User talk:Наименее Полезное

Welcome

Hello, welcome to Wiktionary, and thank you for your contributions so far.

If you are unfamiliar with wiki-editing, take a look at Help:How to edit a page. It is a concise list of technical guidelines to the wiki format we use here: how to, for example, make text boldfaced or create hyperlinks. Feel free to practice in the sandbox. If you would like a slower introduction we have a short tutorial.

These links may help you familiarize yourself with Wiktionary:

• Entry layout (EL) is a detailed policy on Wiktionary's page formatting; all entries must conform to it. The easiest way to start off is to copy the contents of an existing same-language entry, and then adapt it to fit the entry you are creating.
• Check out Language considerations to find out more about how to edit for a particular language.
• Our Criteria for Inclusion (CFI) defines exactly which words can be added to Wiktionary; the most important part is that Wiktionary only accepts words that have been in somewhat widespread use over the course of at least a year, and citations that demonstrate usage can be asked for when there is doubt.
• If you already have some experience with editing our sister project Wikipedia, then you may find our guide for Wikipedia users useful.
• If you have any questions, bring them to Wiktionary:Information desk or ask me on my talk page.
• Whenever commenting on any discussion page, please sign your posts with four tildes (~~~~) which automatically produces your username and timestamp.
• You are encouraged to add a BabelBox to your userpage to indicate your self-assessed knowledge of languages.

Enjoy your stay at Wiktionary! Vininn126 (talk) 20:25, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Belarusian hyphenation

Hello and welcome. I noticed that you made a bunch of recent edits to add hyphenation to various Belarusian words. However there are some errors there. For example, your edit of the word уласцівасць adds an incorrect hyphenation "у‧лас‧ці‧вас‧ць". The hyphenation rules can be found here. In particular, it's incorrect to hyphenate a word in such a way, that a single letter is left out on a separate line. Could you please pause the mass editing for a while? Also it would be nice if you could go through your earlier edits to review and correct the older mistakes. Thanks. —Ssvb (talk) 23:43, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Добры дзень! Ой, я прашу прабачэння за беспарадак, мая англійская не вельмі добрая, таму мне давядзецца мець зносіны з вамі па-беларуску або па-руску. Я прагледжу свае праўкі і выпраўлю іх, дзякуй за паведамленне і яшчэ раз прашу прабачэння! Наименее Полезное (talk) 23:47, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure if there's a strict written formal policy about this, but all communication with the other editors is normally done in English in the English Wiktionary. How good are your English skills on the CEFR scale? Maybe try the free EF Standard English Test from the Internet to get a rough estimate and put this info into your WT:Babel box? If you feel like your English skills are insufficient, then maybe consider contributing to the Russian Wiktionary instead? —Ssvb (talk) 06:30, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Oh, my English is reasonably level 3, I just wanted to communicate in Belarusian because I thought we could Наименее Полезное (talk) 19:33, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Перанос «шкоднасны»: шкод-насны? Наименее Полезное (talk) 23:58, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

References to external dictionaries for Belarusian

The modern words like падабайка or ноўтбук are NOT present in the Kandrat Krapiva's Explanatory Dictionary of the Belarusian Language (1977-1984), because they simply didn't exist back then. I think that it's undesirable and misleading to list this dictionary in the references section for these words. And any other dead links shouldn't be there either. —Ssvb (talk) 16:09, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

My current interpretation of WT:CFI is the following: we can safely assume that any word present in the Kandrat Krapiva's dictionary generally falls into the "clearly widespread" category and doesn't need any special attestation. But the other words preferably should have citations. For example, that's the reason why I added citations for падабайка and содні. And dead links to Skarnik only make it harder to see, where such citations might be necessary. —Ssvb (talk) 16:22, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Noted! this mistake will not be made again. Наименее Полезное (talk) 16:22, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Belarusian etymology formatting

Genuine question, why are you so obsessed with starting every entry with "From", using "der+", and having "and" with the compare cognates bit?

Using "af" instead of "prefix" or "suffix", that's fair enough — even the categories of suffixed or prefixed terms suggest using "af" — but from where did you get the idea that starting etymologies with "From" or using "and" for the cognates are necessary? I don't ever recall this being a required convention for Russian, Ukrainian or Polish. In fact, I'm not sure there is such a convention. Insaneguy1083 (talk) 16:12, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

"When will you learn?"

Learn what? That actual references should be lumped together with dictionaries? If you're so obsessed with following the Polish formatting, why don't you look at mały, mniejszy, and mało, where THEY SEPARATE REFERENCES AND FURTHER READING? Always complaining about me "ruining" the entries, when you're ruining the References section by having a numbered list collate together with an unnumbered list. And if you try - and trust me, I've tried - you cannot combine the <referencеs/> section by trying to number the dictionaries with #. Insaneguy1083 (talk) 03:33, 15 August 2024 (UTC)

Who said I'm copying the Polish formatting? You should open your eyes more. And btw, I know what I'm doing with my own language. Наименее Полезное (talk) 11:11, 15 August 2024 (UTC)

Glosses in the senses of Belarusian words

Hello. I noticed that you tend to be adding rather verbose full definitions for the senses of the Belarusian words under {{gl}} templates, many of which look like direct translations of the full definitions from Skarnik. But my understanding of the Wiktionary:Style_guide#Types_of_definitions policy is that glosses of the non-English words preferably have to precisely pinpoint one of the senses of the corresponding English word.

If my interpretation of this policy is correct, then a Wiktionary contributor is supposed to wikilink an English word. Then go to that English word entry to verify whether all of its senses are really applicable. If only some of them are applicable, then provide glosses in the Belarusian word entry in such a manner that a Wiktionary reader can clearly match the Belarusian glosses with the corresponding English senses from the English article. In other words, we shouldn't just translate Skarnik, but instead attempt to link to the existing Wiktionary senses of the English words. Or at least do this whenever it is possible. Some words can be indeed tricky. --Ssvb (talk) 11:38, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

This diff of the супрацоўніцтва entry is a good example of it. --Ssvb (talk) 12:32, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

Oh yes I understand what you mean, I still have some difficulties in characterizing some words, thanks for letting me know about it, I will make improvements. Наименее Полезное (talk) 16:20, 18 August 2024 (UTC)