User talk:Koavf

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

Welcome[edit]

Koavf, Welcome. We are glad to have whatever portion of your time you choose to devote to Wiktionary. I am including some standard welcome text below because it has some good help. If you're already familiar with the Wiki markup, please do read our article formatting guidelines at the least. I will say, you will find that Wiktionary is a smaller community where your contributions will make a bigger relative impact. --Dvortygirl 06:30, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wiktionary. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:


I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wiktionarian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk (discussion) and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~, which automatically produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the beer parlour or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome!

Redirects.[edit]

Hi,

FYI, I deleted r.e.m., as we don't do that here.

RuakhTALK 01:01, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

bipolar disorder[edit]

Please don't do that. We deliberately do not link the names of common langugaes. Even if you link them, a bot would revert you shortly, since the Translation format is maintained by a bot. --EncycloPetey 07:12, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

breaking bad[edit]

The main problem with this entry is the citation page. Citations have to be actual usages, not just mentions. Both of your cites merely mention the term, but do not actually use it. You should find some cites where it is used, in the wild, so to speak. A good place to find citations is books.google.com. —Stephen (Talk) 09:12, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Delete: move to Commons[edit]

Have you checked that these have all been imported to Commons? I suggested deleting all the files here once and nobody supported it, so I didn't. But if they're on Commons then they can of course be deleted as redundant copies. Mglovesfun (talk) 13:54, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Of the ones you tagged, I've deleted the no-longer needed ones I uploaded, and moved the useful ones that had licences, and asked the uploader of one of the useful licenceless ones to fix it. Maro and I have removed the {{delete}} tags from a few that are just for unfinished debugging here. - -sche (discuss) 19:30, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
Re "if they're on Commons then they can of course be deleted as redundant copies", not necessarily: Commons sometimes updates (or even deletes) files the other projects may want to keep as are.​—msh210 (talk) 22:39, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

recent edits[edit]

Hey, it looks like you restarted editing here on hitting a million edits at the pedia. Are you aiming for a million here, too? If so, you're most welcome, and best of luck. Note that tagging a page with {{rfd}} is necessary but insufficient for nominating it for deletion: you have to then click the "+" in the template that appears, which will cause you to be editing the RFD (or RFDO) page: there, supply a reason for the nomination. Tagged but not nominated pages will likely be detagged after the tagger has had a chance to nominate (though sometimes another editor will bring the nomination to RFD/RFDO himself if he knows of a reason to nominate it for deletion).​—msh210 (talk) 22:37, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Er, sorry, I should have linked: RFD is WT:RFD and RFDO is WT:RFDO.​—msh210 (talk) 22:39, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
Because you replied on my talkpage, I continued the discussion there. Fyi.​—msh210 (talk) 18:13, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

{{delete}}[edit]

Sorry, but marking an image used in more than two dozen pages for imminent deletion without even giving a reason is not a great way to go about things. Please use WT:RFDO by applying the {{rfd}} template to the page and clicking the little + button, then typing in your reasoning and pressing 'Save'. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 06:50, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Okay But the exact same image is on Commons and protected... —Justin (koavf)TCM 07:02, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, but we generally like to discuss stuff like this rather than delete out of process. As of now, each image needs to be dealt with individually. If you want to make a vote about image policy around here, I'd be glad to help. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 07:11, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Phrasebook entries at WT:RFD[edit]

Just so you know, idiomaticity has nothing to do with whether we keep these entries or not. They are Phrasebook entries, so instead we are judging them against the criteria at WT:PHRASE (such as "usefulness"). —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 20:17, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks I guess I can't really judge how important these would be for a phrasebook. —Justin (koavf)TCM 20:22, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Template:Matt Groening[edit]

Hello. I declined your request for speedy deletion of this template [1] because the template is currently in use at WT:Appendix-only pages. I don't get why Daniel made separate templates for everything on that page, but he did anyway. —Internoob 05:17, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

@Internoob: Now it just has two redlinks. What is the value of this? —Justin (koavf)TCM 06:16, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
Well now that Daniel restored one of the pages, it has a blue link. I don't think it's worth it to orphan this page and delete it because now it is transcluded on two pages. So you can update both pages at once with a single edit. Might as well keep it around. —Internoob 06:35, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
Also, red links are not considered as bad here as they are on Wikipedia. The idea is that they help us by showing what work still needs to get done. —Internoob 06:37, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
@Internoob: But why stop there? Should we create a redlink for w:Life in Hell? Redlinks definitely have value at Wikipedia as well. Plus, the appendix page would not be an orphan: it would be linked at Wiktionary:Appendix-only_pages and Wiktionary:Index to appendices. —Justin (koavf)TCM 06:42, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
You can add a red link for Life in Hell if you want to. I don't think anyone would object. There aren't really very many rules for what goes on in the Appendix namespace. If you really think that this template should be deleted, then bring it to WT:RFDO by adding {{rfd}} to the page. It's not a candidate for speedy deletion because it is being used and it at least has a purpose, even if that purpose is mundane. —Internoob 06:52, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Adding cats to categories with catboiler templates[edit]

In general, this is a bad idea. For one thing, such categories should already have all the categories they need supplied by the template (I just reverted an edit that did). More importantly, not using the template means that changes to the categorization code of the template won't apply uniformly to all the cats that use the templates, and renaming or deleting categories gets more complicated. Chuck Entz (talk) 02:21, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

@Chuck Entz: I am not opposed to using the templates--that's why I didn't remove them. The problem is simply sorting. Do you have a fix for that? —Justin (koavf)TCM 04:54, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
No, but if you ask at the Grease Pit, someone else might. The problem with your method is that sort keys should be generated by the templates/modules, so they can be done uniformly, and so they can be redone without redoing all of your edits one by one if consensus on sorting changes later. Why build a huge infrastructure out of paper clips and duct tape when you can flip a switch? Chuck Entz (talk) 05:47, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Beer parlour[edit]

I don't know what your timezone is, but Wiktionary operates in UTC. So could you please undo your post to the January BP page and either post it to the December page or wait till the UTC New Year. --WikiTiki89 17:12, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

@Wikitiki89: I was at work. Does it matter? —Justin (koavf)TCM 05:17, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
I guess it doesn't really matter, but keep that in mind for next time. --WikiTiki89 16:18, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

Question about template[edit]

Template:compactTOC-ase It seems like you made this and have a kind of alphabetical order for sign language gestures. Did you create this order arbitrarily or is it standardized somewhere and you adapted it here? If you respond on your talk, please use Template:ping so I'm notified. Thanks and happy new year! —Justin (koavf)TCM 07:52, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

The order is arbitrary. The ASL phones (shapes/locations/motions that compose ASL phonemes) used in that transcription system are based on generally accepted ASL linguistics (which have evolved since Stokoe notation), but Unicode does not yet have code points for them, I'm not aware of any widely accepted sort order or latin-alphabet transliteration. The order in Template:compactTOC-ase is somewhat arbitrary and could be changed without contention. —Rod (A. Smith) 20:31, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
I take that back. It looks like there has been significant progress since I last researched this. w:SignWriting now has designated Unicode code points. We may want to base our transcription and/or sort order on SignWriting. —Rod (A. Smith) 20:38, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

your signature though[edit]

lol Equinox 00:23, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Time-honoured way to sight a Wikipedian, innit? I'd say mine is approaching the upper bounds of showiness for a classic Wiktionary sig. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 00:26, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
Indeed, you little lexicoslut. Equinox 00:28, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
@Equinox: It's maybe not as understated as yours but I've seen worse. —Justin (koavf)TCM 00:33, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

? or ! used alone in Spanish -- attestable?[edit]

Do you think the ? or ! used alone in Spanish are likely to be attestable? --Daniel Carrero (talk) 02:24, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

@Daniel Carrero: Certainly. I'd be surprised if there weren't some discussion of it from w:ASALE, in point of fact. I have read about it in... El Pais? in the past three years or so. If you want a citation, I can probably find one. I know it is very common in Catalan. —Justin (koavf)TCM 02:26, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
Yes, if you could provide a citation, I would appreciate it. I wonder if this would be too difficult, because Google ignores punctuation. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 02:29, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
@Daniel Carrero: Falas portugue^s e na~o espanhol? —Justin (koavf)TCM 02:31, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
Eu falo português, e não espanhol. Maybe if you talk to me in Spanish, hopefully I'll be able to understand it. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 02:38, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
@Daniel Carrero: ?Has tratado leer espan~ol? Es muy ma's facil que ingles... —Justin (koavf)TCM 02:40, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
Estou conseguindo ler em espanhol! Porém gosto de inglês também. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 02:42, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
@Daniel Carrero: Pues, eu gosto tu idioma y espanhol y mi idioma tambe'm (y portuñol--una entrada en Wiktionary de mi!) ?No hay nada personas en Sa~o Paolo que falan espanhol? ?Cuantos personas falan ingles en tu ciudad? ?Espanhol no es comun? Creo que es ma's comun entra la frontera con Uruguay... Mein Deutsche nichte est guten... ?pero hay muchos personas que hablan alema'n en tu pais tambien, si'? —Justin (koavf)TCM 02:45, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
Você criou portuñol e eu criei portunhol! Normalmente apenas falo com outras pessoas em português. Eu conheço poucas pessoas que falam espanhol, inglês ou alemão. Eu aprendi inglês sozinho. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 02:50, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
@Daniel Carrero: Por lo tanto, "ñ" es "nh" en tu lengua... el "ñ" es solo en español. Your English seems very fine to me. I would love to learn more of Portuguese and strengthen my Spanish. Let me know if I can help you in the future. —Justin (koavf)TCM 02:53, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
Thanks! :) Let me know if I can help you with Portuguese. How come Spanish is easier than English, in your opinion? I just checked your user page and learned that you are a native English speaker. I am under the impression that English is easier than Portuguese or Spanish. One reason is: English uses some auxiliary verbs (will, have, had) for past/future/subjunctive/etc. instead of a gajillion of verb suffixes. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 03:03, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

@Daniel Carrero: Spanish is easier since you are a Lusophone and they are very closely related Romance languages--similarly, Galician would be easy for you. English is 1.) a Germanic language and 2.) has a huge vocabulary with all kinds of etymologies (including Latin). I'm happy to exchange languages with you--I would love to know more Portuguese. Definitely the hardest part of learning Portuguese/Spanish is verb conjugation but it's also a fairly logical system. —Justin (koavf)TCM 14:23, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

You're right: for a Portuguese speaker, learning Spanish is easier than learning English. It seems I can generally understand Spanish texts and speech just based on being a native Portuguese speaker, plus I learned a few Spanish grammar rules. I never tried to learn how to speak/write correctly in Spanish. It looks like a good idea. I'm happy to exchange languages with you, too. I've been slowly learning Japanese by myself as a third language since I was like 15 years old. (by your logic, that would not be a very sound choice: I started with a Romance language, then a Germanic language, and then a Japonic language with a completely different writing system!)
In my experience, it's normal here in Brazil to try to learn English as a second language by going to language schools, even though I learned English by myself. It is something that appears to make a difference in one's resume here. In my previous home, the number of language schools nearby (like Wizard, CCAA, CNA, etc.) was probably somewhere between 8 to 12.
It's normal to hear music in English and most movies you see on TV and movie theaters are from USA (though most people seem to prefer them dubbed in Portuguese; it's hard to find movies with subtitles in movie theaters, and approximately 100% of all animated movies in Brazilian movie theaters are dubbed, at least in most states, most of the time). Many signs in banks, shopping centers, etc. are both in Portuguese and English, and rarely in Spanish. By contrast, I often see hygiene and beauty products like shampoo, soap, deodorant, etc. with both Portuguese and Spanish writing on the same product.
We have English as a regular course in schools, from 5th grade to high school, but the quality is really bad. Some people in Brazil like to mock the specific fact that we conjugate the present tense of "to be" every year in school.
When I was in school, we usually received our textbooks (like 1 for each subject) which we were supposed to take back home and them bring to school everyday. (or just the days when we had that certain subject) I had a tendency to skip school basically the whole year and have little more than 0% attendance sometimes, so I had plenty of time to read my textbooks at home.
I like the ability to navigate English sites on the internet. English Wikipedia is better than its Portuguese counterpart; except the latter usually has more to say about Brazilian people and Brazilian history. Mostly any learning material that I can find in Portuguese I can find in English too. Some sites and comics I like to read are in English (then again, some comics I like to read are in Portuguese and apparently you can't find them in English); and when a book is in English, I don't bother to find a Portuguese translation. That's nice. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 07:45, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
@Daniel Carrero: The utility of knowing English almost can't be overstated. It's unfortunate in a way but it's also extremely useful to have a more-or-less global language and as far as having a hyperpower in the world, you could do a lot worse than the United States. Still not a good situation but things could have been much different after World War II. Knowing Spanish would open up a lot of opportunities all around your continent, of course. They may be irrelevant to you--you could spend a lifetime exploring Brazil! How does pt.wp handle differences between Brazilian and African/European Portuguese in the encyclopedia? —Justin (koavf)TCM 04:35, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
I agree that having a second language like Spanish (or English) opens up a lot of possibilities for travel. Both languages rank high in the list of languages by total number of speakers. Maybe you are thinking of visiting, or already visited, any Spanish-speaking countries? I don't travel much, but I've been to other states in Brazil a few times to visit friends and family.
I have a limited knowledge of history, so I may be wrong when talking about it, feel free to correct me. The "capitalism X communism" conflict was related to the fact that Brazil was in a military dictatorship for a few decades, which was before I was born. It's still normal for older people to remember it and talk about it, and artists still say on interviews how it was to avoid censorship etc. It does seem that the government of the US helped to fuck up some stuff, but I'll have to study more before being able to discuss it effectively.
The policy concerning regional differences of Portuguese in pt.wp is: w:pt:Wikipédia:Versões da língua portuguesa. According to the page, all varieties of Portuguese are welcome (seção/secção, contato/contacto). Edits that do little else than changing from one variety to the other are frowned upon. There are a few additional rules, like basically using Brazilian orthography in page titles concerning Brazilian people, place names, history, etc., and doing the same for other countries. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 22:53, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
@Daniel Carrero: Sorry--I got distracted from this chat. I have not visited any Hispanic countries other than the United States but I would love to be able to go to Iberia and throughout the Americas speaking Spanish and Portuguese (and Dutch and German but that's ambitious). Just like with Brazil, the United States is so large and diverse that you can spend a lifetime exploring it. And for what it's worth, all I was trying to say before is that it is globally unfair that there is one hyperpower in the world (the United States) but it comes with a benefit of spreading our language which is helpful for communication and the States has some pretty good qualities which it has exported as well (in addition to some very nasty ones). My understanding from a recent post on m: where someone wanted to create a European Portuguese fork of Wikipedia is that it is dominated by Brazilians and their orthographies. Does that not seem true to you? —Justin (koavf)TCM 03:10, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
Oh, I felt it was not very clear what you meant when you first said "It's unfortunate in a way but it's also extremely useful to have a more-or-less global language". Ok, I think I'm fine either way. I would like to visit the US, Europe and Japan someday, but I wouldn't be able to afford it right now. Maybe later.
From personal experience reading ptwiki, it feels probably correct that it is dominated by Brazilian editors, but I'd accept a second opinion if someone knows more about this. The population of Brazil is 20x larger than that of Portugal, so maybe seeing pt-BR rather than pt-PT grammar on the internet and on ptwiki is simply statistically more likely. meta:Requests for new languages contains a few requests for European or Brazilian language forks but they were all rejected. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 16:09, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

xenía[edit]

Please look at existing Spanish entries and copy their formatting until you get it right, and feel free to ask if you need help. Those codes like en aren't meaningless — that stands for English, and you need to replace it with es for Spanish. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 23:05, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

@Metaknowledge: You know for a fact that I don't think they are meaningless--look at how many edits I've made in the past 24 hours using these language codes. Sometimes someone makes a mistake--that doesn't mean he's wildly ignorant or incompetent. —Justin (koavf)TCM 23:07, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
When I see multiple formatting errors, I generally assume that the editor hasn't been creating entries for long. I don't think you're wildly ignorant or incompetent, but the offer of help still stands if you need it. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 23:13, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
@Metaknowledge: I definitely appreciate help and if you see more errors, please let me know. Maybe I misread your tone but it came across to me as you saying, "You clearly don't understand that these codes mean things" when you should know that I do in fact understand that the codes mean things. If I assumed too much bad faith, please forgive me. —Justin (koavf)TCM 23:15, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
Could you not categorize non lemmas? I think the topical categories are more useful if they aren't cluttered with many inflected forms. DTLHS (talk) 01:25, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
@DTLHS: Is there a guideline on this? I see a lot of non-lemmas in the en: versions of these categories. —Justin (koavf)TCM 01:27, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
That surprises me. Examples? DTLHS (talk) 01:28, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
@DTLHS:, @Metaknowledge: I just took out a few more so if that's not all of them, it's certainly close. Has there been a discussion on lemma/non-lemma forms in these categories? —Justin (koavf)TCM 01:45, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
I don't recall anything specific. I'm sure this would have broad consensus but you can ask if you want. DTLHS (talk) 01:47, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Character images[edit]

I'm currently listing image links in modules like Module:Unicode data/images/000... That is required before removing the image parameter from the entries. (in case you didn't know it yet) --Daniel Carrero (talk) 01:36, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

The modules also cause the images to apper in the Unicode appendices like Appendix:Unicode/Basic Latin. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 01:37, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
@Daniel Carrero: Obrigado. I figured it was from d: with the property "Image of:" (which, honestly, it should be). But for many of these characters, there is no reference on Wikidata, so a module here is wise, at least as a back-up. Thanks. —Justin (koavf)TCM 01:42, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
I wonder if Wikidata can be used to store the character codepoints, names, images, etc. (I mean, a list of image names to be stored in Commons, ideally) If yes, then I also support using Wikidata in the future, because it sounds like other Wiktionaries would be able to get the same information from there, too. I don't know how to use Wikidata to do these things, so I guess using modules is the best we can do right now. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 02:58, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
@Daniel Carrero: d:Property:P18 can be used by infoboxes, modules, etc. across properties. Many of these individual characters have images on c: and articles on various editions of Wikipedia as well. —Justin (koavf)TCM 03:04, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Place names vote[edit]

I hope you don't mind me messaging you to say that voting is open on Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2017-01/Policy on place names. John Cross (talk) 14:11, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Categories[edit]

Should go in the correct language section (English at the bottom of the English section, not the end of the page). DTLHS (talk) 22:57, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

@DTLHS: That will be a lot more work. Is there a guideline on this? A bot could easily change this as well. —Justin (koavf)TCM 22:59, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
OK, if it's a lot of work I can run a bot to fix it after you're done. DTLHS (talk) 23:02, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
@DTLHS: Thanks. It's much easier to add with HotCat than use individual section edits. There are many thousands of categories to add just for English and Spanish. —Justin (koavf)TCM 23:04, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
I gave you AWB access by the way. DTLHS (talk) 23:17, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
@DTLHS: That's extremely helpful, thanks. Do we have an outline for this category structure? Because I could easily make a hierarchy of [County]->[Subdivision]->[Cities in subdivision] along with more generic [Regions of country] and remove higher-level categories like Category:en:Cities removed from entries that are in Category:en:Cities in Alabama, for instance. Do we want Category:en:Cities to have 300,000 entries or should they all be moved into subcategories? —Justin (koavf)TCM 23:23, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
Categories can be found in Module:category tree/topic cat/data/Place names old. In general they should be categorized into the most specific category (leaves of the category tree). DTLHS (talk) 23:27, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
@DTLHS: Agreed from my perspective. As you may have seen, I've edited the modules on all of these topics (or at least most of them). Just wanted to check and make sure that I wasn't contradicting any documentation on the creation and maintenance of these categories. So far, I've only really made English and Spanish versions of existing categories but I can add to the tree in a logical fashion like that. —Justin (koavf)TCM 23:29, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Category:en:Olomouc[edit]

Hi, Koavf. Thanks for founding the Category:en:Olomouc. I noticed that it is a subcategory of Category:en:Cities in the Czech Republic, but when I open that category, it is not there. I tried purging the cache, but it did not help. Do you have any idea what can it be caused by? --Jan Kameníček (talk) 22:50, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

@Jan.Kamenicek: It just takes time. I know that there is a job queue and it just takes awhile for categories to show up sometimes. Thanks for your hard work as well. —Justin (koavf)TCM 23:38, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

Template:compactTOC-ase[edit]

I saw that you posted a question last year to Rod A. Smith about the Template:compactTOC-ase. FYI: There is no standard for alphabetical ordering of sign language gestures because there is no standard way to write down sign language. The groups presented like 3 and bent-3 are recognizable descriptions of ASL handshapes. Unfortunately, this does not alphabetize several other parameters of a sign language word like location, palm rotation, movement, and repetition. Positivesigner (talk) 16:30, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

@Positivesigner: Thanks a lot. —Justin (koavf)TCM 18:01, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

You have new messages Hello, Koavf. You have new messages at Wiktionary:Information desk/2017/April.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{talkback}} template.

Categories with invalid labels[edit]

If you see the error message you need to edit Module:category tree first. DTLHS (talk) 15:45, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

@DTLHS: I am. It's giving me errors. "Lua error at line 2021: unexpected symbol near 'in' " —Justin (koavf)TCM 15:46, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
Which page specifically? DTLHS (talk) 15:48, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
@DTLHS: Module talk:category tree/topic cat/data/Place names old. —Justin (koavf)TCM 15:49, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
I don't know why you saw an error. I was able to add the label for rivers in South Korea. DTLHS (talk) 15:51, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
@DTLHS: Did you use the same code? —Justin (koavf)TCM 15:53, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
I believe so. DTLHS (talk) 15:55, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
@DTLHS: Weird. I got several errors on different lines with unexpected symbols near different words even tho I copied and pasted the same text repeatedly... These modules are overly long--they should be split. —Justin (koavf)TCM 15:56, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Reverting my edits[edit]

Please refrain from reverting my edits until the discussion in the Beer Parlour is finished. You have no consensus for these. Besides that, you are wasting my time. DonnanZ (talk) 18:19, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

@Donnanz: There is plenty of consensus and I have already pointed it out. The only one wasting your time is you. I'm very glad that you want to make these entries--it's very much appreciated--but you're doing one small thing wrong in a deliberate way hundreds of times. You were told on your talk more than once to not do this, so if you want to persist, that's unfortunate but it's not my responsibility. You have had every opportunity to explain why you think this one category is special and you refuse to, so I am absolutely going to undo those edits. —Justin (koavf)TCM 18:22, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
The feedback I solicited is about the wording on the policy page, not the general idea. —Justin (koavf)TCM 18:22, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

अफ़्ग़ानिस्तान (afġānistān)[edit]

What is the point of removing CAT:hi:Countries and adding CAT:hi:Afghanistan? Last time I checked, Afghanistan was still a country. —Aryamanarora (मुझसे बात करो) 19:49, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

@Aryamanarora: Category:Afghanistan is a subcategory of Category:Countries of Asia which is a subcategory of Category:Countries. —Justin (koavf)TCM 19:55, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
That's useless though. If I want a list of countries in Hindi, I'll go to CAT:hi:Countries, not to the specific category of each country. Why can't it be in both categories? —Aryamanarora (मुझसे बात करो) 19:58, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
You're doing a lot of editing, it seems, manually. And without consensus too. —Aryamanarora (मुझसे बात करो) 19:59, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
@Aryamanarora: At what point would you stop diffusing topical categories? You could make an appendix of the names if you want a listing. —Justin (koavf)TCM 20:00, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
@Aryamanarora: Yes, I'm editing manually... Is that a problem? I have solicited feedback on diffusing topical categories. Are you suggesting that you think they should not be diffused? And if so, which ones and at what level? —Justin (koavf)TCM 20:01, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
Let's empty CAT:hi:Plants then, categorize each entry in the appropriate genus. Maybe CAT:hi:Colors should be split up by type of color too. I think it's pretty obvious that Afghanistan should be categorized as a country AND a country in Asia AND in the category Afghanistan. Also, it seems like too much work to edit manually. Can't a bot do this much faster than a human? —Aryamanarora (मुझसे बात करो) 20:04, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
@Aryamanarora: This is why I got AWB access: to diffuse topical categories (e.g. Category:en:Cities). That's not a bot, of course but a semi-automated tool. But yes, of course we should diffuse categories into more specific ones--that's why they are made. Why stop at plants and not just upmerge all plant entries into Category:hi:Lifeforms? This is the question I asked above but you're not answering: where would you arbitrarily stop upmerging and why? —Justin (koavf)TCM 20:07, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
When you think of a dandelion, you think of it as a plant. Not a Cichorieae-tribe plant or a Asteraceae-family plant. Yes a dandelion is a lifeform, but the most clear semantic category is plant. Of course, it can be categorized in Cichorieae-tribe plants too, but it shouldn't be removed from CAT:en:Plants. —Aryamanarora (मुझसे बात करो) 20:10, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
Actually, now that I see how empty CAT:en:Plants is, maybe it would be different for each language. For example CAT:hi:Plants is pretty sparse so there's no need for subcategorization, but in a dense category like en:Plants, maybe it is necessary. Hmm, this is a bit arbitrary I suppose. —Aryamanarora (मुझसे बात करो) 20:12, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
@Aryamanarora: Of course. For--e.g.--Cherokee there probably won't be many terms for anarchism or common names of Asian birds, etc. so many of those categories would simply never exist. Hindi, on the other hand, will inevitably have several hundred thousand entries over a great course of topics. —Justin (koavf)TCM 20:19, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
lol, you're seriously overestimating Hindi's presence here, there are barely 6000 entries. I suppose you're right though. —Aryamanarora (मुझसे बात करो) 20:21, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
@Aryamanarora: At the moment. —Justin (koavf)TCM 20:26, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Terms related to places vs places[edit]

Topical and set categories form subsets of their parent category. If a category is subcategorised in "Cities in France" then the assumption is that all terms in "Cities in France" and terms in all of its subcategories refer to cities in France. Clearly, not all terms in "Paris" are cities in France, so "Cities in France" should not be its parent, but rather "France". All terms related to Paris are also terms related to France, so they form a proper subset. —CodeCat 14:40, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

@CodeCat: Hm. Is there any documentation on this? I can see how this would be a good idea but I can also see how it would go awry pretty fast. —Justin (koavf)TCM 15:41, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
Not that I know of, I figured it just made sense. All Cities in France are related to France though, so if you want, you can give "Cities in France" "France" as its parent. —CodeCat 17:53, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

mismo[edit]

@Koavf: Hi and thank you for your offer to help me out with Spanish entries. In fact there is something I would like you to take a look at. At mismo I added a definition "right, immediately" but I'm not sure now about whether it is an adjective (as listed right now) or something else. Also, let me know what you think of the definition itself. --Polyknot (talk) 16:15, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

@Polyknot: Note that immediately is an adverb--just like the vast majority of -ly words in English and the vast majority of adverbs in English are -ly words. The use of "here" in this instance is also an adverb since it modifies a verb and how an action is performed: "put the couch (right) here". —Justin (koavf)TCM 16:39, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
@Koavf: Okay, so I'll change it to an adverb. Also, I'm gonna add in "exactly" as per es.wiktionary. --Polyknot (talk) 17:19, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Koavfefe[edit]

That is all! —CodeCat 19:58, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

@CodeCat: This is a good point. This is a really good point. —Justin (koavf)TCM 21:12, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Being a "newcomer" of Wiktionary[edit]

How long will I no longer be considered a "newcomer"? I want to ask something before going to either "Information desk" or "Tea room". --George Ho (talk) 19:42, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

@George Ho: Being a "newcomer" is really just an understanding of how things operate here and specifically how they are different from Wikipedia. E.g. Here, templates are vital for virtually every part of the dictionary, policies are pretty much always decided with votes, and attestation requirements are different from w:en:WP:SOURCE. Do you have a question in mind? —Justin (koavf)TCM 20:00, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
I created joint communiqué (and its alternative joint communique). Sources have used the term, yet I could not find one dictionary. Therefore, I just made some research of its past usage and created a definition. Is the article suitable here? If so, how else do I improve the page? I'm planning to add more categories to the term. --George Ho (talk) 20:09, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
@George Ho: Some things that come to mind are that you could use the references with dates to show how the usage has been sustained over time. E.g. look at Orwellian—I made a lot of that entry and my goal was to show its earliest attestation as well as usages which are more current. Similarly, Indianapolitan. You can also add translations if you know of any. For many entries, a picture is useful and there aren't many pictures here (e.g. see the one I added to crime fighters)—that may not be so useful at your entry but many, many entries can use photos. You can add links to similar terms as well. You may also want to refer to Wiktionary:Criteria_for_inclusion#Idiomaticity for this particular case. Terms which are non-idiomatic such as red door or green fish don't deserve inclusion. I think that "joint communiqué" is a legitimate idiomatic phrase but others may disagree. And if you have questions, you can absolutely ask them in other forums. —Justin (koavf)TCM 20:28, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Partizak[edit]

Although this is the English Wiktionary, having a link to any information in any language for such obscure places is useful. People reading dialectal Armenian entries are anyway to know some Armenian likely, so the link to the Armenian Wikipedia is useful for them. --Vahag (talk) 15:54, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

@Vahagn Petrosyan: I don't have the time or energy to fight you on this. Do you see any other links to different languages? —Justin (koavf)TCM 15:56, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
Yes. All the links to foreign Wiktionaries via interwikis and {{t}}. All the links to foreign Wikipedias via {{wikipedia}}. All the links to foreign Wikisources in Module:Quotations/grc/data. --Vahag (talk) 16:00, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
@Vahagn Petrosyan: ...in a module? If you're providing a source, that makes sense. —Justin (koavf)TCM 16:05, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Shannon County[edit]

It still is a county under a different name. Are you a bit thick? DonnanZ (talk) 17:07, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

@Donnanz: Not sure what your point is. Don't insult me on my talk page. Please be a decent human or just go away. —Justin (koavf)TCM 17:11, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
Well, you're acting thick, so forgive me for asking. The point I am trying to make, and that you have difficulty in seeing, is that when the list of counties for South Dakota is complete (and with your actions today that is hardly likely) it will show one more county (67) in the tally than there should be (66). DonnanZ (talk) 17:24, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
@Donnanz: Again, stop being so rude. I could say the same of you: are you so thick that you don't understand that topical categories aren't just for currently existing tallies? Note that Category:Dinosaurs is under Category:Reptiles but they don't currently exist. Persia is in Category:Countries of Asia. Etc. Where are you getting the idea that topical categories have to provide up-to-date tallies of members in them? Are you just making this up out of thin air? —Justin (koavf)TCM 17:52, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
No, I'm making nothing up. That would be the ideal, but you're obviously not interested in that. You're more interested in getting your own way, as you have proved time and time again. DonnanZ (talk) 18:04, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
Again, I could say the same. Please show me where you found this idea that topical categories are supposed to provide some up-to-date listing. How did you come to this conclusion? —Justin (koavf)TCM 18:07, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
There's a way of getting round the problem you have created. All will be revealed in due course. DonnanZ (talk) 18:25, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
@Donnanz: Dude, please just grow up and let it go. It's some preference of yours for how things are displayed on the Internet--it's not worth all this martyr-playing and cryptic threats. I tried to meet you half way and you weren't having it, just go do something else. —Justin (koavf)TCM 19:13, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
On your bike. DonnanZ (talk) 19:15, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
@Donnanz: No clue what you're going on about. Please leave it be unless you have something new, constructive, and civil to say. —Justin (koavf)TCM 19:17, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
  • Koavf: See here; I can't find enough cites to make a Wiktionary entry. Donnanz: You are being uncivil and engaging in personal attacks. This is a warning: if you cannot communicate civilly, do not do so at all. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 19:22, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
  • I'm objecting to being told what to do: "just go do something else". That's not my intention. DonnanZ (talk) 20:04, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
    • @Donnanz: I'm telling you what to do on my talk page. I have every right to tell you to be civil or go away. Be an adult and stop acting like a petulant child. Literally no one wants to deal with that kind of base obnoxiousness. —Justin (koavf)TCM 20:06, 2 July 2017 (UTC)