User talk:Atitarev

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



I noticed you created the article đó. There you wrote:


{{vi-etym-sino|妬|[[that]]; [[there]]; [[those]]}}

This is a shocking claim for me. As far as I know, Sino-Xenic "妬" means jealous. Do you have source to proof what you have writen? Thanks. Dokurrat (talk) 07:21, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

@Dokurrat Hi. I cannot find my source any more. One of the senses of "đó" is indeed "this, that; there" but it may not be Sino-Vietnamese or the character is not . I'll check again when I get home.--Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 07:34, 21 March 2017 (UTC)


Why did you delete this? ---> Tooironic (talk) 02:25, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

How is this or any other English abbreviation a Chinese term? Bring up an RFD restore discussion if you wish. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 06:46, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
Some English abbreviations are commonly used in Chinese, and are even listed in official dictionaries. PPT is the most common way of saying "PowerPoint presentation", and would be easily citable. See also WTO, WHO, etc. ---> Tooironic (talk) 02:20, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
You can restore it yourself if you cite a Chinese dictionary. Sorry to be a pain but I've sent all other romanised Chinese terms to RFV. This one will need citations too if restored. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 02:30, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
@Tooironic I've restored it with three citations. It shouldn't be a problem now. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 06:36, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
Good job, thanks! --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 06:37, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

Informal translations[edit]

Hi, Anatoli. How's the life under an Armenian prime minister? I notice that you often add informal Armenian translations to English words. I think that this is a bad idea. As you probably know, Armenians often use Russian words in everyday speech. I am not sure if those are Russian borrowings into Armenian or if people are simply temporarily code-switching. I am not sure if words like տորմուզ (tormuz) should even be included in Wiktionary. But certainly they should not be given in translations, as you would not list "Russian" мазган (mazgan) under air conditioner. --Vahag (talk) 07:27, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

Ah, OK. Since you added this as an entry and a link in the decendants, I thought it qualifies as a valid translation. տորմուզ is pronounced differently from Russian. However, I don't see any hits in Google books. Which Armenian prime minister do you mean? Does it have to do with the term? --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 07:33, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
@Vahagn Petrosyan BTW, is it considered too bad to include words that are used in spoken Armenian but hardly used in the written? I'm personally curious about such words, especially the numerous Russian loanwords. Perhaps a special category and CFI should be given to them, given the diglossia? No, I'm not a proponent of "the Russian world" ;) --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 07:38, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
I suspect that -u- in տորմուզ (tormuz) is an Azeri influence, which tries to approximate Russian [ə] with Azeri [ɯ] to which corresponds Armenian [u].
I was referring to Gladys Berejiklian. Aren't you from Sydney?
I too think that documenting the colloquial speech is important, but where do we stop? Some people may say entire sentences in Russian and now also in English. Since that is never written, often I do not know what orthography to use. Many words often preserve foreign phonemes. For now I include in Wiktionary only those words which entered the language long ago, are inflected as Armenian words and often form inner-Armenian compounds and idioms. --Vahag (talk) 07:50, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
No, I'm from Melbourne. I didn't know about G. Berejiklian, congratulations! This kind of diglossia is not unique for Armenian but words like प्लीज़ (plīz, please) are often used in Bollywood movies, even if they are avoided in published dictionaries, so people will want to know what characters are saying, even if it's obvious for English speakers. I did come across some of these anglicisms in Hindi textbooks. I can imagine words like "տորմուզ" can be frequent in Armenian TV shows, even if they are avoided in formal programs. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 07:57, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
OK, I'll be more tolerant towards including these words. գայկա (gayka) is from the same series. --Vahag (talk) 13:15, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. I'll leave it to your judgement. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 12:08, 27 March 2017 (UTC)


I didn't realize you had created "Template:my-num" when I created {{my-numeral}}. Since Template:my-num was only used on one page, I've deleted it. {{my-numeral}} takes parameters for the digit and for categorizing the numeral as cardinal or ordinal. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:15, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

@Angr No problem but I have converted it to a redirect, so that {{my-new}} worked. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 08:14, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Module:sh-translit deletions[edit]

Hi Atitarev. CodeCat tagged Module:sh-translit/testcases/documentation and, therefore, Module:sh-translit/testcases for speedy deletion. You created them both, so do you want them deleted? — I.S.M.E.T.A. 21:25, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

I think she's got a solution for SH transliterations both ways, so these may be obsolete. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 21:28, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
Cool. Thanks for letting me know. I've deleted those two pages. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 21:31, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

স্বামী (sami) pronunciation[edit]

Hi, just letting you know that I've seen your question that you sent a week ago on Wikipedia. I'm just going to repeat to what I've replied on that page, in case you haven't seen it yet:

From my lame experience স্ব is probably an irregular consonant cluster that should always pronounced as ʃ. It should be similar to the Hindi ज्ञ (gy) which is really the letters jñ

AWESOME meeos * ([nʲɪ‿bʲɪ.spɐˈko.ɪtʲ]) 22:22, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

It seems too lame to me and I don't see a similarity with "ज्ञ". --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 01:03, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
Oh well, it was my guess anyway. What I meant by the similarity with ज्ञ was that it was an irregular cluster, just like the Bengali — AWESOME meeos * ([nʲɪ‿bʲɪ.spɐˈko.ɪtʲ]) 01:21, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
It's not an irregular cluster, it's quite common. However, in স্ব, the "b" is always silent. Whenever the letter ‍্ব follows another consonant without a vowel, the "b" is always silent in Bengali, so স্ব is pronounced /ʃ/. —Stephen (Talk) 04:10, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
@Stephen G. Brown Thank you, Stephen! We regularly transliterate () as "s", even if it's pronounced /ʃ/. Now, how should we transliterate স্ব (s)? "sb" or "s" before I add it to the test cases module? My Bengali phrasebook transliterates স্বামী (sami) as "shaami". I couldn't find any standard regarding this digraph. I think we should use "s", unless there are objections. Also calling @Aryamanarora, DerekWinters, Wyang, Kc kennylau.
The other thing, I'd like to discuss is, whether we should ignore shwa dropping for Bengali altogether, like Nepali and provide manual transliterations when the inherent vowel is silent. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 08:27, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
I remember that the way Nepali dealt with schwa dropping was putting < > in words that dropped the schwa. For Bengali however, we should use < > for words that keep the ô, and there are much more words that drop the ô and it would be more efficient if we could use less of < >. — AWESOME meeos * ([nʲɪ‿bʲɪ.spɐˈko.ɪtʲ]) 08:39, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
Actually, let's use "sb" for that diagraph. I did actually ask kc_kennylau to improve the Bengali translit module, just like he did for the Hindi one — AWESOME meeos * ([nʲɪ‿bʲɪ.spɐˈko.ɪtʲ]) 08:41, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
No, we should be descriptive in our transliteraterations. It's pronounced śami so let's transliterate it like that. We can't expect readers to know that sb = ś. —Aryamanarora (मुझसे बात करो) 12:15, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
I agree with Aryamanarora. I don't really care much about the underlying orthography. There are so many languages and scripts, with so many rules, and people can't be expected to know about ‍্ব being silent. I would transcribe clusters with the silent ‍্ব by dropping the "b" from the transcription. The same with ত্ব ("t" instead of "tb"), and so on. I also prefer schwa-dropping, as we do in Hindi. Some languages such as Bengali are (like English) not very phonetic, so a Lua module cannot be expected to get Bengali correct every time. The module is very helpful, but not always perfect. That's good enough for me in most cases. —Stephen (Talk) 13:02, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
@Stephen G. Brown: Nepali also has irregular pronunciation. Probably more than Bengali. What Wyang was able to do was to rewrite it phonetically in the Nepali script and use the transliteration for the phonetic and the orthographic versions. C.f. गाई (gāī) (गाइ (gāi)), for example. We can use both romanisations, perhaps? — AWESOME meeos * ([nʲɪ‿bʲɪ.spɐˈko.ɪtʲ]) 13:15, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
I don't think I would like to see double romanizations. It places too much emphasis on the romanizations. Respelling with phonetic script is very helpful, but it's also a pain to implement. It would be nice to have the capability, but I would not use it myself. I would hope that some other enterprising editor would take on the job of phonetic respelling. Some dictionaries include phonetic respellings, at least on some entries, which is nice. —Stephen (Talk) 13:25, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
We should also be mindful that the pronunciation /ʃ/ is West Bengal Bengali, and not Bangladeshi Bengali, which tends more towards /s/. DerekWinters (talk) 19:24, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
I have added স্বামী (sami) and ত্বক (tôk) to Module:bn-translit/testcases with the expected readings "sami" and "tôk". The pronunciation of ত্বক is confirmed at Forvo. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 00:31, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
@DerekWinters: I've put in both pronunciations in the entry, are they accurate? —Aryamanarora (मुझसे बात करो) 20:52, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Question about short adjectives in poetry[edit]

You have said before that the occurrence of short adjectives in poetry doesn't really count because this is a special usage. Can you explain it?

For example, the word дательный should probably not have short forms, as it's non-comparable. Yet in a poem I find this (see [1]):

Иногда мы слишком винительны,
Оскорбительны и невнимательны,
Хорошо еще, что родительны,
Потому что тогда мы – дательны.

The adjectives here are definitely in predicate position, and the rest of them (except родительный) seem reasonable as short forms.

Another example (see [2]):

Ласкайся взахлеб, за живое
Юлой напряженье держи,
Бери, где сошлось без припоя
И дательны все падежи.

Yet another example, which isn't formatted as a poem but may be one anyway (see [3]):

Мы станем добродетельны Мы станем тихонравны Мы станем безусловно родительны и дательны

Thanks. Benwing2 (talk) 02:44, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

@Benwing2 The usage in the poetry, especially in the examples above is definitely a special and rare case. It sounds funny and the words are used not in their normal sense, e.g. "мы дательны" means here "we give", "we are the giving", "we are the ones who give". да́тельный (dátelʹnyj) doesn't have this sense (in the normal usage) and has no short forms but the theoretical forms are used here. If we add short forms without any notes, it would be misleading to learners. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 02:51, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
@Benwing2 I would also this usage is deliberately incorrect to add a humorous effect.--Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 06:48, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
There's also a vulgar piece of prose for describing Russian cases, no short forms but used in a funny way;)--Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 06:50, 21 April 2017 (UTC)


Hi, I got an email from you today that looks fishy. Did you actually send me anything? --WikiTiki89 02:49, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

@Wikitiki89 Hmm, it's a worry no. Could you forward it back to me, please? I hope you don't have to block my email address. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 02:51, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
I don't want to proliferate it because Gmail is warning me that "it contains content typically used to steal personal information". But it basically says that you shared something with me on DropBox and wants me to click on some links. The subject is "Kindly view". You should check your sent mail if it shows up there to see if you sent it to anyone else. --WikiTiki89 02:57, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
No, I don't have anything of the kind in the sent items. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 03:00, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
Either way, you should have your system checked for viruses. Whatever it is has access to your address book, and is at least spoofing your email address, if not using your actual email account. Chuck Entz (talk) 03:35, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
It's a Yahoo account, which was compromised. I have applied a recommended security setting. I hope it fixes it.--Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 07:16, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

What you said at my page is insulting and groundless for the most part[edit]

You can always say "I'm sorry". d1g (talk) 07:53, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

What part of "collaborating with you is disgusting" should be taken as a sign that you're trying to reach a consensus? You've created large numbers of bare-bones, incomplete entries, with "etymologies" taken from a grammar and implemented with a bunch of slap-dash improvised templates- I would say "not impressive" is being generous. The fact that you've pretty much stopped for the moment is good, but you've switched to heaping abuse on everyone within range, which isn't. Choosing someone who stood up for you against another admin as the main target for that abuse isn't exactly a stroke of brilliance, either.
I'm sure you don't care what any of us think, but someday you're going to have to learn to work with other people. Chuck Entz (talk) 09:42, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Javanese script in lemmas[edit]

Hello. You told me something earlier today, so I just wanted to see what you think about this. As you may or may not know, Javanese is currently written in both the Latin and Javanese scripts. When I was looking at Javanese lemmas, I realised that some Latin-script words seem to say 'Romanised form of [insert javanese script here]'. However, there is the opposite way around, where the Latin-script is the main entry and the Javanese is a red link. What do you think of having everything the same? ** laki-laki keren itu (yang terbaik dalam segala hal) ** 07:56, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

@TatCoolBoy Hello. I know almost nothing about Javanese but according Module:languages/data2 (search for m["jv"]) both Roman and Javanese are equal and I don't know, which script is considered standard, official or most common. It seems editors choose themselves, what script to use for main entries and which entry becomes secondary. We don't have a policy on Javanese, which would be in Wiktionary:About Javanese. It's a good idea to make a choice, which should be the main entry and make a soft redirect or alt form for the other. Opinions on this may differ among editors. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 12:45, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
Concerning about the bahasa entries, I'm going to redirect them to its root form, if you don't mind. Also with orang. ** laki-laki keren itu (yang terbaik dalam segala hal) ** 04:19, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
That's good, thanks. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 04:31, 5 May 2017 (UTC)


Do you have any experience with Mongolian? I tried to fix the etymology according to the Wikipedia page for Arxan, but I can't be sure of course. ---> Tooironic (talk) 12:20, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

@Tooironic Not much, apart from being able to read the Cyrillic Mongolian. I have tried to improve the entry. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 12:32, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. ---> Tooironic (talk) 12:41, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Here's another entry that I'm having trouble with: 白玉. Could you take a look when you get time? Thanks. ---> Tooironic (talk) 15:04, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
@Tooironic I don't know Tibetan. The entry lacks etymology or term templates. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 21:18, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

people's republic[edit]

I don't know much about the etymology of this term, but when I encountered the etymology, it was very hard to read, and some of the cognates mentioned do not look as appealing as the other, better formatted etymologies. It seems that you handle with these things well (according to your babel), so would you mind if you could review it? Thanks! ** laki-laki keren itu (yang terbaik dalam segala hal) ** 09:50, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

@TatCoolBoy Thanks but you're exaggerating my skills in etymologies, besides this is an English entry, I don't normally work on them. You have already RFC'ed it, so let's see what people are going to do about it but please be patient. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 09:54, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
Okay, no worries! ** laki-laki keren itu (yang terbaik dalam segala hal) ** 09:55, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Almost 40,000 Russian lemmas[edit]

I remember awhile ago when you noted that we had hit 30,000 lemmas. We're now at 39,944. Benwing2 (talk) 18:26, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Great! Good work! --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 19:35, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

See Appendix:Gikun Usage in Meiji Version of Japanese Bible/智慧[edit]

Ordinarilly I would ask Erikir but he seems to be extremely busy these days and I am still waiting for responses to a couple other things I've asked him about, so I decided I'd pose this question to you. I found that my source for quotations has an obvious printing error, so I decided to add a "Citation note" to this page which quotes the verse in which this error is found. I corrected the error in the quotation, but the reference still points to the online copy which has the misprint. Is this a satisfactory solution? What whould you recommend? 馬太阿房 (talk) 20:41, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Hi, your solution seems satisfactory to me.--Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 22:07, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for your response! 馬太阿房 (talk) 04:51, 22 May 2017 (UTC)


Privet! I created the item Робин a few days ago and I wasn't sure if I used the declension templates correctly. Could you verify the article for me? Robin van der Vliet (talk) (contribs) 19:24, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

@Robin van der Vliet Yes, it's correct, although I don't encourage making Russian entries, if you're not familiar with the grammar, etc. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 05:53, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

best Russian-English dictionary[edit]

What is the best Russian-English dictionary available on the web? I have a pretty good paper dictionary but I'm having difficulty finding a good electronic one. I often use the translation component of [4], which gives the output of various dictionaries, but it isn't always reliable. In this case, for example, I'm trying to figure out the translation of невыезд, which seems to mean approximately "prohibition on leaving a given city or country". Google Translate offers up the translations house arrest and recognizance, but these are not the same things, and neither is correctly described as a prohibition on traveling. Benwing2 (talk) 14:25, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

You can try 1. [5], which is a bit annoying. It keeps shouting at you to log on. May give lots of example with English translations (other languages are available). 2. [6]. Be careful with users' additions in multitran, which can be either useful and misleading.
Monolingual (Russian): 3. [7] and 4. [8] (the latter doesn't perform quite well, it doesn't load 100% for me, I have to make it stop loading). In you can tick dictionaries you want to look up in. Nothing's perfect. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 14:52, 26 May 2017 (UTC) also searches bilingual dictionaries. I would say it's probably the best source since what it does is search real published dictionaries. --WikiTiki89 15:30, 26 May 2017 (UTC)


I wonder if you could take a look at this. This page includes words where we disagree with ruwikt about whether to have е, э or both. Last year you got up through д or so. I looked up the words up through п in Ivanova and added notes as to what she says; I trust her more than Avanesov (old-fashioned) or Reznichenko (inaccurate). The possible notations to add are ok = keep our pronunciation, ru = use ruwikt's pronunciation (the other one listed), е = е only, э = э only, еэ = list е then э, эе = list э then е. Thanks! Benwing2 (talk) 04:17, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

I finished adding Ivanova notations. You can use the notation Iv to indicate that we should use Ivanova's pronunciation(s). Benwing2 (talk) 05:04, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

уйти and уходить as abstract and concrete verbs[edit]

You reverted my change to уйти which removed the reference to it being a concrete verb. It is not in fact a concrete verb. Уходить is also not an abstract word. Both of these words are pre-fixed verbs of motion and they do not contain direction as part of their semantic definition. See Please reverse your last edit to reflect my correct changes. Willwsharp (talk) 01:46, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

So what? уйти and уходить form a pair - the former is concrete but the latter is abstract. Prefixes show the direction but it's not only the direction that determines whether a verb is concrete or abstract. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 02:19, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

English is a beautiful language[edit]

Hello. I created English is a beautiful language, based on Appendix:X is a beautiful language. As you may remember, the appendix deviates a bit from the normal entry format. But don't get me wrong, I'm not complaining. The idea behind the appendix is great and appendices tend to be formatted in random ways, so it's normal. Anyway, I attempted to do these changes in the new entry: 1) used {{t}} rather than {{l}} for all translations, 2) removed full stops from the end of sentences and 3) un-capitalized the capital letter in the beginning of sentences except when applicable.

I see that you have added a number of translations in the appendix since you created it in 2011. If you have the time, please check if the entry is A-OK. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 14:45, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

Sorry but it can't be A-OK since they all wrong. Do you expect me to translate all those to use "English"? Otherwise, what's the value of this duplication? It was a good exercise in the appendix but I agree with commenters in the RFD that it's not a very useful phrase in a phrasebook. We can change the style of the appendix.--Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 21:43, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
Alright, naturally I'll accept if that entry fails RFD. However, there's another "keep" vote besides myself. The translations are not wrong (as in, I believe you and others added the correct translations with the current language instead of "English") It's more valuable to be able to say "X is a beautiful language" in the current language than to say "English is a beautiful language" in all languages so I don't think we should not translate them to use "English". That is the same with the 2nd translation table of do you speak English and I don't speak English. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 21:55, 6 June 2017 (UTC)


Please explain your revert of my edit. The word has a very specific English translation in the context of data structures and memory management. If you attempt to follow the generic translation ("heap or pile") and call the data structure a "pile", you will be laughed at. Tetromino (talk) 01:13, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

@Tetromino Sorry, I misread your edit diff in a hurry. I thought you have added sum of parts фибона́ччиева ку́ча (fibonáččijeva kúča), not as a usage example. I have reinstated your edit. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 01:18, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. But for reference, a Fibonacci heap is not a sum of parts. If you disagree, try to derive the algorithms from knowing only that they use Fibonacci numbers somewhere :) Tetromino (talk) 01:29, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
When an English entry for Fibonacci heap is created and not deleted (passes RFD), we can revisit. We're dealing with words, not concepts, no matter how important they are. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 01:33, 10 June 2017 (UTC)


Cinemantique's noun list includes the noun дубненец, which I can't find in any dictionary. It appears to be a colloquial term for an inhabitant of Dubna, but I don't know if this is correct or where the stress is. Can you help? Thanks! Benwing2 (talk) 20:18, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Yes, correct. Not colloquial, normal. 1st syllable stressed.--Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 21:35, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
Somehow I got the impression that Дубна (Dubna) was stressed Дубна́; at least, this is what ruwiki says. If so, it would be interesting that ду́бненец has stress on the first syllable. Is ruwiki wrong, or are there multiple possible stresses of Дубна or something? Benwing2 (talk) 22:28, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
OK. I created ду́бненец (dúbnenec) and Дубна́ (Dubná). You might want to check the stresses of the entries for Дубна́ (Dubná), дубне́нский (dubnénskij) and ду́бненец (dúbnenec) and make sure they're all correct. Benwing2 (talk) 22:35, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
After checking some sources, дубне́нец is the correct version. I actually thought it was pronounced Ду́бна, that's why my confusion. It's how the citizens of Duban pronounce it (дубне́нец). There are various forms, claimed by, most of them are disputed. It seems дубне́нец and дубне́нский are preferred over others. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 07:24, 12 June 2017 (UTC)


Do you know of a Russian source for this word? DTLHS (talk) 00:06, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

@DTLHS Done.--Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 00:16, 24 June 2017 (UTC)


Please unprotect the article. NightShadow23 (talk) 16:58, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

No. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 17:08, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
Why? I will not delete skut͡ɕnə. I need to add sources from the dictionaries. NightShadow23 (talk) 19:22, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
How do I know what you are going to do you and how well you are going to do it? You don't inspire trusts. You see, your first and the only contributions are removing info from скучно, edit-warring and my talk page. A blank user page with no info on languages you know and how well you speak them. That entry doesn't need much improvement but you can post the info on the talk page or a sandbox first. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 00:42, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
There are errors in the article. See ru:скучно. Correct the English article:
  • IPA(key): [ˈskuʂnə] (phonetic respelling: ску́шно)
  • (Saint Petersburg, now proscribed) IPA(key): [ˈskut͡ɕnə]
  • (file)
    NightShadow23 (talk) 11:55, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
Errors? You didn't like North Urals and Siberia? By all means. There's no error, the information is correct but those regional contexts are not referenced. Providing references for each pronunciation is an overkill. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 12:08, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
Only St. Petersburg, not North Urals & Siberia. This is one of the mistakes. Remove (Moscow) from [skuʂnə], this is a literary language, which is used in Russian (1, 2). NightShadow23 (talk) 16:32, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
You don't understand. There are defined standards - Moscow and Saint Petersburg|, even though "Moscow" is the default standard. When there are differences between the two, these labels are used. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 19:48, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Bug: Devanagari and Arabic combining character handling[edit]

Hey Anatoli, @Stephen G. Brown, @Wikitiki89, @ObsequiousNewt;

Just in case you are not subscribed to the ticket, the devs have closed the now years-old ticket about combining characters in search. Since it was filed the search has changed a bunch, it would be great if those of you who had insight about this issue could comment on whether or not you feel the issue has been fully resolved or still needs work. - [The]DaveRoss 18:08, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

At least here on Wiktionary it's already been resolved for a few months. I am very satisfied with it and have not found any bugs. PS: Your ping didn't work for some reason. Did you sign with ~~~~? --WikiTiki89 18:44, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
@TheDaveRoss Thank you very much! It's great that it finally happened. Yes, it has been fully resolved. I'd like to personally thank TJones (Trey Jones) for fixing it.--Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 22:00, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
@Wikitiki89 For some reason I always forget to capitalize the "T" in your name, I am guessing that is why the ping didn't work. My bad. Glad the issue is resolved. - [The]DaveRoss 22:46, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
Nope, I was right the first time, no idea why the ping didn't ping. I did sign with tildes. - [The]DaveRoss 22:47, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Добавление родов в венецском[edit]

Добрый вечер, я видел ваше изменение [9] и заметил что одно такое же нужное для венецкого языка (код. vec). Прошу вас тоже добавить, вроде на строке 2467. Спасибо --Tn4196 (talk) 16:58, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

Добавил. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 23:11, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
Спасибо --Tn4196 (talk) 15:37, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Magic words[edit]

Why are you reverting edits to include RFC magic words? They will break in upcoming versions MediaWiki. —Justin (koavf)TCM 07:17, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, how will a string "RFC 2229" break anything? Why does it create a link? Anyway, Robert Ullmann died many years ago and his pages should probably stay as they are and be protected from editing, unless they really cause some errors. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 07:22, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
If Robert Ullman intended these to be links and the links will no longer be supported, we should try to ensure that his pages display as they did before. That also means that "RFC 2229" should be changed to RFC 2229 rather than to rfc:2229. --WikiTiki89 11:42, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
@Atitarev: Strings like that create magic words but those are deprecated. If you would like a link to the discussion, I can find one. @Wikitiki89: I agree that if the original author was trying to make a link, it's worth trying to preserve that. The exact form is not as important to me but making it look the same is probably better. —Justin (koavf)TCM 15:50, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
OK, I've undone my edit. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 20:53, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
Unrelated to this discussion, but the discussion has inspired me to create the MediaWiki sense of magic word. PseudoSkull (talk) 23:23, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

software malicioso etc[edit]

Hi there. Back in June you deleted this and several other similar ones in several languages (I'm not sure why). The plurals are still hanging around and can be found in Category:Plurals with a red link for singular. Would you like them to be deleted as well? (or you can do it yourself) SemperBlotto (talk) 07:03, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

You can delete them, they are all SoP. They will probably be deleted by a bot later. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 07:05, 6 September 2017 (UTC)


At least in US English, a blanket cover is a particular type of покрывало, while a duvet cover is a particular type of пододеяльник. It makes no sense, but that's the English language for you. I corrected пододеяльник accordingly. Tetromino (talk) 19:54, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

I don't see it a big deal. The term is usually translated as both "blanket cover"and "duvet cover" but there are always local nuances. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 23:04, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
Duvet is one of those "official" terms found on products in stores, but no one on the streets really knows what it means. --WikiTiki89 21:42, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
Really? I always thought that a duvet is understood to be a composite blanket: a sort of sandwich panel with down or other thermal insulating material in the middle. While a non-duvet blanket can be homogeneous, e.g. just thick wool. Tetromino (talk) 12:16, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
Our statements do not contradict each other. You might be right about what duvet means, but I think the average American does not know or care, and even if they do, they don't use this word at home. --WikiTiki89 14:24, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

New Hindi dictionary online[edit]

[10] If you ever need to add Hindi. It's the best one of recent times. Apparently it's been up since 2012, but there are no links to it anywhere, not even on the DSAL homepage! —Aryaman (मुझसे बात करो) 22:35, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

@Aryamanarora: Wow, looks good, thanks! BTW, have you worked out any reliable tricks to determine the gender of Hindi proper nouns? I do use some for Arabic but there are some issues, especially considering that plurals of inanimate nouns=feminine singular in Arabic. With Hindi, I use adjectives in masculine or feminine form but the hits are not numerous enough to be sure one way or another. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 09:59, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
@Atitarev: I do the same thing, usually with अच्छा (acchā). {{R:hi:Dasa}} also has genders for some proper nouns. But no, there is no reliable method. —Aryaman (मुझसे बात करो) 10:01, 13 September 2017 (UTC)


For pronounciation, I do not use /æ/ for schwa (indifferent vowel = vowel which is NOT written as alif (ا). In all such cases, I use /ə/.

Plural is "mwagən" /'mwæ.gən/ (For transliteration, I would not use "e" in English, this letter having a pronounciation tending to /i/. I use it in Walloon, where, as in French, it can be easily read /ə/.

Here, and in 95 % of cases, ݣ is pronounced /g/. In some words, there can be a "classical" (rural?) pronounciation with /g/ and a "modern" (citadine?) with /q/ (عقد عڭد) (to bound); ڭفّة / قفّة (basket). I prefer the "g" type as reference word, the "q" being classical Arabic pronounciation.

--Lucyin (talk) 13:35, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Indef Block of anon[edit]

Looks like you indefinitely blocked an IP address (Special:Block/ can you review and shorten that block? Thanks - TheDaveRoss 12:58, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Hmm, OK. Is it being recycled? --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 13:08, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
The theory is that all IPs are recycled eventually, so very long blocks are OK but indefinite blocks are to be avoided. - TheDaveRoss 13:12, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[edit] (talkcontribswhoisdeleted contribsnukeedit filter logblockblock logactive blocksglobal blocks)

Is a 3 month block normal for two edits? (btw: only one was rolled back, and I do not know enough to judge the second.) - Amgine/ t·e 20:48, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

They have been acting under other IP's and adding various software related SoP's. No other useful edits are seen.--Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 21:00, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
Okay, I was indulging my curiousity. Thanks! - Amgine/ t·e 21:17, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
Yeah, but if they switch IPs so frequently, then blocking any individual IP for three months is pointless. I wouldn't given an IP address such a long block unless this editor was repeatedly coming back from the block and editing under that same IP address. I find that in most cases, if you block an IP for three days or so, that's usually enough. But it doesn't matter that much I suppose, unless someone new is assigned the blocked IP and wants to edit. --WikiTiki89 21:27, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
I prefer shorter, more frequent and consistent blocks. Unless you resort to range blocks, they can always get around the block by switching IPs- but there's enough hassle involved that they get discouraged after a while. When I'm trying to get rid of a persistent IP-switcher, I block them for 2 weeks every time I recognize them, regardless of the quality of their edits. With the shorter blocks, I don't have to worry as much about collateral damage, so I can be more thorough.
One oddity about this case: the IP mentioned here is Russian, but the main perpetrator seems to be Polish. They both edit the same kind of entries, and I've found edits by the Russian IP on Basque, Azeri, Hindi and Armenian entries as well as the usual Slavic languages, so they're not that much more responsible than the Polish one (for the Hindi entry,सॉफ़्टवेयर, the Polish IP created the entry and the Russian one tinkered with it afterward). I suppose that since they both have the same problematic approach, it probably doesn't natter if they're the same person or not as far as whether to block them. Chuck Entz (talk) 22:30, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Добавление родов в ладинском[edit]

Здравствуйте, я заметил, что так же, как в венецком, еще и в ладинском языке (код. lld) не хватает родов в автоматической системы добавления переводов. Я б вас спросил, и в том языке это добавить. Спасибо --Tn4196 (talk) 12:03, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

@Tn4196: User:Dixtosa and/or User:JohnC5 have significantly changed the code, so I don't know where the gender data is handled now. Normally, it should be requested at WT:GP. @Dixtosa/JohnC5, are you able to add genders to language code "lld", similar to the way I did in diff? --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 12:15, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
@Dixtosa/JohnC5 Thank you all. --Tn4196 (talk) 12:24, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
  • The data is now located at hereDixtosa (talk) 17:11, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
  • FYI, my JS changes are just autoformatting. —JohnC5 04:32, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

high, fashion, et al[edit]

Was there a vote not to include Chinese terms written in Latin alphabet? ---> Tooironic (talk) 05:11, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

No, I don't remember we needed a vote to state the obvious - that Chinese is written in Chinese characters. However, a vote is not a bad idea. We need to have CFI rules for Chinese and update the policies in Wiktionary:About_Chinese. Some terms have passed CFI, after citations were provided. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 07:17, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
Words like these are often used in running Chinese text with meanings that differ from remarkably from that of their English counterparts. Surely this merits inclusion. ---> Tooironic (talk) 02:25, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
Words like part-time#Chinese have gone through RFV. I'm afraid you'll have to provide citations for non-standard words. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 02:31, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
Why not use {{lb|en|China}} on the English entry then? It looks silly to have a Chinese entry at a Latin-script word... —Aryaman (मुझसे बात करो) 23:57, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
Because they're used in Chinese, not English. And I repeat: they are used in running Chinese text with meanings that differ from remarkably from that of their English counterparts. If you want to delete them, that's fine, but we should at least include them somewhere e.g. in an appendix. ---> Tooironic (talk) 04:39, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Stop harassment at my user page and everywhere[edit]

Since it wasn't clear to you in May...

I don't have so much time as I used to and Benwing2 is unavailable to kindergarten D1gggg, so I don't know. I am OK to let the community decide.

stress added by ip Bullying questions about stress

d1g (talk) 05:24, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

  • I've tangentially followed up on your talk page after seeing the Tea Room discussion. From what I've seen, Anatoli's actions do not comprise harassment. He may have made a mistake, but that's a different matter, which could have been resolved more quickly by simply pointing out the misunderstanding. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 05:38, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
I agree with @Eirikr, but it doesn't help that Atitarev makes so many personal comments as if that was their some strange goal.
Stress is easy to fix or nearly impossible to fix when word is dead?.. d1g (talk) 06:02, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
The comments are not personal, sorry if they sound personal. It's all about how you can manage editing independently, without having to heavily rely on others to check and fix your edits. If you don't have the time to look back at your own edits and learn from the current standards, then maybe you can try somewhere where the requirements are more relaxed, such as Glosbe or help Russian learners at Master Russian, Word Reference, Unilang, etc? You see, you can't expect that you edit in a language and everyone be just happy about it. If you worked in a rare or exotic language then perhaps yes, to some extent. Yes, I made a mistake but I didn't bother checking thoroughly because you made some controversial edits in the past and you were not welcome in the Russian Wiktionary and Benwing2 had a hard time with you. Anyway, I was never keen to block you but everything can change. It's not a threat. I just don't have time to mentor. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 06:16, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
I have no interest in other projects if mistakes occur here.
edit in April from @Benwing2
today edit by @Rua
I would be a happy person not to deal with self-learners over what Grammar book says :-) d1g (talk) 06:46, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
Apologies are accepted.
Dear @Atitarev please remind yourself about
do not agonize over making mistakes and pillars 3-5 overall.
You spent considerable amount of time why mistakes are mistakes, far more than I spend time fixing them.
Recent example: застреха, застрека
And nobody ever complained about my translations, example: 1 d1g (talk) 14:13, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
It's a shame, he probably could have made good contributions in Russian, if he hadn't been so obsessed with his suffixes... --Barytonesis (talk) 07:44, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
The suffixes were just the tip of the iceberg. Just about everything they did required cleanup, and that kind of abusive arrogance has no place in a wiki, regardless of quality of content. Chuck Entz (talk) 13:56, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
The guy caused a lot of unneeded trouble and has horrible manners, but I think indef is not required. A year would be more than enough, perhaps even a month, given that, before the indef, he had received only a single, week long block. --Dan Polansky (talk) 19:38, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
I am OK if someone changes the block to 1 year as a minimum. @Barytonesis, I don't think he could become a good contributor. He was blocked at the Russian Wikipedia as well, expressed his dislike at the Russian Wiktionary and said "see you at the English Wiktionary", now he's got blocked here. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 06:29, 2 November 2017 (UTC)


I was away for 5 months due to work-related issues. Any changes? Do other Russian editors still dislike me due to me making too many empty entries? --KoreanQuoter (talk) 13:43, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Hmm, I don't know what to say, Teho. Nobody dislikes you! Benwing2 has unfortunately disappeared, if you are worried about him. I still encourage you to add only the words you know, understand, know how to stress and inflect, not exotic or rare words, things you can verify from other sources. I only add what I can sort of guarantee. The less I know a language, the simpler my entries are. My Korean is worse than your Russian but I seldom go wrong not only because there is less room to go wrong with Korean than with Russian but because I only add entries I can find elsewhere - Naver, Daum or some electronic dictionaries - usually important and frequently used words or words I come across or look familiar because they have Chinese or Japanese cognates, loanwords from English. I am a native Russian speaker but I stay away from Russian entries for which I can't find translations, stress or inflection, which does happen. If I really need to, I will ask other Russians, check on the forums, post questions but I don;t do it often. I can afford much less time on Wiktionary. Why don't you want to treat your edits seriously? Please don't add empty entries, it's obvious you don't know those words and we don't have people to monitor edits. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 06:22, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

Vietnamese Tbot[edit]

Hey! You work a lot of many languages. Can you check a few of the Vietnamese entries in Category:Tbot entries (Vietnamese)? There's 46 at the moment. --P5Nd2 (talk) 10:18, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

So I wanted to create my first Russian entry and to look at a good example[edit]

It being linked from أَسِير (ʾasīr), I decided to created ясы́рь (jasýrʹ). I opened the entry коса́рь (kosárʹ) because it has the same accent pattern. I looked at the declension tables. And there is an awful lot to delete. Palaestrator verborum (loquier) 20:55, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

@Palaestrator verborum: Good job! It is correct but I have simplified the {{der}} call. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 06:11, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
You did not understand. Look at the declension table of коса́рь (kosárʹ)! The forms there are wrong and have their own pages already that need to be deleted. That is why I write you (because who else does know Russian and is admin?). Palaestrator verborum (loquier) 12:36, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
Fixed the declension, I will fix the forms later.—Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 20:25, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
 : @Palaestrator verborum: Moved and fixed wrong inflection forms. Since User:Benwing2 has become inactive, it's now a manual process. He generated the forms and had a way of re-generating them if they needed a fix. This hasn't been handed over, so, I'd rather stay away from inflected forms. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 04:48, 10 November 2017 (UTC)


Is this also a noun lemma? It seems to have been borrowed into the Sami languages with a meaning of "stick to spur on reindeer". —Rua (mew) 19:43, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

Yes. See хорей (xorej). There is a lot of additional information in Аникин А. Е., Хелимский Е. А., Самодийско-тунгусо-маньчжурские лексические связи, 2007, pages 130—131. --Vahag (talk) 21:19, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
Ah, the spelling is different. It's funny how it ultimately came from another Uralic language. —Rua (mew) 22:14, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
Thanks Vahag, I am not familiar with the term. @Rua: Sorry for the late reply but Vahagn has answered the question. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 09:31, 23 November 2017 (UTC)


Hey Anatoli, could you check the Arabic translation here, it looks dodgy. Cheers. ---> Tooironic (talk) 01:13, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Removed the obvious BS. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 02:50, 28 November 2017 (UTC)


Your edit to hospital added a translation in the wrong place in the wrong format, modified an existing translation without any explanation in the edit summary, and deleted an accurate transliteration. I assumed it was vandalism or a mistake so I reverted it. Gorobay (talk) 19:35, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

What? Vandalism? Wrong place? I was thinking of blocking you for the vandalism. I’ll let you figure out jourself first why I have removed the Oriya transliteration and removed the macron on the Moroccan Arabic. The 2nd point can still be argued but the first one should be no-brainer. —Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 19:50, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
@Gorobay: The Oriya transliteration was inaccurate actually. It's ḍaktôrkhana. —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 00:00, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
@AryamanA: Thanks, and since we may not not be too concerned about the error-prone shwa-dropping implementations, which are hay-wire in Indic modules, "ḍaktôrôkhana" is close enough. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 00:22, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
Yeah, this is even less of an issue because it's a compound of two borrowed words (English and Persian), which are pretty hard to transliterate correctly. —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 00:37, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
@AryamanA: Bengali module works the worst. It drops the final shwa, even if they follow complex clusters but doesn't drop mid-word. It's best to remove shwa-dropping altogether then. The Hindi module works the best way. When it doesn't produce what is considered right, is when it's really unpredictable, as in अलार्म क्लॉक (alārma klŏk) but I've got a feeling that this pronunciation ("alārma klŏk") is more natural for native speakers not familiar with English and we don't use the light or optional shwa-dropping rules. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад)
No, the uneducated pronunciation (which is become marginalized, only really seen in older generations and in rural areas) is alāram klāk or alāram klauk, never alārma. Word-final a is always dropped or very short in pretty much all Hindi sociolects (even in terms like हुस्न (husna)), and I've made MOD:hi-IPA reflect this. Speaking of which, it is probably a good time to start making some IPA modules for the languages whose translit modules are working, like Gujarati and Nepali.
I agree, the Bengali module definitely needs to be reworked, it doesn't work well for consonant clusters at all. Same for the Punjabi module, it mistakenly adds the schwa in words like ਵਿੱਚ (vicca). —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 02:12, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
@AryamanA: 'alāram' vs 'alārma' doesn't make sense to me with my limited knowledge but anyway. Keep up the good work and more common lemmas, please! ;) --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 03:01, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
You're right, it doesn't correspond with the spelling, it's just a way to break up the difficult cluster while trying to match the English pronunciation. And thanks, Hindi will cruise past 10,000 lemmas in no time! :) —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करेंयोगदान) 03:05, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

Appendix:Korean Swadesh list[edit]

I was putting the information from the online antique book to it. Why did you rollback it? Effficientvegetarianpc16 (talk) 20:58, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

@Effficientvegetarianpc16: There are a few issues here. The IPA used in the appendix is not the standard we use at Wiktionary. See appropriate entries. Most of them have IPA. The other issue is, if anywhere, these dialectal IPA belong to the entries, not the Appendix, which should be a very simple presentation of a common vocabulary in a given language. Before adding them, a discussion should happen about the format. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 22:11, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
@Effficientvegetarianpc16: Why are you doing this? Swadesh lists aren't meant for this. Please stop and pursue the discussion you had begun with Eirikr at Appendix talk:Japanese Swadesh list (extended), or your additions will keep getting reverted. --Per utramque cavernam (talk) 22:21, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for explanation. I just copied those words from the book and I also don't understand the non-standard IPA, for example the u with two dots on it.Effficientvegetarianpc16 (talk) 03:16, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

We need to organize translations for draft animal equipment[edit]

There is vocabulary even the most advanced learners miss, quite likely even in their native tongues. There are on the one hand words for single horse parts, on the other hand words for multiple-animal drafts. Category:Translation table appendices needs an overview page, for even if the English translation sections are full the whole picture is thrilling. Possibly we find some charts from old books. I suppose you have some better understanding of those parts? The question has arisen on Talk:arış because it turns out that we (or just I?) are so clueless. Palaestrator verborum sis loquier 🗣 18:15, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

There's no shortage of special areas that we are insufficiently informed about: building trades, sewing/textiles, entertainment, statistics, aerospace, biotech, psychology, biophysics, silviculture. I think all we can do is work on them one at a time, preferably leveraging our own interests and resources. I've picked up various references in some of these fields, but haven't felt up to the task of systematic efforts in any of them. DCDuring (talk) 20:20, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
You are right, but those are mostly really hard and always have been special, as well as possibly voluminous, whereas animal equipment once was at least to a certain extent vocabulary that everybody knew and has roughly foreseeable ends, and also the former has more inventions in each language while the latter has realistic chances to back up etymological studies. And considering the not too unfortunate categorizations on Commons it is probably even possible to acquire more expert HR. At some moment in this context I was just baffled how much knowledge has been buried by oblivion – those topics are specialist. Palaestrator verborum sis loquier 🗣 20:35, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
We have a bunch of translation appendices. Not sure if they are popular with users but they are currently not looked after well enough. I've taken part in some of them. You can always start one by looking at existing ones. The areas in need of improvement are never-ending and I don't know if we strive to be a specialised dictionary - just any word in any language. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 22:15, 2 January 2018 (UTC)


LissanX made a mistake in the transliteration. Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 22:52, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

@Kaixinguo~enwiktionary: Thanks. I have only replaced "kh" with the standard "x" for letter "خ". When you fix, could you also please check if the entry is linked and the same (wrong) transliteration is used elsewhere? --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 23:00, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Guys, I see this transliteration page as well as Category:Transliteration policies the first time, now I know why bad transliterations are so widespread. Those pages look poorly cared for and about. I am facing a kind of a dilemma now concerning when to use Transliteration policy pages and when About pages. It is also unclear why some things are in WT:FA TR and others in WT:AFA. To state a controversial claim I do not yet know arguments against except the work, I think all transliteration policies should be merged into the About pages. Proto-language entries do not use transcription policy pages either. It’s something different of course, but the form wherewith the matters are dealt with is the same. Or I just do not find the transcription policies for Proto-languages that do exist? There would be a naming conflict surely, as some people might like to create transcription policies for proto-languages but cannot use the transliteration pages. Palaestrator verborum sis loquier 🗣 00:37, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

@Palaestrator verborum: The policies can be a little haywire but you need to be aware of a few things here:
  1. Transliterations are best looked at an individual language level. The situations can be very different, although there are commonalities. It depends on active contributors, previous votes, existing policies, including WT:ELE.
  2. For languages with a 100% automated transliterations (by 100% I mean languages where manual transliterations are overridden with the automatic) the policy is now just a reflection what modules do but they are sometimes, out of sync. It is important that the module is kept working and redundant/incorrect transliterations can be safely removed manually or by a bot.
  3. For mostly automated transliterations, it is important to mention when the manual should override the automatic and the redundant/incorrect transliterations are removed or corrected by knowledgeable editors. Thai is a special case at the moment.
  4. Languages, such as Persian and Hebrew, currently and probably always will require care from the contributors in terms of transliterations. There are unfortunately, two many standards and no 100%-agreement, consistency, knowledge, skills and thoroughness from contributors.
Let's just talk about Persian. Issues at hand:
  1. Normally, it's "Wiktionary:LANGUAGE transliteration", so Persian Wiktionary:Persian transliteration is correct. Ideally, pages like Wiktionary:About Persian should only mention and link to transliteration policies. The page Wiktionary:About Arabic is not used correctly for transliteration purposes.
  2. Wiktionary:Persian transliteration is currently pretty good and should be followed but even native speakers and regular contributors sometimes replace use macrons instead of circumflexes - (ā vs â) and the diphthong "ou" is rendered as "ow". The correct form is "ou", e.g. نوروز (nouruz). We need to correct cases like فرعون, خودرو to use "ou" or agree on the policy change.
  3. Common mistakes include 1. treating غ and ق as the same letter and transliterating as "gh" but they should be "ğ" and "q" accordingly., 2. failure to use háčeks, e.g. digraphs "ch", "zh", "sh" instead of "č", "ž" and "š". --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 05:10, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
It's not true to say that 'ou' is the correct form and to imply that 'ow' is incorrect. 'Ou' represents a 'u' sound which causes confusion. That is what caused Lissanx to put the wrong transliteration at 'xodro'. He saw that it was 'xodrou' and thought that someone was confusing 'xodru' (khodroo) the plant with 'xodrow' (khodro) the car. That was purely because of the 'ou' transliteration. It is also why President Rouhani is called Roohani all the time.
This is an issue that can be decided upon by regular Persian editors. User:Atitarev, I don't want to discuss policy issues with because of how you behaved in incorrectly reverting me on 'terrorism' in the past and another occasion when you protected a page to stop me from editing it.

Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 10:09, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

@Kaixinguo~enwiktionary: It may be confusing but "ou" actually stands for [ow], not for [uː], which is normally transliterated by a single "u" without any diacritic. In my observation, regular users use "ou", not "ow" and that's why the policy page states so - WT:FA TR, see letter "و‏". We either have to change the policy and stick to it or change the entries and translations to match the policy, which is a much bigger task and best be done by a bot, if there is an agreement. The surname روحانی‎ is transliterated as "rouhâni" by our standards, not to be confused with popular romanisation or Anglicisations used in the media. IMO, "Roohani" is just wrong, so is "Ahmadinejad" for احمدی‌نژاد (WT standard: "ahmadi-nežâd").--Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 10:22, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
I am not confused in the slightest, I am not sure what makes you think I would be. I thought you were confused because you put the wrong transliteration at فرعون and then when I corrected it, you had to ask for an explanation on the help page.Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 10:38, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
I can see now you haven't understood my point. President روحانی‎ gets called 'Roohani' incorrectly in English because of the 'Rouhani' transliteration. The 'ou' looks like it should be pronounced 'oo', it is misleading (not to me, to users).
I am OK with either "ow" or "ou", as long as it's consistent and is reflected in the policy and followed by editors. Any combination could confusing or misleading, that's why we have transliteration pages. "ow" is never mentioned. I wouldn't and nobody wouldn't know your knowledge and experience if you refuse to make a Babel table on your user page. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 11:15, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
You're confused about whether Anatoli said you were confused (he didn't). The multitude of ways that English phonetic spelling is different from everyone else's phonetic spelling guarantees that there can be no perfectly intuitive transliteration- there's going to be a problem with any system. What's important is being consistent. If you're going around changing things one way, and someone else is changing things another way, there's no way to tell how any given transliteration is to be interpreted. Chuck Entz (talk) 15:03, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

thank you[edit]

i think russian entries are the cleanest and most beautiful of all wiktionary. спасибо --2A02:2788:A4:F44:E9DA:AF34:53E6:DD2F 02:46, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

I don't know if it's true that the Russian entries are "the cleanest and most beautiful of all" but thank you for your feedback. I won't take credit for all the work with Russian at Wiktionary, though. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 08:47, 4 January 2018 (UTC)


Hey Anatoli, when you get time could you help me fix the pinyin for the example sentence here? Thanks. ---> Tooironic (talk) 02:59, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

@Tooironic: I have only suppressed the linking of the number, otherwise it was perfect. The numbers or non-Chinese symbols don't get the pinyin, as you know. Otherwise, you have to respell the numbers in words. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 03:35, 12 January 2018 (UTC)