User talk:The Editor's Apprentice

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

Belated welcome and Void ab initio[edit]

Hello, welcome to Wiktionary, and thank you for your contributions so far.

If you are unfamiliar with wiki-editing, take a look at Help:How to edit a page. It is a concise list of technical guidelines to the wiki format we use here: how to, for example, make text boldfaced or create hyperlinks. Feel free to practice in the sandbox. If you would like a slower introduction we have a short tutorial.

These links may help you familiarize yourself with Wiktionary:

  • Entry layout (EL) is a detailed policy on Wiktionary's page formatting; all entries must conform to it. The easiest way to start off is to copy the contents of an existing same-language entry, and then adapt it to fit the entry you are creating.
  • Check out Language considerations to find out more about how to edit for a particular language.
  • Our Criteria for Inclusion (CFI) defines exactly which words can be added to Wiktionary; the most important part is that Wiktionary only accepts words that have been in somewhat widespread use over the course of at least a year, and citations that demonstrate usage can be asked for when there is doubt.
  • If you already have some experience with editing our sister project Wikipedia, then you may find our guide for Wikipedia users useful.
  • If you have any questions, bring them to Wiktionary:Information desk or ask me on my talk page.
  • Whenever commenting on any discussion page, please sign your posts with four tildes (~~~~) which automatically produces your username and timestamp.
  • You are encouraged to add a BabelBox to your userpage to indicate your self-assessed knowledge of languages.

Enjoy your stay at Wiktionary!

I realize you've been around here a couple of years, but I'm giving you our welcome template because your misuse of language codes in the etymology at void ab initio suggests you still have more to learn. We're trying to phase out {{etyl}}, and it was never right to use {{etyl|en|en}} just to get the language name- that puts the page in Category:English twice-borrowed terms on the assumption that you're referring to a term that was borrowed from English into another language, then ultimately found its way back into English (see English pikake for an example). I would use {{noncog|en|-}} for that. You also used the language code "en" for English with some of the Latin terms, instead of "la" for Latin. I also sent the entry to Requests for deletion/English, because the meaning seems to be covered by the entries for void and ab initio- but I'll leave that to others to decide. Thanks! Chuck Entz (talk) 04:34, 28 June 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I would agree that I am still very much learning. I saw the page be put into Category:English twice-borrowed terms and thought it was a little odd, but didn't end up putting too much thought into the fact that I might have made a mistake. The main reason I made those mistakes, funnily enough, was because I was doing what the welcome template suggests and copying from another page, although not with all the thought necessary to prevent error, as is clear now. Now that I look at the template page for {{etyl}} I see that it is very clearly marked as deprecated. I usually look at template pages, but in this case, again, I wasn't thinking as much. I completely agree with you that the meaning is covered by both void and ab initio individually and I'm going to head over there and state such. I also take a second to look over the different pages that the welcome template links to see what I might be missing. —T.E.A. (TalkEdits) 15:55, 28 June 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

We sent you an e-mail[edit]

Hello The Editor's Apprentice,

Really sorry for the inconvenience. This is a gentle note to request that you check your email. We sent you a message titled "The Community Insights survey is coming!". If you have questions, email

You can see my explanation here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:48, 25 September 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Hi. anticannibalism is not a hyponym of cannibalism! It's just a derived term. Equinox 05:24, 8 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

True enough! I guess that's what I get for editing late at night :-). —The Editor's Apprentice (talk) 18:24, 8 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]


This module generates errors now when attempting to generate an English plural. I assume it's your latest edit. SemperBlotto (talk) 11:32, 27 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey SemperBlotto, that seems very likely to me as well as. As is true for any of my edits, feel free to undo it since it is causing problems. I can always try to make the simplification I was attempting later with the help of more knowledgable people. —The Editor's Apprentice (talk) 16:40, 27 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Hi. This "prejudical" is a rare (probably often wrong) spelling of the normal form. So please keep the citations there. It's not good to cite "prejudicial" with misspellings or odd spellings. Better to keep the oddities in the place where they provide evidence for the odd form. Thanks. Equinox 20:11, 25 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Equinox Got it. I didn't bother to check how common the spelling with one "i" was and so followed what I'd seen on some other entries where quotations of alternative spellings are also hosted at the main entry. —The Editor's Apprentice (talk) 21:49, 25 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Don't Google image search these skin conditions, if you don't know what they are. But wouldn't it be typical for hidradenitis to link to hidradenitis suppurativa in some form or fashion? To my knowledge the suppurativa form (apocrine gland) is the most common. Henstepl (talk) 16:33, 9 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello @Henstepl, I don't understand the relationship between the conditions very well, so i'll give you my general thoughts based off of the impression that I have. first, hidradenitis suppurativa should be listed under a "Derived terms" section at the entry for hidradenitis. If hidradenitis suppurativa is a specific type of hidradenitis then it should be listed under a "Hyponym" section at the entry for hidradenitis and correspondingly hidradenitis should be listed under a "Hypernym" section at the entry for hidradenitis suppurativa. An example for how this can look can be found at the entry for oriented. For general information on this topic see Wiktionary:Semantic relations. take care. —The Editor's Apprentice (talk) 17:51, 9 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Your impression seems correct. It would probably be easier to follow if the term were - I'm making this up - "hidradenitis apocrina", being that it's a condition of the apocrine-type sweat glands which only exist in the groin and a few other regions. (The usual sweat glands are "eccrine".)
But suppurativa is the historical term, and though there seem to be a few conditions called "hidradenitis", the suppurativa form seems indisputably the most common. No other hidradenitis has a Wiktionary article, and I doubt they'd be added anytime soon.
I have added a hyponym to hidradenitis and furthermore linked it to the Romanian translation I found. As for hidradenitis suppurativa, I'd just point out it contains a link back already. If you think anything needs to be done, you can do it. Henstepl (talk) 18:51, 3 October 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Heads up on quesadilla discussion[edit]

I commented in the etymology scriptorium to try to resolve an edit you posted to my contribution where it appears you were fixing my formatting (thank you) but changed the meaning of my contribution. That said, I'm not sure who of the two of us is correct about the etymology, plus I don't know which template to use if I'm correct, so I've refrained from editing quesadilla further. Thisisnotatest (talk) 06:55, 14 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you very much for the note and starting a discussion in the Etymology Scriptorium. I'll leave a reply there shortly. Take care. —The Editor's Apprentice (talk) 16:23, 14 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Hi! You need to become an admin. I'll set up a vote for you Almostonurmind (talk) 19:25, 19 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Almostonurmind Please don't, Wonderfool. —The Editor's Apprentice (talk) 19:54, 19 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]