User talk:Steel Blade/April 2009

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


I can't figure out what you are trying to do. Your definition was for an adverb. But blinding is an adjective. Perhaps you need to give an example of use. SemperBlotto 08:22, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Steel Blade 00:36, 26 November 2008 (UTC) Okay then, Mr.Semperblotto. Am I in trouble, sir?

You added an adverb sense, with this example of use - The blinding destruction is causing serious problems for the world.. That is an adjective (it modifies the noun "destruction"). I do not recognise this use of the word anyway. SemperBlotto 08:15, 26 November 2008 (UTC)


You seem to be using "great" in many definnitions. This is a less than ideal choice because the word "great" has several very different and unrelated meanings. I recommend avoiding it is definitions whenever possible. --EncycloPetey 04:45, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Steel Blade 04:49, 26 November 2008 (UTC) Okay then, sir. Am I in trouble? Thank you for the advice, though.

Trouble? No. Just offering advice that may help to raise your contributions to even higher standards. --EncycloPetey 04:54, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Steel Blade 04:58, 26 November 2008 (UTC) I want my contributions to be raised to even higher standards.


I reverted your additions of "infinitesimal ,little, tiny" as synonyms of "compact". I don't think "compact" is used to mean "small". I may be wrong -- the way to show it is to find citations (e.g. by using Google Book Search) that use "compact" as a synonym for "small". And, just to preclude you asking, no, you are not in trouble, although it would be good if you used Wiktionary:Edit summaries. JesseW 23:51, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Okay then, sir. Steel Blade 23:59, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

But you simply re-added the very material I removed, without providing any citations. This is a problem, and will get you into trouble. BTW, we don't usually refer to each other with honorifics. JesseW 18:07, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Can you find the citations for compact that means small yourself then? Steel Blade 18:16, 31 January 2009 (UTC)


Thank you, Steel Blade. I checked some of your entries because someone else reverted one, but I notice that you have made some useful contributions to Wiktionary. In some cases, I have combined your added sense with a previous similar sense to avoid a long list of nuances of meaning. I hope you are enjoying your last day of January, too. Best wishes. Dbfirs 20:03, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

I didn't notice any lack of civility. I don't know whether you upset JesseW, but you might like to know that in the US (where I have never been) they use the adjective compact as a euphemism for small to describe small cars (though this sense is probably covered by sense 2, so I didn't add it). Dbfirs 20:16, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

I see. Thanks. Steel Blade 20:24, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

I think the "small" sense of compact is usually just a secondary meaning from "packed into a small space", but I agree that some people seem to use "compact" to mean just "small". Can you find some citations to prove this? Dbfirs 20:57, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
You might like to try for citations, but you will need to study each use to decide whether it means just "small" rather than "packed into a small space".
By the way, it is not always a good idea to copy all the synonyms from a thesaurus into a dictionary entry. If you are looking for useful work to do, there are Requested entries (click at the left of the page), and lots of lists generated by Visviva, Robert Ullmann, and others. Dbfirs 21:13, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm afraid to use it. Steel Blade 21:23, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Be bold! Dbfirs 21:54, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

These links might help:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wiktionarian! Dbfirs 21:58, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

I am still afraid to use it. Steel Blade 22:25, 31 January 2009 (UTC)


The word enormously carries overtones of size, which are not part of the definition. This is a case where the context-neutral very seems more appropriate. --EncycloPetey 20:32, 31 January 2009 (UTC)


Please note that the heading we use is "Alternative spellings" and not "Spelling alternatives". 50 Xylophone Players talk 16:36, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Sorry. It was unexpected and an accident. I really didn't know. Steel Blade 16:50, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

No problem, just keep it in mind for whenever you're dealing with alternative spellings in the future, Also, bear in mind that we're all here to develop and improve Wiktionary and I'd say people will only get angry at you if you ignore advice and repeat mistakes or start vandalising things. 50 Xylophone Players talk 16:59, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

I would never vandalize things. Steel Blade 17:01, 1 February 2009 (UTC)


This word does not mean "ultimate (last, final)". --EncycloPetey 17:17, 1 February 2009 (UTC) My bad, Mr.Petey. Steel Blade 17:19, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Misleading edit summaries[edit]

In this edit which you described as "(→Adverb: added citation)" the only change you made was to add a period to the end of a definition. This is obviously no kind of a citation. Why, then, did you state in the edit summary that it was? This does not look like a plausible mistake -- this looks like an attempt to mislead other editors. You are not making a good name for yourself, here. JesseW 18:15, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

You also put your (probably) wrong definitions back into abnormal, supreme and compact with no explanation or citations to verify them. This is discourteous at best, and unacceptable. You need to provide examples of use first. JesseW 18:15, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

I forgot that it was in the entry, NOT the citation section. So that's why I added a addition with the citation and a period, not to mislead anybody. Steel Blade 19:19, 1 February 2009 (UTC)


I didn't realize that you had been adding citations, e.g. Citations:supreme, etc. I want to apologize for my claims that you hadn't been doing any, and thank you for doing them -- this makes me feel considerably more confident about your work here. Thanks again! As an optional suggestion, you can add "{{seeCites}}" to the entry pages when you create a Citations page to alert readers of the existence of the Citations page. It'll help avoid confusions like this. JesseW 18:33, 1 February 2009 (UTC)


Hello Steel Blade -- Thank for your recent good-faith edits. Unfortunately the quotations you added for abnormal are not very helpful, since they do not provide adequate sourcing information and do not do a very good job of illuminating the meaning of the term. Please follow the guidelines at WT:QUOTE when selecting and entering quotations. The best quotations are from sources which can credibly be regarded as exemplars of English usage -- such as classic literary sources, major news sources (such as the New York Times), or current books by prominent authors. Respectfully -- WikiPedant 21:30, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

I don't know where to find that kind of information. Steel Blade 21:34, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Hello Steel Blade -- I reworked the entry for abnormal a bit and replaced the example sentences with classic literary quotations which I believe illuminate the meanings.
-- WikiPedant 04:54, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm afraid to use it. Steel Blade 10:46, 2 February 2009 (UTC)


Leo Tolstoy died in 1910 and (as far as I know) never wrote in English. He could not have published this quote in English in 1998. --EncycloPetey 22:48, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

I don't know exactly, but even I don't know all the answers.Steel Blade 22:50, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

It might have been published posthumously in 1912, but it would be translated. You would need to include the name of the translator. You can see an example of how to format a translated qoute on the page for rustic in the last quote on the page. --EncycloPetey 22:52, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

I really don't understand that. Steel Blade 22:53, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

The quote seem to come from " As Dead As It Gets‎" by Cady Kalian and "C. Wayne's $.02 Worth Volume #1‎" by C. Wayne Owens - I think it needs replacing. SemperBlotto 22:55, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Okay then Steel Blade 22:56, 1 February 2009 (UTC)


You now have a proper noun (which should be defined at Supreme) that is between the adjective and its translations etc. So the translations etc seem to be for the proper noun! Please sort it out - and take much more care in future. SemperBlotto 12:22, 2 February 2009 (UTC)


When adding a new definition, please be sure that it is different from all existing definitions. On the Goliath entry, you added "Someone or something that is abnormally large or powerful" as a third definition, but definition two already said "Any large person or thing". These two definitions are not different. --EncycloPetey 04:28, 7 February 2009 (UTC)


Perhaps you would have better luck asking someone who knows Japanese (we have a few of them here). User:Atitarev, User:Bendono, User:Habemus, and User:Stephen G. Brown are four users who have been recently active who know Japanese. No one you've contacted thus far is likely to assist you, as none of them know Japanese (it's not just a matter of having the translations, it's also a matter of knowing how to format Japanese entries). -Atelaes λάλει ἐμοί 03:13, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Additionally, if you are going to do things so quickly, you may want to keep your eye on Special:RecentChanges. Stephen has already started working on grand, and thus there is no need to conduct your queries further. I suggest you allow him to finish and then I expect he'll respond on his talk page. -Atelaes λάλει ἐμοί 03:25, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
was that enough for 壮麗? --Ciphers 04:49, 16 March 2009 (UTC)


Hi. Have you thought about using the Preview button, so you can see the results of your edits before you save them? This would spare you from editing the same articles many times in a row, which is confusing to follow. Equinox 00:13, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

I thought of it before. Steel Blade 00:15, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Well, I'm sure we'd appreciate it. You could write out the entire entry in a text editor first, and only post it when you were happy with the final result. Equinox 01:12, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

super colossal[edit]

I agree that supercolossal is real but I think super colossal is the sum of parts. (You can put super on anything, if it's a separate word.) See WT:RFD#super_colossal and by all means contribute your own opinion. Equinox 01:01, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

I see the noun wasn't yours — my mistake. However, my point about the two-word super still applies, so I am adding the RFD template. Please let the discussion finish before you remove it; it may well come out in your favour anyway. Equinox 01:12, 24 March 2009 (UTC)


It still has the tag. Should it be removed? Steel Blade 02:15, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

No. The discussion hasn't been closed. However, unless someone comes forward to support it, the entry will soon be deleted. Basically, we couldn't find anything conforming to WT:CFI that used this word. If you can find any such thing (a proper citation, according to WT:CFI, and not just a random Web page), you should add it to the entry as a quotation. Otherwise, we will assume that this word isn't used in the real world and eventually delete it. Equinox 02:18, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
We decide what words to include based on WT:CFI. I know it's long, but you should try to read through it. We don't include words because they sound good, or sound like they should be words, or because they are in some other dictionary. We include them because they can be attested (proved or verified) according to WT:CFI! Equinox 02:35, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
We cannot "make" a word verified if nobody has used it. Equinox 02:50, 24 March 2009 (UTC)


Please be aware that terms do have agreed-upon uses, and that definitions should be as concise as possible, using no unnecessary words. super- includes an implied comparison with massive, as well as the sense of extremely. Thus the comparator 'much'. 'Even' does not convey this sense.

I have the impression you are not examining other sources, nor examining actual usage, when you edit entries. While this may be incorrect, I do encourage you to examine references (though not plagiarizing) when contributing. - Amgine/talk 23:20, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm not trying to plagiarize. Steel Blade 23:25, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

I didn't mean to imply you were. Just a paranthetical reminder to avoid it, since when using sources it is sometimes easier to copy than refine the wording. - Amgine/talk 23:29, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Okay then. Steel Blade 23:30, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

No, I do not know Japanese, although I lived in Japan for a while and learned enough of the language to get around. - Amgine/talk 23:32, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
I know a few Kanji, yes. - Amgine/talk 23:36, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
I do not consider any wiktionary contributors 'jerks'. I am, however, a bit anal about some elements of English usage, punctuation, and grammar, so I help the project by both applying what little knowledge I have and, when possible, by helping others learn how to write more clearly. For example, your use of the colon at ultramassive was logically incorrect; the use of the colon is not easy to express, however, so I simply corrected it and carried on with my recent changes patrolling. - Amgine/talk 23:44, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

When welcoming new users, please make sure to sign your messages on their user talk pages using four tilde (~~~~) so they know who to thank for their welcome. - Amgine/talk 00:25, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

<nod> Just that your first couple welcomings did not include the signature. By the way, Help:Welcoming gives some good, simple advice. Normally we don't welcome IPs, especially those who have done nothing but vandalism. - Amgine/talk 00:33, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

unsystematic risk[edit]

Feel free to add value. DCDuring TALK 02:11, 30 March 2009 (UTC)


There is no point in welcoming users who have made no edits, and probably never will. SemperBlotto 09:53, 30 March 2009 (UTC)


Sorry, this diff should make it less confusing: [1] Parthian Scribe 20:10, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

t+, t- and t[edit]

Hello and thank you for welcoming me to Wiktionary. I have an inquiry for you: what's the meaning of t+, t-, and t in the translation fields? How exactly are those used? Regards. AlphaOmega 14:38, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, but I am not Albert Einstein in those translation fields. And I have no regards about it. Steel Blade 18:42, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

I think you took AlphaOmega's last "sentence" up wrong; "regards" at the end of a comment does not mean the speaker is asking for your opinion, it means that he is giving you his regards. See sense 3 at regards. 50 Xylophone Players talk 20:02, 23 June 2009 (UTC)


Hi again, first off just a friendly bit of advice: in future just post a query in one place and also you do not need to remove postings on talk pages like the one you did; particularly because it makes the discussion easier to look back on later on. Now, please check this page again to see what I've done with it; note the usage of {{prefix}} for the etymology and also compare {{suffix}} and {{confix}}. See you around. :) 50 Xylophone Players talk 19:54, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Repeated minor edits to pages[edit]

Hi. As I requested in March, please decide what you are going to do to a page, and then do it in one action. Lots of minor edits (changing "very" to "extremely" and back again, etc. — this doesn't even change the meaning of the definition, does it?) are unnecessarily time-consuming to patrol. Thanks. Equinox 20:38, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

An archive[edit]

Do you mean you want the contents of an old page? Sure, let me know. Equinox 21:02, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

You can create as many pages as you want under your own user space. Just add a slash and whatever you want to call the sub-page. For example, you could go to User_talk:Steel_Blade/April_2009 and create a page there with April's messages. Hope that helps. Equinox 21:12, 23 June 2009 (UTC)