Category talk:Terms with multiple etymologies by language
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Norwegian Bokmål[edit]
Could someone please create this category for Norwegian Bokmål? Thanks. Supevan (talk) 13:02, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
The following information has failed Wiktionary's deletion process (permalink).
It should not be re-entered without careful consideration.
(And all the language subcategories.) This is an abandoned project from 2011, with only a tiny fraction of multiple-etymology entries in the categories. They could be added by bot, but that seems like a lot of work for a category that doesn't even serve a lexicographical function. And even if it did, the idea of "terms with multiple etymologies" doesn't make sense the way it's being applied — really, these are different terms with different etymologies that happen to be written the same way. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 18:23, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
- Delete. Even if automated, such a category would be useless as long as Rua continues insisting that each part of speech should be given a separate etymology section. Andrew Sheedy (talk) 21:28, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
- Pinging @Hergilei who added most of the categorizations under it. I have rarely added this category, only half a dozen of times when the amount of different etymologies seemed particularly remarkable for me. But it appeals more to me to forgo it. Fay Freak (talk) 20:40, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
- I am planning to make a bot to populate categories like this, so it's good to know that this one is considered unuseful. —TeragR disc./con. 00:10, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
- Delete per Meta; the premise is flawed. Ultimateria (talk) 22:03, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
- RFD-deleted — surjection ⟨??⟩ 19:46, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Metaknowledge Emm, excuse me? Do you expect me to create two separate entries for every single homophone in Polish now? This category has proved useful, at least for Polish, I don't care about your boring English (English entries are quite a mess here, btw., so perhaps you should consider following our example?). I want the category back, no discussion needed, you must comply. Shumkichi (talk) 20:26, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Shumkichi: If you have questions about how to create entries for homophones, please see WT:EL. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 00:00, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Metaknowledge First of all, stop being nice to me, I hate it when the interlocutor tries to show off as a supposedly more moral person than me. As for homophones, I obviously know how to create entries for them, I'm asking you if you want me to create two different entries under the same name (so basically with two "Polish" labels, one beneath the other) or what? I want the category back. Just because you, English speakers, didn't use it for your stupid entries doesn't mean that you can apply it to every other language. Why are you the one to decide which category gets to be deleted? Only 2 or 3 other people have agreed with you; I don't. Shumkichi (talk) 00:13, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Shumkichi: Had you voted, the result would have still been deletion. But it seems that you misunderstand what the categories were for and how this changes anything. There will be no change to entry structure, and you should never place two ==Polish== headers on a single page. My recommendation that you read WT:EL was given in complete sincerity. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 00:54, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Metaknowledge Can you stop already? What the hell, do you have Asperger's or what? I was obviously not being serious with the headers, I was just teasing you to give me a better solution. And how exactly do I misunderstand what the category is for? If there are multiple etymologies, even if the word in question is not a homophone per se but has two morphologically distinct etymologies, then such a word still doesn't have a single etymology, d'uh, and such cases deserve a separate category. I don't really understand why you find this idea problematic. Or, as your main asslicker Ultimateria so nicely put, why you think "the premise is flawed". Shumkichi (talk) 01:05, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Shumkichi Either you don't understand what the category is and what it does, or you're deliberately talking nonsense. It has no more affect on pages with multiple etymologies than Category:Polish palindromes has on the entries that belong to it. Categories don't do anything but help people to find entries. Chuck Entz (talk) 04:33, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Chuck Entz: Excuse me? You will not tell me how I'm supposed to understand the purpose of this category. Idgaf if it helps others or not, or if it affects the pages in any way. I want the category back and you'll comply with my polite request, thank you very much. Shumkichi (talk) 09:08, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Shumkichi: Re: ‘do you have Asperger's’ — Please strike that comment, are you from 1921? Please learn politeness. ·~ dictátor·mundꟾ 07:24, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Inqilābī: Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't know this place was full of boring pussies. PS Will you report me or ban me yourself already? Let's get this over with. Shumkichi (talk) 09:08, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- I just wanted to reeducate you. ·~ dictátor·mundꟾ 09:43, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- Ok, Mr. Hitler. Shumkichi (talk) 10:37, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Shumkichi: HOW DARE you call me Hitler?!? I thought you were being Puyi, but now I see you are Bloody Nicholas, therefore reeducation would be fruitless: so you definitely should be blocked, but unfortunately I do not have the privileges. ·~ dictátor·mundꟾ 11:27, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- Bitch, yo mama. Shumkichi (talk) 11:40, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Shumkichi: HOW DARE you call me Hitler?!? I thought you were being Puyi, but now I see you are Bloody Nicholas, therefore reeducation would be fruitless: so you definitely should be blocked, but unfortunately I do not have the privileges. ·~ dictátor·mundꟾ 11:27, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- Ok, Mr. Hitler. Shumkichi (talk) 10:37, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- I just wanted to reeducate you. ·~ dictátor·mundꟾ 09:43, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Inqilābī: Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't know this place was full of boring pussies. PS Will you report me or ban me yourself already? Let's get this over with. Shumkichi (talk) 09:08, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Shumkichi: What do you plan to do with the category? Because most of us seem to think that we just have to add the category manually, while not getting much of anything in return. Do you have other thoughts and could you please share them, because right now you're just being extremely rude without giving any reasoning behind your wishes. Thadh (talk) 10:23, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Thadh Wait, are you gonna cry or what? Yes, I've already said that idgaf if you have to add it manually (=if it affects the specific entries in any actual way), I want the category back. We used it frequently for Polish entries with two or more morphologically distinct etymologies (there are, of course, far fewer actual homophones). It helped to SORT entries with several etymologies. If we just write "Etymology 1", "Etymology 2" etc., it'll have no effect but a visual one. I want this feature categorised. It's not my fault that most users who add English entries (of very dubious value, most of the time I'm not even sure if they can be considered idioms but whatever, English is fucking boring anyway, and it's evident that you're all running out of ideas how to expand the "English lemmas" category) are incompetent, at least in comparison with many "smaller" languages. Shumkichi (talk) 10:37, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Shumkichi: I don't know if you've looked at my and others' contributions recently, but we are not English editors for the most part. Metaknowledge, Fay Freak and I are all LDL editors of many different ("smaller") languages, Ultimateria is an editor of Romance languages. I'm not sure what Andrew Sheedy's topic of interest is, but they seem to edit a large variety of languages, not just English. So your conviction that this is a purely English idea is just flat-out wrong. Now, Wiktionary is a collaborative project, so if you're not going to start collaborating I suggest you find yourself another hobby. And you haven't answered my question yet: What are you going to do with the category? Thadh (talk) 11:13, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Thadh Bitch, stfu with your suggestions, I don't need to cooperate with you to add something of value (maybe you should look at my contributions and compare them with yours? I'm indespendable, you're not UwU Good luck finding another native Polish speaker who's also a linguist). Anyway, I'm not gonna do anything "with" the category. What the fuck does it even mean? If you're suggesting I do something with the code to make categorisation automatic, no way. It's just gonna be here to sort entries with multiple etymologies, that's all. Happy now? Will you try to ban me because I'm being "disruptive" (i.e. because you're petty and narcissistic but have to provide some other official reason) or are we done? Shumkichi (talk) 11:24, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- You're acting way out of line, and the ad hominum attacks with regards to a simple category are way over the top. No your requests have not been polite. Vininn126 (talk) 12:09, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Thadh Bitch, stfu with your suggestions, I don't need to cooperate with you to add something of value (maybe you should look at my contributions and compare them with yours? I'm indespendable, you're not UwU Good luck finding another native Polish speaker who's also a linguist). Anyway, I'm not gonna do anything "with" the category. What the fuck does it even mean? If you're suggesting I do something with the code to make categorisation automatic, no way. It's just gonna be here to sort entries with multiple etymologies, that's all. Happy now? Will you try to ban me because I'm being "disruptive" (i.e. because you're petty and narcissistic but have to provide some other official reason) or are we done? Shumkichi (talk) 11:24, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Shumkichi: I don't know if you've looked at my and others' contributions recently, but we are not English editors for the most part. Metaknowledge, Fay Freak and I are all LDL editors of many different ("smaller") languages, Ultimateria is an editor of Romance languages. I'm not sure what Andrew Sheedy's topic of interest is, but they seem to edit a large variety of languages, not just English. So your conviction that this is a purely English idea is just flat-out wrong. Now, Wiktionary is a collaborative project, so if you're not going to start collaborating I suggest you find yourself another hobby. And you haven't answered my question yet: What are you going to do with the category? Thadh (talk) 11:13, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Thadh Wait, are you gonna cry or what? Yes, I've already said that idgaf if you have to add it manually (=if it affects the specific entries in any actual way), I want the category back. We used it frequently for Polish entries with two or more morphologically distinct etymologies (there are, of course, far fewer actual homophones). It helped to SORT entries with several etymologies. If we just write "Etymology 1", "Etymology 2" etc., it'll have no effect but a visual one. I want this feature categorised. It's not my fault that most users who add English entries (of very dubious value, most of the time I'm not even sure if they can be considered idioms but whatever, English is fucking boring anyway, and it's evident that you're all running out of ideas how to expand the "English lemmas" category) are incompetent, at least in comparison with many "smaller" languages. Shumkichi (talk) 10:37, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Metaknowledge Can you stop already? What the hell, do you have Asperger's or what? I was obviously not being serious with the headers, I was just teasing you to give me a better solution. And how exactly do I misunderstand what the category is for? If there are multiple etymologies, even if the word in question is not a homophone per se but has two morphologically distinct etymologies, then such a word still doesn't have a single etymology, d'uh, and such cases deserve a separate category. I don't really understand why you find this idea problematic. Or, as your main asslicker Ultimateria so nicely put, why you think "the premise is flawed". Shumkichi (talk) 01:05, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Shumkichi: Had you voted, the result would have still been deletion. But it seems that you misunderstand what the categories were for and how this changes anything. There will be no change to entry structure, and you should never place two ==Polish== headers on a single page. My recommendation that you read WT:EL was given in complete sincerity. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 00:54, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Metaknowledge First of all, stop being nice to me, I hate it when the interlocutor tries to show off as a supposedly more moral person than me. As for homophones, I obviously know how to create entries for them, I'm asking you if you want me to create two different entries under the same name (so basically with two "Polish" labels, one beneath the other) or what? I want the category back. Just because you, English speakers, didn't use it for your stupid entries doesn't mean that you can apply it to every other language. Why are you the one to decide which category gets to be deleted? Only 2 or 3 other people have agreed with you; I don't. Shumkichi (talk) 00:13, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Shumkichi: If you have questions about how to create entries for homophones, please see WT:EL. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 00:00, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
@Shumkichi, making ad hominem attacks on other editors (not least calling them “Hitler”) and using abusive language instead of discussing matters calmly is unacceptable. I’ve blocked you for a day; please take this time to reflect on your behaviour. — SGconlaw (talk) 12:51, 10 October 2021 (UTC)