User talk:Conrad.Irwin/一

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

I archive my talk page when it gets to ~75 topics by moving the first 50 to a new subpage. Please do not edit the archive pages, if you want to talk about something again - copy it back to my current talk page or just start a new topic there and link back.

Debian Indic[edit]

Hi, An updated help file is here; Ref--Praveen:talk 13:02, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Great, looks much more thorough now. Conrad.Irwin 13:03, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Kudos for the FL wikt links[edit]

Wiktionary:Beer parlour#Proposal: a template for linking prominently to foreign-language Wiktionaries. came out looking really nice. Thanks. --Bequw¢τ 18:55, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Ditto. --EncycloPetey 21:35, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
Do we want to add this to the default javascript for anonymous users? Or shall we keep it as a WT:PREF for a bit longer/for ever? (Should really ask on the GP, but seeing as you're talking here...). I feel a bit abashed taking the credit for this, Ruakh did all the hard work with MediaWiki:langcode2name.js. Conrad.Irwin 21:41, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
I'd say give people a chance to get used to it, and to try it out for at least a week or so, along with a poll in the BP. If no serious objections are raised or problems noted, we could dispense with having a formal vote. --EncycloPetey 00:44, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
Agreed, that's a good path for trying to get it out to the public. --Bequw¢τ 12:58, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Japanese?[edit] Are you sure that this is a Japanese word, it's using the Latin alphabet... Conrad.Irwin 09:20, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

It's used in Japanese fiction to represent an "international" look. It's wasai-eigo. 10:42, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Special:WhatLinksHere/Wiktionary Appendix:Latin third conjugation[edit]

Hi Conrad,

Just FYI, I've undeleted Wiktionary Appendix:Latin third conjugation pending the clearing-out of Special:WhatLinksHere/Wiktionary Appendix:Latin third conjugation.

RuakhTALK 18:10, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, I thought I already undeleted that one. Sorry. Conrad.Irwin 18:17, 22 April 2008 (UTC)


Hi Conrad, thanks for the help, it's usually easier for me to just copy what everyone else does than to wade through the sometimes lengthy instructions! (LOL). How about you see how bad I screwed up longe and if I have to fix something there, let me know (or just show me how it's done? Hint, hint..) Thanks! Montanabw 20:28, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Your code[edit]

You gave these lines in March and they placed the show tag right after the title text. When I've tried them now to my Monobook.css that's not what they do. Why would this happen differently? I have cleared the cache.

.NavToggle {
  display: inline !important;
  position: static !important;
  float: none !important;  

Best regards Rhanyeia 09:07, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Urmm, I haven't really looked at it since then - though as the site Javascript and CSS have changed a lot in the mean time I am unsurprised (Ullmann's float fixing, and the other testing we've done) - I'll have a think about how to get this behaviour with the new setup. Conrad.Irwin 12:04, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
Thank you very much. :) I was trying to figure out how to create a demo for this discussion, and some things I tried didn't do what I was expecting them to do. That's why I tested your code again, and then it didn't do the expected thing either. If you think about the code, could you also think that could MediaWiki:Monobook.js file be such that if one sets the show tag to "width 100%" then the whole 100% where it goes would become clickable? Best regards Rhanyeia 07:28, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

If "show" was in the middle, could your earlier code where you made the whole bar clickable be altered so that the right side of the bar would be clickable starting from "show"? I'm using this code to place the tag to the middle:

.NavToggle {
  width: 53%;

div.NavFrame div.NavHead {
  text-align: left !important;

Best regards Rhanyeia 16:15, 26 May 2008 (UTC)


Your comment does not appear to be true for my computer set-up. --EncycloPetey 01:23, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Have you tried clearing your cache? What you should see is bluelinks being the normal color of links (usually blue or purple), but redlinks being black, so you can only tell they're links if you hover over them and get the pointer, underline, and tooltip. (Whether this is in fact the desirable behavior is an open question; but that's what it's currently designed to do.) If after clearing your cache you get a behavior that's different from what I've described, please explain in what way it's different.
Thanks in advance!
RuakhTALK 02:03, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
The red links are red. --EncycloPetey 02:04, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

I know of no reason this should be. If "Template:Notred" is red after a hard refresh then I am at a loss to explain it. Conrad.Irwin 10:37, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
This problem seems to have been sorted by logging out, then back in at Mike Dillon's suggestion, but see below. --EncycloPetey 12:16, 28 April 2008 (UTC)


Thanks, Conrad. All is fine. If you looked at the matrix linked from my user page you'll see I have a passel of accounts and past usernames. Yesterday, I started creating some 'anti-impersonation' accounts using my oldest username as I would like to prevent them ever being created for harassment purposes (which has happened a lot). Is there any concern here about my doing this? And, perhaps, is there a cleaner method than my creating them only to request immediate blocks? First-up would be User:Davenbelle. Cheers, User:Jack Merridew a.k.a. David 10:31, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

As far as I know there is no real concern, but you'd also be (as far as I know) the first person ever to bother here. It seems a bit pointless to create such accounts - if they crop up later they can be blocked, there's no point in trying to pre-empt everything - because there are an infinite number of possible similar account names. Conrad.Irwin 10:38, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
I'll do the Davenbelle account as that was my original username. There are several different vandals who have impersonated me quite a few times and I wish stay ahead at this point. I certainly will not attempt to predict any of the infinite variations that are possible. Note that I had to usurp 'Jack Merridew' here (and elsewhere; see here - and User:Davenbelle aka Jack Merridew and User:Jack Merridew returns). If you see any accounts that are some sort of knock-off of any of the accounts in my matrix, do use a sharp stick on them. Cheers, User:Jack Merridew a.k.a. David 10:47, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
Done; please block User:Davenbelle — sans-autoblock. Thanks; hopefully you're right that this was not needed. Cheers, User:Jack Merridew a.k.a. David 11:02, 28 April 2008 (UTC)


Please don't do this. Your approach has a number of serious flaws that should be worked out first. BiT started trying this approach some time ago, but I pointed out that it won't work with Latin. One of the big problems is that the number of rows and columns are variable for the various Latin declension templates. The number of columns can be 1, 2, 4, or 6. There are also extra rows if the noun has a locative case. There are also situations where there is more than one form in a box, or where a footnote must appear with a particular cell.

Besides the technical problems, I have serious reservations about useful visual information that is being lost with the proposed new format. It would have been really nice if some discussion had happened before starting these changes. I do keep Wiktionary:About Latin on my Watchlist, you know. --EncycloPetey 12:14, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Feel free to revert my changes - that is why MediaWiki keeps the history. While I would discuss large site-wide changes, these templates are included on about 300 pages and so editing them a few (or more than a few) times will have no major impact on wiki. There are a number of big advantages to having these "worker" templates in the background, primarily it guarantees consistency and reduces the number of templates that we have to edit when we decide that the current format is too ugly (which is almost guaranteed to happen every couple of years).
I'm not sure what you mean about "loss of visual information" - the new templates take exactly the same parameters and give the same textual output (minus the Number column heading). The template {{la-decl}}, by design, takes the contents for each cell "raw" so anything can be put into the cells (including footnotes), though in the current templates there are no parameters to allow this - it is something that could be added easily.
To solve the locative problem I suspect it would be better to instead of using numbered parameters for the worker templates use {{{nomsing}}} or a similar naming convention, so the presence of {{{locsing}}} could trigger the insertion of the Locative row. For different numbers of columns, the best solution is different worker templates - as the whole layout would be slightly different.
I will update {{la-decl}} to take named parameters and allow the optional locative - as this won't make any outer difference to the templates. Though as I said, if you want to go back to the old format then just revert my changes to {{la-decl-1st}} and {{la-decl-2nd}}, and I'll play around until I have some more acceptable worker templates. Conrad.Irwin 12:56, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
But that still does not account for the variable number of columns. Many nouns have only a singular, or only a plural, and these will have only a singlke column. Add to that fact the problem that many locative forms exist in only singular or only plural forms. That is, the optional locative may only appear in the singular or may only appear in the plural or may appear in both, depending on the noun.
Some of the lost visual information includes: (1) delinking the words at left (nominative, genitive, etc.) These really should be linked for the user, and also should be visually set off from the inflections themselves, (2) centering the inflected forms, which is bad because it makes it (a) harder to compare the various endings between forms where the stem doesn't change and (b) much harder to spot those forms where the stem changes, (3) eliminating the lines that separate rows and columns might be fine for some of the smaller declension tables, but for a table like the 6-column monster for albus it will make it very difficult to relate forms to the column and row headers, (4) the "colors" you've chosen are so light and so similar than I didn't notice the columns were different colors until I looked at the template coding. These are four that came to mind right off.
Note also that, even if we do switch to the new style (with some changes, though I'm not sold on anything yet), there is an additional problem. When the noun declension tables were originally created, no consistency was used in the sequencing of the arguments. There are a large number of entries that call one of the 3rd-declension templates incorrectly, partly because the templates themselves are inconsisyent so editors couldn't keep the sequence straight.
As far as I can tell, standardization with a single master template just can't work for Latin. There will need to be a minimum of 5 for the nouns and additional master templates for the adjectives. It just doesn't seem worthwhile to go to all that effort. --EncycloPetey 13:29, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
Ok, I can understand objection to the formatting! I meant to mention in my first response that each table with a different number of columns would need a different worker template (probably {{la-decl-1 column}} etc.), though you seem to have guessed that anyway. The thing with having a master template is that the front-end templates they power can continue to work in the same way, just call the background template in a different way. I agree that a single master template would not work, though I disagree with your estimate of five for nouns. I'll have a play around implementing each of the template's with a common master template while preserving the look of the templates and they arguments they are called with. I emphasise that from the normal editor's point of view and the reader's point of view the difference will not be noticeable - however from a template maintainability point of view this will be easier. Conrad.Irwin 13:48, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
I do appreciate the potential for maintainability. The noun templates are on my list of things to update, but they're not at the top of the list yet. I've been doing Verb template/page cleanup for the past two months (and now have about 65 pages to go), and before that I did the Adjectives, which were also a mess and got the Adverbs going. Now, Mutante has started the Wiktionary:Categorizing cleanup, so I'm helping with that too. On top of all that, I've promised myself I'd create 5 new quality lemma entries for Latin each day. It means that I just don't have any extra wiki-time for more projects right now. So, while you might play around with template format for the nouns, I can only give a bit of input here are there and note potential pitfalls. It will probably be a month or two before I can effect serious Latin noun cleanup (and there is a lot to be done). --EncycloPetey 17:33, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Fan (fe)mail![edit]

Random lilies from my own flowerbed. (It rained last night.)

To a couple folks who've been especially helpful/nice to me during my first few weeks at en.wikt: Thanks! :-)

Right. Anonymous greeting cards don't work with edit logs, not to mention Sinebots floating around. (Truth is, I forgot to sign, again!) Snakesteuben 13:48, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Citations pages[edit]

Hi Richardb, I'm not sure if the information you are adding to the Citations pages should be there - it sounds like it should be under the === Etymology === header. Citations pages are for examples of the word being used (see Citations:hinder). Conrad.Irwin 09:04, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

True - but I've just found the info, and finding somewhere to store it is a problem. It's not in the neat and tidy form desired for Etymology. So, I'll leave it in Citations till someone can be bothered to put it into the Wiktionary etymology straitjacket (not my penchant). Unless you have a better suggestion for where to store this info.

Of course, one could also argue the word is being "used" in these bits of text I am storing away.--Richardb 09:11, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure if it is the case for all of them, but the Citations:billboard page seems to be a direct quote from the link given. It might be better to just leave the link languishing harmlessly on the talk page. Conrad.Irwin 09:17, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
Do you mean harnmlessly. Or do you mean uselessly, totally uninformatively. I'm sorry. I hadn't realised these Citation pages were so full that couldn't perhaps be used for temporary storage which are sort of citations. But, it is a Wiki. Do what you like with them, which no doubt you will. But if you delete the info, it's gone, 'cos I can't be bothered arguing with you. I never win against the straightjacket deletionists.--Richardb 09:26, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
Hmm, I had hoped never to be accused of deletionism - but nevermind. I'm not going to delete it, because I agree it is useful - however I can't see the point in wasting time copying other websites here when it is (to my uninformed mind) probably copyright violation and exactly the same as providing a link (which could be under === External Links ===). I know that the Citations pages are not full, however if it isn't clear what is supposed to be put in them then it seems (again personal point of view) more likely that people will not bother to create them because they aren't sure. I have to confess to misunderstanding your intentions above, I thought you meant "I'll leave them there and let another editor format them even though I know it's wrong", though I now realise (I hope I'm right this time..) you are copying the information there so that people can read it on Wiktionary. Conrad.Irwin 09:35, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
"I'll leave them there and let another editor format them" - actually that was what I meant. My view of Wiki's is some people find information, and some people delight in tidying up. Personally I'm not a big fan of the strict formatting here on Wiktionary, which often seems to be held as more important than the content and information. If you want to tidy it up, go for it. As to putting a link instead of content. We'd have nothing but links here if you followed that logic fully. All the information exists elswhere, unless its a neologism. It's easier to get the information with one less click.--Richardb 09:46, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
Hmm, I am personally against using the content namespaces for that, but as no-one else seems to object I can't really claim I'm right. I don't really have a problem with getting information from other places here - otherwise we would be sunk - but I (for no reason I can fathom) don't like the idea of copying prose directly. Conrad.Irwin 09:55, 1 May 2008 (UTC)


Thanks for the help. Evrik 18:44, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

  • Could you fix the sections. I think the hierachy got off someplace and the citation section is adding to that. I'm going for a stroll and will be back in about an hour. If you think the article is okay to go as it is, please let me know as I would like to be the one to put it up! Evrik 18:55, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
  • I have to make a trip to the library to find the Burton book, other from that there is not much else I can see that can be done to finish off the page. You suggested using the {{obsolete}} template. Are there any other templates that can be used, something like {{rare}}? Evrik 20:53, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
  • I'd like to go ahead and post the word. It cannot be done because it is listed on Wiktionary:Protected titles/Persistent protologisms. Is there any other process that needs to be done? Evrik 16:55, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
The person who added it to that list is very experienced on Wiktionary and seems unpersuaded that the word meets CFI. I do, though only just, disagree with him, but without a convincing cite (of which none of the current ones really are) I doubt that recreating it will cause anything but it's redeletion. perhaps rare would be better than obsolete as it does seem to be making a comeback. I don't really know what else to propose. Conrad.Irwin 20:13, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
You can bring it to Wiktionary:Requests for deletion. Despite its name, we have also used it as a "requests for undeletion" page before. —RuakhTALK 21:40, 4 May 2008 (UTC)


Hey Atelaes, how much would it really annoy you if I removed the "" from {{grc-ipa}}? Although I dislike the appearance it gives intensely, as you are the one who is more likely to see them I'd listen to your opinion. Conrad.Irwin 19:12, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

That would be just fine by me. -Atelaes λάλει ἐμοί 19:15, 2 May 2008 (UTC).
DONE Conrad.Irwin 19:19, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
How long do you expect the job queue on that to take? -Atelaes λάλει ἐμοί 19:25, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
Yikes! I hadn't been watching the Job queue recently - it's massive.... From memory it churned through about 20,000 {{IPA}}s in 6 hours ish, so at 70,000 we're talking about a day, I can't think that that is the only recently edited template - unless there really are that many Greek words around? Conrad.Irwin 19:27, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
Don't I wish. No, we're only at about 3,000 right now. -Atelaes λάλει ἐμοί 19:40, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Got it (IP talk page)[edit]

I should have though of that. Thanks for telling me. Teh Rote 21:06, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

No worries. Conrad.Irwin 21:17, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Examples of French idioms[edit]

What do you mean when you say you want me to include examples of French idioms in English? Would you like me to translate the example sentences? -Oreo Priest talk 07:37, 4 May 2008 (UTC)


Dear Conrad,

oh my Gosh! I must have looked like a vandal! What a shame! Thank you for reverting it. - εΔω 11:15, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

P.S. I'm not going to stay here, but I often walk around the Wikiverse and If I trip into translation issues I can hardly resist...

premenstrual stress[edit]

In febuary, you deleted the entry premenstrual stress, a common synonym for premenstrual tension, also with slight differences in implication (within the UK, being tense and being stressed are oft considered quite distinct). As you directed, I checked the CFI, and found absolutely no encouragement to delete synonyms at all. Checking RfV and RfD, I similarly could not locate any established reason for the deletion. Could you please explain why this decision was made? 18:31, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

It doesn't really need an entry as it is merely stress that occurs premenstrually, so anyone can work out what it means if they know the two words separately. Though it could be argued that it should be included as a common set phrase. Had the entry been a dictionary definition and formatted correctly I wouldn't have deleted it - as it was just a long passage of text (probably copied from another website) that was of no value to Wiktionary there was no point in keeping it and I was probably feeling lazy. If you want to have a go at recreating it, please feel free - you should probably copy the syntax from premenstrual tension or a similar entry if you are not familiar with Wiktionary. Conrad.Irwin 18:40, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the warm welcome![edit]

Thanks for your warm welcome! I hope to contribute some german words and translations. I didn't do any wikipedia work yet and at the moment I don't indent to, but I did start some wikibooks - work (the german one). Since about 1,5 years I am working on the german wiktionary. Unfortunately I don't have enough time for all wikis I'm interested in, but I'm trying to spent as much time as possible around here! See you Akinom 16:59, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

I apoligize.[edit]

I had no clue that fictional characters are not allowed. I've seen some pretty odd terms in dictionaries, and I thought that because this is a lst of all known words, then I would be able to add a goomba into it. I attempted to cite two real sources, both of which use the word "goomba" as the definition described. What do you mean by " three independent, archived, durable sources"?

Thank you for answering:

TurtleShroom was here! JESUS LOVES YOU AND DIED FOR YOU! 21:20, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

No need to worry about it. In fact now I look on (a good source for cites) it looks like goomba may be a term that is used for things other than Mario. The type of cites I was referring to are those that show the word meets our Criteria for inclusion. <complicated waffle> The need to be "durably archived" which means that they can't just be from a random website that may go offline at any point, instead they should come from sources such as published books and (odd though it might sound) internet newsgroups. The "independence" means that they can't all be from the same author or publisher, i.e. we don't accept words that are only used by one person - no matter how often they use it, until there is evidence that someone else is using the word. There are other criteria, such as they must be from a period of time greater than three years, and that they must by use not mention (i.e. a dictionary does not count as evidence for use of a word).</complicated waffle>. If you see Citations:hinder you will see the kind of format that Citations should take. Conrad.Irwin 21:34, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
P.S. It's normal to use the + to add a new topic to a discussion page so that everything is kept in date order.

language name template[edit]

Wanted to chat with you ... but I've discovered that I now have a way to crash the ISP proxy from my laptop. Just open a connection with cz. Works consistently ;-(

See notes on WT:GP, I was going to set up {{langname}} last night; it makes fewer template calls, and doesn't create huge numbers of links to non-existent templates. (that then must not exist ..). Robert Ullmann 14:49, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Ok, that's a much neater solution. Conrad.Irwin 18:59, 7 May 2008 (UTC)


Thanks for dealing with these so neatly. I was dreading the idea of running them all through RfV. Widsith 16:22, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

They were RfV'd and I just idled away my afternoon on googlebooks. Conrad.Irwin 16:23, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Your mom[edit] an open proxy! 20:57, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Wow, that was absolutely hilarious. -Atelaes λάλει ἐμοί 20:59, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
Above blocked, insulting my mum by spelling it wrong. Conrad.Irwin 21:05, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Etymology and definition of, and example for "deniability"[edit]


The etymology of 'deniability' appears to be ≈1970-75 and is a compound of 'deniable' + 'ity'.

A common definition also appears to be something along the lines: "the ability to deny something, such as an accusation, as by claiming to have no knowledge of the event(s) or action(s) involved." I have also seen common uses that rely more heavily on the illegality of the topic, such as "the ability to deny something, such as an accusation, as by claiming to have no knowledge or connection with an illegal activity". However, the current definition that was changed upon entry does not appear to stay in line with the origin of this word. I believe that this word first came into its own as part of the phrase "plausible denial" or "plausibly deniable" during the 1974-75 Church Committee's investigation of alleged assassination attempts by the CIA. Today the word is commonly used in the phrase "plausible deniability".

These facts perhaps lend themselves to an altered definition and also to examples that might help illustrate the use of the word.

In summary: should the illegality of the denial be something that is pointed out in this definition and thus in examples of the use of this word?

Pagoda123 19:23, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure about your date, see Google books, but the suffix idea is plausible. In general example sentences in Wiktionary entries are a good thing, but even better would be to provide some Citations (see the exemplar page) this would allow us to show exactly how the word is actually used. I'm not sure myself what the word means, I'd need to go and scan through some cites and work it out, however if you feel that the word is (or was) used in a certain way, feel free to add to the entry. If someone disagrees with you again they can put an {{rfv}} on it and cites will be found. Again in general terms, a lot of words that were used to mean one thing change their meanings over time, Wiktionary aims to be more descriptive than prescriptive, and so we will always include definitions of how words are actually used as opposed to what they should mean in theory. I'm not sure this is the clearest explanation I've ever given, so to sum up: Change the entry to improve it, provide cites if someone challenges you. Conrad.Irwin 19:42, 9 May 2008 (UTC)


But why does Love need a separate page to love then? according to the policy, uppercase forms are only kept if there is a special need, and otherwise, all should be kept in the lowercase form, and therefore, the content of Love should be moved to love, and then Love should be deleted, so it "automatically" redirects to love, as the policy states. Nwspel 19:40, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

That would be the case if Love wasn't a different word from love. It's the same with Pension and pension and thousands of others. I don't think that it's ideal, but it's how Wiktionary is set up - and that is unlikely to change in the near future as we'd have to get everyone to agree. Conrad.Irwin 19:45, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't get it[edit]

If Nintendo is on Wiktionary, why can't Grand Theft Auto be on it?

- 12:05, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

You'd have to read the CFI for the full detail, but as I understand it (which isn't very well) it's because "Nintendo" is used to refer to more than one thing, whereas GTA is only ever used to refer to GTA. If you want to create the entry, I won't stop you - but please mark it with {{rfv}} and start a discussion by clicking on the (+) link in the template. Conrad.Irwin 12:09, 17 May 2008 (UTC)


Thank you for your kind remark. It's my first Wiki-entry so the more comments the more and quicker I learn. I completed my entry and hope it now fulfills the criteria. Heipa! (cheers) MiuMau

Happy to help. Conrad.Irwin 14:01, 17 May 2008 (UTC)


Not bad. The only problems were: (1) this verb actually has a subtle shift in meaning between the active and passive voice, and which is counterintuitive to an English speaker (active=cause to emit beams; passive=to emit beams), (2) you left the macrons off of the Conjugation table. I've made these corrections and expanded the entry. --EncycloPetey 20:58, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Note: I've also corrected radiāns. --EncycloPetey 21:04, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
Yes, I saw some mention of it in the dictionary, but I read it as implying that it was two seperate verbs, and that we should have radior and radio. Sorry about the macrons, having been taught Latin without them, I have to try and guess where they might go. Thanks for cleaning it up. Conrad.Irwin 23:16, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
Well, you did get the macrons right in the inflection line. The trick, then is just knowing which verb template to use. This verb was regular and has a full inflection, so you can get the details from the template's talk page. Knowing that macrons are diffuclt for most folks (and being a strong believer is useful documentation), I've added extensive notes and examples to every one of the verb conjugation templates. In fact, I usually set up new verb pages using cut-and-paste from one of the examples, adjusting the specific forms to the new entry. So, whenever I come across a case not covered by the template discussion and examples, I'll add a new example in. --EncycloPetey 00:16, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
Oh, I see what you're saying now. Sorry and thank you. Conrad.Irwin 00:33, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

(notes that macrons are never, ever, ever, used in written Latin. They are totally an affect of dictionaries and "readers". And our abject failure to represent Latin as written does our readers and users a severe disservice. They should be confined to Pronunciations sections if used at all. Robert Ullmann 00:32, 18 May 2008 (UTC) [prays for a fluent native speaker and writer of Latin to come along, is the Vatican listening?])

I thought that this was one of the first debates I commented on, back in the days when I was an IP - but I can't ever find my comment again (I am definitely against them). Conrad.Irwin 00:33, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
I see Robert is still preaching against the evils of macrons, so I'll drop in the one strongest counterargument for keeping them. Latin Wiktionary uses them. --EncycloPetey 01:39, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
Ok, I don't want this to degenerate into making a mess of my talk page, but I can't help responding to that. It seems to me that there are far better reasons to do things that just to copy the Latin Wiktionary. I was under the impression that lots of people are taught Latin with macrons and so it makes sense to include them for their benefit, though no doubt teaching patterns will change over time. I do, and will probably continue (being (as you may have noticed) a tad obstinate) to think that they are bad, simply because I don't understand them and they are not used in written Latin. I see no harm in having them as a teaching tool, indeed it is probably useful in many ways, which is why I don't really mind them being used here - but my preference would be (for simplicities sake) not to have them. Conrad.Irwin 02:02, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
As you say, there are many reasons. And, as you say, this discussion should not burden your talk page. Hence, I dropped in one short statement and will not press the point any further here. The conversation should focus on the skill with which you handled an unfamiliar set of templates, which is what I tried to communicate with my initial response to your query. --EncycloPetey 02:10, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Your mum[edit] spelled wrong. It's "your mom." 00:24, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Shall we take this to WT:RFV? I can't see you finding three cites for my mom. Conrad.Irwin 00:31, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

delete process[edit]

Now 15206 tasks done, 15172 to do. And into 6-letter words. I must figure out how to fix IRC; it is now only a good way to crash the ISP proxy. Robert Ullmann

Update: 22137 done, 8241 to do. Wish I could figure out how to connect to IRC again. Robert Ullmann 17:16, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
Have you tried any of the IRC over HTTP services (such as ). Feels like we're nearly there now! Conrad.Irwin 17:28, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
No, I was going to ask about that sort of thing. FYI I am going to Tsavo for 4 days to hunt elephants. I'm leaving the automation running (this, AF, and Interwicket, which is up to typewriter on this run). I'm sure it won't mis-behave, but if it stops for some reason I won't be able to restart it. Robert Ullmann 06:47, 20 June 2008 (UTC)


Why did you revert? SC is more appropriate than WS. What does WS even stand for?? Nwspel 18:56, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

I didn't revert, I merely added to what you had put. WS stands for "Wiktionary Shortcut". Conrad.Irwin 18:57, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
Then surely WA should direct to the Administrator page; and WELE should direct to the ELE page, and WRFA for RFA... etc... Nwspel 19:02, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
Someone, long ago, decided on WS, and people have used it, and it's enough people's minds now that the redirecting link should remain. And there's nothing wrong with an illogical redirect. That doesn't mean that other illogical redirects should be put in place. As far as SC, which is far more logical that WS, thanks for adding it, but note that Wiktionary has few enough regulars, unlike WP, that multiple shortcuts for infrequently used pages are not particularly necessary (yet).—msh210 19:10, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
[1] Why did you revert? WT:WS should be preserved for Wikisaurus. Nwspel 21:09, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
That redirect has existed for (much) longer than Wikisaurus. Just because things don't make sense is no reason to break them. Next you'll be asking about WT:FWC no doubt... Conrad.Irwin 21:14, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
We don't keep things out of sentimentality of tradition; this is a wiktionary that needs to appeal to the average new user: we should be logicifying the system, not antiquifying it. And yes, I am asking, lol ;) Nwspel 21:17, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
The shortcuts exist to facilitate the experience of editors, most of our readership doesn't get out of ns0 let alone into shortcuts etc. Breaking things for the people who use them is never a good thing to do. Things like adding WT:Admin are just downright strange, all the visible shortcuts are in uppercase (there are a few that I use for typing that are lowercase so that the pipe trick works, but these are not advertised), so this just creates more confusion. If you want to logicify the system you need to understand it, and have a plan of action (you don't have to write one down, but it helps if you are trying to get the community to accept changes like that), instead of just coming in and attacking it with a sledgehammer. WT:FWC was always a redirect to "Featured words candidates", a page created with a similar name to "Featured article candidates" on Wikipedia but morphed to having a totally different purpose. When the page was moved to its Wiktionary purpose, the old shortcut was retained so that people can still get to the page. Conrad.Irwin 21:24, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
Conrad, are there any shortcuts used in WP that we could use as redirects to our own roughly corresponding pages that are not already used for another purpose here? DCDuring TALK 21:39, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
If people want to create them then that's fine (see the BP) The thing I was more concerned about was the breaking of the existing shortcuts. It's been a long time since I was interested enough to read the WP policies (though I have done so) so I've mainly forgotten which shortcuts go where. Conrad.Irwin 21:52, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
WT:WS should not be redirecting to Wiktionary:Shortcut, since there is a more logical redirect for that (WT:SC), and since WT:WS is much more needed for Wiktionary:Wikisaurus. Nwspel 21:56, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
Feel free to discuss this on the WT:BP. It is bad to break things without telling people. Conrad.Irwin 22:01, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
I've collected the WT and WP shortcut lists. I'll see if I can find some opportunites to be nice to WPers. DCDuring TALK 23:35, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Internet Explorer/Double-clicking for defs[edit]

  1. I have switched to Firefox and note that everything seems to work better than with IE7 (not perfectly, but well). That's great for me, but, given the widespread use of IE, it would seem important to get things to work better with IE. What do you know about the status of efforts to improve the operation of WMF projects with IE? Where would I got to vote or agitate?
  2. One of the features that I have only noticed since switching to Firefox is the ability to double click on a word and get the corresponding WT entry to pop up. Is it possible to get such a thing to run in WP: double click on a word and the WT entry window pops up? Are there tools that accomplish this for Google? for Word? for Writer? Firefox? IE? Where would I find them? Why wouldn't we be promoting them or encouraging their development?
  3. You might find the following data (and site) interesting. I don't know if there are better comparative stats available. DCDuring TALK 13:58, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
I noted that ordinary user preferences at WP included a "Java standard library" option for browsers such as IE, Safari, and Opera (I think) that don't support .... something. Would that address my (and others') troubles with IE? DCDuring TALK 21:05, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
To be honest, I don't know. The only issue that I know of with IE is the popups refresh bug, and that is beyond my scope to fix. If you have smaller niggles then feel free to bring them here and I will try to fix them. The double clicking on a word is one of the WT:PREFS and it should also work in IE if you enable it there. For Browsers we have Help:Tips_and_tricks/Bookmarklets, maybe we should advertise them better. Conrad.Irwin 22:23, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Just wwrong alphabet then[edit]

It is a greek word so I assume whoever put it on WP just didnt realise the subtle differences between some of the letters. So Im going to change it back with the right alphabet. That OK with you? -- 22:18, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

This is what wikis are good for! You'll have to put it at νεφρος though, because it should be at the right title. Yours Conrad.Irwin 22:21, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I see. However, what about the current entry. Nephros is not an english word. Though it could be put down as a prefix or something. Im not sure about wiktionary policy on this. What do you think? -- 22:24, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

You'd need to tag it with {{rfd}}, as the page should be at nephros- if it is a prefix. Conrad.Irwin 22:32, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
We already had the Greek at the correct spelling (note the accent) νεφρός, so I've deleted yours, sorry. Conrad.Irwin 22:36, 20 May 2008 (UTC)


Which server do you play on? :-D 10:53, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

That was a lie, sorry. [2]. Conrad.Irwin 10:54, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm a Level 60 70 80 Elite Tauren Chieftan fan, personally.


done. - Amgine/talk 22:34, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

misspellings in search box[edit]

Nice functionality and speed. I'm not as crazy about where is placed on the screen, although it is far better to have it a non-ideal location than not to have it. DCDuring TALK 16:19, 25 May 2008 (UTC)


Thanks for the update. You know, some Wikimedians think that if they can run a sister project of Wiktionary, they can run Wiktionary itself. I even thought that at first! But the message you sent me really showed me that Wiktionary is completely different from the rest of Wikimedia in some ways! So, thanks. BlueCaper 20:03, 29 May 2008 (UTC) P.S.: How do you vote on things? I read the infoboxes at the beginning of Wiktionary:Votes and I could not understand some of it. Please get back to me.

Policy is discussed and debated in the Beer parlour, if it's about English or all languages. (If it's about one language, not English, it's sometimes discussed and debated on the [[Wiktionary:About language]] page instead.) Then, if a vote is necessary (in particular, if WT:ELE or WT:CFI is to be amended, but also sometimes in other cases), it's brought to a vote on WT:VOTES following the format of previous votes and the guidelines in the infoboxes you mention. If the vote is to instate a bot, same deal. If it's to instate an admin or cetera, it's usually just brought to a vote following the format of previous such, without BP discussion. Discussions on individual entries, templates, categories, etc. are almost never brought to a formal vote; discussion and debate take place instead on WT:RFV (seeking verification a word exists with the definition given), WT:RFD (debating whether a term is idiomatic), WT:RFDO (debating whether to delete a category/template/cetera), WT:RFC (cleanup requests), WT:TR (other questions about a word), or WT:GP (discussing technical issues).—msh210 20:23, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Re:Language names[edit]

Thanks; I'll use that format from now on. --Harald Khan Ճ 20:46, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

I was going to give you a barnstar...[edit]

... but you don't have them here... lol. :S --nwspel tork kontribz 21:35, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for wanting to give me one, and also for not (if you see what I mean). Conrad.Irwin 21:39, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
Haha. Well since I've got your hopes up:
Have some cookies! :) --nwspel tork kontribz 21:43, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

(If that seemed weird, I'm sorry; it's just what people do on the 'pedia ;] ) --nwspel tork kontribz 22:30, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
No worries, I understood the concept - just :p Conrad.Irwin 22:36, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
Hooray for intercultural communication and understanding! :-) —RuakhTALK 22:47, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

getting started[edit]

Thanks for the 'personalised' greeting. I plan to add some import/export/postal/freight/shipping terms here if that's OK. I have a background in these areas, and many big online dictionaries don't have these expressions (this dictionary is the easiest place to enter these terms). Is it possible to categorise these terms together - I saw Template:business, and I'd like to make a similar one for import/export terminology, but the syntax is quite tricky. I will look at the links you sent me if I plan of sticking around. -Jack

What do you mean?[edit]

what are you saying by sending me and Palmrick to other sites, we are just conversing ideas together. We completly understand that this is a dictionary and nothing more or less. you have no need to worry about us.PapaSmerf 02:41, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Re: arsen[edit]

I neither have met such meaning in paper dictionaries, but it appears in Internet slang dictionaries... It's not common but I think it's correct. Maro 18:18, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I've reverted the edit. Conrad.Irwin 18:32, 3 June 2008 (UTC)


Hi Conrad, I know you are busy, but would you be able to rerun the Hungarian index when you have a chance? Or even better, is there a way I could run this particular bot so I don't have to bug you any more? Thanks. --Panda10 16:15, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks so much! I really appreciate it. After a brief review, here are my thoughts. 1. I like the parts of speech, but it would look (to me) better in italics and without a period. 2. Have you changed your mind about the layout to use multi-column lists? 3. The TOC does not really do anything on the right. I would add NOTOC and just use the horizontal alphabet. 4. Sorting. I will look at it in more detail later, for now I'd like to mention that the paper dictionaries do not distinguish the short and long vowels for sorting purposes. They are one and the same (a and á, e and é, i and í, o and ó, ö and ő, u and ú, ü and ű). According to this rule, there would not be separate pages for these pairs, e.g. only page A for words starting with a and á. The same rule applies if these pairs are within the word. The sorting algorithm should treat them the same. 5. What do you think about adding the audio template after each word if the audio exists in the entry? I tested it and I think it would be useful. The only difference that I made in the template is to use a dot instead of the word "audio" in the third section. This shortens the appearance of the template. There is no reason to repeat "audio" when the speaker icon is already there. Think about it and let me know if you think this is useful. Maybe it's too much work, I don't know. Thanks again. --Panda10 19:55, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
I like the changes, but the letter ü is now missing from the alphabet. --Panda10 20:43, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Ah, sorry - I'd just merged all the u's and o's, I've read you properly now (I hope). Conrad.Irwin 20:49, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Thank you. --Panda10 21:11, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Why did you decide to number items rather than use bullets? I can see either way working, but I am curious why there is a numbered header within each section. That is, the items that look like they ought to be headers are instead within the section and numbered along with the entries. So, on the ny page, the first "entry" is a bolded and numbered nya with no link. The next section has a bolded and numbered nye, etc. This looks like an error to me. --EncycloPetey 22:16, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, I'm yet again acting at least a month too early, the changes will propagate through the CSS soon. Once the CSS has been purged you should see something that resembles User:Conrad.Irwin/test. Conrad.Irwin 23:57, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

I've started working with the index and noticed a couple of missing words, dob and fest, both were created a longer time ago, and are on a multi-language page. --Panda10 00:27, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Ah, it's not a problem. I am just too happy to have an index. If you don't mind, I will keep mentioning things as they come up. Actually, I have a wishlist with some nice to have items. Let me know what you really think about each.
  1. Add a note to the top of each index page: "Refreshed on xx/xx/xx using the xx/xx/xx XML dump." Or something similar.
  2. If possible, give a word count on each index page and a total count on the main index page.
  3. Postposition forms {infl|hu|postposition form} should be removed, only the actual postposition should remain (the lemma).
  4. Infinitive - they are still on the list, although they are verb forms. However, for some the lemma is still missing, so for now it's good they are there.
  5. Can you connect each entry to the appropriate index page? It would be either a link on the main entry page, or a new header "Index" on the bottom, or a link in See also. The link could be generated automatically using the language name and the first letter of the word.
  6. Audio icon next to each index entry.
  7. For some reason, the horizontal TOC does not work. Nothing happens when I click on the letter pairs. This is the TOC that is repeated several times on the index page.
Well, that's all for now. :) Thanks. --Panda10 15:51, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
  1. Yes, good idea and easy to do.
  2. Word count on each page is currently hidden in the comment at the bottom of each page, but could be merged with the text providing the solution to #1.
  3. I need a hand with this, I'm having to do lots of guessing to work out what is a "form of" what.
    • At the moment anything who's only definitions consist of a template that spans the whole line, (except {{given name}}, though there are probably other templates I need to let through)
    • Except a few occurances of the words "form of" that look particularly like they might be grammatical as opposed to anything else. /(present|perfect|plural|singular|past historic|ive|preterite)(\]\])? form of[ ']*\[\[/
  4. As #3.
  5. Connecting back to the index would be harder - as it'd require a lot of bot-work - maybe something for wider community discussion.
  6. I'm working on the audio - should be there soon (unless I get bored)
  7. Horizontal TOC will be fixed next time I update.
Conrad.Irwin 19:08, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
Great, thanks. For "form of" - can the inflection line help in this? The infl template would contain the word "form". If this is not feasible, leave it as is for now. Connecting entry back to index - when you build the index, could you do the connection at the same time? Or your index-builder bot does not edit the entry, only reads info from it, right? I thought adding a simple link based on the language name and first letter of the word would be simple, but obviously not. New observations: 1. I see two columns suddenly instead of the previous three which I really liked. Is there a reason? 2. In ez, the quotation is mentioned as POS. Thanks again. --Panda10 19:26, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
I'll add an extra check for {{infl - The bot doesn't actually read wiktionary at all, everything it needs is a database dump on my local computer. Adding a link to the index to every entry is possible but it'd be a big change - so we'd probably need to get community input (and a bot flag). I made the columns slightly wider to help fix the TOC bug, I've put them back to the original width now that bug is solved. The bot counts any line that starts with a # as a definition (because that is what ELE says) so when people number the quotations that appears there. I'll add a filter for Quotations and Pronunciation as those are the two most-often incorrect. Conrad.Irwin 21:06, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
I've found these two subpages in the index: lead/experiment and lead/experiment2. Would you agree anything with a slash in it should be excluded? --Panda10 11:09, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
NS:0 doesn't have "real" subpages, so we can use a slash in entry names P/N. Things with a slash should be included, Connel's experiments with lead should be moved elsewhere (like to his user subpages. These index pages are cool. I would not try to "connect" entries back to them though. 11:19, 11 June 2008 (UTC) Hmm, was logged out somehow ... Robert Ullmann 11:22, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the clarification, Robert. It's ok if we don't connect the entries to the index. But is there a way to actually find the FL index? Only the English index is displayed on the the main page. --Panda10 12:56, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
There's a link to "All languages" at the top, but until the index namespace is in much better shape it's probably better not to link there too prominantly. I'm currently stuck with bugzilla:14406, and until I know whether that can be solved or I need to find a different solution the English index is not going to work. Not even considering the issues behind sorting the other 200 languages correctly... Conrad.Irwin 13:05, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
What is bug 14406? The link points to a page of wikiproject list. Does this bug appear only on the English index? But not on Hungarian? .... And YAY! I can see the count and the audio, except the icon shows up as a blank square in my browser. What do I do to display it? Thanks!! The new index is breathtakingly beautiful. --Panda10 16:12, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
Urm, it should be a play button - but maybe your font doesn't support it. I've edited {{audio-list}} to spell it out instead, though maybe a better symbol/word can be found - feel free to experiment. Sorry, I meant bugzilla:14406, which is the software development bug tracker - for some reason the English Index pages break the server... Conrad.Irwin 16:19, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
I've put it back to the play button with a class="unicode", if you still can't see it - let me know, or just edit {{audio-list}} yourself. Conrad.Irwin 16:31, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
I still could not see it. I added the triangle icon, this is what we see on play buttons. I can see this. When you play audio, do you always have to click OK on the download pop-up? I am unable to adjust .ogg files to just play (using RealAdio) and not have this additional click all the time. --Panda10 16:38, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
That triangle is very similar to the one I was using, computers eh ;). I don't have to click ok on the popup, but I'm not using a windows computer so things might be different. If you aren't already, you might want to try using Firefox - which I think will allow you to configure the download to play automatically. Conrad.Irwin 16:45, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
As a workaround for the long pages bug, what if you break each page into two? All words before L go to the first page, after L to the second page? This issue will eventually appear on all languages when the page reaches a certain length. And what is the breaking point? E.g. it still works with 1000 words, but not with 1001. --Panda10 23:08, 11 June 2008 (UTC)


I've noticed that you changed the dot in the hyphenation template. It appears larger. However, some of the dots were not changed. So now if a word has two dots, the first is smaller than the second. See előttetek. Is there a reason for the difference? --Panda10 23:00, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing the hyphenation. And yes, I'd accept the nomination, thanks. --Panda10 23:16, 5 June 2008 (UTC)


Hi Conrad. Could you have a look at my question to another user, it is about capitalisation, but he seems to be very busy with other local tasks, so I wonder if you know what to do about moving free on board to Free On Board. (the latter is how FOB is more commonly written --Jackofclubs 16:36, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

I've done it for you as you need administrator privileges to move pages over the top of existing pages that have a page-history. Conrad.Irwin 17:36, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

exemplary pages[edit]

Hi, and sorry to bother you again. I've been looking through Wiktionary:Entry layout explained for the good ways to make a page, and it is very helpful but there aren't any example pages, links to complete "feature article" pages. I'm hoping to improve the trade page, and I'd like a model to work from - maybe if a word has an adj, noun and a verb meaning. Thanks in advance. --Jackofclubs 18:18, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

The short answer is that hinder is widely considered to be an exemplar page, the long answer is that we haven't really got any criteria for what makes a page good - just stick to common sense and what seems best to you (within the confines of WT:ELE of couse ;). Conrad.Irwin 18:23, 10 June 2008 (UTC)


Is there a generic "pillars" of wiktionary to read?

Can you check my edits? I've just fixed up some mandarin:

  • men0 and men5 are identical sounds in mandarin, just different transcriptions, and men0 was missing its characters, so I copied men5 to men0
  • is the more standard character for ni3 (2nd person singular pronoun), but wiktionary also has an entry for the variant , so I added a {{see also}} from the variant 伱 to the main 你. I was going to add the reverse when I got your warning.

Hope these are fine. JackSchmidt 19:19, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

King's Counsel[edit]

Thanks for the clean up. I had just found Queen's Counsel and was going back to clean up King's Cousel myself, but you beat me to it. However, I will make one small change your reference to the gender of the monarch. Best wishes. Ron B. Thomson 21:25, 10 June 2008 (UTC)


C on the no-more-exams. :-)   —RuakhTALK 22:21, 11 June 2008 (UTC)


Thank you very much for the advices.Rollyta 02:35, 12 June 2008 (UTC)


Thanks. I don't know, but it has been suggested by someone to be used for non-word entries (see for example Appendix:Proto-Indo-European *ph₂tḗr). Hakeem.gadi 12:03, 12 June 2008 (UTC)