User talk:Razorflame/Archive 2

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


There's {{trreqcatboiler}} for the Translation request categories - it automatically adds hiddencat and all the needed categories, you might want to use that. -- Prince Kassad 22:54, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Ok. How exactly do I use it? Do I do {{trreqcatboiler|lang=id}}? Razorflame 22:55, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
{{trreqcatboiler|Indonesian}} -- Prince Kassad 22:58, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. I figured it out before you posted that, but thanks anyways :) Razorflame 22:59, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Your name... Italian is Rasoiofiamma (it sounds a bit strange, but the name in English is beautiful!). Though I dislike your "promise" and I hope a change to all these discussions / promises / contracts / blocks from everyone, I'm very happy you came back. Happy editing so!^^ :) :) Pharamp 12:33, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Changed. Thanks for the compliment. Cheers, Razorflame 12:51, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

shiny Pokémon

Hello, Razorflame. Perhaps statements such as your "having a 1:65546 percent chance of finding one" on the word shiny at Appendix:Pokémon/S should be avoided in favor of other definitions. The reasons are, specifically: (1) In-depth information is considered encyclopedical, so you may want to bring it to Wikipedia if it's not already there. Such details are not useful to simply define a word. (2) That statement requires that the reader already knows you are talking about the chances of wild Pokémon being shiny in one or more games, without additional aid such as an egg with shiny parents. (3) Outside that context, the information is false; it's likely not true in the anime, in manga, trading cards, or even in other games or other conditions. So, I've altered the wording. --Daniel. 16:45, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Actually, remove it from the Appendix. I've thought it over, and I agree with you that it makes the entry sound more encyclopaedic, so I believe removing it is the best course of action. Cheers, Razorflame 16:46, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
I did remove your precise statement, but the basic information remains on this new wording: "extremely rare compared to most members of its species". --Daniel. 16:57, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Yep, that sounds better and more definition-like than what I wrote, so therefore, I agree with keeping it and removing the rest. Cheers, Razorflame 17:01, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Basque translations

Hello Razorflame! OK, I will translate those words into basque. I never knew existed that category. Bye! --Ikatz 17:34, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

No problems. Always happy to help :) Razorflame 17:37, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Italian in your promise

You have added an allowance to add Italian to your User:Razorflame/Promise, although Italian has been removed from your promise rather recently[1],as you made too many errors in Italians. On 26 December, EncycloPetey rejected your request that you should be able to add entries in Italian[2].

I can only recommend that you remove Italian from your promise again, and, after doing so, leave the promise untouched for two months, and keep the promise for these two months. That is, avoid changing the promise for some time, and abide by it for some time.

There is enough work to be done in English, Spanish, Ido and Esperanto, isn't it? --Dan Polansky 19:11, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Based upon what SemperBlotto has said, I believe that I am ready for a test run of being able to edit in Italian again. If I start making too many errors again, I'll remove it from my promise. Is that good enough of a compromise for you? Razorflame 19:28, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
No. You're just proving that you'll never stop making changes to your "promise". — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 19:54, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
I'd also prefer the promise going untouched for some time, and it would probably be better if any changes were made by someone other than Razorflame. --Yair rand 20:50, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Very well. I will remove the edit that I made. Razorflame 20:51, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
It is a promise that Razorflame makes. Razoflame is the main person who should edit the promise document. I have edited the promise with the understanding that Razorflame can revert me, and that he is the editor in chief. --Dan Polansky 09:02, 8 January 2010 (UTC)


That’s correct. ತೆಂಗಿನಕಾಯಿ is the one used by the Kannada Wikipedia, but the other two also mean coconut. —Stephen 19:57, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the help :) I'm learning something every day :) Razorflame 19:58, 7 January 2010 (UTC)


Maybe time to ease off on this one? Some pages are getting quite silly (I knew I should never have listened to hippietrail when he made me add it to editor.js :p). I think limiting the number of requests on one page to about 20 would be a good guideline, but that's not to be taken literally, the phrasebook entries should have nearly that number, but some terms don't even need five. Conrad.Irwin 00:54, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Yep. Don't worry. I'm done using it now :) Cheers, Razorflame 00:55, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Actually, I'm still gonna use it, just not as much :). Cheers, Razorflame 00:59, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
everything in moderation, eh? Thanks. Conrad.Irwin 01:02, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Yep. By the way, how is that request of mine coming? Can you do it? Cheers, Razorflame 01:03, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
It was a little bigger than I was expecting. User:Conrad.Irwin/eo_without_pronunciation_1 User:Conrad.Irwin/eo_without_pronunciation_2. Conrad.Irwin 02:47, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

I support that you stop adding trreq. I do not see the purpose of adding these comprehensively for all languages. How did this edit at "I don't speak English" improve Wiktionary? We don't have active editors in many languages, so the trreqs are going to stand there for no purpose. Given your recent activity with trreq, one that seems designed to maximize your edit count more than anything else, I ask that you remove the exception "(a) Requests for translations can be added by me in any language: +nl:{{trreq}}" from your promise, and add instead:

  • "3. I may not add any requests for translation using the trreq template."

I have made a proposal edit to the promise. --Dan Polansky 11:41, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

  • Dan, I understand your concerns, but after reviewing the changes that I made, and after the post that Conrad.Irwin made on my talk page, I understand that I need to tone down on the number of additions that I made using the trreq template, and after Conrad posted this post to my talk page, I believe that I have successfully toned it down, adding only a few languages per word, and then waiting until they are confirmed before adding any more. Therefore, I see no reason to remove my ability to request languages using the {{trreq}} template. Cheers, Razorflame 19:18, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
I have never added any trreq myself, so could you perhaps explain me: what purpose do trreqs serve (I know that they add the entry into a hidden category)? How do you know to which entries to add a trreq and in which languages, given you do not speak the given language? How do you make sure you only add high-priority items?
I don't have answers to these questions, and from what I have seen so far, you did not apply common sense when starting to add these trreqs. So in your case, avoiding adding trreqs altogether seems the best option.
You don't need to post a notification to my talk page; I watch your talk page after I post to it. --Dan Polansky 20:28, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
I agree that I went overboard on several pages, but I've refined my tactics, and now, I usually only add trreqs templates to entries such as scallop that are lacking several of the big languages, such as Vietnamese, Turkish, Romanian, Italian, French, Finnish, Dutch, Danish, German, Hungarian, Estonian, and several others. I make sure to only add them if I know that people will fill them in, and I always make sure to choose the ones that need them the most. For example, I add trreq templates to a word like scallop for languages such as Hungarian, Estonian, and others, because I know that they will get filled. I've cut down to only add a few language trreqs at a time to give people a change to fill them in. I've adopted a new strategy to only add new ones to the same page if and only if the old ones have already been filled in. That is how I know which pages to add them to, and which pages not to add them to. I shouldn't add them to highly specialized pages such as nucleoskeleton, because of the fact that there might not be a translation from that language to English. Anyways, I'm being fairly careful in my additions now, so I see no reason why I should not be allowed to add them to entries. Razorflame 20:33, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
So why is the entry "scallop" particularly important? I don't know the word, and it denotes some marine mollusc. How do you know that these trreqs are actually going to be filled? Do you have evidence on how quickly trreqs are being handled in the languages you have listed? --Dan Polansky 20:45, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
I know that the Finnish trreqs that I add are usually filled within 24 hours, as well as the Georgian trreqs. I have no data on how quickly the other ones are filled, but I would think that they are filled usually within a few days, if not, shorter than that. Anyways, scallop is a fairly common English word, along with oyster, and mussel. All three of them are a kind of shellfish that is served in quite a few restaurants around the United States. Foreign people might not know what a scallop is, but I believe it to be a common enough word that trreqs should be added to them. An example of a word I wouldn't add a trreq template to would be a word like cupric acid, or copper oxide, for example. Those are highly specialized words that probably don't have any English-equivalent in many languages due to how new and recent the word is. I believe that I know what makes a word common and what makes a word specialized, and I am fairly certain that I can distinguish the two easily. Therefore, I don't believe that I should not be able to add the {{trreq}} templates to entries. Razorflame 20:50, 10 January 2010 (UTC)


In terms of the etymologies on this page, I don't understand what you've done here. Is the Ido word from Esperanto < Latin < Ancient Greek, in which case they are the wrong way around, or did you intend for something else? Note, it's useful for the descendants section to use {{l}} (on aconītum), in order that it links directly to the language section on the desired page, and if the list of descendants gets above 5 or 6, it's also useful to use {{top2}}, {{mid2}}, {{bottom}}, etc., to reduce the length of the page and make it look neater, though on aconītum you could probably get aware with leaving it. Caladon 21:05, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes, the Ido word is from the Esperanto word, which is from the Latin word, which is from the Ancient Greek word, so I guess that I did put them in the wrong way. Secondly, I didn't know that I should use the {{l}} in the descendants section, but now that I know, I will start doing so. Thirdly, I'm probably going to stop adding etymologies now as it is too complex, so if you could correct the etymologies on akonito, I would be grateful. Cheers, Razorflame 21:07, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

eo pronunciation

You don't actually intend to do all these manually, do you? Wouldn't it make more sense to have a bot do it, along with the other conlang pronunciations? --Yair rand 04:08, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

I dunno. Maybe. It just gives me something to do, other than adding new entries. Anyways, yeah, it'd probably make sense to make a bot to do it, but until then, I'll do them manually. Cheers, Razorflame 04:09, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

About црькъі

The characters Ꙑ and ꙑ (U+A650, U+A651) were officialy included into the Unicode Standart since 5.1 version ( for use in the Old Church Slavonic texts. ОйЛ 06:26, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Ok. Cheers, Razorflame 10:12, 11 January 2010 (UTC)


Hey there. Ngarrindjeri, like other Australian Aboriginal languages, was not traditionally written and so you may find various spellings of the name. However, in recent interviews with compilers of the Ngarrindjeri dictionary (I'm a journalist in my spare time), they refer to the language as Ngarrindjeri. Here, as an example, is a link to an article about the launching of the Ngarrindjeri language guide [3]. I hope this helps. --Roisterer 03:18, 13 January 2010 (UTC) (who mainly lives at Wikipedia).

Hey there. The [AUSTLANG database] gives the ISO 639-3 code for Ngarrindjeri as "nay" and notes Narrinyeri as its previous name. Hope this helps. --Roisterer 06:51, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
Yep. That's perfect! I just wanted to make sure that the language you were editing in had an ISO code :) Cheers, Razorflame 06:53, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Learn Basque

Hello Razorflame, I have been watching and I found a rather interesting page to get started in Basque. Although I think the internet isn´t the best way to learn and also most are in Spanish or French. If you have questions you can ask me. Good luck. --Ikatz 17:54, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I forgot to put the link --Ikatz 18:09, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
No, it is not close or Spanish or French. Quite the contrary is an isolated language, one of the oldest in Europe, before the Latin. I mentioned the Spanish and French because Basque is spoken in these territories. But it's a very nice language;) --Ikatz 20:09, 13 January 2010 (UTC)


Please may you check this anonymous edit [4] to see if it is correct or not. Caladon 19:21, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

It isn't correct. I've reverted the users' edits. Cheers, Razorflame 19:23, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

IP question

Can I ask why you changed my addition to plectonemic? I understand that I am an anonymous user, but it is correct.

The reason why I reverted your changes to plectonemic is because it is too detailed for what we are about. That kind of information belongs in Wikipedia. Wiktionary is not Wikipedia. Furthermore, it looks like and was a copyright violation from the website that you posted, so therefore, since we don't allow copyright violations, I rollbacked your changes. Cheers, Razorflame 20:29, 13 January 2010 (UTC)


Responding to your request that you modify your promise to allow to edit Italian:

I cannot judge how good you've become in Italian. I just think that when you make a promise that you mean seriously, the promise can rest unmodified for two months, meaning until 28. February 2010. The promise can be reviewed and revised on 1. March 2010. I should not be the one to confirm that you have proved that you have learned enough Italian; I know no Italian. Again, the reviewing frequency should be not every two weeks but every two months or even less.

There is so much work to be done on English, Esperanto, Ido, and Spanish, even manual work that does not require much thought or knowledge, but a bit of carefulness and attention. Some of it can be found in WT:TODO. --Dan Polansky

Fair enough. I asked SemperBlotto about a week ago if he thought that I was ready to work in Italian and he said yes and that I should modify my babel to it-1, but I guess I should keep my promise the way it is for now. Cheers, Razorflame 18:56, 14 January 2010 (UTC)


Here's another one with a confusing etymology. What's currently there is very ambiguous; does it mean that the Esperanto word was influenced by the Latin and French words separately or that it's derived from the French and the French is derived from the Latin? The derived terms could do with a clean-up; as far as I know, it's not standard formatting for definitions to be included on derived terms, related terms, etc. or for the words to be bolded. Caladon 20:57, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Firstly, I know that the derived terms and related terms aren't bolded, but thanks again for the reminder :). Secondly, I don't know who added the etymology, but it wasn't me. After looking more carefully at the etymology section, I think that it is safe to say that it only derives from the Latin term, and not the French term. I'm sorry, but I cannot answer your question about the etymology. I will go clean up the derived terms now. Thanks for pointing this out! Cheers, Razorflame 21:00, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
It wasn't an accusation at you, just that the entry appeared to be wrongly formatted. The etymologies for Esperanto and Ido don't seem to be very clear. Thanks for the general fixes. Caladon 21:05, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
Oh, don't worry. I knew it wasn't an accusation at me :). Sorry if I offended you or sounded a little off-putting. I was thinking about some other things that might have influenced the way that I spoke. No problems with the general fixes. Cheers, Razorflame 21:07, 14 January 2010 (UTC)


Why?​—msh210 23:48, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Because removing the whole declension template wasn't the right way to go about solving the problem. Changing it so that the template declensed appropraitely was the right way to go. I was going to leave a message on his talk page, but I've been very busy talking with other people on IRC, so I forgot to write him a message. Razorflame 23:52, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
If he's correct that the declension table is very wrong, I say better none than a wrong one.​—msh210 00:31, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
The table is completely useless as a reference, for the declined forms therein are only applicable to proper names e.g. in companies' names. In colloquial finnish, the word is pronounced [bisnes] and declines as follows
bisnes bisnekset
bisneksen bisneksien
bisnestä bisneksiä
bisnes/bisneksen bisnekset
bisneksessä bisneksissä
bisneksestä bisneksistä
bisnekseen bisneksiin
bisneksellä bisneksillä
bisnekseltä bisneksiltä
bisnekselle bisneksille
bisneksenä bisneksinä
bisnekseksi bisneksiksi
- bisneksin
bisneksettä bisneksittä
- bisneksineen
It's possible to replace the "bisne-" part with "busine-" in writing.
You're not ever gonna hear anybody say "Hän meni metsään businesseineen (his business went afoul)" or "Hän hämärine businesseineen (he and his shady business)". It looks - and most definitely would sound - just ridiculous. That kind of declension is also not ever used in writing. Try Google: "businesseineen" will give you two hits - both of them directing to Wiktionary! "bisneksineen" gives 253 hits. That should tell you something.
The same goes for every other case as well: Try googling them and you'll see that the forms given in the (stupid) table in question are exclusively used with proper names.
My ultimate point is that the questionable table in question is misleading. The rarer cases like instructive and comitative practically don't exist for proper names.
Did you know, that a useful declination chart can be found under "bisnes" entry? Would you have been able to tell that the chart in "business" article is not actually helpful for anybody trying to learn Finnish? I suggest you undo what you've undone.
As to changing the template, it can't be done. There simply isn't a template for "Finnish" words that end with two esses. In fact, there aren't also any Finnish words ending with "ss". In my opinion, it it's somewhat dubious to have the whole Finnish section under the entry "Business". It's a word as English as words ever come. Yes, it is used as a direct loan - in its nominative - as a common noun also (in writing). But when it comes to declension, problems arise.
(sorry for my bad editing)
Thanks for your interest 00:44, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
Interestingly, there are three Google hits for busineksineen, all with dates on them, all from 2008 or 2009. Perhaps business is just starting to get declined like a true Finnish word, which would seem, perhaps, to imply that the nominative singular is already Finnish. I agree, though, that if there's no attested and also no rule-based method of declining this, then there should be no table at all (but perhaps a usage note to that effect, if the Finnish section remains).​—msh210 00:53, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
Very well. I agree with you completely msh210. I apologize for undoing his edit. It was an honest good faith error. Thanks, Razorflame 01:02, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

eo-conj, eo-verb

If I've managed to do this correctly, {{eo-conj}} and {{eo-verb}} no longer require the {{{1}}} parameter. Let me know if you see anything screwing up, okay? --Yair rand 06:04, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Ok. I'll let you know if anything is screwy :). What exactly do you mean by that? Cheers, Razorflame 06:07, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
It means that you no longer need to use {{eo-verb|stem}} or {{eo-conj|stem}}, you can just use {{eo-verb}} and {{eo-conj}} (or, in the case of intransitive verbs {{eo-conj|intr=yes}}). --Yair rand 06:22, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
That is truly great :). Thanks so much for the hard work you put into it! Cheers, Razorflame 06:26, 15 January 2010 (UTC)


I think it would be the best if you completely terminated interaction with Ric on his talk page. Even if you happened to be playing Romanian scrabble (which I somehow doubt..) He made it abundantly clear that he's just being irritated by your comments, regardless of how benevolent they might seem. Looking at the Multi-word IPA discussion that you initiated, I get the impression that you deliberately persist to push him off the boundaries of civility by continuous pestering. And there is of course always some rogue admin hiding in the shadows waiting for the mistake to be made so that one can be "punished". As if we're 12-year old kids that can be conditioned into "proper behavior" by punishment and remorse, and not grown up human beings that can talk problems out in a civilized manner, united under the noble goal of collaboration on a project of a such an enormous potential and magnitude.

Ric is one of the most important contributors around here, and you're effectively doing more damage than good by bothering him that way, so please desist in the future from such actions as no good will come out of it. Cheers --Ivan Štambuk 06:17, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Razorflame, listen carefully. this edit goes against what Ivan told you here. (I know your intentions are good, but in this case, it is the wrong thing to do.). Let me clarify: Do not edit Opiaterein's talk page ever for any reason at all (that includes undoing your recent edit, what has been said can never be unsaid). If you like you can consider it a formal warning, I will likely block you for "Stupidity" if you ignore it. Conrad.Irwin 15:15, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
I have no reason to edit his talk page any longer. I only posted that notice to inform him that his tools had been restored. If not for that, I wouldn't have edited it at all. I even said in my note that I would no longer write on his talk page, and I intend to keep my end of the deal. Razorflame 15:16, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
I am glad to hear it. As I said "I know your intentions are good, but in this case, it is the wrong thing to do.". The reasons it was the wrong thing to do are predominantly that Opiaterein has made it abundantly clear that he does not want to speak to you; but also that it looks almost like gloating - you were strongly involved in the reason the tools were removed in the first place. The only acceptable thing you could have said would have been "Sorry", but it would have been better to do that elsewhere. I am picking on you a bit, but I think it's useful that you learn how to interact with people better - I hope this situation will be a useful education. Conrad.Irwin 15:26, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
Could you come onto IRC? I want to tell you something in private (nothing to do with Opiaterein, but about me, but is personal)? Thanks, Razorflame 15:28, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Template:new io plural

Oddly enough I made this yesterday as a substitutable template for entries that already have other languages (that is, WT:ACCEL wouldn't work). So they're duplicates of each other. Feel free to edit/redirect as you see fit. Mglovesfun (talk) 16:31, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Although subst: templates should start with new (see {{new en plural}}). Mglovesfun (talk) 16:38, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
Hold on, I'll change it to a better name. Razorflame 16:59, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Learn haitian creole


I admin the HT wiki and i'm a native speaker. If any help do not hesitate :-) w:ht:user:masterches

Thanks for the offer. I'll definitely think of you the next time I need to learn anything about Haitian Creole. Razorflame 19:48, 19 January 2010 (UTC)


[5] What is wrong? Maro 23:09, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Inflection template could be used. Razorflame 19:48, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Citing references to Wiktionary pages within Wikipedia sister projects

I may be being a bit dense but I have been looking through the help pages and doing Google searches in order to try and find out what is the standard or template to use when citing references to a Wiktionary section on a Wikipedia page.

At first I thought it was "sisterlink" but then it seemed as if that resulted in an unwanted redirect.

Then I thought that the wikt: prefix could be used but as I wanted to cite a reference to a category page instead of a specific wiktionary entry for a word I wasn't sure if this was the right one either.

Forgive me for being confused about this.

I would like to add a link on the Wikipedia Linear B page to the Wiktionary page which provides a growing list of Mycenaean nouns - possibly in the External Links section.

Please advise best this might be achieved when you have a moment. Thank you.

Chi/Ron 19:16, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Are you trying to link a certain Wikipedia to this list of Mycenaean nouns, or are you trying to add a link to a page here to a particular Wikipedia? Razorflame 19:18, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

I am trying to add a link to on the page (in one of the end sections).

Chi/Ron 19:22, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

I do not believe that that is where such a link would go. The category Mycenaean Greek nouns is a Wiktionary-specific category, in my opinion, and I don't think that it should be linked on that page. Razorflame 19:26, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

I suppose you are right. It is just a shame that such walls exist between the various sister projects because I am certain that most people who view the page on Linear B would love to actually see some of the Mycenaean words from the inscriptions and their phonetic relation to ancient (and modern) Greek.

As someone who has been using Wikipedia for many years I was totally unaware that there was even a Linear B section on Wiktionary as there is absolutely NO mention of it anywhere on Wikipedia which makes no sense to me whatsoever.

I thought it was simply a lack of "joined-up" thinking but if the issue is essentially one of political boundaries then it is probably not worth my "rocking the boat" by trying to link the two resources together logically.

If the same cross-reference material was provided by a website that was not a sister project then this could be done easily and boundaries would probably not be an issue.

Sorry for making such a mistake. It was a well-intentioned error that I thought would be of benefit to a serious researcher - most of whom are still unaware of the Linear B content on Wiktionary.

Chi/Ron 19:40, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Hold on, you said Linear B was mentioned here? Does it have its' own entry here, because if it does, I can add a link to the entry there. Razorflame 19:43, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

The Linear B page is on Wikipedia and the page I wanted to link it to is on Wiktionary (as in the URLs which I provided in my earlier message).

I thought a link to the list of Mycenaean nouns would be appropriate in the SEE ALSO section at the end of the Wikipedia article on Linear B.

Chi/Ron 19:48, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Nah, it wouldn't be appropriate there. The see also section there is usually for pages that exist locally, not on another wiki. Razorflame 19:50, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

So in answer to my original question which was about linking sister projects I am as much in the dark as I was when I asked for help and now am under the impression that such links are to be discouraged as "inappropriate".

Is that really the official Wiki policy or am I misunderstanding the issues involved?

Chi/Ron 19:54, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Please add such links, though I don't know about any templates to do it. Conrad.Irwin 19:57, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

If the SEE ALSO section would be the wrong place to add the link then is there another accepted alternative which will not create difficulties between the sister projects?

I could simply add the link as an EXTERNAL LINK but that seems odd in terms of the concept of sisterlinks and the wikt: prefix.

Surely this cannot be the first time that such a connection has been proposed.

Is there someone who is an expert in this area that could advise on this point?

It never occurred to me that asking what I thought would be a simple question would involve so much discussion. The FAQ and Help pages that I have consulted were a bit unclear and all I was seeking was clarification of the standard method.

Perhaps I should go back to the original FAQ and Help pages which mentioned the sisterlinks and try to ask their authors to clarify the prose a bit because as it stands it is difficult to follow.

Chi/Ron 20:05, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

I don't know how things work on Wikipedia, but it seems that See also would be an acceptable place; sorry for any confusion. I've added it to the article, please feel free to change the style of the link, or do as you see fit. Conrad.Irwin 20:11, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
It just didn't seem that appropriate to add a link to a category that has nothing to do with the page at hand. That was all that I was getting at. Razorflame 20:13, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
I assumed that Mycenaean Greek nouns were written using the Linear B alphabet, so kind of revelant; maybe I'm wrong. Conrad.Irwin 20:19, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

The link to the Wiktionary page which provides a list of nouns written in Linear B script in the language of Mycenaean Greek would seem to be appropriate (IMHO) for both the Wikipedia page on Linear B and the Wikipedia page on Mycenaean Greek.

As I mentioned earlier, I had absolutely no idea that there was any Mycenaean Linear B content on Wikipedia and I discovered it entirely by accident some weeks ago.

At the time I thought it was a great shame that there seemed to be absolutely no reference to it on Wikipedia let alone no means of providing a direct link between the two essentially related resources.

Would this not enhance the effectiveness of both sister projects?

Chi/Ron 20:24, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes, if you include a list of Linear B nouns, that would indeed be beneficial. Razorflame 20:26, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

I guess that my writing may be as difficult to decipher as that of the FAQ and Help pages I was trying to read because that is precisely what I have been trying to do from the outset.

Are we now on the same page ?

Chi/Ron 20:29, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

It might be a good idea to include the phrase "Linear B" on the original Wiktionary page to clarify this point for those who are not familiar with the fact that Linear B was the syllabic script used by the Mycenaeans.

The category page is currently entitled Mycenaean_Greek_nouns.

Should it be altered to include mention of Linear B or would some form of redirect be more effective?

Chi/Ron 20:34, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

It should only include the Linear B term if all of the nouns in that category are of that script. Otherwise, I can add this to the page on Wikipedia, unless Conrad.Irwan already did. Razorflame 20:37, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for this. Sorry for the tangled threads. Chi/Ron 20:49, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

I can confirm that ALL of the nouns on the page (without exception) are written in Linear B script and I have just posted a note on the talk page of that category to suggest that this point is made clear in the category description on that page.

It was an oversight on my part to assume that this was widely known.

I suppose that to most people this would be considered an obscure subject area.

Chi/Ron 20:46, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

It is already added to the page in question, so nothing needs to be done. Cheers, Razorflame 20:51, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
Thank you, Mike, you are indeed a gentleman and a scholar !

Chi/Ron 20:53, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

No problems. Cheers, Razorflame 20:55, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Your user page

I have no idea how you get baaḷujaacle out of Template:Knda. There's no ca anywhere in that word. -- Prince Kassad 20:06, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

  • Hi there...the jaac came from Template:Knda, which I believe that little sign underneath the long a being one of those confits that you told me about earlier. According to my transliteration table, Template:Knda means jaa (for the letter without the sign underneath it) + just a c because that was what the little sign underneath looked like to me. Am I wrong about the little sign underneath the jaa letter to be a c? Razorflame 20:12, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
  • By the way, Template:Knda does indeed mean jaacle according to the Google transliteration help service. Razorflame 20:12, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
    • I don't know if I figured out Google Transliterate correctly but I never get Template:Knda by typing in jaacle. To get Template:Knda, I need to type in is baaLujvale (which is equal to bāḷujvale in scientific transliteration). -- Prince Kassad 20:19, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
      • Click on the Kannada script after it is transliterated to get several different options of the same transliteration, but different ways of doing it. I probably did screw up the transliteration of my name because I had to combine two words, Template:Knda and Template:Knda as a compound word in order to come up with my name. Therefore, I figured that I could just combine the two transliterations from the separate words into one transliteration for the big word. Anyways, thanks for solving this. I'll add the transliteration that you came up with on my userpage because it seems to be the most correct one. Thanks again, Razorflame 20:27, 21 January 2010 (UTC)


I'm really not sure whether or not this is an Esperanto word, but if the IP is certain that it's not, xe probably actually speaks Esperanto fluently, which is a much better determiner than other dictionaries. Online dictionaries frequently copy mistakes from others, which makes them often unreliable. I'd say that if you have never actually heard it used, and its validity is disputed, then it should probably be removed. --Yair rand 19:23, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

It is also in several other offline dictionaries from older periods of time, so maybe it could be an archaic or obsolete word? Razorflame 19:27, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
Possibly. I've RFV'd the entry. --Yair rand 19:29, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
Ok, then. Cheers, Razorflame 19:37, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

WT:Blocking policy/new

Hi, please edit this page! You have some unique experience which it would be good to get in writing before you go afk for a bit (like it says on your page). Thanks in advance. Conrad.Irwin 22:22, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Ok. I'll drop some things into the discussion before I leave sometime in the near future. Cheers, Razorflame 22:25, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Of user boxes and so forth

Thanks for your encouraging words and assistance. I'm slowly working my way through Ngarrindjeri and while my knowledge of the language is limited to basic sentences, I feel adding them to wiktionary is helping me improve. I'll add the userboxes to my page. Cheers. --Roisterer 06:56, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

No problems! That is great news! I hope to see more of your edits in the future! Cheers, Razorflame 22:28, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Razorflame in Cyrillic

Hi, your name may be written differently, it depends on the language. Cyrillic is not a language (referring to My name in other languages). Note that э is only used in Russian and Belarusian (not Ukrianian, Serbian, Macedonian and Bulgarian). Cyrillic usually transcribes the sounds, not the letters, at least the latest borrowings. I suggest "Рейзорфлейм" (Rejzorflejm) as Russian/Ukrainian spelling, unless you want to translate it. --Anatoli 01:43, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the concern. The truth of the matter was that I do know that Cyrillic is not a language, but that I did not know which language to place just the plain translation of it from English to Cyrillic script. I do believe that Serbo-Croatian does use just plain Cyrillic or something close to that, so I do believe that I could probably list that one under Serbo-Croatian, but again, I am not sure. I will list your translation and transliteration on my page, though. Thanks for the help, Razorflame 22:46, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
No problem. "Разорфламе" still looks weird, since no Cyrillic based language would transcribe it so including Serbo-Croatian, that's why I posted. As I said, the phoneticisation (what you hear, not what you see) is the most common method to write foreign names in Cyrillic. If you wish a complete Cyrillic picture (at least in Slavic languages): Russian/Ukrainian "Рейзорфлейм" is also Bulgarian (non-Slavic Mongolian would be the same as well), Рэйзарфлэйм - Belarusian (note letter "а"), Реjзорфлеjм - in Serbian (Cyrillic) and Macedonian. Japanese: レーザーフレーム (Rēzāfurēmu). Anatoli 00:58, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
Yes. You should be aware, Razorflame, that the transliteration system that you learned is very specifically for Russian only. It will not work for other languages that use Cyrillic, such as Ukrainian or Kabardian, nor does it work in reverse to transliterate English into Cyrillic. The English-to-Cyrillic exercise was just that, a learning exercise. This system actually works only on Russian and only here on Wiktionary (because there are many different systems in use, and everyone else will be using a different one). —Stephen 01:45, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
(@Anatoli) "Рейзорфлейм" is also Bulgarian - truth be told, Bulgarian uses the letter ъ when when the sound ə occurs in English, so Рейзърфлейм is the more likely spelling. Рейзорфлейм is also possible. The uſer hight Bogorm converſation 09:14, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, Bogorm, I knew that one, although my Bulgarian is very poor. :) --Anatoli 22:27, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

night soil

Hi there TDR. On Talk:night soil, I posted three links for Google books citations for this word, but I am unsure about whether or not to place them on that page or the alternative spelling night-soil because the examples include both usages. Do you think that you could add them to night soil please? Thanks, Razorflame 20:16, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

I can add those citations (or you can), but they don't actually attest the hyphenated version. The first two don't use the hyphen and the third uses night soil as an adjective and when a multi-word term is used adjectivally it is usually hyphenated.
In order to add those citations just go to the Citations page for the entry and use the {{citation}} template at the top, then use the {{cite}} template with type book. If you want to take a shot at making the citations just save them and if there is anything amiss I can fix them up, but they really aren't very hard. - [The]DaveRoss 20:30, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Opi's talk page

[6] Don't ever do that again, Razorflame. Seriously. It's not helpful. To quote cirwin, Do not edit Opiaterein's talk page ever for any reason at all. That includes requests, warnings, explanations of past edits, information, or anything else. --Yair rand 00:19, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Do not worry. The situation that we were involved in is over, and I have again no reason to edit his talk page again. Razorflame 00:21, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
The edit was inappropriate. The point I'm trying to make is that should a new situation arrive, you should not edit his talk page. Period. It doesn't matter if he's making incorrect edits, it doesn't matter if he is making mistakes, or if he's misinformed about something. Nothing warrants you editing his talk page. Okay? --Yair rand 00:39, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
Yep. I'm going to add this to my promise now. Razorflame 00:52, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
You already promised me this above. And I have, as promised, blocked you for stupidity. Conrad.Irwin 00:54, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

(unindent) It's frustrating that you two can no longer communicate even if it is not to attack each other... Opiaterein is right. "j" is pronounced /j/ at the beginning of a syllable and /i̯/ at the end of a syllable. In mal-ga-ja, it is at the beginning of a syllable. Ultimateria 01:05, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Razorflame's not very far from a lifetime ban anyway, even his own contract says so. Mglovesfun (talk) 13:33, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
That seems a fairly inflammatory comment for no purpose... Conrad.Irwin 13:37, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
I just meant, it might be best for all concerned. I think Vagahn's "not Wiktionary material" comment (now archived) was a pretty good assessment. It wasn't meant to be inflammatory but I can now see how it could be read that way. Mglovesfun (talk) 13:41, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
Please only keep comments directed at me. Any comments not directed towards me or any side-conversations will be moved to one of your talk pages. Thanks, Razorflame 23:34, 8 February 2010 (UTC)


Here is a page that may be of some help: Index:Kannada. I had forgotten that I worked on it last year. It doesn’t have the conjunct consonants, but it shows each consonant with each vowel. —Stephen 17:55, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the page. It helps immensely. Cheers, Razorflame 23:33, 8 February 2010 (UTC)


I protest against the deletion of User:Razorflame/Promise that you have requested, and ask that the page is restored. The page should have traced what you have promised. --Dan Polansky 08:40, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

You wrote: "I will do as you said and wait until the first of March to begin discussions about modifying the promise, as discussed on my talk page here. Hope this clears up the confusion :) Razorflame 11:10, 21 January 2010 (UTC)"[7]. --Dan Polansky 08:47, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

The final version of my promise is the one that I will follow. I will modify it to not include Italian translations yet. Razorflame 17:17, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Breaking your promise

In this edit you have broken your promise not to add Italian translations. The first blocking period that you have proposed in your promise was one week. The second blocking period that you have proposed in your promise was one month. This is your second offense against your promise. --Dan Polansky 08:50, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Promise-shmromise. Why are we even negotiating with Razorflame? He is a terrorist: we do not negotiate with terrorists. --Vahagn Petrosyan 09:03, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
I don't like such hyperboles as "he is a terrorist"; they obscure clear thought. Nevertheless, he is now blockable for one month based on the wording of his own promise. But he can be blocked for even longer based on the accumulated past behavior of his. --Dan Polansky 10:49, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
I've removed the promise on my talk page and will resume following the one on the user subpage. Furthermore, the Italian page already existed, so I don't think that I should be blocked for adding a translation to a page that already existed...Razorflame 17:49, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
I've blocked him for a week, but if someone else wants to change that to a month, I won't object. and msh210 has "fix"ed that to be a month. I don't like these "promises" of his, and I don't like the thought of treating these "promises" as binding, because that seems to be condoning the entire notion; but since he's not even claiming to know whether his edit was correct, and he should know better by now, the block does seem to be in order. (Indeed, we're reaching the point that we might want to start discussing an indef-block …) —RuakhTALK 18:26, 9 February 2010 (UTC) updated 19:35, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
I am not particularly keen on seeing him indefinitely blocked, as he has not inflicted a major disruption on this project. He is interested in some foreign languages and if we give him some leisure time (the current one month by msh210) and he proceeds with his studies, he might return capable of making more elaborate and correct edits. And since we have no regular Kannada contributors, this would be beneficial, if he begins to edit more diligently. I struggle to assume good faith with him, as he was civil in a conversation with me and has shewn some interest in the Bulgarian language. The uſer hight Bogorm converſation 19:51, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
"...he has not inflicted a major disruption on this project..." Well... he did try to have Semper's adminship revoked. And then also mine. He's something of a drama queen and does not in my opinion take verification of correctness seriously enough. I know I make mistakes, especially when just starting in a new area, but RF moves on to new areas with surprising frequency and continues to make these "promises" and then break them. — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 20:30, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
I'm not particularly keen on indef-blocking him, either, but we can discuss a possibility without having to be keen on it.
I would be very concerned if he came back and became our only regular Kannada contributor, as we'd have no way of knowing if any of his contributions were correct. (For the record: I don't think he's acting in bad faith. But good faith isn't always enough.)
RuakhTALK 20:40, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
This double-block strikes me as extremely heavyhanded and completely inappropriate. He is being blocked for one month for going against his own private policies, which certainly are not the policies of English Wiktionary or Wikimedia. And then he only broke his private policies if you interprete his badly written rules your own way...the way Razorflame interpretes his policies, he did not break them (if it even mattered...there is no site policy that says you cannot change your mind about what you want to do or how you want to contribute). There is only a passing reference that he might not be certain that one of his edits was entirely correct...but no evidence is provided to show that the word was incorrect at all. To my eye, it looks perfectly fine.
He is a young and clearly well-meaning and enthusiastic contributor and this block is something you should be ashamed of. I’m sure glad I didn’t have a hand in it. —Stephen 00:22, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
I initially tried to refrain from commenting on this matter, but i think it's necessary to establish my view here. I think opiaterein is a little too harsh on Razor. I don't want to see another case of Mallerd, whom I know outside Wiki, re-occur. Both of them share an enthusiastic and energetic temperament, which I think is exactly what we need for this project. Patience is a virtue and I think this is what some of us here lack. JamesjiaoT C 00:42, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
What is this block about? What for? Did he commit any vandalism? Are you crazy? Unblock him quickly!!! --Anatoli 00:48, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
He made a note to himself sometime ago that he was only going to work Esperanto, Ido, Spanish, or English. Then he changed his mind and decided he wanted to learn to read Kannada and he added this Italian word. Nobody says the Italian word is wrong, but that’s why he was blocked for one month. —Stephen 00:54, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
He changes his mind rather frequently. Since perhaps December, he's gone between Finnish, Hungarian, Bulgarian, Italian, Kannada... even I'm not that jumpy. He may be enthusiastic and well-meaning, but as said above, that's not always enough... even his dubious entries aside, he's always been a bit of a loose cannon, starting or at least not backing away from silly drama... case in point particularly his motion to desysop Semper. At least twice he's edit warred with me insisting that he was right, when it turned out he wasn't... Considering all things together, I just don't value his presence here... it would sadden me to have to say that, but after everything I've experienced of him... it doesn't. :( — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 01:03, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
@Opiaterein: I don't think your comments here have been too inappropriate, but I'm not sure you're the one who should be making them. Since Razorflame has promised not to contact you or speak to you, and you seem to be holding him to that promise, I think it's best if you reciprocate to the extent possible. (Obviously if you notice bad edits of his, it's fine to roll them back. But in general, I think you should avoid commenting on his talk-page. Just my 2¢.) —RuakhTALK 01:10, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
Actually it's more Conrad that does anything about him editing my talk page, I just bark at him when he does. But he's also broken the promise not to contact me. He's emailed and left me messages on IRC, so I guess you can make of that what you will. — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 01:18, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
@Stephen: To clarify, it wasn't a note to himself, but rather, a "contract" or "promise" that he made to the community (see User:Razorflame/Promise). He was blocked for one month not only because he broke his promise, but also because said promise came with a request that he be blocked for his second "offense". (Personally, I don't see as we're bound to honor the requests in that promise, but that's where it came from.)
Anyway, given y'all's objections, I've unblocked him for now. We'll have to wait and see what happens next …
RuakhTALK 01:10, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
I just came across this discussion. Yes, I blocked him for a month for adding the Italian translation because he had asked for it (literally, in his "promise", not idiomatically), not because he did something normally considered blockworthy. The way I see it, his "promise" was like giving someone your car keys before you go to a party at which you might drink: you are giving someone else the reins on your actions in case you lose yourself. Razorflame lost himself, and I took his car.​—msh210 16:45, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for your explanation, msh210. I believe that your analogy is not correctly used because I did not "lose myself" by adding an Italian translation for a page that already existed and was created by someone who knows Italian. I was only trying to help the English Wiktionary out by including the translation in the translation table for thermotropism because I notice that neither SemperBlotto, nor Barmar, adds any of the entries that they make in Italian to the translation tables for the English translation of that word, so I was trying to help out by doing that task for them. I am sorry for just trying to help out by doing soemthing that needed to be done, but that was all I was intending on doing. Cheers, Razorflame 01:49, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
Our new blocking policy will say that blocks should be used to prevent edits that will hinder or harm Wiktionary. It is the opinion of many editors that Razorflame's edits do not help Wiktionary; they are frequently full of errors, and he readily admits this. It would be a mistake to accuse solely Opiaterein, though he has been perhaps the most obvious catalyst; the problem that people have with Razorflame is not to do with his behaviour towards other editors. As it should be evident to most people that he is a polite, friendly and good natured person.
As I have attempted, at reasonable length, to explain to Razorflame; his attitude towards mistakes is the core of the problem. Yes, he learns from his mistakes, and promises never to make them again; No, he does not stop making them, but the crux of the matter is that he has not learned the reason that he makes mistakes. It seems that he does not understand that copying things from other places on the internet is unreliable, nor that following rules to the letter without actual knowledge leads to making mistakes about the exceptions to those rules. While I, and others, have tried to explain this, perhaps not clearly enough, it seems to make no noticable impact; every time he is reprimanded for a mistake, we get a new promise about that specific kind of mistake that is held for some too finite length of time before being broken. While I appreciate the enthusiasm, and think it would be a phenomenal power put to good use, the attitude does not help our project. Accuracy is phenomenally important, mistakes made here are replicated elsewhere, and replicated mistakes have a good deal of credibility, "there are hundreds of google hits that say this, it must be true". It is very easy to spot a missing piece of data in the future and add it, a red link shows this; it is much harder to spot a mistake in data that exists, you have to be on the page, and reading it thoroughly.
At the moment this block is a month long, clearly too long for the crime, yet it is according to Razorflame's law. Perhaps we should make it illegal to ask to be blocked, much as it is illegal to sign away your human rights. If I could be sure that Razorflame's attitude would change, I would have no qualms about unblocking him; however, as amply demonstrated in the past, it does not seem at all likely - what is worse is there is no proof he can give us if he has chosen to turn over a new leaf; any promises are likely to be ignored due to the myriad of empty promises we have heard so far. Conrad.Irwin 01:16, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
Thank you all for the feedback. I've taken it in, and will continue to absorb it in. I cannot guarantee that I will not make any mistakes, but what I can guarantee is that I won't be making nearly so many as I have in the past. As stated, when editing in a language that I am learning, I will make sure that the edit that I am making is 100% correct before making it. While I know that this does not excuse my past actions and mistakes, I am hoping that this is a stepping stone for stopping making as many mistakes as I have in the past. Opiaterein's comments about how "jumpy" I am hit home, and have made me stop and realize that I should not jump as often as I have in the past. I will stick with the language that I want to contribute to the English Wiktionary on, and I will make sure that the edits that I make are as error-free as I can make them. I don't expect any of you to believe what I am saying, so I will be showing you through my edits. What I do ask is to not be blocked for editing in Kannada, which is the language that I plan on working in. Stephen G. Brown knows some Kannada, so he can help point out a mistake that I make (which, hopefully, won't be the case). That is all that I am going to say about this. Razorflame 03:11, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
I am glad it's resolved. Razorflame, you must have been naughty, judging from the discussion. You are given another chance. I hope you got your lesson and will try to keep your promises from now on. --Anatoli 03:08, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
The promise listed on my userpage will be the one that I will stick to from now on. Razorflame 03:12, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
Good. Making mistakes in a language you don't know well is common. You can also use the "{{checktrans-top}}" section using "ttbc" like in planet: "* {{ttbc|Kannada}}": ಗ್ರಹ (grah). Edits should still be welcome, it's the keen learners who can be the most active contributors, not always native speakers. There is a possibility of an error but it's the responsibility of the editor to make those possibilities rare. Don't rely on one source only, if you don't know the language and remember that some online dictionaries copy wrong translations from each other. This includes Wiktionary. --Anatoli 03:32, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
Yes, I know that Internet sources are notoriously unreliable, which is why I've been reading a Kannada-English Dictionary that I bought a few days ago to help me with the translations, in addition to the definitions found on the Kannada Wiktionary, and a few other sources. I would only add them if all four of the sources that I use say the same thing. Thanks for the advice, and here's to hoping that I learn some :) I will strive to make as few mistakes as I possibly can. Cheers, Razorflame 03:36, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
Razorflame has tried yesterday to get his promise page deleted, in spite of what he wrote earlie: "I will do as you said and wait until the first of March to begin discussions about modifying the promise, as discussed on my talk page here. Hope this clears up the confusion :) Razorflame 11:10, 21 January 2010 (UTC)"[8].
It seems that many editors commenting here don't mind that Razorflame is utterly unreliable and always tries to work his way around any promise that he makes, be it one made on the promise page, one made untraceably in an IRC conversation, or one made on a talk page.
The idea with the promise or contract was mine, and it can work only to the extent to which it is taken seriously by Wiktionary editors. As there is little support for the idea of the promise among Wiktionary editors, I am retracting the idea of promise. I am stopping to monitor what happens to the promise and whether it is kept. --Dan Polansky 07:15, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
I've replied to this message on Dan Polansky's talk page. Razorflame 01:50, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
sigh... Razorflame, I'm sorry that you don't seem to fit with this community. You appear emotional, restless, energetic and carefree and most people round here are quite strict, focused, no-nonsense and boring. I don't think he should be obligated to stay within any few languages, but - in languages he doesn't know, he should be checking at least with a highly reputable dictionary, but better a native speaker to validate his contributions. When he makes a mistake - don't pounce on him, please? We all make mistakes. At least let him fix his own problems. If this was a community of 'ah ha! I caught you and let's see, this was your fourth mistake, so you are now available to be whomped with a great big stick' that would be so discouraging. I know he's made many mistakes, but that's human and I probably have too. I wish I had more time to spend around here! L☺g☺maniac 02:10, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
If you want to punish someone who makes many mistakes, look at User:Strabismus. He created thousands of entries which are just plain wrong. -- Prince Kassad 05:18, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
Hey, Razorflame, I see on Dijan's talkpage that you are interested in contributing to Azeri now. May I say I strongly support your decision for no specific reason whatsoever: you should stick to Azeri and artificial languages, like Esperanto and Ido. But leave other languages alone, please. --Vahagn Petrosyan 06:59, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
If you read it closer, I stated that I am not going to be contributing to Azeri. Furthermore, I do not believe that I deserve that kind of overly sarcastic comment from you. Razorflame 07:09, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
I am not sarcastic, honestly. Do Azeri. --Vahagn Petrosyan 07:16, 11 February 2010 (UTC)


Hi Razorflame. Partly out of curiosity, partly out of respect for you, I'd like to nominate you as an administrator. Having bureaurcrat and adminship experience on simple.wikt is a bonus (BTW, why did you lose your adminship there?), and I understand that you're actively looking for things to do here - admins say that more work comes with adminship. I shall remind people in the vote that this is not a "Who likes Razorflame and who doesn't" vote, neither a popularity contest (although, in a way, maybe it is) ;p --Rising Sun talk? 12:05, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Sir, are you a sadist? --Vahagn Petrosyan 12:17, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
I thought that was mean. Mglovesfun (talk) 12:18, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
It will be much meaner when RF fails by a 2-25 margin. --Vahagn Petrosyan 12:20, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
My bad, I meant "I think Rising sun is being mean". Mglovesfun (talk) 12:21, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
Razorflame, do not agree to nomination. This Wonderfool clone is trying to break your spirit. --Vahagn Petrosyan 12:23, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
What he said. Mglovesfun (talk) 12:25, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
I decline the nomination. I will not have you spite me and try to remove me from this Wiki. Razorflame 15:04, 11 February 2010 (UTC)


The guide I have has yayun as "eating", although it is a verb (indicated by the suffix -un, which in Ngarrindjeri indicates a verb). So it it would be used like "I am eating". If you think it needs correcting please do so. Cheers --Roisterer 01:39, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Hmm...that kind of sounds like how the Latin pages are set up. Maybe you should write in the entry I am eating. as the definition. Razorflame 01:47, 13 February 2010 (UTC)


Hello Razorflame. Actually I've never used any online sources to learn Azeri, as it's pretty familiar with Turkish, I can instinctively understand it. Hmm but I can give you a few links. [9], [10], [11], [12] and also a link for a English-Azeri dictionary: [13] (But please keep in mind, I've never used it yet and I don't know if it's trustable). Cheers. Sinek 11:43, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the links :) I'll make sure to use them when I learn Azeri :) Cheers, Razorflame 20:38, 14 February 2010 (UTC)



Please romanise Kannada translation of Karnataka - ಕರ್ನಾಟಕ. I've also found ಕನಾ೯ಟಕ. Are both valid or the last one is incorrect? If they are both valid, please add the alternative translation. Anatoli 12:07, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

I'll see what I can scrounge up :) Cheers, Razorflame 12:08, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
Don't worry if you can't, I just thought it was worth adding the transliteration for the homeland of Kannada. --Anatoli 12:09, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
Already done with the transliteration and added. Also, the alternate translation you gave me is also correct. Verified by seeing it on quite a few web pages :) Cheers, Razorflame 12:10, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
I saw it thanks. Isn't the symbol ೯ number "9" in ಕನಾ೯ಟಕ? Sorry, if it's a stupid question. I don't know Kannada. Yes, it is used in some Wikipedia's but it may be wrong, as Wikipedia may have a lot of errors. --Anatoli 12:16, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
Yes, it is the symbol for the number 9....that translation is probably incorrect, then. Razorflame 12:22, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, I hope you are right by requesting the deletion. Anatoli 12:30, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
I don't see why I would be. I compared the symbols in the translation you gave me with the symbol that you wrote for the number 9, and the two symbols matched up. It is the 9 symbol, which would make absolutely no sense to have in a transliteration....if I'm wrong about the deletion, someone will remove the qd tag and verify that it is correct, if not, it'll be deleted. Even if it is deleted, we aren't missing out on most, I think it could be a redirect to the official translation if not deleted...Razorflame 12:35, 15 February 2010 (UTC)


  1. te-noun and kn-noun do not need sc= because the templates already specify this.
  2. "header=" is not something we use. You probably meant head=, which is still not all.

[ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 22:05, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Both of which were already told to me by Prince_Kassad. Hmm...I'll see if I can use AWB to remove the |sc=Knda}}...Razorflame 22:06, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

re: Kannada

What's your deal with my knowledge of Kannada? I don't understand why you have to be such a snob about things. Please get over it.--Strabismus 07:26, 16 February 2010 (UTC)


You should note that Kannada Wikipedia has an article w:kn:ಭಾಷೆ which actually means "language". Surely that's not possible if Template:Knda does not mean "language", is it? -- Prince Kassad 10:09, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Hmm..for that particular word, I did not check the kn.wikipedia, but I did check kn.wiktionary, and could not find anything else about that, so I guess that since you found that to mean language, that that can be restored (I am assuming it was deleted?) Cheers, Razorflame 02:16, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for clarifying it, Prince Kassad. There are many languages using this Sanskrit word - भाषा (bhāṣā), I thought this could be a false friend after Razorflame's comment. --Anatoli 22:58, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
It is still possible that it is a false friend. I do not know exactly, so I would probably not add it because of the chance that it could be one. Better to not add it than be incorrect. Razorflame 01:32, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
w:kn:ಭಾಷೆ is a good indication that it's not, do you agree? BTW, as a person learning Kannada, I would buy a good paper dictionary, then you could say with authority. You still haven't told me, I am curious, why are you learning Kannada? --Anatoli 01:54, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
Yes, but I still have my doubts...Kananda Wiktionary lists the word as meaning promise and not language, but I guess it could mean both. I have already bought two paper dictionaries. Furthermore, I love the symbols in the Kannada language...that is what interested me in the first place. Razorflame 01:57, 24 February 2010 (UTC)


I'm not sure whether it's desirable to have entries on individual letter-vowel combinations, since their number is very high and anyone who knows Kannada script will know how to construct them anyway. -- Prince Kassad 21:17, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Hmm...I think it would be desirable to include just the consonants ending with a, right? Razorflame 21:20, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
If you mean the plain consonants (with just inherent vowel), then yes. -- Prince Kassad 21:27, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, that's what I mean. Razorflame 22:43, 23 February 2010 (UTC)


You sure you can attest that? Equinox 22:27, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

I wasn't the one who made the page. Razorflame 22:28, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
Oh yeah, my mistake. Equinox 22:30, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
No problems =D Razorflame 22:30, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
I guess Eq thinks we're the same user or somethin, weird. But no, I didn't check anything before creating it. Just kinda assumed.--Rising Sun talk? 22:31, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
Haha, or maybe my eyes can't tell apart people who begin with the same letter. Equinox 22:33, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
I might recolor my signature or sth...but then again, no --Rising Sun talk? 22:37, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
Please take this discussion elsewhere. Thanks, Razorflame 22:38, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Wiktionary:Kannada transliteration


Thanks for your contributions. I wonder if you are interested in expanding Wiktionary:Kannada transliteration and making it similar to other transliteration tables, like Wiktionary:Hindi transliteration or Wiktionary:Thai transliteration. Not meaning to give you more work but I thought it would be beneficial if you could come up eventually. --Anatoli 06:10, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Since you are probably the only editor actively working in Kannada here, you could probably come with a method based on existing scientific or popular methods. --Anatoli 06:14, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
I'm actually really bad with those kinds of things (wikitables), so I'm sorry, but I can't expand it much further. Sorry, Razorflame 06:51, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
I added a sample table, however it's badly formatted and still missing a few characters. -- Prince Kassad 07:01, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
Ok, great! I'll see what I can do to add to it! Cheers, Razorflame 18:59, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
Looks good, thank you both! (I didn't have internet access for some time) --Anatoli 23:29, 8 March 2010 (UTC)


I can correct them if you would like to :) Pharamp 20:55, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Which ones are wrong? Razorflame 23:26, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
Please correct them. --Rising Sun talk? contributions 22:44, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
It does not matter if they are incorrect or not if they are in my userspace. In fact, I'm going to request the page deleted now because it seems to be a point of consternation that I don't need right now. Razorflame 15:33, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
Sorry, I forgot to check back if you had replied :) I can correct them if you desire, or delete the page. Or correct them, and then delete! Pharamp 15:52, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
Okay, I see now the deleted page. Nevermind :) Pharamp 15:52, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
Yes, I just placed a deletion tag on it, so any administrator could delete it if they want. Thanks for the offer, though :) Razorflame 15:54, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Swedish - piano


I saw that you edited the piano page. I do not understand why you said that the gender needed to be included, as I stated that piano is a neuter noun in the Swedish language. Thank you, Davidleeroth 06:22, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

I also see that you liked having your name transliterated into other alphabets.

Arabic - ريزرفليم Greek - Ρειζορφλειμ

Davidleeroth 06:26, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

your name in Polish

I might be wrong, but I think your name in Polish would be "płomień brzytwowy" (literally, flame razory [as an attributive adjective]). --Volants 15:12, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for the help :) Cheers, Razorflame 18:29, 17 March 2010 (UTC)


Please, no offence, but do not "meddle" (for lack of a more appropriate word) in affairs which you do not fully understand. While the SC vote was a total disaster, if you just ask Ivan, Bogorm or anyone else who contributes SC entries you will see that it makes much more sense to obliterate these "duplicates". The main reason why so much opposition to said vote blew up was that RU opposed it and actually seems to have canvassed for votes in opposition of the proposal. As a result many arrogant, nationalistic Croats (and probably Serbs too) came a posted their little oppositional votes and started raging waffling on...To give you a clearer picture, I might add that many of these people had never contributed to Wiktionary before (or at least had do very little). There were also suspicions of some users that voted against the proposal being socks of RU, but I don't think anything was proved. 50 Xylophone Players talk 23:40, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Please do not personally attack me again. First off, I would not have made the revert if I did not already fully understand the situation. Secondly, I think your deletion of valid content is inappropriate, and if needs be, I revert it as such. Thirdly, I would rather have Ivan remove any content to the article that he believes should be removed as he is the one who added the content. Fourthly, do not speak of Serbians and Croatians in that manner, because I find it to be extremely offensive (even though I am neither). Razorflame 00:54, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
I see neither personal attack, nor anything about Serbians and Croatians, in PalkiaX50's comment. (The comment does mention "many arrogant, nationalistic Croats (and probably Serbs too)", but does not say anything to suggest that Serbians and Croatians in general are arrogant or nationalistic.) —RuakhTALK 01:49, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
But you Palkia you don't speak any of languages involved according to your Babel anyway. Language/dialect is a very blurred line. Perhaps a fair vote (on either side) is impossible, that's not a reason to ignore the result, is it? Mglovesfun (talk) 23:44, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
I would rather have Ivan do the revert himself if he feels that it is needed. Otherwise, I think the article should be left alone. Razorflame 00:51, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
The fight over whether we use Serbo-Croatian or separate entries for Bosnian/Croatian/Serbian (and possibly Montenegrin) is only impacting the work. If you ask Ivan (I did - for translations), he will only encourage you to use Serbo-Croatian, not separate entries, he will change them, anyway and fix any possible errors or add regional deviations, if they are needed. Any standard word in Croatian can also be called Serbian or perfectly understood by Serbs, only some will have a different flavour and usage, taking into account the script and Ijekavian/Ekavian differences. Why not ask Ivan if you refer to him? --Anatoli 02:01, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
@Mglovesfun: Language/dialect is indeed a very blurred line, but also seemingly an irrelevant one, since apparently Serbian and Croatian are neither one nor the other, any more than {Bostonian and Cockney English} is, or {Californian and Liverpudlian English}: Serbo-Croatian has a number of dialects, some of which are "Serbian", some of which are "Croatian", and some of which are shared, with "Standard Serbian" and "Standard Croatian" being two forms of one of the shared dialects. If we restricted ourselves to standard forms of languages, then the distinction between "Serbian" and "Croatian" could perhaps be meaningful (each referring to the relevant standard form of the shared dialect), but since we don't, they're both paraphyletic groups, so not a meaningful classification for us. (At least, if I understand the situation correctly.) —RuakhTALK 02:30, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
That's right: Modern standard Bosnian/Croatian/Serbian/Montenegrin are all based on the same dialect - Štokavian, moreover the same subdialect of it (Neoštokavian, aka East Herzegovinian). Actually spoken Slavic dialects on the SC territory can very quite extremely, but these all are non-literary, and not written anywhere (in fact, no one except the expert dialectologists knows how to write them "properly", becase they have quite different phonological and accentual system than the Štokavian dialect). Anyway, the whole language/dialect distinction is irrelevant here because the whole point of common SC treatment was not argue on that matter, but to 1) provide enhanced learning experience by common layout since SC is almost everywhere taught as "one language" 2) reduce maintenance effort with duplicated/triplicated content. What we treat as ==Serbo-Croatian== at Wiktionary is all the 3 national standards combined. It can be done pretty trivially, and there's no reason why not to do it other than hurt nationalist sentiments. --Ivan Štambuk 05:16, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Razorflame, as I've already told you, I have no problems with such edits of yours as long as you don't (re)introduce errors. While it may appear to you that you are pursuing some better cause, by making edits such as this you're simply needlessly infuriating other fellow-editors, while providing no additional value to the user. If the need for separate B/C/S treatment eventually arises, it can easily be done programmatically by bot by automated generation from existing SC sections. --Ivan Štambuk 05:16, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

I was not trying to keep them un-unified. I was making sure that that is what you wanted to do before it was done. I have no problems with it being done; I just wanted someone who knew the language to make the revert. Razorflame 15:14, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
Well, I'm may not speak the language but I am at least clued in to what went on and who may well be right and who was pushing their own agenda relentlessly as it would seem. And one more thing, I did not personally attack you >.> Sorry if I offended you but I was merely trying to inform you of the situation and explain why you were wrong to revert. 50 Xylophone Players talk 23:01, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
I understand. Don't worry about it :) Cheers, Razorflame 23:02, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

mission#Old French

Personal opinion, but avoid adding words used in etymologies as that's not a primary source. It might be quite hard for me to find mission used in a text because of all the French and English hits I'll get. Use WT:RE:fro instead, which is what I do when I find a word and I'm not sure what it means. Mglovesfun (talk) 12:47, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Sorry about that. I just wanted to help out :( I'll not add any new words from etymologies from now on. Thank you for the message, Razorflame 15:13, 18 March 2010 (UTC)


Hi there,
Could you please be a little bit more specific in your statement? Which terms, from which page?
--Alif - le reformeur siamois 05:07, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

All of the entries you just made. Basically, all the words that follow a to. Razorflame 05:08, 19 March 2010 (UTC)


Hi. Do you have any evidence for this entry? The Spanish would normally use generalización = generalization or generalidad = generality I can find no real evidence for either "generalismo" nor for your translation generalism either. Cheers. -- ALGRIF talk 14:33, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

No, I don't have any evidence for it. In fact, Semper, and someone else were just talking about it....I will mark it for deletion now because I thought that I would be able to find evidence of it, but I was mistaken. Razorflame 14:35, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Please don't

I believe you mean well, but I would very much appreciate it, if you stopped writing Finnish entries out of scratch. Your writings are sometimes even correct in the sense that there are no obvious errors, but they are always incomplete. Most of the time they are at least somewhat misleading, sometimes blatantly wrong. Take takomo as an example. You gave paja and ahjo as synonyms to takomo, but:

  • There's a difference between paja and takomo. They may both be called "forge" in English, but as takomo is normally an industrial-scale operation, a better translation is "forging plant".
  • Ahjo is definitely not the same as takomo, as it means the furnace in which a blacksmith heats up the pieces of metal he is going to work with. The fact that a term means three different things in English does not necessarily or even usually mean that the Finnish equivalents can be used as synonyms of each other.

Btw, I appreciate that you did not add the declension. It wasn't of valo -type. --Hekaheka 16:44, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

I would not add any declension tables that I was unsure of. Razorflame 00:49, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
Further: the word takkuilu may mean "hesitation" in some rare occasions but it is not its first or even second sense. --Hekaheka 16:57, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
"warrantor" is a kind of takaaja, but normally one would use markkinatakaaja in order to be specific. --Hekaheka 17:01, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

As per Hekaheka, I suggest you add entries only for languages you know. These examples are exactly what I meant. Since you seem to be eager to contribute (highly appreciated), maybe you could add a word list into your user page with translation suggestions? People could check if they're correct before adding them. Also, it may be better not to add non-lemma words for now, very easy to make mistakes (I've done many!). Such menial work is not meant for human beings, better to let a bot to take care of them eventually. --Jyril 17:07, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Ok. I will stop adding them from scratch, but I will still be making form-of entries. Does that sit alright with you? Razorflame 17:37, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
How come you are still making bad entries in languages you don't understand several months after being told not to, and agreeing not to? It's not rocket science. Equinox 00:47, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
This discussion is over. Both Jyril and Hekaheka said that I may still make form of entries, and that is all that I will be making from now on in Finnish. Any more edits on this topic will be reverted. Razorflame 00:48, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
Revert what you want. The next time I see you add something wrong out of ignorance you will be permanently blocked. You are a dangerous menace to the quality of this project and you should be ashamed. Equinox 00:51, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
I give nothing but my all for this project, no matter what you guys say. Furthermore, I am not making nearly as many mistakes as I was before, and furthermore, I am no menace. I dutifully work on the project even when I don't have to. Say what you will about me as a person, but do not question the heart that I put into my work on this project. Furthermore, you will not have community consensus to indef block me. Razorflame 00:53, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
Perhaps you could take some of this immense effort you spend in creating erroneous information that will mislead site visitors, Mike, and redirect it towards learning those languages fully and thoroughly? No? This is only the 99th time you've been asked, isn't it? I know you're a young schoolchild but you must be able to pick up an idea eventually. As for "community consensus", more fool them if they let a destructive error-spreader rampage over Wiktionary. I've said what I'll do and I stand by it and after so much harm caused by you I believe it is reasonable. Equinox 01:02, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
What harm have I caused this Wikipedia? Every entry that I've made has been valid and everything that I do is for the project. Furthermore, I am in the process of learning Finnish, and I've been practicing my form-ofs by making them. Thirdly, the information that I add to this site is not misleading. Sure, I make a few mistakes, but who doesn't make any? Even Opiaterein and SemperBlotto must have surely made plenty of mistakes in the past, so I do not see why I should be treated in a special way that is different from every other editor on this site. Ultimately, I feel that what I do for this site is much better than what I see some other people do for this site. You could not even comprehend how much enjoyment I get out of helping to improve the English Wiktionary because it helps me to get invigorated to continue along with my studies of the Finnish and Czech languages. This is the last time that I ever want to hear such clearly marked personal attacks from anyone on this site. I just want to get back to working on this site, just like everyone else, so please, just drop this. Nothing good will come out of it if you continue to pester me. Razorflame 01:08, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
Maybe try moving to editing in French. This is an area where we as a community can help (both you and the project). I, for one, will trawl any French edits you make, and correct any glaring mistakes that I see. And, as always, I really appreciate the effort you give here. But you still can't get it into your head that you make a lot of mistakes and don't know when you're making them - this is the problem. Languages are not easy things. --Rising Sun talk? contributions 01:06, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
Very well, I will respond to your points. "What harm have I caused?" You have repeatedly, many dozens of times, added incorrect information, while knowing you didn't know enough of the language to add the entry. You have done this very, very often. "Every entry that I've made has been valid." Demonstrably untrue; see the talk section right above this one, where you admit an entry was wrong; and there have been many, many more. "Everything that I do is for the project." If what you do is wrong, then you are hurting the project, because we intend to build a dictionary of actual real words that can be relied upon by people looking them up. "Sure, I make a few mistakes, but who doesn't make any?" Everybody makes mistakes, but most people realise what they are doing and stop making them after a hint or two. I cut down on my edits in French after I'd made a couple of errors and been called on them by native speakers. You, however, continue to make mistake after mistake after mistake, to the point where I start to wonder whether you are some kind of troll intent on filling Wiktionary with inaccurate rubbish. Equinox 01:18, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
Razorflame. Please learn to accept criticism. You have more than enough here to ponder on for a while, so there is no more needed, for now. Let's all go back to doing useful things. Conrad.Irwin 01:25, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Removing comments

I warned you about this. You don't own talk pages and have no right to remove valid comments. Vandalism like this, fine, but you are not to edit or remove the comments of others. You have been blocked for a week to think about what you've done. — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 13:22, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

You will not post any messages on my talk page from now on, whether you want to or not, nor are you to block me. You have a conflict of interest and a bias towards me, and you are looking for any reason that you can to block me, whether I did anything wrong or not. If you want to block me, message another administrator and ask them to block me, otherwise, I will have a problem with you blocking me again. Razorflame 22:20, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
I don't know why you think you have the authority to tell people what they can or can't will or won't do. My only bias towards you stems from your incredibly self-evident unwillingness to work with the people who criticize you. You have been asked for over a year not to make major edits in languages you don't know, and you promise not to, then move to a new language. I don't care what you do on simple wiktionary, but here where I work to provide correct information... if you continue to do things that undermine the efforts of other users or that other users have (edit) repeatedly told you not to do, I will not be going through your red tape to stop you.
And don't remove this message. You know what will happen if you do. — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 22:44, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
I won't remove your messages, like I said in my edit summary. Furthermore, I do have the right to tell you what to do if you have the right to tell me not to message you on your talk page. Therefore, you cannot edit mine. You cannot block me because you have a bias towards me and you always search for every reason to block me, whether it is correct or not. Therefore, I believe that your judgement would be compromised if you were to block me, and therefore, if your judgement is compromised, I would not believe you capable of making the right choice. It is a simple request, really...I don't see why you have to be so hostile towards it. I am sure other administrators will agree with me here. Razorflame 22:48, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
Making yourself the victim isn't cute. The fact remains that you don't listen to respected and established editors. (I'm not referring to myself here, I'm just tolerated.) You need to learn to control your erratic behavior. — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 22:58, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
And you need to learn when to leave people alone when you know they want nothing to do with you (which I have done). I listen to the editors that I believe to be respected and established. I don't consider you one of them. I listen to people like EP, SB, MG, SGB, Atitarev, PK, and others whenever they have a problem with anything I do. Razorflame 23:00, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Quit it you two. Conrad.Irwin 23:05, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

A friendly change of pace

You have a wide assortment of languages that you study. How do you pick them out? I'm studying Finnish because I live here, but you seem to have a much more academic interest. ~ heyzeuss 13:28, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I study Finnish because I am thinking about becoming a translator, so a background in many different languages will help me to better provide translations for others who need it. Cheers, Razorflame 22:57, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Breaking promises

You do not even intend to keep your very latest highly relaxed recent promise from 29 March 2010: "I only plan on editing in the following languages: Kannada, English, Spanish, Italian, Czech, Finnish, Esperanto, and Ido. Those are the only languages that I actually plan on expanding our knowledge base in. I won't even touch other languages because I don't know enough of them to touch them."[14]. Your edits from 31 March 2010: Bulgarian, Portuguese, Russian, Romanian, Afrikaans, Indonesian. --Dan Polansky 10:14, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough. Let us not be friends, then. Razorflame 20:10, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
Wiktionary is not a social networking site. Do you realize that the more you say you're going to do things a certain way and then fail to do so, the less the community is going to trust you? Eventually you're just going to get run out. — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 20:17, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
I never said that Wiktionary was a social networking site. I am tired of you badgering me over everything. Just go work on Wiktionary and I will do the same. Razorflame 20:18, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
"Let us not be friends, then". What does that have to do with anything? He's been trying to keep you out of the hands of people like me and now perhaps he's starting to see what we've been seeing. I'm badgering you because I've seen your propensity for making mistakes, however slight, for editing rapidly in languages you have little or no familiarity with, for breaking promises and being excessively sensitive and unpredictable. I just don't trust you to make edits that aren't at least somewhat dubious. — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 20:31, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
Hey guys, I'm also getting a bit tired of seeing you always fussing about some promises of Razorflame's all the time. Who cares? Frankly, I don't see the point of these promises anyway. I think it's reasonable to expect users not to insert content they're not sure about, but even with languages one does not know well, one can learn the meanings of a couple of words. Also, an entry may be useful even if it isn't very complete or specific, and I really appreciate the way Razorflame puts {{attention}} on pages where there is some basic information missing, etc. I think it's unreasonable for any language enthusiast to be completely restricted to certain languages. Those of us here who are more proficient in the languages in question should just learn to accept such extra input as may be, and correct and expand it as it comes in. Feel free to reprimand users for inserting erroneous content, but this has been going quite beyond that lately. Although the edits of the less proficient may sometimes be frustrating, we must learn not to let it get to us or start bashing other users over it (NO “badgering”). I've had to hold in quite some frustration over Icelandic, but I've learnt the best way to solve problems with the entries is simply to change them myself. I suggest, Razorflame, that you stop making these silly promises. The only thing you have to do is use your own sensibility and verify entries in trustworthy dictionaries and mark with {{attention}} if you deem it necessary. You other two: stop whining like a couple of ninnies. It is quite unbecoming. – Krun 21:09, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the support, Krun. I intend to keep on adding only entries that I can verify first before adding them here to make sure that they are correct. I have a large pool of people that I converse with on another website that are native speakers in some of the languages that I edit currently, including Czech and Italian, and I ask them first whenever I have any qualms or concerns about any entries that I add first before I add them. Opiaterein, I know it might seem hard for you to believe, but I do my best to make sure that every entry that I add is completely correct (in terms of a basic entry) before I add them. Razorflame 21:34, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
Just pointing out the obvious lack of sense and purpose in this long-winded discussion. It's not about supporting one person or the other nor about being friends, although a genial atmosphere would of course be nice. – Krun 21:58, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
He's been doing it for over a year. We already have Tbot to make bullshit entries. Razorflame should study a language and make minor edits until he actually knows enough to go on editing sprees, and in the mean time save most of his energy for English. You might not care if he continues to add dubious content, but some of us don't want Wiktionary to become a clone of all those other bullshit online dictionaries that can't be trusted for shit. Kthnx. — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 21:26, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
Come one Opi, be fair. We're not a clone of anything. I agree we bullshit, however. --Rising Sun talk? contributions 21:28, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
Alright, we're a gene splice of one of those and wikipedia. Not exactly a clone, but close enough. — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 21:35, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
Besides, those edits mentioned above are neither dubious nor do they constitute an “edit spree”, and why should you care what he wastes his energy on? Anyway, I think the “dubious” phase is mostly over and what with checking more thoroughly and marking entries for attention, he really isn't doing any harm anymore. So what if he's sometimes only as useful as Tbot? The rest of the time he's doing more useful things, and in both cases, he's being at least a bit useful. Like I said, just stop whining. At least try to snap at him only when you can point out actual errors. – Krun 21:58, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
I'm not going to get into this with you. Maybe one day he'll take a 5 day interest in Icelandic and you'll see what it's like. — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 22:09, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
Re: "At least try to snap at him only when you can point out actual errors": I mostly agree with this: if he's making errors, then pointing out non-errors just muddles the issue, and if he's not, then there's theoretically no problem. But on the other hand, it is a problem that (1) we can't trust him, ever, period, and (2) he frequently edits in languages where it's hard for his watchers to determine if he's making errors. It's tricky. (Personally, some days I'm really annoyed at how hard people are on him, and other days I wish I could just permablock him and have done with it. :-P ) —RuakhTALK 22:04, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
When he started doing Esperanto, he would add scores of entries rather quickly. They didn't all contain errors, but going through every entry he made or edited very quickly becomes tiresome and frustrating. It also can take up a lot of time. An hour of going through his edits since you've last been online every day isn't remarkably enjoyable. Now that he's discovered Kannada, we don't even have anyone to watch that. — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 22:09, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

That is ENOUGH! This is my talk page. If you have something to say, say it to me. Otherwise, stay off of my talk page. Talking amongst yourself will have the discussion moved to the appropriate talk page. Razorflame 22:10, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

If you, Krun, do not care about keeping and breaking promises, that is your choice. It is certainly not my choice. I have posted this breach of promise here only after Razorflame insisted on my talk page that he can change, and that I am adamant, stubborn, rude, with an unhealthy attitude, an attitude that Wiktinary does not need right now--these are his words, just check the conversation on my talk page. He whines on my talk page that I should trust him again, and few days later, he breaks his new promise again. I care to document this breach, if you allow. He has told me: "You should be acting like: Ok, you keep the promise for two weeks and we can help each other again. I don't see why you can't have that kind of attitude when that kind of attitude is exactly what this Wiktionary needs right now." After that, I feel entitled to post a plain notice to Razorflame's talk page that specifies shortly what happened, to make misbehavior traceable. --Dan Polansky 06:18, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
Razorflame, don't remove my posts from your talk page. --Dan Polansky 06:39, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
I moved it to Krun's talk page because it has nothing to do with the discussion on this talk page. I did not delete the post; I merely moved it to a more accessible location. That is allowed...SemperBlotto does it. Razorflame 06:41, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
(<) It has to do with the discussion: It explains why I have posted here in the first place, adding details of what you did before the post. It explains that my post to your talk page documenting your breach of yet another promise was not an action initiated by me, by rather one initiated by your series of recent posts to my talk page. --Dan Polansky 06:46, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
Ok, sorry for moving it. I guess it was a little rash. At least I did not delete it :) Anyways, I understand everyones' frustrations with me and please understand when I say this that I absolutely mean it, but I have a mental health condition that makes me very finicky, and I change my mind alot, which is why, when coupled with my ADHD, I change languages so often. I am trying very hard (and I sincerely mean this) to stop doing this, but I am struggling to do so. Please understand that I will continue to try very hard to keep myself limited to fewer languages, but I cannot guarantee anything....I only intend the best for this Wiktionary. Razorflame 06:49, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
Don't use your disabilities as an excuse for breaking peoples' trust. (Wasn't Sven's block related in some ways to him using his RSI as some kind of magic word?) If you can't control yourself, maybe Wiktionary just isn't the place for you. — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 13:18, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
Sven's block was because he thought he should be given so much attention because of his RSI. When he wasn't babied like he wanted he got mad and started sending us all hate mail. RF, even if you have ADHD, please try to not jump around so much. It does get on people's nerves. Opi and Dan, and everyone else too, please try to understand and work with instead of against him. L☺g☺maniac 14:14, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
Re:Dan Polansky (already posted on my talk page, where Razorflame moved your comment):
There is a lot of his conduct that I don't like either. That includes his whining and his promises, and such hasty comments as he has flung back at other users. That does, however, not give said users any valid excuse for doing the same and worse. If you can't trust Razorflame, that's your personal issue. If you care about the languages he's editing, you should just patrol his contributions, then. I'm already going through them, expanding his Serbo-Croatian entries, etc. You could also patrol entries needing attention, since he has taken to tagging his “skeleton” entries for attention. I certainly don't trust all content from every user on Wiktionary. That's why I check entries, and that's how Wiktionary becomes a good dictionary. Quite a lot of our high quality entries started off as this sort of skeleton, or even as a complete mess. We should just deal with it. – Krun 09:40, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
Now, on to more productive things. Over and out. – Krun 13:14, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
(<) Re "If you can't trust Razorflame, that's your personal issue." Not at all. If I have traceable evidence that Razorflame breaks promises, it is my moral responsibility to share it. I should do it so that Wiktionary editors do not need to learn about Razorflame's behavior each for himself. If Razoflame is demonstrably untrustworthy, and Wiktionary editors know it, they share their responsibility for Razoflame's actions. While you obviously don't care about breaking promises, I do, and so do some other editors. --Dan Polansky 08:36, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Czech errors

Czech errors created by you:

  • jedlovek - should be "jedlovec"; this was easy to verify using Czech Wikipedia and Google books.
  • nesamočinný, entered as "non-automotive": that is wrong, and should be "non-automatic". Also, "nesamočinný" is rare, currently not even attestable - google books:"nesamočinný". --Dan Polansky 12:44, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

I will add more to the list as you create them. --Dan Polansky 07:27, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the note. Yeah, I noticed this yesterday, but since I had company over, I could not fix it in time. Thank you for fixing it for me. If you find any other errors, please let me know so that I may correct them. Thanks, Razorflame 14:19, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
You could just tell him to add to Wiktionary:Requested entries:Czech instead of making mistakes in the main namespace. — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 12:49, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

are these really comparable?

nukleární doesn't seem comparable - no google hits for nukleárnější --Rising Sun talk? contributions 08:05, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes. I've spoken with some of my friends who speak Czech fluently, and they've said that it is indeed comparable. Razorflame 08:07, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
Well, no offence, but I tend to believe Google more than your friends. I'll send it to RFV --Rising Sun talk? contributions 08:11, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
No, don't bother. I'll ask them for quick deletion. Razorflame 08:12, 14 April 2010 (UTC)


You didn't search that hard :-p. It's on the Ido Wiktionary and a quick Google search pulls up references in both Ido & Esperanto. Nicoleta 05:03, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Actually, I did. It wasn't in my print Ido-English dictionary, nor was it on the Ido Wiktionary last night. Razorflame 19:52, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Why delinking ai?

I thought we were supposed to link languages not in WT:TOP40. Conrad.Irwin 17:49, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

We are, but I believe that they should not be linked in the headers of entries. They should only be linked in the translation tables. I could have sworn that there has already been a discussion on this that stated that they should be delinked...maybe I am mistken....if I am, then I'll start a new topic in the BP. Razorflame 17:51, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Oh, of course. That one always confuses me. Conrad.Irwin 18:10, 27 April 2010 (UTC)


Please do not destroy my contributions! If you have sources that vrpca is not Croatian, then you can delete that it is Croatian. If you have sources that it is used in Serbian (or some other language), then it can be put under Serbian (or under some other language). Thanks for leaving my edits as they are. --Roberta F. 18:51, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Roberta... Go away. — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 19:17, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Desysopping vote.

No. You've started a discussion. Please wait for the community to decide what to do. Pushing the issue does not help your case. Conrad.Irwin 21:34, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

I have every right to start a desysopping vote. You are covering for Opiaterein now. Razorflame 21:36, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
If Opiaterein was being as aggressive as you, I'd do the same to him. Conrad.Irwin 21:38, 29 April 2010 (UTC)


You are blocked for once again editing in languages you do not speak: Catalan, Galician, and Romanian among them. --EncycloPetey 02:47, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

I don't approve his editing in these languages but I feel sorry for the guy and we didn't get consensus on his blocking. Razorflame, I have unblocked you but it may be the last time. I understand why editors are upset with you and I already suggested how you could still make contributions without causing extra work for others. --Anatoli 03:58, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
I have reblocked him. He has been warned about this (more than once), has been blocked previously, and we block for this (See WT:BLOCK). If you disagree, Anatoli, you need to consult with the blocking admin (me in this instance) first, and not act unilaterally to undermine other admins. This block is unrelated to the current discussion about the histrionics concerning Opiaterein. The fact that Razoflame is involved in another problem does not exempt him from blocking for this problem. --EncycloPetey 04:28, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Template:count page

Hi, Razorflame, I notice you recently made a lot of edits like [15]. You don't need to - AutoFormat can do that for you. Also, you made a slight mistake, it should be {{count page|[[Wiktionary:Page count]]}} you have to put the link in or it doesn't work. Conrad.Irwin 22:18, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the note :) Yeah, I realized that, but I think AutoFormat will fix them for me, right? Anyways, yeah, I know that Autoformat does that for me automatically, but I decided to take a load off of the bot for once :) Razorflame 22:19, 8 May 2010 (UTC)


Razorflame, lijepo te molim ne ometaj me pri doprinošenju ovome projektu. Pozdrav --Roberta F. 22:27, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

I don't speak Serbo-Croatian. I just added the tag to the entry. I wasn't planning on doing anything further. Razorflame 22:39, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
Roberta, you aren't contributing. You're POV-pushing. We don't like that. — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 22:43, 8 May 2010 (UTC)


Car amico,

Vole ben pardonar que io te scribe in Interlingua.

Le Index:Interlingua sera le adequation a en.wiktionary de mi:

Io vole corriger lo e extender lo, ma qualcunque adjuta sera benvenite.

Imbracios amical

If you know how to speak English, please repeat your message in English. I do not speak Interlingua. Razorflame 16:34, 9 May 2010 (UTC)


The Index: Interlingua will be the adjustment to en.wiktionary of my

I would to correct and extend it, but any help will be welcome

Best regards

I'm sorry, but I am very busy with this site and another site that I go on, and as such, have no time to contribute to any other sites at this point in time. Sorry, Razorflame 16:47, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Multe gratias, nonobstante. Io facera le Index:Interlingua e io lo actualisara.



If there's a problem with {{fi-noun}} then the template should be fixed. {{infl}} is the opposite of ideal. — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 21:05, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

I understand that, however, I would bring it up with either Hekaheka or Jyril. I am not the one that can make that decision. I know that it is the opposite of ideal, but that is the way that they have things running, so bring it up with one of them and they'll help you out :) Razorflame 21:19, 10 May 2010 (UTC)


What's wrong with it? Spanish participles inflect. --EncycloPetey 03:56, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

I know that they inflect, however, I wanted Matthias to run his bot to update the verb entry :) Razorflame 03:57, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
I repeat my question: What was wrong with the entry? Why do you have to bug someone to run a bot to fix it? --EncycloPetey 03:58, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
It was not using the appropraite templates: See here and here. Razorflame 04:02, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
The inflection line template was fine. And you were unable to fix this yourself, and had to ask someone to do it for you, while removing content from the page in the meantime? --EncycloPetey 04:10, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
I will fix it now. Razorflame 04:36, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Recent BP post

I've gone ahead and removed this, as it's just going to evolve into a giant flame war. If you want to know what people's positions are on the subject, just look at the vote. I haven't had much in the way of dealings with you, so I have no grudge against you, but looking at a few discussions here and there, it seems you have a knack for stirring up controversy. It also appears that you're trying to get away from this nasty habit. If so, I suggest you read the vote, find out what you need, and let folks move on, because the rest of us are tired of hearing about this issue. -Atelaes λάλει ἐμοί 13:37, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Ok. Sounds good to me. Razorflame 14:53, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm eager to know: what is your position on the issue, Razorflame? Are in your opinion modern standard Bosnian/Croatian/Serbian different languages? Should they be treated separately or commonly? --Ivan Štambuk 16:10, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm torn between each side currently. While I think that they should be listed separately to prevent confusion and prevent any mistakes from happening with words that aren't in all three languages, I can see why unification might be a good choice at this point in time, however, I think that maybe if they are listed separately from each other, you could get all the heat from off your back...Razorflame 21:52, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
Can't this be an option in WT:PREFS? Using a Javascript to split up SC in BCS should be reasonably easy to do. -- Prince Kassad 21:55, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
Wow! That is an amazing idea :) That would make everyone happy! You should definitely bring this up to the Beer Parlour! Razorflame 21:58, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
I'm not sure that would help, for two reasons. (But first, a disclaimer: I don't speak B/C/S. My knowledge is strictly secondhand, and derives largely from past discussions here. My apologies for any inaccuracies.)
  • First, there's the problem of accuracy: while the standard forms of the three ISO-coded linguistic entities are based on the same form of the same dialect, and therefore have almost identical lexicons, there are plenty of dialectal, neologistic, or other words that do not belong to all three, as well as spellings (especially, I believe, Cyrillic spellings) that aren't shared even of words that are shared. Placing a word under a unified language header implies only "this word exists somewhere in B/C/S-dom"; but having three identical sections would instead imply "this word exists in B; it exists in C; and it exists in S". In fact, since our CFI require three uses, it could happen that we find two Croatian uses and one Bosnian one, and suddenly a word meets the CFI as BCS without meeting the CFI as B, C, or S! The bulk of this problem could perhaps be addressed by establishing a rigid system of context templates or inflection-line templates that the JavaScript could use in deciding which language sections to generate, but it would require a lot of thought, and a high level of compliance from all editors in this language. (And some complications seem completely intractable; for example, how would RFV work? Would we create, for example, a special {{rfv-hr}} template to indicate that the word as a whole is not being RFV'd, but only its existence in Croatian, and therefore that the JavaScript should only put an {{rfv}} thing in the Croatian section?)
  • Second, the editors who are opposed to the unified treatment are not opposed because they want to see separate sections, they're opposed because they want everyone to see separate sections. Perhaps they would accept a situation where the "edit" tab uses only a single section, and where individual editors could choose via a PREF to see only a single section, but I'm positive they wouldn't be satisfied with a solution that basically just lets them choose to deceive themselves into thinking there are three sections when everyone else sees one. (After all, if the only thing that bothered them were seeing the single section when they visit here, they wouldn't come here. Most of them only come here when there's a vote going on that they want to participate in, anyway.) This could perhaps be addressed by implementing this PREF on an "opt-out" basis, but it would be messy. (We don't currently have any "opt-out" PREFS, for good reasons.) And it still wouldn't affect Google results, mirrors, readers with JavaScript disabled, and so on.
RuakhTALK 01:01, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
It would work, IMO. Cyrillic and Ekavian would be for Serbian (and Montenegrin) and Latin and Ijekavian for Croatian, need to confirm which version is used by Bosnian (Ekavian or Ijekavian, there seems to be some debate) but it's in Latin as well. If the translation doesn't have a regional flag (e.g. Croatian), then it would apply to all form of Serbo-Croatian. Here's a rough example where all 4 are present: rijeka (Croatian), ријека (limited use - Ijekavian Serbs), река (Serbian), reka (Bosnian?) but Ivan Štambuk may explain this better. The preferences for the script (Latin or Cyrillic) and the form (Ekavian or Ijekavian) could be set in preferences for each language (Bosnian, Croatian, Serbian and Montenegrin) --Anatoli 01:53, 12 May 2010 (UTC) --Anatoli 01:50, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
No, I don't think so. <-our> spellings are British, not American, and we tag them as UK spellings; but if we presented American and British as two separate languages, then many such spellings would actually meet the CFI for both (unless we declared by fiat that such spellings are to be considered "misspellings" in American — but then we'd run the risk that some of them might be common misspellings, meaning that we'd still need an ==American== section, but with completely different content!). There are definite tendencies like you describe, but they're not decisive enough to base automation on (unless we're willing to explicitly warn readers that what they're seeing has systematic inaccuracies!). —RuakhTALK 02:05, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
My point is, if we add two script translations under Serbo-Croatian (sh) without specifying the region, then it would automatically make them standard Bosnian, Croatian and Serbian, split by the script only. The Ekavian and Ijekavian are usually flagged but some work would be required that those flags are consistent. If those words are Croatisms, etc. or a preferred word in those countries then they wouldn't be added under SH in the first place or be flagged as Croatian, Bosnian, etc. Do you see my point? Why would a contributor add a word under SH, if he or she knows it's only used in one region and is considered non-standard outside? I merged translations of agriculture after checking they are all used in all sections of SH but in different frequency and added Ijekavian/Ekavian flags. Further, just as an example, some authority declares that a word is only Bosnian but not Serbian, then this is flagged by (Bosnian). Ivan and others have been marking this marginal cases. --Anatoli 02:24, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Sorry, but I think you've 100% completely misunderstood the problem I'm trying to describe. I'm not worried that a word will be listed as ==Serbo-Croatian== when it's considered Bosnian-specific; quite the reverse. I'm worried that a word will be listed as ==Bosnian== because it's considered Bosnian-specific, even though it's also attested in Serbian. You write, << some authority declares that a word is only Bosnian but not Serbian, then this is flagged by (Bosnian) >>, as though that should reassure me; but in fact, you're making my case for me. I don't consider it acceptable that the presented language-sections be chosen based on ideology, or even based on relative frequency; the only thing that should matter is the existence of three cites. —RuakhTALK 02:45, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
I admit I lost it. Anyway, I thought we are describing the possibility of displaying the translations based on user preferences where one entry in SH is displayed as three - BS, HR and SR, using the above considerations for and whether they would be misleading because of the regional standards. --Anatoli 02:59, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
I see. I suppose there are two separate things the JavaScript would have to handle: (1) in ====Translations==== sections, the splitting of * Serbo-Croatian: into * Bosnian: and so on; and (2) the splitting of ==Serbo-Croatian== sections into ==Bosnian== and so on. You seem to be talking about the former, whereas I was talking about the latter. (The former hadn't even occurred to me, actually, since all the revert-warring I've seen has been over ==Serbo-Croatian== sections.) —RuakhTALK 13:45, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

(unindented) I already proposed last year what Kassad is mentioning as one of the alternatives, but nationalist forces from Croatopedia and Serbopedia don't like that either: the whole idea of B/C/S being "generated" almost trivially in xy lines of code from Serbo-Croatian entries is to them even more sacrilegious than B/C/S being considered one language. That could be done very easily actually, with some corner-cases handled by some invisible metadata (or predefined exception lists in some compressed form). The only problem are the templates and all the faecalities they usually generate (categories, wikilinks..) that are language-dependent, and I'm not sure if those could be post-processed in javascript or that it could make sense actually (e.g. generating some topical Category:hr:XXX at presentation-time, which doesn't really exist at the server...). But that all aside, it could be done. This should of course be properly implemented only at server-side. --Ivan Štambuk

You're the boss, Ivan, who else is going to do it? It's up to you. In any case, having an exception list is a good thing to have the words, which don't belong to all 3 or 4. --Anatoli 00:58, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

my talkpage

I have no problem unprotecting my talkpage, but I'd like you to give me a good solution to the recent vandal attempts on my talkpage. Cheers. JamesjiaoTC 23:43, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Reversion is enough. The attacks haven't been frequent enough to validate a permanent protection of your talk page. Razorflame 00:29, 13 May 2010 (UTC)


THX for the welcome message! :) --WizardOfOz 09:27, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

No problems. Razorflame 09:28, 13 May 2010 (UTC)


Is this likely to be attestable in the plural? Equinox 21:47, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm fairly certain it will be. Most other uncountable nouns that I've dealt with in the past in both English and Italian, the Italian version had a plural, but again, I only have a basic knowledge of Italian. Therefore, I think it would be wise to ask Semper if this word does indeed have a plural. Razorflame 21:48, 13 May 2010 (UTC)


You really need to stop editing languages you don't know, and messing up templates. Kassad was nice enough to unblock you, but if you keep making messes I'm going to reblock you. — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 23:36, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

You are going to have nothing to do with me as per the agreement on the Beer Parlour. According to it, you are not allowed to block me. Furthermore, I know every language that I edit in, so don't give me that I don't know languages that I do. Razorflame 23:42, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
I'm not going to sit back and watch you make mistakes because you don't like me pointing out that you make them. And you clearly don't know the languages, because you keep making mistakes. Even if you did know them, x-1 is not knowing a language. — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 00:04, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
I said nothing about you pointing out that I make mistakes. If you tell me where the mistakes that I make are, I can correct them. Furthermore, if my babel says x-1, then I know the language enough to make entries in those languages. Furthermore, you will have to sit back and watch because you have a conflict of interest with me, which prevents you from blocking me without it being abuse of your tools. According to what our last discussion came up with, it said that we can't block each other or communicate with each other, so you shouldn't even be posting on my talk page. If you'd like, I could bring this topic up again, but I doubt that you'd want this topic to come up again. Razorflame 00:11, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Opiaterein, if you wish to criticise Razorflame, please provide links to bad edits (and, if you're feeling generous, some explanation). Razorflame, accept criticism. You must have noticed that a lot of people think that your -1 is not enough. Conrad.Irwin 00:14, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Sure. here he added Italian, where it should've been floreale (which already existed). here instead of taking 2 minutes to figure out how to use the template, he just marked it for attention and left it. He makes so many edits that it's hard to even verify and clean up. — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 00:26, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
The first link is an honest mistake (people make them). The second link you provided was for a language that I don't speak or know, so I just marked it for attention and left it, because I don't know that language. Razorflame 00:29, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
An honest mistake that you could've avoided making had you taken a minute to look up the word in a source outside of wiktionary instead of just trusting our translation table. You apparently felt comfortable enough specifying the feminine form. It's not hard to figure out how to use templates. If you aren't comfortable enough to do that, you shouldn't be editing that section at all. But you do. — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 00:33, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
I do edit the section to let other people know about the problem, thus getting it fixed. That is all that matters. Furthermore, I don't trust our translation tables and I always look at outside sources. This discussion is over now. Any further messages left by you here on this topic will be ignored. Razorflame 00:39, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Ignoring issues is not going to work in your favor. — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 01:05, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
I never said I would. I said I was going to ignore any further messages about THIS issue, because it is resolved. Razorflame 01:26, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Maybe in your eyes. But I'm still going to block you if you keep making senseless mistakes and leaving messes for others to clean up. — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 01:57, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Again, you cannot block me without it being an abuse of the blocking tools because you would have a conflict of interest in the matter. Therefore, since you have a conflict of interest, any block you make against me would be a misuse of the block tool because you are not neutral to the situation. Therefore, you would have a conflict of interest and therefore, would be construed as a misuse of the tool. Razorflame 02:00, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

You keep saying COI and it's making me think you don't really know what it is. It's not just something you can say in any situation where you don't like the other person telling you they're going to block you. — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 02:08, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

I know exactly what a COI is and I know what it is. Since you cannot objectively make a decision in reference to me (you are biased towards punishment), that is a conflict of interest. We edit the same things. That is a conflict of interest. Don't say I don't know what a COI issue is when I've dealt with dozens of them in the past. Razorflame 02:12, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
I'd accept it if it were constructive. When it isn't, I don't accept it. Razorflame 00:15, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

RF, Opiaterein may not be easy for you to handle given his behavior towards you, but your replies do not tally with your recent edits. You've said that if you knew what the problem was, then you would fix it, but that isn't the case. Look up above at the coversation we had about reducido, where you clearly knew there was a problem, what the problem was, and were capable of fixing it, but instead asked someone to run a bot to fix something that would have taken you far less time. You also say that you are successfully editing in languages listed on your User page, but in your creation of brutalizar you got the inflection line wrong in a fundamental way that first-year Spanish students would not do. You seem to think that you are cleaning up Wiktionary, but some days you are producing as much or more cleanup for other people that you yourself are correcting. This must stop. --EncycloPetey 03:28, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the constructive criticism. I knew what the correct conjugation was, however, I could not figure out how to work the template. I spent a good 8 minutes trying to figure out how to fix it. You are right that I sometimes make impulsive decisions, however, I am working hard to prevent and stop these from happening in the future. I understand that sometimes I make more work than I do on other days, and I assure you, I am working very hard to prevent lots of work in the future. I've narrowed my focus down to just a few languages with a few edits in others here in there, and that is how it will be from now on. I'll mainly be working in Czech, Spanish, English, Italian, Esperanto, and Ido. Those are the languages in which I am able to edit without causing too much work for other people, so those are the ones that I will stick to. That does not mean, however, that if I find a really cool word in another language that is listed in my babel, that I won't make it. If I don't know the conjugation to a verb, I'll just use {{infl}} and append the end of the entry with the {{attention}} tag. I am willing to work with you if you are willing to work with me :) Razorflame 03:44, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Ummm... you couldn't have spent more than 4 minutes at the most, since you made edits to other entries 1 minute before and 3 minutes after the edit to brutalizar. Did you look at the documentation for {{es-verb}}, which has instructions and examples? If you know the correct conjugation, you simply have to spot a matching pattern from the list of examples. --EncycloPetey 05:59, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Yep, I saw the changes that you made and will implement them the next time I see a z-c verb. :) Thanks much for the help, Razorflame 06:00, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Your response strikes me as flippant, and as much too narrow in scope: EncycloPetey was talking about reading a template's documentation so you know how it works, and your response is about learning one specific feature from seeing someone else use it. I strongly urge you to actually read EncycloPetey's comment, and to respond thoughtfully in a way that demonstrates you have understood it. Otherwise, I fear that this is just is one more milestone on your rapid path to perma-block. —RuakhTALK 17:58, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Yes, I was too flippant with my last response to this issue, and as such, I will respond to it in a thoughtful way now. EP, I realize that you are just trying to help me, and I appreciate it. As such, if I ever need to make another Spanish verb, I will take every precaution to make sure that it is formatted appropriately, and if I need to, I will look through and carefully read the template documentation and make sure that I understand it before adding it to any entry in the future. Thanks again for taking the time to help me, Razorflame 20:31, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
I think you should be reading template documentation for any templates required in any pages you might be editing, regardless of whether they are Spanish, Czech, verbs, adjectives or anything. Maybe even this response was too quick. — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 20:46, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Yes, you are right. I will take the time to look over any templates' documentation. Thanks for the correction Opi :) Razorflame 21:11, 14 May 2010 (UTC)


nezpěněný doesn't even get 30 google hits. You should probably get someone who is more familiar with Czech to look at these. — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 00:37, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

I've already had three native Czech speakers look it over on another site that I go to and they've all told me that it is a valid word. Razorflame 03:18, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Can you provide a hyperlink to that conversation with three native Czech speakers? --Dan Polansky 08:41, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Responding to your post on my talk page: I do not know the word "nezpěněný", but that does not prove anything. The word has only one Google books hits right now, but it may get more hits later. OTOH, the word is currently unattestable and thus does not meet CFI.
Then again, can you provide a hyperlink to that conversation with three native Czech speakers? --Dan Polansky 21:33, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Ok, if it does not currently meet the CFI, I'll request its' deletion. Razorflame 21:35, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
I've deleted it. Are your native freinds unreliable? In which case, please don't rely on them again. Conrad.Irwin 21:38, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
I guess they can't be trusted....I won't rely on them in the future. Razorflame 21:56, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
A broken record says: can you provide a hyperlink to that conversation with three native Czech speakers? --Dan Polansky 21:55, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
I don't need to answer that question now that this issue has been resolved. Razorflame 21:56, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
No, but if you don't it looks like you were lying. Conrad.Irwin 22:01, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
I cannot give you the hyperlink because I talk to them every day over IRC. Razorflame 22:23, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Sorry to butt in, but am I missing something? On inspection, I find this is a perfectly valid term, much more than citable. Sure, it doesn't get very many Google hits compared to many other words (and much less than its synonym, nepěnivý), but I've had 78 Google hits so far (with the forms nezpěněný, nezpěněná and nezpěněné), many of which are valid usage examples. Anyway, I can see no valid reason to doubt Razorflame's Czech buddies in this. Razorflame is flawed like the rest of us, but it seems to me as though this is being used as a bad excuse to discredit him. I should think there were plenty of real blunders of his that could be pointed out instead of taking him down where he was actually right. I have now restored the entry and added three cites. – Krun 15:06, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

We need b.g.c (or b.g.cs in this case) hits. Web search is useless. -- Prince Kassad 15:17, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
Why is it useless? There are countless Web-only sources already being used as citations. b.g.c is useful only for printed sources, which today represents only a tiny fraction of all written (typed) language output. Web is the source. --Ivan Štambuk 22:28, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
WT:CFI only considers "durably archived sources" as acceptable to verify a word. Both books and newsgroups are considered "durably archived", websites however are not. -- Prince Kassad 22:44, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
Web is permanently archived on several places (e.g. Internet Archive). CFI nowhere explicitly excludes Web sources. Online magazines, blogs, fora...all are valid sources for attestations. --Ivan Štambuk 22:50, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
It might be time to reassess the various web archives to determine whether there is a consensus on their suitability. There is not much need for change for English, but uncommon words in most languages are hard to attest using only the sources that suffice for English, AFAICT. It seems like a WT:BP matter. DCDuring TALK 22:56, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
What exactly is "unsuitable" with Internet Archive? That is one of the most important sites on the entire Internet. I'm much more bothered with using b.g.c. because that site could be taken down any moment, since almost all the material there (copyright-expired works aside) was illegally scanned and unilaterally published on the Web, and Google has yet to set a deal with thousands of publishers whose rights they shamelessly infringed. --Ivan Štambuk 09:12, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Let us look at one of your citations, Krun:
"to neni možne! Pokud maš dobre trubky a hadičky a z válečku jde nezpěněná kapalina tak musíš mít tvrdý pedál . Leda že by se ti podařilo převrátit gumičky v hlavním válci."[16]
In this citation, "neni", "možne", "maš", "dobre" are lacking diacritics and should be "není", "možné", "máš", "dobré". It is no wonder as the quotation is from an internet discussion of an article published on the web. It is exactly the sort of resource that should be avoided for citations. I doubt that it matches the understanding of "durably archived" shared by Wiktionary community. Asserting that anything found on the web is durably archived is a truly creative misinterpretation of "durably archived". --Dan Polansky 09:51, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Dropping diacritics is very common in Internet discussions. It doesn't mean that the authors were "less literate", but simply were either too lazy to type the worlds properly, or were operating under time constraints. At any case - that shouldn't be a deciding factor: if nezpěněný is indeed used there (inflectedly) in the corresponding meaning, I don't see a reason why that particular forum discussion shouldn't be used as a reliable lexicographical source. It's certainly more preferable to use a free and open platform such as the World Wide Web, to some privately-owned, (semi-)illegal corporate website such Google Books. The Web is the platform of communication for hundreds of millions of people every day, and an important source of words freely available for harvest. --Ivan Štambuk 14:30, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Openness and closedness of a platform has nothing to do with lexicographical relevance. The material found in Google Books is durably archived and more selective than the material found on the web. What is found in Google Books are printed books, journals, what not. Their existence does not depend on Google books.
On another note, the non-policy Wiktionary:Searchable external archives says that "Bulletin boards, message boards, and online forums, such as those employing PHP and Perl, are not considered durably archived." I do not have a link to a vote, though. Neither have I links to past discussions on the subject. --Dan Polansky 14:43, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Google Books is a privately-owned website by a corporation who earns 99.5% of its multi-billion $$$ revenue by serving ads. Corporation which also happens to route most of the Web search traffic, and has a record of irresponsible behavior towards users of its services. The database of books it illegally scanned is also available via Web interface - I fail to see how that particular website is any "more" durable archived than any other website which could be just as likely taken down from the Web at any moment. Internet Archive, on the other hand, is maintained by a nonprofit organization, and has nothing but best intentions in promoting free and open content. Its database (measuring in petabytes) will not vanish anytime soon, and it's an ideal base for harvesting words.
Lexicographical relevance indeed has nothing to do with openness or closedness of a platform - but I never claimed it does. What I'm saying is that in no way is some forum message written by an anonymous user is more "relevant" than something written by an author signed with full name, printed and published for him to make money. Language is not "owned" by a close-knit coterie of professional writers. It is a spontaneously formed platform of communication among all of its speakers - be it a Nobel-prize winner in literature or some unsophisticated peasant. The Web is the primary method of written communication of hundreds of millions of people, nowadays outweighing the collective efforts of all professional scribomans in history by many orders of magnitude. Why not take advantage of the unique opportunity we have in snapshotting the state of affairs of actual language use, without artificial chains of an entire army of editors, lectors, reviewers...who do nothing but distort language in its pure form.
The SEA page that you quote has a rather perverse notion of "durably archived". Now, when I think about it, I think it should be dumped altogether in case of Web: it would be enough that we have e.g. 3 independent editors verifying that the quoted sentence can indeed be found on the linked website, which should serve as a confirmation of its authenticity, irrespective of the fact that the website itself becomes unavailable in the future. --Ivan Štambuk 15:29, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Whereas the contents of google books will be findable, even if google books itself is taken offline (as you say, it's all shamelessly ripped from other people), this is not the case with the internet archive (as good as their intentions are). I do agree with you that exclusing the web doesn't make much sense under "durably archived" - hence my suggestions on the talk page of WT:SEA. I think the web at the moment is mainly excluded as a way to avoid having to include coinages that spread like wildfire - cf. and the fallout at Wikipedia. Whether we want to include it afterall is a question for a wider audience, and is a drastic policy change. We'd certainly want a way of tagging them as {{internet only}}, and be scrupulous in finding independant citations that demonstrate the word being clearly used for its definition. Conrad.Irwin 15:39, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
I'll continute the discussion at Wiktionary talk:Searchable external archives, if any. --Dan Polansky 15:59, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Re:some old Icelandic form-of additions

I noticed a while ago some entries you made a good few months back using {{is-inflection of}}. Please note that gender does not need to be specified for noun forms (unless that is Icelandic has some nouns that have multiple genders [like French] but I don't know about that). The m, f and n abbreviations function in it so that the same template can be used for adjective forms. 50 Xylophone Players talk 22:18, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Just delete them. They were made back when I hadn't a clue what I was doing. Razorflame 22:23, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
No, no, the few I've seen so far were good apart from that minor detail, AFAICT. 50 Xylophone Players talk 22:39, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Ok, then. That detail is noted, although I won't be making any more of them anytime soon. Razorflame 22:49, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

You have new messages at QuickGround's talk page!

Welcome, Razorflame, you have new messages at the QuickGround's talk page. QuickGround 05:14, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Removing languages

User:Dijan created Wiktionary:About Serbian on 9 July 2006 Ivan Štambuk moved it onto Wiktionary:About Serbo-Croatian on 28 February 2009

Dijan cannot be considered the owner of that page.

Furthermore Štambuk added this which complicates the sittuation.

I saw Wiktionary talk:About Serbo-Croatian#Removing languages but this happens regularly, for instance here, the User:Kilibarda pushed his version onto what Roberta F. wrote.

If you have some interest in this topic, I would be very much obliged to receive an answer from you.

Yours truly

Bugoslav 15:01, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I do not have any interest in the situation any longer, so I am unable to help you any further. Along with my limited knowledge of Bosnian, Serbian, and Croatian, I feel that I would not be able to contribute much in the way of anything helpful. Razorflame 14:16, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
Never, absolutely never, would I nor any Croat accept to write under that header. Razorflame, you should know that no matter what, that header should go away. The person who made Wiktionary:About Serbo-Croatian has not consulted anybody before making and proclaiming that Serbian, Croatian, Bosnian (Bosniak), and Montenegrin would be deleted as obsolete, in favour of the obsolete language code sh. You said that there should not be any deletion, but on the example of skupnik we see just that.
Bugoslav 22:12, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
If I see something that I think would benefit from this, I would go ahead and do that, but that is rarely happening. I usually stay out of things like this. Therefore, I would like to request that you take your concerns elsewhere, because I am not capable of answering them at this point in time. Razorflame 19:37, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Range Blocks

I realize that indef IP blocks are not wise, I am planning on unblocking them as soon as the underlying issue is resolved. Thanks. - [The]DaveRoss 18:24, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Ah, ok. I see your intentions now :) Razorflame 21:05, 30 May 2010 (UTC)