User talk:Saltmarsh/Archive 4

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

Archive for 2007 July to December[edit]


Possessive forms exclusion WT:VOTE rewritten and restarted[edit]

I have rewritten and restarted the vote, having attempted to reword the proposal to address the issues that people have raised. You may want to reread the proposal and reconsider your vote. † Raif?har Doremitzwr 20:05, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

inflected forms and template use[edit]

I notice you have been using the "form of" templates of late. So I changed the examples from WT:AEL for αδελφοί and added a bit of text about that. Now I am thinking that was too rash; when we get to the adjectives, these templates will not be so helpful because there is no parameter for gender. User:EncycloPetey pointed me to the {{inflection of}} templates they are using for Latin; what do you think about them? ArielGlenn 07:11, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Excellent! I will start using them now. Also, I was thinking about having the {{el-verb}} template mark its arguments as Category:Greek verbs (it doesn't seem to do that right now). Is that ok, or am I going to break something, given I didn't write it? ArielGlenn 08:53, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for all your changes and cleanup, and sorry you had to go through and retag the nouns :-( I have changed my scripts to use the new format. Say... you wouldn't want to look at the adj templates, would you?  :-):-) ArielGlenn 09:55, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
I think I prefer leaving out the case but having the gender and the full form of each adjective in there; it just seems easier on the eyes to the non-expert. So that means a vote for

  ζεστός m (zestós)     f:ζεστή, n:ζεστό

I know the m there is a bit redundant but it doesn't really hurt anything (and we put the gender in all the translation links anyways, so at least it's consistent).
p.s. I have been working up a bot to watch new (greek) entries so we can (or I can) clean up the tagging and at least get them into a noticeable category. A lot (as if there were a lot to start with!) of them get created with no templates or category markings whatsoever. I'll put the results of that up in a couple of days after it runs a bit. ArielGlenn 10:18, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
A metaphorical vote only! (Besides, I don't believe so much in votes as in reaching a concensus among interested parties.... of which there are, I guess, two :-) ) Yes, no brackets, and I thought about the romanization and decided it was fine without it. Also f instead of feminine is fine. And yes, then changing the noun template to drop the second romanization makes sense to me, and to line it up with this format. We could even put pl instead of plural I guess, hmm. Hey are you ever on irc? (I am in the wiktionary channel most of the time.) ArielGlenn 06:44, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Concordance:Fragments of Heraclitus[edit]

Thought this would fall within your interests. Cheers! bd2412 T 04:59, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

POS summary[edit]

The summary was very helpful! My thoughts:

  1. Noun template: Colon after plural (or none in the adjective template). We also need to be able to mark uncountable nouns.
    • covers: nouns, noun forms, proper nouns
  2. Verb template: Can we mark them as "imperfective past"? I know that's longer, but it's a bit more on target. (Also it's what's in my verb conjugation templates.)
    • covers: verbs in active form, verbs in medio-passive form, verb forms
  3. Adjective template: Great
    • covers: adjectives, adjective forms, comparatives, superlatives
  4. Other POS: Great
    • covers: pronouns, prepositions, adverbs, conjunctions, interjections, articles

Did I forget anything? Are there WT:ELE considerations for any of these? ArielGlenn 22:15, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Entirely my bad! Of course perfective past (is what is in my templates). Argh! So much for preview helping get it right... ArielGlenn 07:18, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Inflections etc[edit]

Thanks for all your work on the inflections. Thanks for your patience on that too. Do you want to start a betting pool on how many comments the BP discussion gets (other than you or me)? :-)

I put up some ruminations on dialects and all that a couple days ago, see User:ArielGlenn/what to include. I will be interested to hear your thoughts. You have been trying to organize these pages a lot longer than me...

Funny you ask about the redlink list. Just in the last couple of days I stumbled across the Index:Greek and found out that it is virtually useless because it's updated by hand (and hadn't been in about a year). So I have *just* finished redoing those based on the July XML dump; This includes all entries tagged as Greek (l2 tag) and all translations marked as Greek (and not Ancient), with about 10 exceptions because they were oddly labelled. Hope we find it useful!

IRC, dude, I'm telling you... all the cool kids are there :-) ArielGlenn 07:37, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

translation lines for greek (ancient, modern)[edit]

I have started going through entries tagged with *Greek, Modern and changing them to Greek. (This helps some processing I do with the monthly XML dump.) Some entries though look like this:

I had been restructuring them to say

  • Greek, Ancient: (...)
  • Greek: (...)

thinking that was right. Is it? I cross-posted at User:Atelaes too. Sorry this is so nitpicky, I just don't want to be mucking something up. ArielGlenn 12:22, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Moving the discussion to Wiktionary talk:About Greek (but hopefully we can sort it out fast). Thanks... ArielGlenn 04:23, 3 August 2007 (UTC)


oops :-([edit]

I did *not* intend to exclude you from the discussison. *At all*. Pleasae accept my apologies. I really do wish that we could do some of this over irc or some other mechanism "off channel", so to speak. That's all. I'll shut up now. ArielGlenn 11:05, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Transliteration (again)[edit]

Hi! I didn't think that romanisations should be phonetically accurate. That would make them inconvenient for the purposes they are intended. My only concern was that there should not be created any romanisation entries. Secondly, I do think that there could be some improvements in the romanisation system followed here, e.g. oi and oï, but it isn't so much important to me. So, you needn't worry too much about my "hypersensitiveness". :-) --Flyax 07:56, 4 August 2007 (UTC)


We say νόες in the plural (google it) but it is rare and still sounds a bit strange. We cannot form however the genitive of the plural. Some say των νόων, some say των νοών, but both are wrong. About the templates, I usually don't know what to put in the 'edit summary' box. If it's a new template, there is nothing to say more. If it's an edit, it is something very small. I will try, though. --Flyax 06:43, 7 August 2007 (UTC)


The form ενδιαφερόντων for the feminine (genitive plural) is incorrect. Although some may use it, it shouldn't appear in the template, even with the notice ungrammatical. What is your opinion? --Flyax 22:02, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I am talking about the whole declension and also about the oxytone declension. The right form for the gen-pl of the feminine is -ουσών for both declensions. --Flyax 07:42, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

tracking new and removed entries (greek)[edit]

Now that I am on a regular schedule of crunching the XML dumps, here is the first round of tracking: User:ArielGlenn/tracking-el. I should clarify that this is the change since the July xml dump, not the change for a 30 day period. Not sure what its immediate use is, but perhaps you'll find it entertaining :-) ArielGlenn 07:25, 14 August 2007 (UTC)


Hi, are you already an admin? Unless you have any objections, I'd like to let you know that I intend to nominate you. DAVilla 07:36, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

No worries. It's not anything you have to commit to, just a few extra buttons to push like protection, deletion, and restoration, for which the community places its trust in you. No attendance requirements or anything. DAVilla 15:06, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
You mostly learn by doing. The requirement is that you can be trusted not to be malicious or destructive, and (more importantly!) willing to learn and participate. And have shown that over a sufficient period and number of edits, both in NS:0 and in discussions. Robert Ullmann 17:35, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Please accept here. DAVilla 16:47, 17 August 2007 (UTC)


I think it would be better to use {{checktrans-top}}. What do you think? In any case, it is "translations to be checked" (not "categorised" ;-) Robert Ullmann 14:47, 21 August 2007 (UTC)


Look for δοσοληψία here. There was a problem with ί in your spelling (another ASCII character maybe?). I am not sure about this, but I think that stressed characters have different ASCII in polytonic and monotonic keyboard settings.--Flyax 09:33, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

This is certainly a late reply but on the subject of the accents, it is true that the polytonic accents are a different character (different entry in unicode). But I think Mediawiki silently converts charcters in the "wrong" (i.e. polytonic) code block: see User:ArielGlenn/Unicode hell for my encounters with this, in case it's not already old news to you both. ArielGlenn 19:16, 15 September 2007 (UTC)


New Buttons![edit]

I'm happy to announce that you have been promoted. Here are some basic instructions about the new tools. If you have any questions, feel free to ask any other admin, including your promoter, User:Dvortygirl. Also, please update your entry in the administrator list with any additions or corrections at WT:A. Thanks for your hard work in the past and (in advance) for the work you will be doing! Happy trails... and, hey, what's your bandwidth situation like these days? Still inviting you to IRC (unless of course you can't stand it, which is perfectly ok). ArielGlenn 05:51, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Congrats! Rod (A. Smith) 05:59, 12 September 2007 (UTC)


Bible template[edit]

See note on WT:GP. I'm moving this to {{books of the bible}} so {bible} can be a context template ;-) Robert Ullmann 13:37, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

I edited Acts of the Apostles to put the template inside the English section. Keep in mind that some entries may have other language sections with completely different meanings; this applies to English. Looks good ;-) Robert Ullmann 14:10, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
You might want to make it {{book of the Bible}} as Connel suggested; some people like to see Bible always capitalized, and there is no reason not to here? Robert Ullmann 14:12, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Bel & Dr.[edit]

Um, what? I just deleted something that looked like obvious vandalism. But, it has your name on it and I know you've been doing the books of the Bible. What is that? --Connel MacKenzie 05:56, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Just checking in[edit]

Sorry I've been such a slacker lately, I think I didn't even get the Greek index updated before the next XML dump is due (out today or tomorrow)... but I wanted to check in. I see you've got another project going ( the Bible books, where I am of no use whatsoever :-) ) but I hope you are still doing the modern greek entries and that I haven't somehow pissed you off or something, for example with the discussion around pronunciation. If I have, please let me know! Also if I don't weigh in on things (like moving the about:greek page for example) it's usually cause I don't have a good idea what to say that would be helpful... ArielGlenn 20:27, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

mv Genitive before Accusative[edit]

When I started working here, I just followed the previous model for declension tables, even if I was used to see the Genitive before the Accusative in every Greek grammar textbook of both Ancient and Modern Greek I have. However, after a notice from another user (Wiktionary_talk:About_Greek#Declension_tables) it seemed to me that it would not be inappropriate to edit the tables. --flyax 15:16, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Please see my reply in Wiktionary_talk:About_Greek#Declension_tables --flyax 10:01, 17 October 2007 (UTC)



Please please don't use this; it is written horribly. Use {pedialite}, {sourcelite} if you must replace the box. (I think the box is excellent, and reducing it to more grey text down the left of the page is a serious loss.) Robert Ullmann 06:35, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Sorry to be quite so terse, I was trying to (and succeeded at) getting to my bank at 10 AM precisely. There are some people who don't like the boxes; they fight with them, trying to shift them around to keep them from messing up the positioning of the [edit] links. Actually fixing the edit links doesn't seem to be an option. (It may seem to be a bit too deep in the s/w, but remember that we are running on open source s/w all the way down to the silicon ;-) I think the [edit] links are horrid; they are almost okay in the 'pedia, where sections have blocks of text; but no good here. I turn them off, and use right-click for section edits; it would be good if that was the default.
The boxes help a very great deal with avoiding the "list down the LHS" effect, giving us some kind of layout balance. I'd like to see a few more. Robert Ullmann 12:10, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

{{wikipedia}} and other sister projects[edit]

Is there any reason why you vote Wiktionary:Votes/2007-07/Sister project links cannot be taken? —SaltmarshTalk 06:58, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

I got some negative feedback on it and never pushed it through, but you could put that question to the community and make revisions before trying to get it accepted. DAVilla 03:54, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps you should check before you delete it?[edit]

You put "vandalism?" in the deletion reason, yet if you weren't sure, perhaps you should have checked the Wikipedia page about it? ORLY? :-D —This unsigned comment was added by (talk).

The question mark was ironic - it seemed onbvious vandalism.
  1. Perhaps you should sign in?
    The spelling was incorrect.
    There was no etymology or other justification for the entry/definition.
SaltmarshTalk 06:52, 20 November 2007 (UTC)


Could you add the entry for the Greek? The etymology contains the word from the Greek Wikipedia, but it's not in my (Modern) Greek dictionary. I'm not familiar enough with Modern Greek to make a go at it. Do we have a place where (Modern) Greek requested entries can be listed? --EncycloPetey 15:36, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

spelling errors[edit]

Is there a policy about spelling errors? I mean, is it preferable to have redirections or entries or nothing at all? You see, the possibility of spelling errors in Greek is huge and we couldn't have 3 or 4 entries for every single word (e.g. αλλαγή, αλαγή, αλλαγεί etc ). Of course some spelling errors occur more often than others, so a redirection could be useful there. In the case of μπίρα it's absolutely clear that the spelling with "η" is wrong; none of the major Greek dictionaries refers to it. And, looking for the word "μπήρα" in Google, I saw that in the most of the cases it was an other form of "πήρα" (I took); I don't know if it is some dialect form or a "phonetic" spelling of "δεν πήρα" (IPA: ðembira). --flyax 15:10, 29 November 2007 (UTC)


I think I have heard also chemists using in Greek such plurals, but this use is rather informal. According to G. Babiniotis's dictionary the word has no plural. --flyax 15:39, 29 November 2007 (UTC)



Just checking with you before putting it on RFV. Is it actually used attributively etc? Language Lover 13:13, 17 December 2007 (UTC)