I noticed you created the article đó. There you wrote:
===Etymology===
{{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)[reply]
@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 妬. I'll check again when I get home.--Anatoli T.(обсудить/вклад)07:34, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
@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)[reply]
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 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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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
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)[reply]
@Stephen G. Brown Thank you, Stephen! We regularly transliterate স(śo) as "s", even if it's pronounced /ʃ/. Now, how should we transliterate স্ব(śo)? "sb" or "s" before I add it to the test cases module? My Bengali phrasebook transliterates স্বামী(śami) 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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
@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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
@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)[reply]
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. --WikiTiki8902:57, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
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.
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-lakikerenitu (yang terbaik dalam segala hal) ** 07:56, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@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)[reply]
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-lakikerenitu (yang terbaik dalam segala hal) ** 09:50, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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 gramota.ru you can tick dictionaries you want to look up in. Nothing's perfect. --Anatoli T.(обсудить/вклад)14:52, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
dic.academic.ru also searches bilingual dictionaries. I would say it's probably the best source since what it does is search real published dictionaries. --WikiTiki8915:30, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_grammar#Prefixed_verbs_of_motion. Please reverse your last edit to reflect my correct changes.
Willwsharp (talk) 01:46, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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 Gramota.ru, most of them are disputed. It seems дубне́нец and дубне́нский are preferred over others. --Anatoli T.(обсудить/вклад)07:24, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
There are errors in the article. See ru:скучно. Correct the English article:
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
I wonder, nevertheless, how relevant are these regional marks today, aren’t they a bit misleading. Pronouncing чн as шн was, of course, considered a feature of the old Moscow dialect, but it is long dead as a whole. Today the variation is probably for the most part idiolectal. I think it would indeed be better to look for sources covering current regional distribution, if it still exists. Older descriptions are irrelevant since virtually nobody nowadays says either конечно(konečno) or мушной(mušnoj), as they presume. Otherwise I’d just label [ˈskut͡ɕnə] as a spelling pronunciation; note how this modern dictionary, apparently prescriptional, doesn’t consider it regional, but just gaining ground among youths. Guldrelokk (talk) 05:57, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Guldrelokk: I agree that "Moscow" and "Saint Petersburg" labels are no longer current but this is how I found them and I find the background interesting. Perhaps those labels can be linked and described in an appendix. I started Appendix:Russian pronunciation but didn't have the will or interest to complete. BTW, [ˈskut͡ɕnə] is quite alive and many of my relatives use it. I hear "конечно" occasionally. BTW, fill up your user page a bit, it looks as if you're here temporarily. --Anatoli T.(обсудить/вклад)06:51, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Bug: Devanagari and Arabic combining character handling[edit]
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]DaveRoss18:08, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
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 ~~~~? --WikiTiki8918:44, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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. --WikiTiki8911:42, 13 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@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)❤T☮C☺M☯15:50, 13 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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. --WikiTiki8914:24, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@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)[reply]
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.
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. --WikiTiki8921:27, 25 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
Stop harassment at my user page and everywhere[edit]
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 mig05:38, 13 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with @Eirikr, but it doesn't help that Atitarev makes so many personal comments as if that was their some strange goal.
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)[reply]
I have no interest in other projects if mistakes occur here.
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
@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(alārm 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 करें • योगदान)02:12, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
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 करें • योगदान)03:05, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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 verborumsis loquier 🗣20:35, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
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 verborumsis loquier 🗣00:37, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Palaestrator verborum: The policies can be a little haywire but you need to be aware of a few things here:
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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)[reply]
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: 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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
@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)[reply]
Thanks for that. Ideally we should display the pinyin readings for numbers, since that's the whole point of having the pinyin there in the first place. We display pinyin for number entries too like 0.5, 69, etc. ---> Tooironic (talk) 01:00, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I think the translations are OK, not perfect but acceptable. The SoP translation is linked with separate words, which is the normal way of doing it when no idiomatic word or expression exists. --Anatoli T.(обсудить/вклад)05:38, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, the longer translation only had 9 results on Google which made me suspicious but I can see now that only related to whether or not it had an acute accent on the 'e'. Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 10:26, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Kaixinguo~enwiktionary: Thanks for letting me know. We need handle this in the community. The anonymous editor makes substantial edits with no edit summaries and refuses to communicate. You can post in WT:RFC, if I don't do it earlier but I might only do it withing a day or two. I will spot-check a few edits before posting. --Anatoli T.(обсудить/вклад)01:28, 12 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I've been wondering about that, but they geolocate to Saudi Arabia, and I can barely read the script, let alone check the finer points of the morphology. If they're just editing the Arabic, there's always the possibility that they aren't comfortable communicating in English (though we've also had a number of bad editors who just pretended not to understand). Chuck Entz (talk) 14:40, 12 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I raise your attention and @Benwing2’s to the habit of this IP trying for three years furtively to undermine the parallelism of {{ar-coll-noun}} and {{ar-decl-coll-noun}} and {{ar-sing-noun}} and {{ar-decl-sing-noun}}, so on عِنَب(ʕinab), عِنَبَة(ʕinaba), وَرَق(waraq), وَرَقَة(waraqa), ثَمَر(ṯamar), نَوًى(nawan) and many more. The purpose of the named declension templates has the clear use in showing declensions of both singulative and collective in one table. This IP is unable to discern the real relations between the words of singulative, collective, paucal and plural of variety, since he apparently thinks that وَرَقَات(waraqāt) is the جَمْع(jamʕ) of وَرَقَة(waraqa) but أَوْرَاق(ʔawrāq) the one of وَرَق(waraq) or something like that, separating conceptionally wrong by assigning the paucal to the singulative and the plural of variety to the collective and making undue distinction here, confused by his impotence in English language and discourse and the insufficiency of the categories used in Arabic discourse about the forms; the edits are also not consistent, sometimes only the table is changed, sometimes also the header, or maybe sometimes only the header. It is always the same person, never speaks, never translates usex etc., mostly only removes forms. I remember @Robbie SWE having enquired about the quality of that IP’s edits but I cannot find the thread anymore. Fay Freak (talk) 12:44, 9 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Anatoli ... I am back for now. I have a bunch of Russian words to add. Let me know if you need anything done. Benwing2 (talk)
@Benwing2: Welcome back, mate! It's been a while. I'm glad you're back.
We might need your help with Belarusian transliterations - make "ё" in monosyllabic words unstressed but there's no need to produce "o", it's always "jo", unlike Russian.
Before you disappear again, LOL, could you make something we can run to delete, create and recreate inflected forms if there are any changes to inflections? No rush, just joking. :) --Anatoli T.(обсудить/вклад)04:37, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. I just wanted to verify that it was indeed you who joined the English Wiktionary Discord server under the username Anatoli#3617. If you reply here that it was, I'll give you the administrator role there. PseudoSkull (talk) 04:11, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, would know whether 'дасткаш' really exists (apart from in meanings other than 'glove')? I can only see it in one Russian-Tajiki dictionary. I can see more usage of 'дастпӯшак' but even then there are not many results, so I just deleted the 'fa-regional' template because the person who added 'дасткаш' made some unreliable edits, apparently. Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 11:17, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Atitarev: Thank you. I saw it in Google Books but that could be the same dictionary as your site. I am a bit wary as there are so few results. I will try and find out more before restoring it. I find that alphabet quite difficult, though. Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 11:49, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Kaixinguo~enwiktionary: Thank you. If it can't be verified, then maybe it should be deleted but perhaps Tajik belongs to badly documented languages? Do you mean Tajik Cyrillic script is difficult? But it's very phonetic. You can use {{m|tg|TAJIK TERM}} to help you pronounce it. Occasionally you may see letter "ц" (c) used in that dictionary, which is not transliterated by the Tajik module, mainly in loanwords from/via Russian. The modern or correct spelling seems to be "тс" (ts). --Anatoli T.(обсудить/вклад)12:00, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Atitarev: I don't know whether Tajiki Persian is badly documented, but if it is then I think it is only insofar as it broke away and used a different script. If they return to the Perso-Arabic script then wouldn't they be re-connected with the rest of their literature and documentation? But that is a political issue and I don't know anything about it.
I think I can verify дастпӯшак, but as for дасткаш, I don't know if you noticed but the first result for it is a Facebook post asking what it is, which doesn't exactly inspire confidence. Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 15:16, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
TBH I think I'm going to leave this for now, so just restore дасткаш and дастпӯшак to the fa-regional template at دستکش if you feel like it. Maybe there is a Russian word, too. Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 15:32, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Kaixinguo~enwiktionary: Sorry, somehow I forgot to answer but I don't know. I'll leave it up to you. We are not supposed to have words, which we can't confirm but there is a possibility that this word is only used in spoken Tajik and is never written down or is a regional word. --Anatoli T.(обсудить/вклад)12:11, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Kaixinguo~enwiktionary: Sorry, it happens when trying to edit in multiple tabs. Fixed now. BTW, "و" as a consonant is normally transliterated as "v", even if it leans on /w/ but there seems to be no desire to standardise the transliteration among Persian editors or no consensus on how to. --Anatoli T.(обсудить/вклад)14:46, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
As for vocalisations, they can serve as a base for a semi-automated transliteration and IPA for Persian and another, native method how to indicate the pronunciation. --Anatoli T.(обсудить/вклад)14:48, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Atitarev: I meant I would have pronounced it like this: 'soo-aa-zee-land', that is why I changed 'svâziland' to 'suâziland' (sorry I don't know the IPA). 'Sv' can't really occur at the beginning of a word. Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 14:58, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Kaixinguo~enwiktionary: You don't have to ping me on my talk page, I'll get notified, anyway:) I see. There are hits for "savâziland", not "sevâziland" - suggesting that some people pronounce it that way but it makes more sense for "sevâziland" and the pronunciation resources for Persian, especially loanwords are not reliable. For "suâziland" is the respelling still سوازیلَند? --Anatoli T.(обсудить/вклад)15:05, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I don't like the name of it, but: {{harakat-fa}}. I knew I had seen it somewhere. In Persian, you don't put all those sokuns etc., though, in the way it has been used already. This kind of thing is for children's books in Persian. Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 00:32, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Kaixinguo~enwiktionary: Thanks. Yes, I know, Persian vocalisation is simpler but also different from Arabic, short vowels are "e" and "o", not "i" and "u", as in Arabic and بی is "bi" بِی is "bey", بو is "bu" and بُو is "bou". I'll check the template. --Anatoli T.(обсудить/вклад)01:10, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, as I've been 'banned' from discussing things with him on his talk page, if possible could you ensure that his entries are either formatted or deleted instead of building up, that would be great. Thank you. Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 16:27, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Kaixinguo~enwiktionary: You're not banned from discussions but I don't know why you're enabling him by communicating with him. Gfarnab is out of control, his edits are maybe 80-90% right, depending on the language and the source he's copying from but he completely disregarded all warnings, so he got blocked. I'll leave it up to you - mass-revert, fix his edits or ignore them. --Anatoli T.(обсудить/вклад)23:06, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
How is it up to me? Whatever happened with him is nothing to do with me. All I cared about was whether the Persian entries were being maintained. There is no-one available to fix his edits in Persian. I don't agree with the Persian entries being allowed either as they can only be copied from other sources. Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 00:34, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Kaixinguo~enwiktionary: Let me explain. The situation with Persian entries edited by Gfarnab and his numerous sock-puppets is no different from entries in other languages he has edited or vandalised. He was blocked for bad edits but he's bypassing all blocks, coming back and laughing at us. @Chuck Entz, Wyang, Wikitiki89 and others have blocked him but he doesn't stop. What do you want me to do? We don't have a tool to mass-undo his edits (but we do have a mass-delete of new creations) at the moment and we don't want to punish other honest editors because of one abuser. --Anatoli T.(обсудить/вклад)00:51, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I can tell, this isn't Gfarnab. To start with, this doesn't seem to be an anonymous proxy. Also, the other technical details also don't match. Unless they're using a different device and the IP address is a proxy that the geolocation databases don't know about this is apparently an actual Kazakhi mobile user. Of course, both of the above are entirely possible, but the straightforward expression is more likely. Chuck Entz (talk) 21:00, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It seems like the rollback link should appear in the bar on the left as "rollback all", and it only shows up on "Contributions" pages, and only if there are edits that can be rollbacked. I can't actually test the functionality because I'm not a rollbacker. :p —Suzukaze-c◆◆17:52, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Have you got an example of je t'en prie or je vous en prie in the sense of here you go? [12] — I cannot imagine any, but maybe there is? Regards, — Automatik (talk) 00:48, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
In this forum, the example — Merci. — S'il vous plait. is given, which means basically that s'il vous plaît is used in the sense of you're welcome. Is you're welcome a synonym of here you go then? Do you say “— Thank you. — Here you go.”? (I'd say rather “— Here you go. — Thank you.”). — Automatik (talk) 11:22, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You're right; that forum example is slightly strange actually, precisely because of that reversal you're pointing out. Je dirais plus volontiers : "Tu saurais me passer le sel ? – S'il-te-plaît. – Merci."
(edit conflict) If you read the definition and the gloss for "here you are", it says: is said when you hand something over. English words for this are not very clear but in many languages, there is a specific idiomatic word for when you're offering something to someone or hand over something to someone. Cf. German bitte (interjection, sense #3), Russian пожа́луйста(požálujsta) (interjection, sense #3), Japanese どうぞ(dōzo) (sense #2). --Anatoli T.(обсудить/вклад)11:34, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, even though here you are is used not only when handing something over to someone, whereas s'il vous plaît seems to be used only in such a case. Anyways, I've added the mention Belgium for these translations. — Automatik (talk) 17:12, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I slightly prefer having a basic gloss, but empty is fine too if you're unsure about the meaning. Thanks for expanding Mongolian, are you learning it currently? Crom daba (talk) 21:49, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Crom daba: I will do my best and add basic glosses. No, I am not learning Mongolian, although I should. I served in a Mongolian desert for two years in the Soviet army with very little exposure to locals. I've got some interest in learning basic Mongolian. --Anatoli T.(обсудить/вклад)09:30, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Awesome job. Please let me know what a reasonable rhythm of requests would be; I don't want to flood the category, as it can become discouraging. Perutramquecavernam10:18, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Per utramque cavernam: Hi. No problem so far. I don't want to set any rhythm yet. I've been always adding translations into languages I can handle and I will now keep in mind that Belarusian translations are wanted. I will do other things I have planned and like doing in Wiktionary as well, though, when I'm active. --Anatoli T.(обсудить/вклад)07:07, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Per utramque cavernam: Hi. I don't mind adding Russian, Belarusian or other translations and I've been doing that but sorry, necessary condition and sufficient condition is the kind of cruft I have been trying to stay away from, well, mostly. We need more translations to necessary, sufficient and condition and all the important and basic words and they are endless but any combinations, no matter how important the concepts are, are not so important for a dictionary and to language learners. You need to know the basic components to translate combinations. --Anatoli T.(обсудить/вклад)06:53, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Atitarev: Looking back on it, yes, I agree it's the same kind of cruft I was dissing :p How ironic!
@Per utramque cavernam: Hi. I think I have overestimated my ability/desire to fill all requests for Belarusian translations quickly. Please slow down. :) I will continue adding them, but over longer time. I should have set some limits when you asked about the rhythm. I would also encourage you to maybe do some work yourself on very basic Belarusian, so that you learn and show that your interest is genuine, not just for the sake of filling those translations and forget about them. --Anatoli T.(обсудить/вклад)12:07, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Anatoli. Could you have another go at it? It would help me with my goal of reaching 3000 Belarusian lemma entries. (some pretty important words are missing translations in other languages you're interested in, so I think it could help you as well) Chignon – Пучок12:54, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think the list exists for Belarusian. I just happen to visit frequently used words over and over again to add/check translations, I just know. You can use English or Russian frequency list to check cognates or translations but it takes time. I don't know if you keep track of words you add requests for but they disappear from the list once the request is filled. I noticed in the past that many requests stayed red-linked, so you didn;t do anything with them :) I also feed discouraged to translate some words requiring SoP translations (impressionable), too many senses (encouragement) or some are just a bit too difficult to translate (exasperating). I am not fluent in BE, I just find it easy.--Anatoli T.(обсудить/вклад)13:52, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Chignon Heya, I have been adding dozens of Belarusian translations but (if your target is to create those red-linked entries), I am not sure you tracked them well. Many are from CAT:Requests for translations into Belarusian but many are not. I don't necessarily fill the oldest but often the oldest request. Once the request is filled, it goes away from the category, so if it's not on top of your Watchlist, then you won't notice. That's my observation. --Anatoli T.(обсудить/вклад)00:53, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Chignon: Useful tool, thanks, pity it doesn't show red links and won't trap my additions if I add them in the edit mode - when copying from a more common synonym's translation. --Anatoli T.(обсудить/вклад)04:24, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Kaixinguo~enwiktionary: It's OK. No-one cancelled {{qualifier}} template yet, so it's legal. I've been working with multilingual word translations for years and used a similar method every now and again and seen others doing the same. If no equivalent exists in your language, what do you do?
Give a descriptive SoP translation with each word separated in square brackets.
Ignore - not always good - missing translation may mean nobody bothered or knows the right translation.
@Chuck Entz: UkraineCityNameRepository (talk • contribs) is clueless/sloppy. The etymology of the Ukrainian term Залі́сся(Zalíssja) they described with Russian words за(za, “behind”) + лес(les, “forest”), which is for the Russian cognate Зале́сье(Zalésʹje). The Ukrainian Залісся is obviously derived from Ukrainian words за(za) + ліс(lis) + gemination + -я. No brainer but they stuffed it up. The English proper noun entries are OK but lacking some stress marks on Slavic terms in etymologies, which are required. --Anatoli T.(обсудить/вклад)05:18, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
When you're talking about extreme measures like we use for them, a reality check is good every once in a while. I had no clue whether their bad editing carried over into their Ukrainian edits, but they obviously do. I've now blocked them as a sock-puppet and mass-deleted or reverted all their edits. Chuck Entz (talk) 05:35, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Do you know how to protect against creation? —20:46, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
I have no admin experience, but it is certainly possible, as I have seen it happening. I guess it's done where you would normally protect a page, but you protect against creation instead of editing or moving. SURJECTION·talk·contr·log·20:48, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
For most of people, their first language(L1) and their nation's official language are same. So, people can easily confuse these concepts. But academically, it's a little bit diffrent.
Let me give you an example. Belgium has three official languages: Dutch, French, German. If a man who has Dutch-speaking parents was born in the Flemish, Dutch-speaking region, this baby's mother tongue(모어) will be Dutch. But the French is also can be his '모국어'. Because, he's a Belgian, it means that Belgium is his '모국'(母國). --Nuevo Paso (talk) 10:16, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Anatolii, I am trying to add pronunciation to សិរិ, but without success. It is both a verb and a noun. The verb and noun have different pronunciations. I added the two pronunciations, but it ignores the second pronunciation and uses the 1st pronunciation for both. —Stephen(Talk)21:29, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Stephen G. Brown: Stephen, I think there's no way around it at the moment, rather than to manually transliterate the second (third, etc.) pronunciation. It's the same issue with Thai entries, I believe. In multiple pronunciations, comma-separated or in separate sections, the first one is default. @Wyang, Octahedron80: Am I right, is there another way?
There is a way in multi-pronunciation entries: |phon= can be used in the headword templates to specify the phonetic respelling for that headword line. Wyang (talk) 08:35, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@L-native: I will answer here, not on your talk page but I'm sure you will be notified, since I am using {{ping|L-native}} with your user name and my signature in the same edit. I was using some a pinyin IME from chinese-forums.com for years, then Wenlin dictionary, which automatically converts pinyin to tone marks when tone numbers are entered. Everyone does it differently, finding their own way. We don't really have a tool designed to enter pinyin but Chinese editors get by without it. You can copy from https://www.mdbg.net/chinese/dictionary, Google translate (watch for wrong pinyin and capitalisation) or Latin/Roman template at the bottom of your edit window in the edit mode here, at Wiktionary. Many modules and templates automatically transliterate, unfortunately not for translations, e.g. 減輕／减轻(zh)(jiǎnqīng) doesn't transliterate but 減輕／减轻 (jiǎnqīng) does and provides a simplified form.
Thank you for your reply. Actually I got an alert rather than a notice.
This is very helpful. I find the mdbg.net website can simply solve my problem, so I simply bookmarked it. Google Translate is not a good choice, because it is blocked in China. Using a VPN can cause other problems, for example the IPs are already blockede by some Wikipedia versions.
It seems there are still a lot for me to learn in order to use WikiMedia sites in a efficient and proper way. The templates and modules seem to be not available cross versions, don't they?
I did realize that was not your name, a bitter late after my response. Sorry for the misunderstanding. :)
Something not related to this topic. Is there a way to fix a broken Template? I find a Template has been edited into a page. It is not here in wiktionary, but in a version of wikibooks. I am tryting to contact someone who seems to be administrating it.
@Tooironic & @Atitarev Well indeed, translate.google.cn can be accessed and used, but it is not good enough. One of the reasons can be that Google Translation is not built in a top-down way, but adjusted by users. The more people use it, the better it get. Due to the block of Google services, its user group becomes very limited in Mainland China or Chinese-speaking people. Sadly. And google.cn is just a dummy site. --L-native (talk) 09:09, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Fay Freak Well, I realize it is possible and I do know how to type in German umlauts directly, without an IME. However after screening the source codes you provide, I still don't have an idea how to input Chinese pinyin characters. Is there a specific tutorial? L-native (talk) 08:46, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Which means you press the fourth level of the key AC11 (i. e. the eleventh key of the ASDFG row) – because there is dead_caron – and the the first level of the U key to obtain ǔ.
Assuming you need characters with breves, not with carons:
The compose file contains: <dead_breve> <u> : "ŭ" U016D # LATIN SMALL LETTER U WITH BREVE.
Which means you press the fourth level of the key BKSL (i. e. on physical keyboards spread in Germany the twelfth key of the ASDFG row but on some physical keyboards elsewhere – called BKSL because the Anglo-Saxon layout has the backslash there) – and the first level of the U key to obtain ŭ.
The compose file contains: <dead_macron> <o> : "ō" U014D # LATIN SMALL LETTER O WITH MACRON.
Which means you press the fourth level of the key AD12 (i. e. the twelfth key of the QWERTZ/QWERTY row) and the first level of the O key to obtain ō.
This is a small amendment to what I previously suggested: Don’t used de(basic) if you use the German layout but de(deadtilde) because de(basic) contains “asciitilde, macron” instead of “dead_tilde, dead_macron” (which latter you need for one of the tones) after someone coming from Windows complained that it is not like on Windows so they changed the default. de(deadtilde) is the same as de(basic) but replaces the AD12 key, as you see in the code of the de file. You can see yourself now, I think, the other combinations and what needs to be pressed if you use us(intl). The data files are pretty legible. Fay Freak (talk) 19:29, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Fay Freak Err, I must say it needs much tech knowledge to understand what you are talking about. Eventually, I figure out how to type in them. Thank you for your explanations. --L-native (talk) 11:30, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi all, Let me summarize with two simple solutions.
1. You can use websites, e.g. https://www.mdbg.net/chinese/dictionary or Google Translation to type in Chinese once and then copy the pinyin and the Chinese characters and paste.
2. Using a extened keyboard layout. Here it is English(US, intl. with dead keys) layout with a compact standard English Keyboard(only the left part) under Linux/Ubuntu.
This layout of keyboard has four levels of keys, usually two levels with shift to switch. To use the third level, hold the right-alt. To use the fourth level, hold the right-alt and shift.
For pinyin, there are four tones for one vowel. For example for o, there are ō, ó, ǒ, ò.
ō: first tone with a macron, right-alt + right-shift + 3/fourth key in the second row, release and then press o.
ó: second tone with a acute, right-alt + o.
ǒ: third tone with a caron (not a breve, which is round), right-alt + right-shift + ./period, release and then press o.
ò: fourth tone with a grave, `/first key in the second row + o.
I have several additional suggestions for pinyin and Mandarin,
Chinese Mandarin is called 官话 in Wiktionary:Babel. This sounds strange to me. Although its meaning is totally correct, I haven't read this in other places. Can you change this into 普通话, which is typically used for Standard Chinese/Mandarin in Mainland China? 官话 itself sounds also historical.
Now the pinyin is suggested to be added in a continous manner. The example is zìmǔ for 字母. Since it is possible to have a translation of five or more Chinese words for one English word, isn't it better to use a separated way?
Inputting pinyin is still a very tedious work. Is it possible to write some script, which can convert the tones. For example, after I input zi2 mu3, it will be automatically converted into zì mǔ.
Hello. The word "democracy" in Thai language is ประชาธิปไตย. And พรรคประชาธิปัตย์ (พรรค + ประชาธิปัตย์) is Democrat Party in Thai language. Thanks. --Garam (talk) 09:21, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The word is not included in any dictionary; it is only found as the party's name (proper noun). I think this cannot be kept. FYI: -อธิปไตย is derived from Pali whereas -อธิปัตย์ is derived from Sanskrit. --Octahedron80 (talk) 01:17, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Octahedron80: Thanks. If the term is attested as used in the party name only (never separately), we could use something like {{only used in|พรรคประชาธิปัตย์|lang=th}}. Please see ру́сски(rússki) for a Russian example. You can add usage notes/labels, if you want.
(after I mentioned "matryoshka doll" as a synonym for complex situations in English) "we don't use матрёшка as a synonym for complexity; we use 'чёрт ногу сломит' = devil would crack himself? devil will break his leg?"
Sorry for the possible idiocy of my post because I don't speak Russian. But I feel like we might be able to get a proverb or two out of this. Equinox◑23:44, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Equinox: Hi, sorry for the late reply. Pls don't call me comrade, just Anatoli.
It's a joke about people who try to justify their theories, no matter how stupid or unrealistic, with statements about some unknown/imaginary British scientists who already that point. No entry is required, it's not a very linguistic feature.
I think you misused of the template my-IPA. The respelling is just used to describe how to read, and then to convert into IPA, not how to spell. You can make other pages for alternative spellings. --Octahedron80 (talk) 03:47, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! Get it. However, I still prefer the minimalized respellings ပျဉ္ဉာ. A respelling should indeed inform the dictionary used how this word should irregularly pronounced this way, as effective as possible. If possible, I'd like to add a symbol to mark Pali ည to make it a ဉ္ဉ instead of processing it in the Burmese way. --173.68.165.11405:32, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@173.68.165.114: The idea of the phonetic respelling is to show the phonetics, i.e. how to say the word, which affect the two phonetic romanisations. So, different letters with identical pronunciations (including their effect on the tone) should be merged into one letter. --Anatoli T.(обсудить/вклад)05:40, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! Stalin (and Ста́лин(Stálin)) is defined as "a surname", but is it? I thought it was just a codename that Josef made by combining сталь + -ин; does anyone (else) bear it as a last name? (Did anyone have it as a last name prior to Josef?) Relatedly, is Lenin a surname? The English entry defines it as only referring to Vladimir Ilyich's codename derived from the Lena river, but then the etymology mentions him borrowing a passport from a Nikolay Lenin, suggesting it's also a surname some people have... - -sche(discuss)23:42, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@-sche: Yes, they are considered code names or what they called in the USSR, "pseudonyms". псевдони́м(psevdoním) = nom de guerre, pseudonym. There are various theories about why these names in particular. Ле́нин(Lénin) has two or three: 1 and 2 Solidarity with Lena massacre, which happen on the Lena river and Lena river itself, 3. A real person named N. Lenin. I'm not really sure, if these don't qualify as surnames. Let me think about, meanwhile, you can start a topic in WT:TR and invite Russian speakers and other interested people. --Anatoli T.(обсудить/вклад)
I sincerely advise you against creating entries based on Wikipedia articles only. While Wikipedia is a great source for getting an idea for certain words, the editors of certain Wikipedias (like Min Nan and Zhuang) seem to have particular tendencies in their language use. As I've also mentioned before, there may also be one-off translations, which would not fit WT:CFI. I'm ok with using Wikipedia for pronunciations, but making entries is different. For example, many of the country names in the Zhuang Wikipedia don't look "right" (or "standard"). I'm not sure if those country names are actually used in certain dialects of Zhuang, but this dictionary from the Translation Bureau gives very different names, e.g. Ngozlozswh vs. Ezlozswh, Audaliya vs. Audaihleihya. I think we should stick with the Translation Bureau's recommendations for now, especially because they are used in 广西民族报. — justin(r)leung{ (t...) | c=› }23:39, 19 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Justinrleung: Thanks. I've also got a big Japanese-Mandarin-Min Nan phrasebook at home with Min Nan audio recording. Bought it in Japan. More like a textbook. Interesting that it doesn't have a single word, which is not in Chinese characters. I'll share the title with you later, if you wish. --Anatoli T.(обсудить/вклад)00:42, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This resource would be impressive for someone who wants to learn Min Nan - even if there is not much explanation of the grammar one has to figure out based on the translation and other examples. I am not actively learning it but I thought I'll invest in it. I cannot judge the accuracy of each Min Nan translation but it looks like a lot of effort was put into it. The recordings must be done by native Min Nan speakers. --Anatoli T.(обсудить/вклад)06:10, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I came across this bit of text and I'm having difficulty translating it properly: Когда тебе уже лень играть, но ты не можешь остановиться. I'm not sure what уже(uže) means in this context. The literal translation of the first half seems to be "When you already have laziness to play" which doesn't make any sense. —Rua (mew) 21:26, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Rua: You can translate it as “When you no longer want to play but you can’t stop”. “Лень” is impersonal here and “уже” can mean “no more” in a negative sentence. Мне лень/неохота писать - I don’t want to write, я уже не могу бежать - I can’t run any more. I will check if our entries cover these senses. --Anatoli T.(обсудить/вклад)23:50, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Anatoli, how have you been? Today a professor mentioned in class a Russian man as the only translator of 史記 into a European language (Russian). He said his name was something like Rudolph Vyatian (sp.?) but I can't find him online. Could you help me have a look? He must be pretty famous, at least in Russia. ---> Tooironic (talk) 02:38, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, many thanks for that! I've been well, just busy with my research. At the moment I am focusing on translations of Chinese classics into Western languages, and was surprised to find that none of the 二十四史 has a full translation into English. Obviously, they're huge texts, but they're also very important texts. I hope one day I can lead a team to translate one of them in full. Also, the 三禮 texts, which will probably be the focus of my doctorate thesis. 禮記 and 儀禮 have translations but they are over a hundred years old, and 周禮 has none at all. ---> Tooironic (talk) 06:13, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
you've added a Uk: translation as uk:гуртка at mug article. What is the word source ° meaning. Sum.in.ua does not nkow nothing about it. and my G-books search also. Please, if such word exists, to write an uk article--Albedo (talk) 08:10, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
thank you for answer, it's interesting indeed. But I noticed, that moyaosvita is autotranslation which not prove accoracy of terms (не можна докладно вірити чи справді ці слова вживаються у властивому їм значенні), it is not aditor-proved text, and so I can belive|вірити| is the term correct or not. Are other sources to assure in reality of such word? I've try exact search, i.e. parenthesis |"гуртка"| for Gbooks in UK lang direction. --Albedo (talk) 12:43, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Albedo: Зараз я не можу знайти джерело від того часу, і я теж не можу знайти в словниках, якими я тепер користуюся. Це було дуже давно. Я вважаю, що цей переклад можна видалити, так як це слово рідкісне (якщо воно взагалі правильне) і можна додати більше вживані слова. Я не володію українською вільно, як видно за моїм профілем. Якщо ви бачите не зовсім ідеальні переклади українською, будь ласка, виправляйте! --Anatoli T.(обсудить/вклад)13:19, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
the problem is not that. I'm native speaker, and I suppose, and I know more--less lexicology (+/-) but this word seems me interesting altough not verified (not seen) yet. And I seek appropriate translation for жбан (|mug | jar). І тут таке! (and here this!)--Albedo (talk) 13:29, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Albedo: Вам доведеться самому пошукати, так як я вже не можу підтвердити, що цей переклад правильний. Пошукайте в різних формах і контекстах. А я пізніше виправлю переклад mug. Успіхів! Нам потрібні українські учасники. --Anatoli T.(обсудить/вклад)13:43, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Anatoli, any idea how we can correct the simplified display of 瞭望 here? When 瞭 is read liào it is used in simplified, and should not be 了. ---> Tooironic (talk) 04:09, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, Carl, you can use "/" to put the required simp. values, e.g. 瞭望／瞭望 (liàowàng) or 瞭望 (liàowàng), see also 臺灣／台灣／台湾 (Táiwān), which uses three forms. See Template:zh-l/documentation, basically it's {{zh-l|TRAD_FORM/SIMP_FORM/FORM3|Transliteration|Gloss}}.
Hi Anatoli. Check out the synonyms for 著手 and 入手 and you'll notice the former lists 5 while the latter lists 4. Is there a way to fix this bug? It seems to arise because the headword specifies a simplified form (著手/着手). ---> Tooironic (talk) 09:30, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Canonicalization: {{d}} is for speedy deletion, i.e. deletion without discussion. The page was originally tagged with {{d}} for speedy deletion, which I declined because the entry had been around for many years and had been edited by several different editors, and I didn't feel qualified to summarily delete it just because one user says it's a misspelling. We do allow misspellings at Wiktionary if they're common (see CAT:Misspellings by language; and many things that one person considers a misspelling turn out later to be archaic spellings or eye dialect or something else that is actually keepable. In my opinion, this entry should have gone to RFV rather than RFD (and certainly not speedy deletion), but it's gone now so it doesn't matter anymore. —Mahāgaja · talk09:57, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Как я пойму можно мне в итоге добавлять церковнославянские термины или нет? Сколько уйдёт времени на решение этого вопроса, а то у меня запал пропадёт. ПростаРечь (talk) 07:30, 16 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Да и что в старославянском мене разве не генетив? (мене ради, тебе ради)
В общем я приношу прощения, но я продолжу пока добавлять термины, так как код как старославянского, так и для церковнославянкого един, а заголовки разные, если придут к мнению, что обойдутся без церковнославянского (всяко может быть, хотя на русском wiktionary два этих языка уживаются вместе), то сам и откачу. ПростаРечь (talk) 07:44, 16 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@ПростаРечь: Привет и добро пожаловать. Да, добавлять, только пожалуйста, используй принятые нормы, например, мы используем "Old Church Slavonic", а не "Church Slavonic", хотя если найдёшь примеры "Church Slavonic", нужно будет разобраться почему и принять решение. "Old Church Slavonic" в основном соответствует "церковнославянский" язык. Ты спрашивал у людей, какой шаблон использовать для новых статей. В основном, участники работают по существующим статьям и в режиме редакции, если выбрать "Templates and Headers", можно найти много распространённых шаблонов и заголовков. Обрати внимание, что в английском викисловаре много усилий потрачено на нормализацию глифов и букв, ведь многие источники непоследовательно их используют. Для церковнославянского смотри Appendix:Old Cyrillic script (для древнерусского Wiktionary:About Old East Slavic), Module:Cyrs-Glag-translit, конечно Category:Old Church Slavonic lemmas. Найдёшь интересными Category:Proto-Slavic lemmas. Надеюсь, что запал, если и пропадёт, то не так быстро :) --Anatoli T.(обсудить/вклад)10:15, 16 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ок, но честно говоря не совсем понял, почему "Old Church Slavonic в основном соответствует церковнославянский язык."
Хотя про нормализацию честно говоря я не особо понял и вообще мне это слово просто ужас преужасно не нравится, например в Острожской библии везде используется оу или Ꙋ, например блꙊдити, а тут https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Category:Old_Church_Slavonic_lemmas указано блѫдити, блꙊдити в словарь добавлять запрещается? или же я должен везде старославянское Ꙋ подменять на оу? то есть вместо оригинала блꙊдити писать блоудити или последнее также запрещается?ПростаРечь (talk) 11:09, 16 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Простите, но мне нужно понимание на конкретных примерах.
Ꙋ(U) - заглавная буква ꙋ(u). Я не могу решить, так как я лично не работал со старославянскими или церковнославянскими шрифтами. Правильно наверное будет блꙋдити(bluditi) - похоже это альтернативная, более новая форма блѫдити(blǫditi). За неимением кода, можно наверное давать ярлыки, типа {{lb|cu|New Church Slavonic}}. Если это станет серьёзной проблемой и есть поддержка сообщества, то можно инициировать Wiktionary:Requests for moves, mergers and splits - раздел "Old Church Slavonic" на "New Church Slavonic"/"Church Slavonic" -- вести новый код языка, напр. "chu". Пример "нормализации", чтобы тебе понятно было, это когда символ, которого нет на клавиатуре или для удобства, от незнания или лени заменяют на что-то другое, например кавказская палочка ӏ на символ на латинское "I", при нормализации такие символы приводят в норму, то есть пишут как положено, а не как в источнике (неправильно). --Anatoli T.(обсудить/вклад)11:33, 16 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Попробовал вставить в шаблон "New Church Slavonic", но мне как-то это не очень визуально приглянулось, вроде сначала "Old Church Slavonic", а потом сразу "New Church Slavonic", на мой взгляд, это может привести читателей статьи в ступор или может быть я просто куда-то ни туда вставляю.
+ Для старославянского пишут, что должен использоваться символ ꙑ, тогда как для древневосточнославянского он является предпочтительным, но не обязательным, в Острожской библии вместо него используется исключительно ы. + также использование в Острожской библии е вместо старославянской ѥ.
If this is true, it means that these forms are rare and obsolete. You reverted my edit changing them from archaic to obsolete, which would mean that the above usage note about быть isn’t true. As a native speaker I imagine you would know how rare those forms are or aren’t, and whether they are understood by a typical modern Russian. I just think these two situations (the usage note and the archaic tags) are incompatible. Dylanvt (talk) 06:25, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Dylanvt: Sorry for simply reverting your edits. I think the label "archaic" describes best how these forms are now viewed and perceived. Most are not even understood or known by a typical modern Russian. BTW, you very seldom need to provide the manual transliterations for Russian terms, e.g. есмы́(jesmý) or есмы́(jesmý). --Anatoli T.(обсудить/вклад)06:31, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Atitarev: I see. But the glossary on Wiktionary says that obsolete means "No longer in use, and (of a term) no longer likely to be understood." If these forms "are not even understood or known by a typical modern Russian", wouldn't that make them obsolete? Archaic is defined as "No longer in general use, but still found in some contemporary texts that aim for an antique style." Dylanvt (talk) 06:42, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Спасибо. Я очень плохо разбираюсь в шаблонах и технике вообще, но стараюсь, поскольку хочу вносить сюда какой-то языковой вклад. Dylanvt (talk) 07:04, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I guess we have to give Kazakh verbs a sort-out, since many should be categorised as verb forms.
In the past I made many entries which were supposed to be categorised as reciprocal, passive, reflexive or causative voices. Besides, transitivity, persons, modes, aspects and tenses should also be considered altogether.
@Vtgnoq7238rmqco: Sorry for the late reply. Creating an appendix is actually easy, just Appendix:APPENDIX NAME and add meaningful categories for the right language and topic. You can always refer to existing appendices for other languages. As for verb entries, you can use labels, eg {{lb|kk|transitive}} and that will add a verb to the right category if it's already defined. If you find that a label doesn't add to the expected category, it doesn't exist or is red-linked, you can act depending on what it is. If you require new templates or modules, it may require more work and more people involved but try approaching it one thing at a time, eg start handling reflexive verbs if they exist in Kazakh. If it's a technical issue, you can ask at WT:GP, if it's a policy question, you can ask at WT:BP. --Anatoli T.(обсудить/вклад)02:17, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
According to the Mongolian MFA website and also the Standardised Dictionary, sovereign states like Romania, Hungary, Ukraine, and Georgia (also Mongolia), which having no additional words clarified their types of polity in full name, are treated as countries as Румын (улс), Унгар (улс), Украин (улс), and Гүрж (улс); but as states with full name as Румын Улс, Унгар Улс, Украин Улс, and Гүрж Улс. Compounds in the latter form may also to be treated as proper nouns. LibCae (talk) 23:07, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@LibCae: I understand but it's the same type of scenario we are having predictable qualifiers for many other languages with words for rivers, cities, countries, languages, mountaiuns, countries, etc. Thai: ภาษาสเปน (language + Spain), Vietnamese: người Nga (person + Russia), Chinese 泰晤士河 (Thames + river) or 北京市 (Beijing city), Japanese: 富士山 (Fuji + mountain), etc., etc. These qualifiers are important, no doubt but they add very little to the dictionary. So, Румын Улс is completely predictable. We can have entries for ภาษา(paa-sǎa, “language”) and สเปน(sà-bpeen, “Spain”) but there's no point for having a full-blown entry ภาษาสเปน(“the Spanish language”) (it's a redirect). Some cleanup has been carried out for major languages, Mongolian hasn't been discussed for obvious reasons.
"Румын Улс" can be added as a usage example or a generic usage notes can be added to each country name, e.g. to Румын(Rumyn):
Hi, I notice that you haven't been updating User:Atitarev/Chinese topolect entries to be checked. Maybe I haven't been checking on it as often as you want, but I still would like you to update that page so that I don't have to go through your edit history to check. If you still haven't noticed (with the pings I send you in edit summaries and the comments I put on your page of topolect entries), I don't think you've gotten the hang of it yet. There are still many mistakes in your edits. If you'd like me to send you additional resources, I'd be happy to send some more over to you. Just try to be a bit more careful with your edits. — justin(r)leung{ (t...) | c=› }04:19, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Justinrleung: Hi. I apologise again for the mistakes and thank you for your corrections. The mistakes were silly but not always necessarily made by the lack of understanding but by not focusing properly, as you probably guessed. I still want to continue adding a few dialectal readings myself but I won't persist if I make more mistakes.
I'd be happy to look at more resources but making it easier to follow and map the existing documentation would also be helpful. I will add the characters I edit, so nobody has to go through my edit history for checking and correcting.
I have recently edited these Chinese character entries (apart from the characters on my check page): 城, 市, 熱, 凊, 冷, 蠻, 真, 太, 很, 晚, 早, 雨, 筆, 畫, 買, 賣, 把, 吶, 拿, 鱉, 鼠, 等, 找, 找, 島, 兒, 久, 姓, 聲, 音, 輪, 藥.
You probably noticed, I mostly select the most used (or important) characters. I promise I won't insist on editing dialects I don't know much about if I continue to make mistakes. I do care about my reputation and I don't want to cause grief to anyone. I have worked on Wiktionary for many years and learned to deal with many complex scripts but I needed time and support before I got better and even efficient. Thank you for your understanding! --Anatoli T.(обсудить/вклад)09:41, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Justinrleung: Thanks. I think what can be done short-term, just the mapping to an online dictionary, similar to how WT:AZH/Wu has rather detailed mappings to the transcriptions used in the 吴音小字典·吴语小词典 (Minidict). If the 漢語多功能字庫 Multi-function Chinese Character Database is the best topolect dictionary, it can be used as a source and appropriate project pages could have the mappings. E.g. some of these differences in Jin confused me originally:
Thanks for the suggestions. I'll add these later when I have more time. There are also some problems with our current IPA transcriptions - too much phonetic detail for phonemic transcriptions. For example, the nasalization on those Jin finals you listed are completely predictable from the following /ŋ/. I'll have to look into whether we should have both broad and narrow transcriptions. — justin(r)leung{ (t...) | c=› }01:41, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Justinrleung: Thanks. If they are broad vs narrow transcriptions, it's fine. I'll leave it up to you, which to choose. If we have a note (in a separate optional column), it will be easier to map and understand. Also with Gan /-t̚/ vs /-ʔ/ difference in the finals. Maybe occasional tone number divergence could be mentioned or clarified. I will add some more differences so that they can be collated later when you have more time. --Anatoli T.(обсудить/вклад)02:14, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hallo, I wonder if you are also active on en.Wikipedia, or know someone who is? I see that the map at Ozerki is of Africa! I am not sure how to fix it. PJTraill (talk) 23:37, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Tooironic: No, I don't have a source. "nèige" is a more colloquial form of "nàge" and this filler only happens in the colloquial speech. That's my experience but you had more exposure. I question "nàge" in the filler sense, since I never heard it used that way but let me know if you did or have a source. --Anatoli T.(обсудить/вклад)06:51, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Done. :) You can also use the label "Chinese calligraphy". Wyang (talk) 08:03, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
