 'onomatope' should be used. Either way, onomatopoeia needs to be cleaned up a bit, I think; I can't bear the formation 'onomatopoeias' that's in there.)
On the matter of templates, I can't find any likely candidates, so we'd have to create if we're going to have one. --Wytukaze 12:34, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

IPA[edit]

Hi, thanks for fixing my pronunciations. I'll try to be more careful. :) 24 23:00, 30 May 2005 (UTC)

Oh, no problem. If you ever need help (or just want me to add in the IPA and SAMPA), leave me a message and I'll pretend to be an expert ;). You're doing a good job with AHD, by the way, I generally don't choose to add that, so I'm partly pleased someone is. Regards, Wytukaze 23:02, 30 May 2005 (UTC)

Pronunciations requested[edit]

Hi, Wytukaze. If you happen to go on any pronunciation stints soon, please spend some time with Category:English heteronyms, Category:200 English basic words and Category:1000 English basic words, in that order. I hope to start adding audio to the words on those lists first, modem permitting. Many thanks! —Dvortygirl 22:59, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

hoi polloi[edit]

= οἱ πολλοί —Muke Tever 03:37, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Moving[edit]

Hi. Copy and paste moves are bad; they kill the history. 24.224.153.40 19:40, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Agreed. However, in this situation, there was little other choice than to wait to see if the server would get over itself, which was frankly unlikely. In any case, the talk page was moved in the usual fashion, and that's the only page with any history of consequence. Jun-Dai's user page was only ever edited once before me, by him, and in any case, the history is retained in the redirect page. So, thanks for the heads-up, but in this situation I don't think it matters much. --Wytukaze 19:46, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Quotes[edit]

I used a direct quote for school counselor, and I cited the source, which was not a dictionary, but the Kansas Dept. of Education. Is this alright? --Whicky1978 22:15, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hmm, debatable. It's usually best to form a definition yourself (and you can make sure you've put it in layman's terms) from any sources you're using. You can link to the source at the end, both in case you've slightly infringed copyright somehow, and to give the reader something else to look to for information. At any rate, we're rather picky about our syntax around here, so you can sort that out if you want, or someone else will come along and do it for you sooner or later, I expect. I believe Dvorty used the good ol' standard {{welcome}} on your page, which has the handy link to the entry layout and so on. Whatever you decide, don't beat yourself up too much about it. --Wytukaze 22:22, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Pronunciations[edit]

:)   Jun-Dai 00:55, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
You're welcome :D
P.S. Did you want your plaintext stuff left in? --Wytukaze 00:58, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Nope, those were just placeholders, in case people wanted an explanation of why the term was a heteronym. Jun-Dai 01:13, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Administrator[edit]

You are now an administrator. I notice that you have been busy with a lot of maintenance work, and we can now bring out the whip to make you work even harder. :-) Your participation in our collaborative group will be appreciated. Eclecticology June 30, 2005 17:28 (UTC)

Congrats, and welcome. Couldn't have happenend to a nicer guy. Did I mention I'm skipping town in a couple of days, here? I'm sure you'll do very well; just go easy on the delete button. You might be surprised at what turns out not to be junk. --Dvortygirl 30 June 2005 17:32 (UTC)

German[edit]

I see you have designed a really nice declension table. But before you put it to extensive use, I strongly suggest you swap the "Dative" and "Accusative" lines. Another thing that needs to be changed is the title of Template:de-conj-noun: Verbs are conjugated, but nouns are declined (The pertaining noun is "declension", not "declination", as I wrongly claimed elsewhere). Although I'm German, I'm not particularly interested in German words here on en.wiktionary. Nevertheless, if you have any questions or need help, don't hesitate to ask me. Ncik 23:21, 06 Jul 2005

That's a good point, and a mere oversight on my part. I shall rename it forthwith. Why do you suggest swapping the Dative and Accusative lines? I've always encountered it in the order that it's currently in, as it's direct object and indirect object. However, I do notice de: has them the other way around. Thanks, Wytukaze 6 July 2005 21:26 (UTC)
I always assumed the classical, Latin way of ordering the cases in such tables would be the same for all languages where these cases are present. I'm pretty sure you won't find a German or Latin grammar (no matter in which language it is written) with another order. I don't know about English grammars. Beer parlour? Ncik 21:34, 07 Jul 2005
Nah, no need. I've looked through some German grammar stuff and it definitely confirms what you're saying, which I already assumed to be true; what I've encountered is pretty much irrelevant. I'll go change it. Incidentally, English grammar wouldn't really work like that: There's only an objective, or oblique, case (both accusative and dative, and also instrumental) and it's only used with pronouns. Genitive is possessive, and is entirely predictable, so you only get nominative, really. English grammars writing about other languages would follow any traditions that language already has, or at least we hope it would. --Wytukaze 7 July 2005 20:44 (UTC)

RFDing pages[edit]

What are you doing to my entries? 39059608

Requesting them for deletion. See the page for my reasons when I'm done. --Wytukaze 6 July 2005 22:47 (UTC)
Well I hope you're having a jolly good time then; we'll let the community decide that my entries are worthy. Some of us actually put work into improving Wiktionary, not deleting it. 39059608 6 July 2005 22:52 (UTC)
Please, don't bandy around ad hominem attacks; I work very hard on improving Wiktionary, be that adding more content or removing things that don't fit. I hope my contribution record attests to this. --Wytukaze 6 July 2005 22:55 (UTC)
However, the fact that your rfd'd three quality entries speaks louder than your contributions; and these are only my contributions! I wonder how many blooming entries have been struck out by you before. Removing entries does not help Wiktionary, a user might want to search for that number; I added it because that was only the first number: soon enough, I want to create an entry for every number imaginable (well...) so all knowledge is contained within Wiktionary. 39059608
Indeed, a noble quest to be sure. However, can we not credit the average user with enough gumption to build a number up from its individual parts? Perhaps an appendix on the construction of numbers in various languages ('fifty-eight' in English, 'acht und fünfzig' in German etc) would be more useful? --Wytukaze 6 July 2005 23:09 (UTC)

Links to other languages[edit]

Hi Wytukaze,

I have edited the word maker to add Greek translation to it. I linked the translation to Greek dictionary but you afterwards delete it because "(Neither of those Greek words are in gr:, and besides, they should be linked locally)".

As far as I am concerned the translations of the words could be better to be linked to language which it belongs. Duplicating all the words of every language in the same dictionary it might not be wise. That the words do not exist it might not be or a problem IMHO because anyway half of the words do not exist in that dictionary anyway.

I would like to ask your advice on these matters because your experience on edition of articles is far greater than mine.

Best Regards, User:Zinon

Yes, your points have been put forward before. To be honest, you may well be right; however, Wiktionary's stated goal is to define "every word in every language". Thus, on the English Wiktionary you will have English words defined in English, German words defined in English, Greek words defined in English and so on. On the Greek Wiktionary, you will have English words defined in Greek, German words defined in Greek, Greek words defined in Greek and so on. This applies to every Wiktionary. This is designed to help native speakers of English understand what the Greek or German (or whatever) words mean; your average Englishman can't speak Greek.
As for linking to words that don't (yet) exist somewhere.. That is generally discouraged when linking across projects, as you did, because you can't see that they don't exist until you follow the link. However, if you link locally, you can see that the pages don't yet exist as the link turns up red.
I, personally, agree that duplicating the efforts across Wiktionaries could be a problem; but it can also help to reduce errors. If two Wiktionaries have different definitions for the same word, that will encourage users who are on both Wiktionaries to check which is correct (or so we hope). There is a plan in the offing to unify the Wiktionaries (called Ultimate Wiktionary, or UW), but that won't be around for a while.
If you have any more questions, or would like me to clarify anything I've said, please, just ask. --Wytukaze 20:11, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

Transfinite[edit]

I've added a few comments to Transfinite Talk; I won't copy them here. I think the entry could do with modification, but it's hardly important: I shouldn't think that many people who don't know the meaning need to look it up.

I haven't changed the entry from your revision, as I think others should decide.

Best wishes, 213.208.107.91 14:29, 28 July 2005 (UTC) (aka pol098 when logged-in)

The David Protector[edit]

Since it appears you have nothing better to do than protecting against-voting-strangers from The David :-) , where do you find wiki code such as that you use on your user page? And thanks for the smiley - but am I right in thinking that its use is frowned upon? Cheers, --Stranger (SSL69 16:34, 24 August 2005 (UTC))

Hah, what an interesting reason for asking me that. For the record, I had no intention of protecting him, I just thought it was high time for some more humour, even if it sucked a bit :). And the use of the smiley isn't excessively frowned upon; take Connel, for example, who was the one to start using it and uses it once in every three comments, near enough :). As for my user page, the layout is based on your good ol' WikiTables, and the colour and border are created through a <div> tag with CSS styles, so it's not really wikicode at all. That help? --Wytukaze 19:42, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
MY humour was lame - I thought yours was great. Thanks for the wiki-semi-code pointers. Cheers. --Stranger, SSL69 20:58, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
Geen probleem, mon ami. --Wytukaze 21:51, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
I think that this is your name, yeah. I am horrible with names and faces in The Real World, so I thought I would attach something to help me remember people here.
And, for the record, "The David Protector" means that you are the one protecting me from a cult-brainwashed David - not protecting The David. :-)
Do you mind terribly? Cheers, --Stranger 13:48, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
Don't give me that. You enjoy it! :-) --Stranger 15:01, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

de-decl-noun[edit]

If you don't object I'll change the order in which the words entered into the template are displayed in the rows and columns of the resulting declension table. It would be natural if one had to enter the singular forms first (nominative through to accusative), then the plural forms. I'll fix the existing templates. Ncik 16:09, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

Go ahead, I have no preference on any order. I could enter them in a random order, so long as I knew what that order was. Thanks for informing me. --Wytukaze 17:05, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

double redirects[edit]

I thought that we had these beat. But another thousand have turned up. Good luck with the dishwashing! SemperBlotto 15:09, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

Klingon[edit]

So you're the one sneaking Klingon translations into Wikipedia etc. Why? --Connel MacKenzie T C 21:22, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I'm not; only today. I saw the Klingon words on other Wiktionaries, and around the same time saw the translations on the Klingon page. I added them because it's an interesting language :P. Are they discouraged nowadays? If so, I have no great love for the entries, feel free to mark them up for deletion. I would argue the ISO code tlh and the existence of both a tlh.wikipedia and a tlh.wiktionary, but I can't really be bothered. --Wytukaze 00:03, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
Actually, according to WT:CFI Klingon entries are in some kind of "undecided" state. Never mind then...if we are letting them stay, then they stay. I've noticed over time though, that they seem to come back on their own. Perhaps many different contributors are dropping in one or two here and there...that would be some indication of growing support. Leave it for now, I guess. --Connel MacKenzie T C 00:21, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Invitation to contribute[edit]

Hi,

You might or might not already be aware that there is now a new system in place for marking translations that need to be checked (those that are suspected of being incorrect or those where it is not clear which sense(s) of a word the translations apply to). (See here for the Beer parlour discussion on this topic.)

Translations to be checked are now categorised by language. For example, Category:Translations_to_be_checked_(French) contains a list of all words where French translations need to be checked. This is designed to make the checking of these translations easier to maintain and work with.

I'm contacting everyone who has expressed an interest in working on translations (see the thread '"Translations to be checked" - a proposal' at Wiktionary_talk:Translations) or has indicated in Wiktionary:Babel that they have a good knowledge of a particular foreign language or languages.

Would you be interested in helping out with the translations to be checked for Ga and the translations to be checked for Tok Pisin? If so, please read the page on how to check translations.

If you want to reply to this message, please do so on my talk page. Thanks for your help you can provide.

Paul G 09:21, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes, you're quite right about Ga - I hadn't checked to see what was there and so didn't realise that the only translation was one that has been made up. Sorry about that. I hope you are able to help with Tok Pisin though. — Paul G 10:12, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Block indeed[edit]

Its a little late for a block to prevent me from obtaining the evidence I need.

Have a great day.

209.216.92.232 18:01, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

And what, may I ask, would that be evidence of? I'm afraid I am at a loss as to what you might be referring to. And thankyou, have a nice day yourself. --Wytukaze 18:37, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
The evidence I am referring to is the failure of certain Wiktionary sysops to comply with the principles set forth in the Untied States and State of Florida Constitutions under which the bylaws and terms of incorporation of the Wikimedia Foundation has been chartered. Please be mindful that the Wikimedia Foundation has been authorized to accept public donations in exchange for tax benefits. Should a negative review of the Wikimedia Foundation operation be sufficient for its charter to be denied please note that other countries in this day and age may hold the Wikimedia Foundation to an equal standard. For example: In Australia the High Court has found a constitutionally protected right to political speech whenever and wherever it occurs. The reasoning is that the constitution requires that members of parliament be elected by the people, and so governments cannot prohibit political speech, because that would undermine the electoral process. Have a good day. -- Pce3@ij.net 14:43, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Ahh[edit]

No, that's not preaching, it's a real help, thanks! It's confusing when you type in a word you want, and then it comes up but capitalized or something. Thanks for the help, take care Jakeybean 11:53, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

tilt at windmills[edit]

Thanks for your help with tilt at windmills.—msh210 17:17, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

question regarding tpipron[edit]

Howdy. I have a question regarding your Tok Pisin pronunciation guides: Where'd you get the vowel values from? According to Wikipedia, Tok Pisin uses the values of /IPA|a e i o u/, and if I recall correctly, I have seen the same values described in Loreto Todd's "Modern Englishes: Pidgins and Creoles". I am aware that some more educated or English-influenced speakers of TP use English vowels in pronunciation, but Tok Pisin is a language of extreme phonological variation and it's generally safer to use the more general, five-fold value system in transcription (though some speakers also monophtongise /ai/ and /au/).

Oh, and pardon for being so logged-out, but Wiktionary apparently ate my username. --87.205.251.162 09:23, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

I'll reply here, then. Without actually checking any of my transcriptions, they were all quite a while ago and I was transcribing fairly impressionistically, from memory and, well, badly, I shouldn't doubt. Where I learnt Tok Pisin, there's a roughly 50/50 split of more educated or English-influenced speakers and those who are not, so the vowels are obviously affected by English, but most of the differences are in fact within the bounds of allophony (primarily between open- & closed- and stressed & unstressed syllables), I have come to appreciate, and I would recommend the five-vowel system as well. Indeed, I do now use that system when transcribing Tok Pisin in other situations, and I have plans to improve and systematise Wiktionary's transcriptions for various languages, including TP, but have not yet got around to any of it. Feel free to correct the transcriptions as you see fit and please accept my apologies for them.
Cheers, Wytukaze 00:07, 30 March 2008 (UTC)