User talk:Daniel Carrero

Definition from Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Jump to: navigation, search
User:Daniel Carrero edit
User talk:Daniel Carrero

2008 | 2009 | 2010
2011 | 2012 | 2013
2014 | 2015 | 2016
2017

Vote[edit]

Hey. I forget how to add votes to the Timeline. Please add this one. I see no problem with inventing words in the vote. --Gente como tú (talk) 15:49, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done. But it's really easy, just edit that box that pops up in your watchlist. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 18:43, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

Proto-Indo-European redlinks[edit]

In 2016, you deleted Category:Proto-Indo-European redlinks. What was your reason for doing so? I am a bit confused by an explanation you gave in User talk:Daniel Carrero/2016#Redlinks categories. Was the rationale for deleting the PIE category the same, i.e. because you were “testing Module:redlink category and Template:redlink category to see if it was possible to populate all redlinks categories at once”? (Did you create it?) And, if so, why did you delete this category but keep certain others?  — J​as​p​e​t 01:57, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

@Jaspet: The answer is this: Yes, I created and later deleted the PIE redlinks category.
Currently, we only have redlinks categories for a few languages -- see Category:Redlinks by language. Anyone can edit Template:redlink category and thus change which languages have redlinks enabled, including you or me. (unless there's some template protection, in which case people can ask an admin to do it)
Presumably, we should really only enable redlinks categories for a handful of languages when we are actually going to work with these categories. Ideally, I would like to keep redlinks categories for all languages. That's why at some point I really did enable redlinks categories for all languages, to see if that would work. But I quickly discovered that it's a strain on the server and it causes numerous entries to have module errors. I created and deleted the PIE redlinks category, and also Category:Chinese redlinks and others. Feel free to recreate the PIE category if you are going to work with it. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 02:30, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
Ah, I get it now. Thank you :)  — J​as​p​e​t 02:37, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
@Jaspet: You're welcome. :) --Daniel Carrero (talk) 02:38, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Template ws and the headword as synonym to itself[edit]

{{ws}} seems to generate "[WS]" even when the headword is identical to the page name. Thus, in WS:aircraft, the word "aircraft" in Synonyms section has a little "[WS]" to the right of it, in boldface.

As far as I remember, the template did not used to do that. Would you be able to change the behavior back? --Dan Polansky (talk) 14:11, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

@Dan Polansky: I believe it's fixed now. The problem was that the template was specifically testing for the existence of "Wikisaurus:aircraft" as opposed to "Thesaurus:aircraft". --Daniel Carrero (talk) 14:15, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

Internet for attestation of words[edit]

Hi. I read several discussions recently from a few years ago (more notably this one) where you proposed a change to WT:CFI to allow for non-durably archived citations to attest entries. I just want to say I highly support this, and am sad to see that this discussion did not get anywhere since. Speaking from the perspective of a person who likes to make entries for English slang and informal terms, such a change would be exceedingly useful to our lexicon. It is quite often that I have to struggle through durable citations only, when the rest of the Internet contains so much more of what I'm looking for. Entries like Luafy have been deleted with comments like the one you see by the deleter: "RFV-failed, which is sad, because it clearly is used, just not on permanently archived media." The thing about it is that the "durably archived" sources were more abundant many years ago, such as 2005 for instance AFAIK, but this is 2018, a time when the Internet and social media, etc., are the biggest deal ever (I really don't know how else to say it). I highly recommend that we discuss this sort of thing further, since it is very important to Wiktionary's lexicon. These slangs/informal terms must be saved. @Purplebackpack89 @Andrew Sheedy. PseudoSkull (talk) 20:30, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

I very much agree. I'm not around much these days, so I can't engage in discussion much, but there are words that are part of my everyday vocabulary that I have not found proper attestation for. It's been a while since I've checked for some of these words, so they might be attestable now, but the fact is that they were in widespread, common use at the time, and we didn't (and in most cases, still don't) include them because of our insistance on using durably archived sources, which naturally excludes many slang words that don't make it into print very often. It's valuable to include such words for the sake of history as well. How many Latin or Ancient Hebrew slang words have been lost to time because they didn't make it into the extant documents from those languages? Thanks for reopening the discussion. If you manage to put a good proposal to a vote, I'll make sure to support it. Andrew Sheedy (talk) 19:59, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

This may interest you[edit]

https://www.economist.com/news/americas/21737551-challenges-urbanisation-globalisation-and-primacy-portuguese-fight-saveJustin (koavf)TCM 00:54, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

@Koavf: Interesting. I added Talian to WT:WE. I see it's easily citable from Google Books. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 07:14, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

latte[edit]

Oi Daniel. Você sabe como pronunciam esse italianismo em São Paulo ou outros lugares fora do Sul? — Ungoliant (falai) 16:20, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

Olha, eu já ouvi algumas pessoas dizerem esse "latte" exatamente como o "late" do verbo latir. Como se fosse "Vou tomar um late."
É assim nesses vídeos do Youtube (não posso postar o link direto por causa do blacklist):
  • fVopYy4tqUU (nos primeiros 3 segundos)
  • iJ2WQIdymyg?t=45 (aos 45 segundos)
--Daniel Carrero (talk) 17:17, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
Obrigado. Eu fiquei surpreso em ouvir latte com /e/ em vez de /i/ no primeiro episódio da última temporada de Black Mirror. Foi a primeira vez na vida que eu ouvi /e/ atônico no final de uma palavra pronunciada em português padrão. Nem mesmo em outros empréstimos não-adaptados eu tinha ouvido isso. — Ungoliant (falai) 17:30, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
De nada. :) Realmente essa dublagem que você descreveu (eu não assisti) não é normal. Vai ver eles resolveram tentar imitar o sotaque italiano. Pode acontecer, mas quase nunca vejo alguém fazer isso. Por exemplo, alguém dizer "nerd", "croissant", "ronin", etc. com o sotaque original no meio de uma frase em português. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 18:07, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
(A não ser que o idioma em questão seja a língua materna dessa pessoa.) --Daniel Carrero (talk) 18:09, 5 March 2018 (UTC)