User talk:Lo Ximiendo/Archive 8

From Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This is an archive page that has been kept for historical purposes. The conversations on this page are no longer live.

Notice

@Lo_Ximiendo, see answer at NOTICE. —Stephen (Talk) 17:45, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Low German

You changed Low German to German Low German. Despite the split being introduced some years ago, it can't be said that "German Low German" over "Low German" has a real consensus amongst the few editors. It's a bit of a sore spot and there's been multiple proposals to merge all back to simple Low German with no one really objecting but with nobody having a good plan on how to productively do it either. Currently, in terms of entries, 'Low German' is of roughly equal size as 'German Low German'. In the light of all of this, I'd personally prefer if you don't change language codes around, though from what I see on the grand scale, our Low German editors in total are in a sort of disarray with no one willing to make a strong effort for establishing either side over the other. Make of this info what you want. Korn [kʰũːɘ̃n] (talk) 20:04, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

by dint of

As a native, do you know whether this expression has a negative valoration of the result of the action (as thanks to has a positive perspective and because of is neutral). Sobreira ►〓 (parlez) 10:07, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest, I have seen the phrase "thanks to" being used in a negative connotation (as in "Everyone here used to be hostile to truth seekers thanks to the predatory aliens and the technology and cunning thereof."), but I have never heard of the phrase "by dint of" before. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 10:11, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please fix formatting of Special:Contributions/Fastifex and Special:Contributions/Verbo

Hi, please check these links. Some of these entries have crappy-presented etymologies, especially with compound word structuring that have not been fixed yet... — AWESOME meeos ！ * (не нажима́йте сюда́ [nʲɪ‿nəʐɨˈmajtʲe sʲʊˈda]) 08:06, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have fixed some of Fastifex's ones starting from the beginning of his edits — AWESOME meeos ！ * (не нажима́йте сюда́ [nʲɪ‿nəʐɨˈmajtʲe sʲʊˈda]) 08:06, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Don't worry; I'm helping too! — AWESOME meeos ！ * (не нажима́йте сюда́ [nʲɪ‿nəʐɨˈmajtʲe sʲʊˈda]) 08:53, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

German terms

Thank you for improving my German entries. My knowledge of the language is only as a tourist. I am working my way through adjectives that are on the German Wiktionary but not on ours - some way to go. SemperBlotto (talk) 06:48, 22 April 2017 (UTC) p.s. Your babel table could do with expanding.[reply]

I'm just merely importing the IPA and some terms, that are either derived or otherwise related; and I only have two books for learning German (both of them have audio CDs as well) and a dictionary that one of my two autistic brothers ruined with a pen. So... a level 1 status will have to do? --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 07:16, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@SemperBlotto P.S. Alongside the aforementioned paraphernalia, I also have this one music CD by the Euro Express Band and the URL name of an Internet radio station, Alpen-Melodie. Therefore, could this warrant a level one for my Babel Box? --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 17:11, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Go for it. I have a bottle of German wine somewhere. SemperBlotto (talk) 18:36, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

removal of link templates

Hi, I noted you converted {{l|en|...}} to plain wikilinks in these two edits. (diff diff) It's no skin of my nose, but are there any particular reasons to prefer square brackets in those contexts? Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk) 11:27, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Lesser bytes to worry about? --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 11:31, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
That's certainly an original reason. But it's sometimes useful to the reader to be immediately directed to the English section, when there is a large table of contents. Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk) 12:47, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ض

(diff) Words with ص, ض, ع, ط, ظ, ح are almost exclusively directly from Arabic. In particular, the letter/phoneme ض (ḍ, “dhad”) is unique to Arabic, whence the nickname "the language of the dhad" (that is, it is not found in other Semitic languages). --Z 17:57, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

oberfaul

Have I got this right? The definition doesn't seem to follow from the presumed etymology. SemperBlotto (talk) 05:37, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

German

@Lo_Ximiendo I noticed that you have incorrectly edited the class of a number of words in German such as denken, rennen, nennen, etc. to strong. Know that strong verbs =/= irregular verbs. And these verbs are weak: their preterite have a dental stem added, and their vowel changes are caused by rückumlaut, not ablaut. Please undo these changes.

Ainu for finger

I ran across the entry アシペケッ (asipeket) while checking on some questionable anon edits. Further research suggests that this spelling is in error. Batchelor's 1905 dicitonary (https://archive.org/stream/ainuenglishjapan00batcuoft#page/n73/mode/2up/search/finger) lists a spelling of アシキペッ (ashikipet, see page 48), likely modernizing to アㇱキペッ (askipet), and indeed the Intermediate Ainu Dictionary (http://www.frpac.or.jp/teach/files/text-bihoro_tyu.pdf, Ainu-Japanese) lists アㇱケペッ (askepet) in its glossary (see page 87, left column towards the bottom; the PDF text is sadly not searchable using CTRL+F).

Do you have a source for アシペケッ? Is it possible that this is a misspelling? Or is this a valid alternative form? ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 17:44, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not familiar with Ainu. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 21:44, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies for the confusion. The history page there shows you as the initial creator, hence my posting the question here. Would you have any objection to me moving the entry? ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 22:19, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Since I would like to stay out of the field of Ainu because I'm not familiar with it, you may move the entry. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 23:04, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

diff

Perhaps you meant Ladon? If not, in what context did you encounter this?__Gamren (talk) 18:36, 3 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I shall interpret your silence as "please delete it".__Gamren (talk) 13:30, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'll try to remember where I came across the tern ladon. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 15:21, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

pagat

And as for this: Dansk fremmedordbog gives the definition "det værdifuldeste kort i tarok", and it and “pagat” in Ordbog over det danske Sprog agree that it is derived from Italian pagato, past participle of pagare (“pay”), so named because "payment must always be made when the card appears". OTOH, your etym also seems plausible, though I'm not sure why < b > would become < p >. Perhaps it's a confluence?__Gamren (talk) 19:03, 3 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

wrong spelling

hey plz b careful with Shahmukhi spelling. for ਦੁੱਧ u put ددھ instead of correct دودھ . similarly u put لونبڑی instead of لومبڑی , the correct one for ਲੂੰਬੜੀ 61.69.208.200 08:30, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thai entry formatting

Hi Lo Ximiendo. Please don't remove the trailing full stop for Thai definitions. This has been discussed here, and most of the existing Thai entries are adhering to these rules of formatting to ensure a consistent manner in which content is delivered. Wyang (talk) 00:45, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings

Hello there. I saw you edited the چشم /// بی چشم و رو Persian word for eye page most recently and perhaps you could take a look at the new page I just created. Link given. Thanks. Biosthmors (talk) 14:29, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

thanks

Thanks for correcting my error, I really messed up. Roybook1234 (talk) 23:00, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

request at oranjekoek

There is in fact an image of it on Commons, but in my opinion it doesn't do a good job of demonstrating the vertical structure of the pastry, unlike many unavailable images. But feel free add that image if you want. Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk) 11:52, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template:se-IPA

Just so you know, this template isn't finished yet and will generate incorrect output for some words. Moreover, the written form of a word isn't always enough to predict the pronunciation, some vowels can be long or short and this isn't written. —Rua (mew) 23:37, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you add half-baked Arabic entries?

Hi, I have cleaned up the weekend about fifty entries almost exclusively by you of base stem Arabic verbs without the present vowel specified, which has wasted a whole day for me. Now I have also had to edit سِوَار (siwār). For you and the guy before have not included the plural forms of this word in it. Why do you do such things? Don’t you have any sources to get the complete information? Palaestrator verborum (loquier) 00:40, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

labiomancy

You cannot claim to be unfamiliar with WT:CFI. It is unacceptable for you to defend adding a protologism with a web page when cites are not forthcoming. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 06:36, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Entry for German "Weihe"

You added the bird of prey definition to the first etymology, but that is incorrect. If you look at the Old High German roots, they have two different etymologies. That's why I added the second in the first place. Steapenhyll (talk) 14:28, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

On second inspection, I see that you added it before I finalized my edit. I've moved your definition down to the second etymology. Steapenhyll (talk) 14:38, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Min Nan

You should probably set up a page for Hokkien similar to the ones you've set up for the other lects. It's even more of a problem if you try to infer the readings because Min Nan (and other Min lects) often have multiple readings for the same family of meanings (literary vs. vernacular) and it is seldom used to read Standard Chinese, unlike Cantonese. — justin(r)leung { (t...) | c=› } 22:01, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Taixuanjing 竈

Can't this just be put in 灶? 灶 is much more common nowadays, even in traditional Chinese. — justin(r)leung { (t...) | c=› } 02:29, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No... thank you? Besides, I wish there's a deck of oracle cards based on the Taixuanjing, just like there are oracle cards based on the I Ching. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 03:27, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Is there a particular reason why this can't be put in 灶? @Wyang, Dokurrat, any thoughts? — justin(r)leung { (t...) | c=› } 03:39, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Page 彊 is of this issue too. Dokurrat (talk) 05:12, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Justinrleung I concur with you. Wyang (talk) 07:33, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Wyang Then what should be done about the definitions concerning the Taixuanjing tetragrams? --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 10:09, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Wyang, Justinrleung, Dokurrat How about this: I made usage notes that mention the Taixuanjing. I hope that will resolve the issue, so forgive me and I'll forgive all three of you. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 22:31, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You still haven't given any reason why Taixuanjing has to use 竈, which is completely equivalent to 灶. I'm pretty sure any simplified version of Taixuanjing will have it rendered as 灶. I'm sorry if I have offended you, but please don't take this personally; it's for consistency in Chinese entries. — justin(r)leung { (t...) | c=› } 01:52, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Justinrleung I don't know of any reasons, but I could amend the usage notes, as my source for the characters was the Chinese Text Project. (Also, I wish I could visit where you live. It's not to physically hurt you or anything, it's just so I could see what your day-to-day life is like.) --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 02:27, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Of course, ancient copies of Taixuanjing would use 竈, but that's because 灶 was not around then or it wasn't the "standard" then. It's kind of insisting that we should have the definition for the word son at sonne.
Anyway, you're more than welcome to come visit. You know I live in Canada, right? — justin(r)leung { (t...) | c=› } 02:36, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Justinrleung I didn't know you live in Canada (and not exactly where); if its provinces' cities or even the towns therearound don't appeal to me for any reason, well, at least there's always the national parks and the three territories of Nunavut, Yukon and the Northwest Territories. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 02:43, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Haha, I haven't ever been that far up north, though it might be interesting to see what there is up there. — justin(r)leung { (t...) | c=› } 02:57, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

há, lối, nhánh

Those are not glosses. See {{gloss}} and Wiktionary:Entry_layout_explained#Variations for languages other than English. Wyang (talk) 03:51, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Derived terms"

Please stop adding Japanese terms in the Derived terms of Chinese entries. Thanks. ---> Tooironic (talk) 04:40, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

明心

明心見性 does not derive from 明心 as far as I know. 〔哲〕 中國哲學術語，原為佛教禪宗的主要修養方法。意指「心」是可以轉變的（轉迷為悟），但佛「性」是永遠不變的。因此只要悟了自心本性（即佛性），就能成佛。後宋明理學家如陸九淵、王陽明用此術語，認為心、性、理都是一物，一切本來就存在於「心」中，不假外求，只要通過內省（明心）的功夫，就可以認識真理（見性）。 It seems to be 明 + 心. ---> Tooironic (talk) 00:33, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Khmer

Hi LoXi,

Just wanted to make sure you know what you're doing. Are you checking the pronunciation against Sealang or other dictionaries? Thanks if you do. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 07:09, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

កំញម (kɑmñɑɑm) was incorrectly respelled. It's "kɑmɲɑɑm" according to Sealang and there's also a hint on how to respell the second syllable PRONUNCIATION: -ញ៉ម - ញ៉ម (ñɑɑm).
ញ (ñɔɔ) is a 2nd class consonant (o-series) and the inherent vowel is "ɔɔ", that's why the letter name is "ñɔɔ". To make it read as "ɑɑ", you need to convert it to the 1st class (a-series) using ៉ (៉). Without it, the default reading is ញម (ñɔɔm), which is incorrect here. More here: WT:KM TR. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 09:48, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Proto-Chadic Reconstrucions

hello LoXi, I just wanted to thank you for all the formatting help you did with these. It's a solid piece of work, much appreciated. Allahverdi Verdizade (talk) 08:16, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Entry for Berndorf

It contains a link to the German Wikipedia. Because this the English-language Wiktionary, it should link to the English Wikipedia. -- GreenC (talk) 18:35, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's a German section. When an English section is created on that page, it can link to the English Wikipedia. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 19:23, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

胖子 and 瘦子

Do you have a source for these words' Hakka? I highly doubt that they're used in Hakka. — justin(r)leung { (t...) | c=› } 03:35, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Inferring readings for Cantonese and other Chinese varieties

Please do not infer readings based on the individual characters for any Chinese variety. While this may be right 90% of the time for Cantonese, I still don't think you should add them directly to entries. I've caught a few errors here and there (頭目, 裝車, 騎手). I suggest you make more of those pages like User:Lo Ximiendo/Min Dong Chinese for the other varieties that you don't already have pages for. — justin(r)leung { (t...) | c=› } 04:00, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm seriously concerned. I don't want to be following you around, but I still see you adding Hakka to entries. If you really have valid Hakka sources for words that are less commonly used (e.g. literary terms or Buddhist terms), great; in this case, it'd be great to know what resources you're using. But it is absolutely unacceptable if you're still inferring readings for Hakka; in this case, I request that you stop adding such readings to the entries and make User:Lo Ximiendo/Cantonese Chinese, User:Lo Ximiendo/Hakka Chinese and User:Lo Ximiendo/Min Nan Chinese. — justin(r)leung { (t...) | c=› } 03:28, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Justinrleung At least something tells me, that I'm better off editing German language entries. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 18:34, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Could you please avoid doing mass edits like this? It is very distracting when looking through an entry's history. Thanks. Wyang (talk) 07:52, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Lo_Ximiendo/Archive_8&oldid=57907122"