User talk:Mglovesfun/Archives/16

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

Irregular Verbs[edit]

I was just wondering why you undid my edits to English Irregular Verbs Appendix. I tried to consolidate many verbs, such as abide, which is a formation of "bide." Any explanation would be much appreciated. Thank you.

That's an easy one, you either intentionally or unintentionally removed loads of valid stuff. Mglovesfun (talk) 20:12, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Oh, sorry, I did not mean to do that. I simply meant to make the list appear cleaner. Thanks for the explanation!

I’m not welcomed here[edit]

Please permanently block me. --Pilcrow 00:24, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

I disagree; I at least want you here. I don't agree with everything you do, but that's totally different to not wanting you here. Mglovesfun (talk) 12:38, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

ku future perfect form[edit]

Hi Mglovesfun
could u add the future perfect form [1], please?George Animal 12:55, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
What am I supposed to be adding? Just text that displays future perfect of [[{{{2}}}]]? Mglovesfun (talk) 13:16, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Yes.Sorry, I should say it correctly.George Animal 13:20, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
You could simply the template further by using a switch for the first and second parameters; what code would you want for 'future perfect of'? Do all forms require 1st, 2nd or 3rd person? If I knew what you wanted I imagine I could do it, though also you may be able to do it yourself. Mglovesfun (talk) 13:25, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Thanks.fp= future perfect and all forms 1st, 2nd and 3rd are required.George Animal 13:29, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Actually the hard bit is because I speak no Kurdish to know which combinations are allowed and not allowed. I don't promise to do it by the end of the day as I'm going out in about an hour and a half. Mglovesfun (talk) 13:33, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Tomorrow. Mglovesfun (talk) 13:26, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
Template:ku-verb form of/new, basically every thing is done; does Kurdish not have present participles? Are they dependent on number and person? In terms of what the template should check for, it depends on what forms do not require number (singular/plural) and person (1st, 2nd, 3rd). Since all four parameters are not always required. Mglovesfun (talk) 13:12, 12 January 2012 (UTC)


Hi there. Wouldn't those two forms have different pronunciations? "tinging" and "tinjing" SemperBlotto 16:05, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Yes, from whinge, the rhyme seems to be Rhymes:English:-ɪndʒ for tinge and Rhymes:English:-ɪŋ for ting. I was a bit lazy. Mglovesfun (talk) 16:11, 10 January 2012 (UTC)


I've got a question for you here, if you don't mind.​—msh210 (talk) 16:45, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your input.​—msh210 (talk) 21:50, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Help with rfv[edit]

Got the message from 'informatic' (noun). No, not trolling, but I wasn't (and still am not) sure about the rfv policy. Thought I'd give it a week and wait it out. Thanks for your help.--Wikimedian 19:50, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

WT:CFI#Attestation, the only passage in CFI that I find perfectly clear. Mglovesfun (talk) 22:17, 11 January 2012 (UTC)


I am sorry, I fail to understand the removal of this page? I have received from the "Oxford University Press" "Oxford Dictionaries" and "Scottish Qualifications Authority" today that "physistical" is a word, please consider this and recheck with your sources. It is unlikely to appear in dictionaries for a month or so! I here by request the re submission of the word "Physistical" to Wiktionary immediately. Thank you. Sir Peter A. Bert. January 12th 2012, 19:11 GMT.

Can you (or anyone else) cite it per WT:CFI#Attestation? Particular three independent citations? I'll have a quick look but if I don't find at least one I won't restore it. Mglovesfun (talk) 19:45, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

No, I cannot, however the word was only introduced recently, with somewhat lack of promotion; implying there would be no proof of widespread use. I would have to verify it with the senders, but could post a PDF of a letter and article from the Oxford Dicionaries and University Press regarding its introduction to society?

No, it wouldn't be of any use whatsoever. I might personally find it interesting though, that's it. Mglovesfun (talk) 20:26, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Oh well, I have drafted an email to the Oxford Dictionaries to see if they would add it and permission for the posting of the email and original, on here, if you "sarcastically" would like to read it. I have reposted the article on here a few hours ago. Physistical - PhysicsDude21 20:48, 12 January 2012 (UTC)


Has there been a formal vote about including only Serbo-Croatian entries? I know that people have been removing entries but I don't remember if there was ever any kind of agreement on it? —CodeCat 20:44, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

See Category talk:Serbian language. Mglovesfun (talk) 20:54, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
Ok thank you. :) —CodeCat 20:55, 12 January 2012 (UTC)


the following message is written in French

Salut. Peux-tu vérifier les traductions anglaises de rééduquer sur le wiktionnaire (fr) pour être sur qu'elles s'emploient réellement dans ces sens là. Je n'en voie pas d'autres mais n'hésite pas à en rajouter si t'en trouve. Ensuite je ne trouve pas les conventions de structures, peux-tu m'indiquer le lien ? Comme ça j'exporterais l'article ici ce sera bien plus simple pour moi. Merci. V!v£ l@ Rosière /Murmur…/ 21:31, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Yeah I've reviewed rééduquer and fr:rééduquer. As for formatting, officially it's WT:ELE though I think it's not up to date, I'd (obviously) recommended User:Mglovesfun/templates as good guides. Mglovesfun (talk) 21:48, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
Allright, thanks you very much. Sorry next time I'll write the message in english like that everyone can understand it. ;-) V!v£ l@ Rosière /Murmur…/ 07:43, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

By the way I try to import my .js page from fr.wiktionary to here, but the customs buttons don't want to show up. I checked it thrice but I have really no idea what's going wrong with. Have you an idea where the problem can coming from ? V!v£ l@ Rosière /Murmur…/ 09:20, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

No, sorry, you're asking the wrong person. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:44, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
No problem, I'll go whining to a specialist: JackPotte hahaha. V!v£ l@ Rosière /Murmur…/ 11:10, 19 January 2012 (UTC)


Dude – I see you're the main editor behind most of our Old Provençal entries. I'm just reading through a book of the troubadours' verses now, but wanted to check out the lay of the land before putting too much in. I was assuming it would be without diacriticals, but then I see you've created jòi...? Also, any decent reference dictionaries on the subject that you know of? Ƿidsiþ 16:31, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Re diacritics, I dunno; I'd imagine they're not used in the original texts, but in Old French we allow trové, truvé etc. Also I've searched Google Books for a good references and I can't find one; in contrast there are literally hundreds for Old French. I think I just typed in "Old Provençal" grammar, and got nowt. Mglovesfun (talk) 16:58, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
It's amazing how little there is, even printed stuff. There is a decent wordlist here, and some good grammatical detail here. The hard thing will be keeping track of all the variant spellings and making sure we don't end up with 20 duplicate entries for every word... Ƿidsiþ 17:15, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
At the risk of stating the obvious, I have no easy answers to that; creating Wiktionary:About Old Provençal might help. can't stay, it's my turn to cook tonight. Mglovesfun (talk) 17:17, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

One other thing...any chance we can have Template:pro-noun work more like Template:fro-noun? For example amor is actually the oblique singular, but there seems to be no way of specifying the nominative singular amors. Ƿidsiþ 21:37, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

You know, I feared as much, but as I've said I can't find any information on Old Provençal grammar. I wonder if my Leeds University Library card (which expired in 2011) would still work, as I live about 5 minutes walk from the university. Anyway, the short answer is yes it can. Mglovesfun (talk) 09:47, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
It should be more or less identical to the fro template. See here for a quick rundown. Basically, I'm wondering if I can just copy the details of fro-noun over to pro-noun, or if that will break any existing uses of it? (Sorry to be bothering you about this – templates are not really a strong point with me.) Ƿidsiþ 10:22, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
It will break a couple of entries no doubt, but {{pro-noun}} is used so little it can easily be fixed. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:23, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Looks great. Thanks. Ƿidsiþ 10:56, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Category:Old Provençal plurals should be nuked just like Category:Old French plurals was. Mglovesfun (talk) 17:30, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Flood flag[edit]

Hi, can you remove my flood flag? I no longer need it. Thanks. --Dan Polansky 16:43, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Category:Serbo-Croatian terms needing attention[edit]

Ok. I'm on to it. Some of them need tone also. This requires a bit more work tho. Anyway I'll do my best. --BiblbroX дискашн 15:17, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Headings with errors[edit]

Hi! It seems your diligent bot has made some strange edits (diff): it has created headings like =====Descendants====. (And strange enough there seems to be no mechanism to alert us that the wiki syntaxis isn't correct here.) So if you are looking for an idea what to do next, you may want to repair the equals-signs :-) Greetings --MaEr 14:32, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Not quite sure how that happened; presumably some sort of simple typo, though why I was doing anything to the Descendants header now seems beyond me. Anyway, I'm not at home right now but it's super easy to fix, tomorrow morning, methinks. Mglovesfun (talk) 17:30, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
Fixing now. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:14, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Copyright violation[edit]

I saw you hid 2 revisions at santorum for copyright violation. Can you please leave a note at the user's talk page for the user that performed the copyright violation? -- Cirt (talk) 09:19, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

I could, but I mentioned it on the talk page, and that seemed enough for me. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:13, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
Okay, sounds good, thanks for the response. :) -- Cirt (talk) 16:17, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

Thanks very much for the categorization help at Florida flambe, I must remember to use "en" in the beginning of those categories when available. :) -- Cirt (talk) 23:05, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Missing RfV entry ...[edit]

... is now at composite video, blanking, and sync. I don't know if it needs RfVing. SemperBlotto 19:42, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Probably not; Google Books has enough hits for it to pass. It might be sum of parts but not to me. In fact even with a definition, I still don't know what it means. Mglovesfun (talk) 19:59, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
That's because the entry omits the context in which it has meaning, one in which folks understand the component terms. DCDuring TALK 20:39, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
I'm not saying don't RFD it, just that I won't be RFDing it. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:26, 4 February 2012 (UTC)


Is there some specific reason you deleted resultingly? It's included in at least one edition of Webster's. CMBJ 11:10, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Yes it was a sandbox entry. That deletion says nothing of the entry's validity. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:12, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
I've added a proper definition (though it's rather rare). SemperBlotto 11:18, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Alternative forms[edit]

Ok Martin, thanks you (you do a real good job for occitan language!). Jiròni 11:52, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Any corrections tips welcome, very welcome in fact, mercé. Mglovesfun (talk) 12:02, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

sentir and vestir[edit]

The inflection line for both Portuguese verbs is fine, but the conjugation tables for these verbs are both horribly wrong. Unfortunately, the documentation for the tempates is both incomplete and screwy (vestir is listed twice for example), and there are no instructions concerning template implementation for Portuguese verbs that tell me how to fix the problem. --EncycloPetey 15:34, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

There's Template:pt-verb/vestir but no Template:pt-verb/sentir. I think if you create Template:pt-verb/sentir and then use {{pt-conj||sentir}} in sentir, everything works. If it doesn't, ask Daniel Carrero, as only he would know, I think. Mglovesfun (talk) 15:39, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
There's the rub. I made a number of test changes, but nothing worked. The vestir template itself seems to be generating the wrong endings, and I don't know how to fix it. --EncycloPetey 16:07, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
Is pt:vestir right? If so, I should (eventually) be able to fix it. Mglovesfun (talk) 16:09, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
Sorry to take so long to reply, but yes, the conjugation table for vestir on pt:wikt looks correct, and I've now checked it against a published source to be certain. --EncycloPetey 04:28, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
I have a pretty empty weekend, so I imagine I'll do it then. —This unsigned comment was added by Mglovesfun (talkcontribs).
I've set sentir to use {{pt-conj|sent|ir}} per pt:sentir. Mglovesfun (talk) 12:31, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
Hmm, hang on, what's happened there? Mglovesfun (talk) 12:32, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
I think I've fixed them both, but it's hard to tell. Please check, someone. Mglovesfun (talk) 12:56, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
Looks good, but the 1st-person sing, present subjunctive should end in "-a", not "-o". --EncycloPetey 16:57, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done. Mglovesfun (talk) 17:27, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

interwiki lb[edit]

Would it be possible for you to only add interwikis to non-main namespace entries. The reason for this is we have a lot of bots who can do it, and who do not clog up the recent changes in the process. Mglovesfun (talk) 18:34, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

All is possible, but I see that the lot of bots, don't find all, even if the interwikis are put in other languages for a long time. So I put them manually. Best regards --Les Meloures 08:08, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the gentle prod[edit]

Thanks, Mglovesfun, for the gentle prod regarding entry American Dialect Society. You're right, I shouldn't have initially created it as a redirect. So instead, I've gone ahead and recreated it as an actual proper noun entry for an organization. I modeled it after other similar organization entries at Category:en:Organizations. And I also went and added a bunch of sourced citations with quotes from relevant passages. :) -- Cirt (talk) 22:16, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Fair enough, but it might get nominated for deletion. As you may have noticed there's a bit of a drive to get read of encyclopedia-only entries. Mglovesfun (talk) 08:28, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
I've nominated all the multi-word terms in Category:en:Organizations for deletion. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:36, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
I wish you hadn't done that, as I've put a lot of work into it, including the Citations page, but I'll of course learn from this and defer to community consensus! ;) -- Cirt (talk) 15:14, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Problem with Portuguese verb encaminhar-se[edit]

The conjugation of that verb is simply the conjugation of encaminhar with the pronoun -se. {{pt-verb}} doesn't allow for that; it should appear as this:

encaminhar-se (present participle encaminhando-se)

Can you do something about it? Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV 15:45, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

The simplest solution is to not use {{pt-verb}} at all and use {{head|pt|verb}} instead. Of course, it would be possible to make {{pt-verb}} deal with reflexive verbs, but I'm not sure it's desirable. Mglovesfun (talk) 16:24, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the donkeypunch help[edit]

Thanks very much for the help at donkeypunch, I'll use that model to assist my formatting with other pages in the future. ;) -- Cirt (talk) 00:49, 13 February 2012 (UTC)


diff Thanks.  :-) ​—msh210 (talk) 16:29, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Bot request[edit]

Hi Mglovesfun, may I ask you for a bot run at the Wiktionary? I would need small edits in 240correction: 420 articles, quite simple automatic working following a list that I will provide. I'll discuss the details when you answer. -- sarang사랑 12:31, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Well, it depends what the edit is, but in principle yes. Mglovesfun (talk) 12:32, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

It is an insert of a short string, always at the very beginning of the articles, as I did it e.g. at "" and "Index:Chinese radical/一" with {{Commonsrad|1}}. I would pass you a list of the 210 characters (as "一") with the corresponding numbers (as "1"). You just tell me what format this list should be; I can put it into your bot talk page. -- sarang사랑 13:01, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi Mglovesfun, May I return to my question? Is there anything I can explain better, that you are able to decide whether you do it? -- sarang사랑 11:35, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

I don't think I actually could, as it I don't know how to. Can I ask, what do the radical numbers refer to? If I were you I'd ask CodeCat (talkcontribs) or Ruakh (talkcontribs), who both run bots and are more technically able than I am. Mglovesfun (talk) 14:08, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, I shall ask them as you adviced -- sarang사랑 05:50, 11 April 2012 (UTC)


Talkback. --Dan Polansky 14:11, 23 February 2012 (UTC)


It gets really tricky and sometimes arbitrary with borrowings, but generally even if it may sound masculine everything berry (word and fruit) related is feminine except for arándanos and a few others. Anything stand out in particular? I will review them all.Lucifer (talk) 21:19, 1 March 2012 (UTC)


Why was 'swick' deleted? Have you not heard this word used in conversation at some point? Enthdegree (talk) 22:51, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Does it meet what WT:CFI#Attestation says? Mglovesfun (talk) 23:16, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
No reply a week later, I guess not. Mglovesfun (talk) 23:42, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
Yes, it does. It was even used on an episode of South Park Enthdegree (talk) 23:33, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
Well, how does it meet CFI? Mglovesfun (talk) 00:46, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
What do you mean? On what points does it /not/ meet CFI? Enthdegree (talk) 19:07, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
I dunno, I've never heard of it, that's why I'm asking you! Mglovesfun (talk) 10:47, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
Ok super, I'll recreate the page with sources. Sorry for the misunderstanding. Enthdegree (talk) 20:03, 15 March 2012 (UTC)


Hello Mglovesfun, I did not know if the delete requests are followed but I put delete template in several Aleut word (que-elat, ma-na, nalima, na-shuk, malt-jiska, cola-baska, chur-ko). Unsui on French Wiktionary who has some knowledges in Aleut and Alutiiq language started to clean the words in Aleut language (see this discussion). So to avoid copy-paste, I check these wrong words are deleted everywhere. Pamputt (talk) 21:49, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm gonna delete them, on WT:BP#Entries from unreliable sources nobody's objected and there have been no comments for 3 days. Mglovesfun (talk) 22:17, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Want to be a mediator/translator?[edit]

Will you help me over at fr.wikt? Ultimateria (talk) 00:32, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

GaAs has been known to do this, not only edit languages he doesn't speak, but then go one step further and undo edits by native or fluent speakers. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:50, 7 March 2012 (UTC)


Thanks for improving the format, Mglovesfun. I pop in en.wikt occassionally, usually in a hurry, and I often find it difficult to find an existing lemma whose format I could use with the info I want to add, so your formatting is helpful both per se and as reference for future edits. -- 15:56, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

You're totally right. Thank you for letting me know.--Forudgah (talk) 13:05, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

Well thank you for making me feel welcome. :-) Aiko (talk) 12:21, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi Mglovesfun[edit]

Those were meanings of the name but sorry, I'm not so active in this project and am not familliar with the Manual of Style here, I don't know where/how exactly I should add them. --Z 23:38, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Is it an etymology (how the word was formed) or meanings that an Old Persian speaker would use directly, that is, not referring to the person. Mglovesfun (talk) 23:41, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
This discussion relates to 𐎠𐎼𐎫𐎧𐏁𐏂𐎠 (a-r-t-x-š-ç-a). Mglovesfun (talk) 23:42, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Some French words[edit]

Hi there.

I've never actually come across tenants and aboutissants apart from on Wiktionary, so I can't really help, other than looking the terms up. For the other one, I should be able to fix it, though the code is weird, I had a go last night, failed, and went to bed. Mglovesfun (talk) 12:11, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
{{fr-conj-traire}} uses {{fr-conj-table}} instead of {{fr-conj}}. If I had the patience, I would switch it over. Mglovesfun (talk) 21:02, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
Tenans et aboutissans appears in Michel de Montaigne, Essais, chapter 24. Mglovesfun (talk) 15:54, 13 April 2012 (UTC)


Is this verb really conjugated? Or is it only used in the infinitive? (I shall put off botifying it for now) SemperBlotto (talk) 15:00, 19 March 2012 (UTC) p.s. Please check example sentence.

Well the French Wiktionary gives a conjugation, it can be conjugated in Scrabble, and I can find a couple of hits for conjugated forms on Google Books. Usually only in negative constructions, such as "je blaire pas les pédés" (I can't stand queers). Probably worth creating the conjugated forms, I mean, we do have other forms which are likely to be unattested (nous défragmentassions) and adding something in the usage notes. Mglovesfun (talk) 15:08, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

cliqueter (and others)[edit]

According to fr.wiktionary, it can take the simple fr-conj-er. Confusingly, in their "Annexe" it describes both conjugations as being from the same "template" (fr-conj-1). SemperBlotto (talk) 20:59, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Yes, all the first group verbs use fr:Template:fr-conj-1, it's more like our en-noun where it can adapt by changing the parameters, unlike our {{fr-conj-er}} which only has two parameters, otherwise a different template must be used. Mglovesfun (talk) 21:02, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
In case that's unclear (and I think it is) for example gérer uses their Template:fr-conj-1, but not our {{fr-conj-er}}. Mglovesfun (talk) 21:03, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Apropos communier - fr.wiktionary uses fr-conj-1-ier rather than fr-conj-1, but we redirect fr-conj-ier to fr-conj-er. I can't see any difference between the the templates apart from including the "i" (but I have poor eyesight). In Italian there would be a minor difference in order to avoid a double "i" in the tu form. The French don't seem to have this problem, so I'm going ahead and botify it as normal. Let me know if this is wrong. Cheers. SemperBlotto (talk) 18:21, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

I believe that template exists just for the pronunciation. The i is pronounced /i/ or /j/ depending on what follows it. Mglovesfun (talk) 18:24, 24 March 2012 (UTC)


Now that 青出於藍 exists is it okay for me to recreate the redirect now. Just found out that the established practise seems to be to duplicate everything in both simplified and traditional text-seems wasteful to me, but when in Rome.--KTo288 (talk) 23:30, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Canadian spelling[edit]

Hi. I just found this old edit, where you removed a Canadian label and replaced it with {{British spelling}}. This is wrong. Canadian English uses Canadian spelling – which sometimes corresponds to US spelling, other times to British, and is occasionally unique. There's a book about it (Clark, Organizing Our Marvellous Neighbours).[2]

Have you done this to a lot of entries? Michael Z. 2012-03-26 15:32 z

No. Mglovesfun (talk) 15:33, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
Though it's not a Canadian word, it's a Canadian spelling. Mglovesfun (talk) 15:36, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
Yes, and that is indicated by “(Canadian) Alternative spelling of armor.” I know you have another idea on how this should be done. Can you make a proposal as to how this would be applied for more than just British spellings? Michael Z. 2012-03-26 15:59 z
The template {{Canada}} exists - mostly used for Canadian French, but you can specify lang=en if you wanted to. SemperBlotto (talk) 16:11, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
My idea is to keep British words (word used in Britain but not generally elsewhere) apart from British spellings (as opposed to American spellings; colour/color and so on) with respect to categorization. That means there has to be two context labels, {{British}} and {{British spelling}}, also {{US}} and {{American spelling}}. They could even display the same thing, but categorize differently! Ditto {{Canada}} and {{Canadian spelling}}. I don't know enough on that subject to comment further, though creating the template could hardly be simpler. Anyway Mzajac, I'd like to thank you for listening to my ideas and at least taking them seriously, even if you don't agree with them. Mglovesfun (talk) 16:47, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
You're welcome. What else am I to do?
But the form-of entry armour doesn't represent a British (or Canadian) word, only its British spelling. This is self-evident by the definition comprising “alternative spelling,” set in italics (while the lemma entry armor has five actual definitions, in roman).
So the label British on this entry only tags the spelling as British, not the word. This can't change as long as our categories are applied to entries, and entries represent spellings, rather than words (and do I think this is a problem, but at least we have a somewhat clear distinction between full lemma entries and subordinate form-of entries).
Substituting {{British spelling}} (text: “British”) for {{British}} (text: “UK”) makes editing more complex and confusing, without improving anything for the reader. And it's inconsistent, because the main entry armor is labelled chiefly US and categorized as American English. There is no way for an editor to deduce or discover how this is supposed to work, so I don't see this practice catching on.
Perhaps a better solution for categorizing spellings separately from words would be tied to the form-of template. Still, I'm not sure that would be helpful.
# {{alternative spelling of|armor|region=British|region2=Canadian|region3=Australian}}
 Michael Z. 2012-03-26 23:19 z


Hi there. fr.wiktionary says this is the feminine plural of cuissard, but that is a masculine noun. So I'm confused. I think the word means shorts. Any ideas? SemperBlotto (talk) 09:05, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

It's a generic bot error, there are LOTS of them on the French Wiktionary. And I mean thousands. Anyway it seems there's a noun cuissarde as well, meaning waders (as in fishing). Mglovesfun (talk) 09:36, 27 March 2012 (UTC)


Hi there. In the French entry, we have, for the automotive use, "bonnet" / "hood". Is that correct, or is it the "soft top" of a convertible? (See my entry for décapoter) SemperBlotto (talk) 10:12, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Like cuissard, I don't know actually, I shall probably speak to my ex tomorrow who's French, I'm sure she'll know this. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:16, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
She says soft top is capote and bonnet is capot, so quite easy to confuse them, even for a native speaker. Mglovesfun (talk) 09:53, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Empty headers[edit]

I apologize if this is an old issue. Could you make an exception for the remove empty headers behaviour on your bot for numbered etymology sections? These are used to divide content within an entry, and are left blank when the etymology is unknown or inappropriate. Take ἰδίω (idíō) for example. The second etymology header is left blank, as an etymology is superfluous for inflected forms, but it is necessary to separate them from the unrelated, homographic lemma entry. Many thanks. -Atelaes λάλει ἐμοί 03:50, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

It was actually a one-time job. Mglovesfun (talk) 09:26, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
Cool. Thanks. -Atelaes λάλει ἐμοί 09:38, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

Thanks for the encouragement on the endangered languages vote! BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 15:55, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Request for tokens[edit]

Thank you for the support on the sparsely documented languages initiative. (Failed vote)

I have been thinking about doing a new vote since the first criticism was posted. In response to Dan Polansky's request for actual tokens (word examples), I am gathering examples. If you have any, either currently on Wiktionary or ones that you know of, I would greatly appreciate it if you would be willing to share that information with me. BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 23:44, 3 April 2012 (UTC)


What do you mean they aren't in bold? Examples, please.

kyk, diff, the template head does the head word in bold AND does the categorization, so it's quicker than writing kyk and then lower down Category:Afrikaans verbs. Mglovesfun (talk) 19:21, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

eti anbun[edit]

Why did you delete Down sign? Etianbun (talk) 22:59, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

It's patent nonsense. Mglovesfun (talk) 23:01, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Nonsens? There is a page at wikipedia, that was what i wanted to explain. Check: ...
There's a Wikipedia entry for Bill Clinton, that doesn't mean we should have it! Let's get back to the issue, why should we have down sign? What possible content could it have which is on-topic for dictionary? Mglovesfun (talk) 23:26, 7 April 2012 (UTC)


[3] What script did you request? Maro 20:47, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

It was a mistake of some sort. Possibly confusing Turkic with Ottoman Turkish. Mglovesfun (talk) 21:07, 8 April 2012 (UTC)


See the discussions at enWiki and also note that I did, indeed, read the approriated pages here on deletions. The terms are improperly defined (that is, using a dysphemistic definition where a legal definition exists), duplicative (singular and olural!), and pointy - placed here for an express purpose contrary to WMF guidelines. Cheers. And you may elide snark. Collect (talk) 13:32, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

I have only one question. What the fuck are you on about? Mglovesfun (talk) 13:39, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
Yep. Snark. Look at your recent posts. Cheers. Collect (talk) 13:42, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
There's no point you writing on my talk page if I can't understand what you're saying. To be honest, if you know nothing about Wiktionary, I'd recommend sitting back and observing a bit. If I went on Wikibooks or Commons and tagged some stuff for speedy deletion based on Wiktionary guidelines, I'd be blocked in less than a minute. And given your behavior, I see no reason to assume good faith. Your nominations seem to be based on who creates the entries, no what the content of the entries is. Mglovesfun (talk) 13:45, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
I have actually read about most of the English-language projects - including being active in a number of them You might wish to note that I have contributed now on 9 projects, with over 22K edits. I consider myself well-versed on non-snarky attitudes, by the way. And thanks for telling me that AGF is meaningless here <g>. Cheers. Collect (talk) 15:44, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
AGF is not meaningless here, you're just not acting in good faith. Assume good faith doesn't mean assume good faith no matter how ridiculous it is to do so. Mglovesfun (talk) 15:47, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
Quoting: I have only one question. What the fuck are you on about? seems to indicate your position quite succinctly - Cheers, and have a nice cup of tea. Collect (talk) 15:49, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
I'm still waiting! Mglovesfun (talk) 15:50, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

why on Earth[edit]

Should this be merged into on earth, or all forms kept seperate (or redirected, as you just did)? --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 23:36, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Based on previous cases, it should be redirected, see the devil, the fuck, the dickens (and so on). Mglovesfun (talk) 23:41, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

ɹhymes pages[edit]

Thanks for the reminder about /ɹ/ being used for RP pronunciations. I've had quite a long break from Wiktionary and I think that one was still in discussion the last time I was making frequent contributions.

I've started moving some of the rhymes pages accordingly, but I see you've compiled a list. Are you planning to do this manually or will your bot do it? In other words, is my time better spent on things other than moving the pages myself? Thanks.

(I see from your user page you're a stickler for accuracy, which is great for Wiktionary, like you say, but maybe you are unaware of this, also from your user page: "For the one's [sic] that didn't exist, I started creating them myself.")

Paul G (talk) 14:19, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Good spot! Mglovesfun (talk) 20:45, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
If I could do it by bot, I would, I can't. I could move 'em all by hand eventually, 900 not as many as it might seem. Mglovesfun (talk) 22:58, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
OK. In the meantime, I'll add new pages using the inverted "r" and may help out with the occasional move as and when new content goes in. I'm not around here very much so I can't promise more than that. Maybe recruit some willing Wiktionarians to help if it's going to be a huge manual job? — Paul G (talk) 14:49, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
Moving the page isn't too much of a big job; correcting their content and also correcting IPA in main namespace entries is a very big job. Mglovesfun (talk) 15:21, 20 April 2012 (UTC)