Hello, welcome to Wiktionary, and thank you for your contribution so far. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
- How to edit a page is a concise list of technical guidelines to the wiki format we use here: how to, for example, make text boldfaced or create hyperlinks. Feel free to practice in the sandbox. If you would like a slower introduction we have a short tutorial.
- Entry layout explained (ELE) is a detailed policy documenting how Wiktionary pages should be formatted. All entries should conform to this standard, the easiest way to do this is to copy exactly an existing page for a similar word.
- Our Criteria for inclusion (CFI) define exactly which words Wiktionary is interested in including. There is also a list of things that Wiktionary is not for a higher level overview.
- The FAQ aims to answer most of your remaining questions, and there are several help pages that you can browse for more information.
- We have discussion rooms in which you can ask any question about Wiktionary or its entries, a glossary of our technical jargon, and some hints for dealing with the more common communication issues.
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wiktionarian! If you have any questions, bring them to the Wiktionary:Information desk, or ask me on my talk page. If you do so, please sign your posts with four tildes: ~~~~ which automatically produces your username and the current date and time.
The 'i' in 'die' does not look like a 't'. If you read a lot of Fraktur, it is unmistakeably an 'i'. The dot over the 'i' is missing, but it is an 'i'. There are several reasons why the dot could be missing, including a defect in the paper, a damaged sort (piece of cast metal type), incomplete inking. It's a printing error, definitely not a typographic error. —Stephen (Talk) 13:03, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Stephen: I agree that the middle letter in 'd?e' is not a 't' but an 'i' whose dot has gone awol, which is why I added an alternative explanation to the comment in this edit. Still, the damaged 'i' might easily be misread for a 't', so I thought the comment had a function, namely to alert further editors they should refrain from modifying the quotation in the article text to something like "dte [sic]". Your edit transformed the HTML comment into something I wasn't sure was sufficiently clear to serve that function; to me it seemed more like a meta-comment on the earlier comment it replaced. I have now made clear that of the two competing theories – typo versus damaged 'i' – only the latter has validity. --Lambiam 18:30, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
Hi Lambiam, thanks for your edit on my draft for the term autoplagiarism on my user page (User:Zumley/autoplagiarism). Please feel free to add that edit to the actual entry. Else I could do it for you. Cheers! Zumley (talk) 19:28, 11 September 2018 (UTC)