User talk:Williamsayers79/2006

From Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Archived talk page from 2006[edit]

Active talk page is at User talk:Williamsayers79

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wiktionary. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wiktionarian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk (discussion) and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~, which automatically produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the beer parlour or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! — Vildricianus 15:25, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Geordie[edit]

Hi. You seem to be a Geordie (forgive me if i'm wrong). Can you give a definition of howay please? --Expurgator t(c) 13:00, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(Sorry for butting in) - it's a general purpose cry of encouragement - best translation is probably come on! SemperBlotto 13:15, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Howay is used as a cry for encouragement e.g. in football matches, or, as a way of saying "come long".
Aye, am a propa Geordie man! --Williamsayers79 13:34, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Words to add[edit]

hound[edit]

Just out of interest, why is hound in Cat:Geordie? Widsith 10:47, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is used in preference to the word dog by a lot of north-easterners (namely Geordies). For this reason it becomes a colloquial use of a lesser used standard English word.

Another exaple is muckle - this word is in many standard English dictionaries however it is rarely used by non-northumbrians and scots - it just happens that no one put it in as standard English into the Wiktionary.

I can re-jig the hound entry with some words to make it more obvious if you think that would be more appropriate?

Er no, it should be all right. I was just curious. Widsith 11:04, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

meth and meths[edit]

From Widsiths disscussion page

Hello, thanks for tidying up my scrappy work! I assume that the format prefered for etymologies is to keep them seperated as in your contrib to meth? Anyway I'll try to keep things short and simple. Cheers.--Williamsayers79 15:58, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Etymologies[edit]

Yes, words with different etymologies should be in separate sections for clarity. Keep up the good work. Widsith 16:00, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

our kid[edit]

Do you have anything to add to the our kid page? I've always assumed this is a Madchester thing, but I'm just a scally from down south. Is this part of all of northern England's vocabulary? --Dangherous 14:32, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aye that term is used, in the north of England and predominantly in Manchester. The term Geordies use is wor kid and just for trivia's sake its "oor kid" in places like Wolverhampton, Birmingham and the rest of the Black Country ar!

I'll do these these pages soon enough! Cheers marra! --Williamsayers79 15:11, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Scots lanuage vs. Scottish English[edit]

Waiting for confrimation from folk on the Beer Parlor.--Williamsayers79 09:27, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Seems to be OK with everyone so I'll change appropriate entries to Scots and try to clean-up the others.--Williamsayers79 15:27, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See full discussion on: Wiktionary:Beer parlour archive/July 06#Scots language or Scottish English wrt categories?

Pejorative[edit]

Hello; there is already {{pejorative}}. — Vildricianus 08:49, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Crap, I've made a bit of a mess there, sorry about that - could you delete:

Template:en-pejorative for me? Sorry again!--Williamsayers79 08:51, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please, urgent only.[edit]

Please use WT:VIP only for real vandalism. If even the most remote sense of calling something a good faith contribution is possible, we're supposed to use {{rfc}} or {{rfv}} or {{wikify}}.

Also, WT:VIP is not checked nearly often enough, as the #wiktionary channel is so much faster for urgent vandalism, most of the time. --Connel MacKenzie 23:59, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Square characters[edit]

I seem to be seeing a lot of squares around here, in place of actually characters I mean. The main characters that are displayed as squares are the IPA and Alchemical or Astro symbols. I'm using IE version 6.0.2900.21.80.xpsp_sp2_gdr.050301-1519 - if you got all that! Anyway what can I do to see the symbols and fonts properly? Replies here or on my talk if you like!--Williamsayers79 17:52, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ditch IE and download a better browser. Firefox displays the characters correctly, is free, quick to install. Download it from here. — Paul G 10:19, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Works a treat - cheers marra! --Williamsayers79 08:09, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RFD/RFV[edit]

plamph and reekin o' pish[edit]

Hello Widsith, these two words have been on RFD for a while now and apear to have passed RFD? can have their RFD status removed yet?

On another related topic I've noticed that people have put in the dicussion pages of articles whether or not they have passed RFD, RFV etc. Is this something that is standard practice or would it be a good idea to do this anyway?

Cheers, --Williamsayers79 07:50, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The person to speak to is Andrew, who has a whole system going on. I'm not entirely sure how long he normally leaves it, but it should be at least a month. Widsith 07:54, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Passed on conversation to User:Andrew massyn.--Williamsayers79 11:36, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Andrew, Widsith pointed me to your kind self :

The two words plamph and reekin o' pish have been on RFD for a while now and apear to have passed RFD? can have their RFD status removed yet?

Hi. I have been involved with RFV for a few months now, and haven't really looked critically at RFD for ages. I will look at both words on the weekend and make a decision. (see comment below) The problem is that at rfv alone, there are about 100 words per month to verify and there is also a backlog on both pages. I dont think that there is an admin specifically dealing with RFD at this point.
PS Referred words are generally left for at least a month, so if you can curb your enthusiasm till the end of August, I promise to deal with these two entries then.

On another related topic I've noticed that people have put in the dicussion pages of articles whether or not they have passed RFD, RFV etc. Is this something that is standard practice or would it be a good idea to do this anyway?--Williamsayers79 11:35, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have been asking people to use the talk pages, and to move discussions from the general forums to the talk pages once the topic is talked to death or finalised. Quite often, the same words come up again, particularly if they are contentious and if the history of the discussions are not on the talk pages, it makes it difficult to establish what the consens was relating to the word. Regards. Andrew massyn 02:51, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that's a fabulous idea and I have to admit to being quite lazy about it. I've passed and struck out a number of terms without moving the discussion. I've also noticed Williamsayers79 has been impatient about these at times, though honestly I would trust his judgement in calling them... especially considering, William, that you're not as stubborn as the rest of us.
One question though, Andrew. Should the discussion be moved or just copied? DAVilla 09:35, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, copied, definately. What I am doing at WT:RFV is archiving the page at WT:RFVA once a month with the full discussions there. Each individual discussion is copied to the talk page of the article as it is dealt with. Best wishes. Andrew massyn 18:21, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

obscene images[edit]

Where is this image? What page is it on? Widsith 14:56, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. The image is held on Wikimedia Commons; I have put in a request there for it to be removed (which should happen pretty speedily given the nature of the picture). Widsith 16:30, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Please remember to use WT:BIL to prevent local image display of commons' images. --Connel MacKenzie 23:31, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

chupacabra, chupacabras[edit]

Posted on User talk:Hippietrail

Hello, I've edited the two articles in question and I hope this clears things up a bit between the two words. I've also put some blurb on the RFV page. I'm sure you've had a look at my edits any way by now. What do you think?
I've read material on the chupacabra(s), the cryptid mentioned, in Fortean Times magazine and some books. Fortean Times has had a long running dicussion on the whole spelling of chupacabras for a while now. I'll dig out the reference from my collection at home and put into the articles to help clear up the confusion a bit.
Regards--Williamsayers79 10:41, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

cadge, cadger etymology[edit]

Where did you get Anglo-Norman from? There's no reference to it in the World Wide Words article, and the word is not recorded until the 15th century, when Anglo-Norman was effectively gone. Widsith 08:24, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Must have got confused I'll correct them. Cheers--Williamsayers79 08:49, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I did see a program once, I think part of the Southbank Show?, anyway there was a series of episodes called The Journey of English the whole cadge, cadger, codger thing was mentioned as an example of inherited words from Norman but the guy presenting could of had his facts wrong of course. I think we'll stick with the World Wide Words reference for now.--Williamsayers79 08:58, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

templates[edit]

Hiya – as you've probably seen, I'm creating some templates for Scots. {{sco-noun}}, {{sco-adj}} and {{sco-adv}} already there – I'll do a verb one as well in a bit... Widsith 15:50, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I saw the Index, it looks great. I should be possible to have words which use a Scots template added to the Index automatically, but I'm not sure exactly how to do it. Also, I wonder if it's necessary to include the plural forms as well as the singulars? Widsith 16:21, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Personally I feel that the infinitive form is enough, but I don't feel particularly strongly about it either way. Widsith 16:27, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Voting[edit]

I would like to point out to anyone who hasn't voted yet that there are at least four votes going on at the moment that everyone has a vested interest in, 4 Checkusers, 2 Admins, 1 new logo and 1 boardmember, the more the merrier when it comes to these votes, especially the checkusers which requires 25 votes before anyone can be appointed, and the board vote which determines the course of Wikimedia! - TheDaveRoss 15:48, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Scots language articles / Geordie words[edit]

Hello there, I'm looking at populating the English Wiktionary with Scots words. I thought it may be a good idea to use the Scots Wikipedia as a source but would like to know any other reliable sources.

I've already added quite a few Geordie words and categorised them accordingly. Since I'm a Geordie, an a can taalk propa like, I've been able to check up on most of these words and reference them accordingly to stop any unnecessary RfV/RfD'ing. Do we need to do the same for the Scots words and reference the source of them using quotes from the Scots Wikipedia?

Regards --Williamsayers79 10:53, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea. The only other decent use of modern Scots on the internet that I know of is on the Scottish Parliament website. Unfortunately, newspapers and media outlets in Scotland are notoriously dismissive of Scots so there's fairly little out there. Widsith 06:47, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

fash[edit]

Hello Widsith, do you know if fash is also a Scots word? It's used by Geordies but could not find it when searching the Scots Wikipedia.--Williamsayers79 10:49, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, indeed, good word! I'd forgotten about that. A good place to check Scots is the Scots National Dictionary. Widsith 12:17, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
My mum was evacuated to Aberdeen as a 20 yr old medical student during the war, and often used to tell me "dinna fash yousel" which may qualify as a Scots, rather than English, phrase. In hindsight, it was an oddity, since she had a mild Australian accent, having been brought up there and moved to SE England aged about 11, and I can't immediately think of any other Scottish phrases she used...but you don't notice things like that as odd when your mum's said them all your life. --Enginear 18:01, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Step right up[edit]

Just lately, it occurred to me that you're not yet a sysop, and that you should be. You're doing good stuff here, and plenty of it. Sysop, in case you didn't know, means having an extra set of tools: delete, rollback, block, and protect, used for removing the nonsense and those who persist in adding it. May I nominate you? —Dvortygirl 19:05, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

we aye! - yes of course you can!--Williamsayers79 19:13, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, there seems to be ample support for you. Congratulations. You're a sysop now. If you have any questions about those new buttons, please don't hesitate to ask me or any of the other sysops on talk pages or come see us in IRC sometime. Welcome aboard. —Dvortygirl 15:01, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
One more thing: please have a look at your new line of WT:A and check that it's right. —Dvortygirl 15:17, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

patrolled edits[edit]

Could you go to prefs and check "mark my edits patrolled" ? Robert Ullmann 15:44, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

heptane[edit]

I believe this to be countable "any of the nine isomers . . ." SemperBlotto 08:58, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My mistake, need to read up on that A-Level Chemistry again!--Williamsayers79 11:49, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

itabrac[edit]

When you change {{chemistry}} to italbrac you remove the word from the Chemistry category. Is that what you intended? SemperBlotto 12:05, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, my intention was to help tidy up category:Chemistry a little by subcategorising into category:Organic compounds for instance. I intended to leave the (chemistry) tag next to the definitions to aid in understanding them and used the {{italbrac}} to remove the article from the parent Chemistry category.--Williamsayers79 12:08, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Spanish/Latin derivations[edit]

Since almost all Spanish words are technically Latin derivations (as also the other Romance languages), I don’t feel like Spanish words should be tagged with Category:Latin derivations (e.g., coño[1]). This category makes sense, I think, only for words borrowed directly from Latin. Although Spanish evolves from Latin, it, unlike English, actually borrows very little directly from Latin. An example would be English in absentia, which would usually be translated into Spanish as en ausencia ... the borrowed Latin phrase in absentia does exist in Spanish, but it is much rarer than in absentia in English. —Stephen 13:58, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think I agree with you in that the language from which a word is borrowed should be considered the language from which it is derived. However the I'd like to confirm that category:es:Latin derivations is there to categorise Spanish words that are borrowed from Latin much like category:Latin derivations is used to categorise English words that are borrowed from Latin. What do you think?
On another note it can become somewhat complicated trying to categorise some words into relevant derivation categories since there Etymologies are rather hazzy, i.e. possibly derived from Old Norse or Old English or Icelandic - so I usually apply the relevant templates {{ON.}}, {{OE.}} and {{etyl|is}} to cover all bases as our American cousins would say.--Williamsayers79 14:40, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that is how I would interprete the use of Category:es:Latin derivations. The problem is that, compared with English, there are very few such words in Spanish. Certainly coño and hoy are not such, as they have evolved regularly from Latin cunnus and hodie over many centuries. Although the English lexicon comes from many different sources, probably 99% of the Spanish lexicon evolved from Latin. While Category:Latin derivations is a useful category for English, I don’t believe Category:es:Latin derivations is needed in Spanish at all. OTOH, Category:es:Greek derivations would be very useful, as would Category:es:Arabic derivations, Category:es:Nahuatl derivations, and Category:es:Tupi derivations.
And the {{OE.}}, etc., templates are okay for English, but I don’t think we should use them for any other languages. Most languages are not the melting pots that English is. Virtually all Russian words came from Old Russian, and that from Old Church Slavonic, and that from proto-Slavic. Almost all High German words came from Middle High German, from Old High German, from Proto-Germanic. Almost all Arabic words came from Old Arabic, etc. It is not useful to label all 500,000 Spanish words as "Latin derivations"...it is enough to say that Spanish is a Romance language. —Stephen 15:21, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I see where your coming from now, and agree that the more weirder derivation categories for a language such as Spanish are more useful.--Williamsayers79 20:18, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A good example here is palabra and parabola, both Spanish words, both from the same Latin word – one evolved naturally, the other was a borrowing. Tricky. Widsith 16:34, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Moose.[edit]

Hi, sorry, not sure what happened there with my edit of moose. I must have had a few screen tabs open and edited the wrong one. --Dmol 16:22, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Standlized Templates?[edit]

Hi Williamsayers79, I saw your edit on DOE (08:18, 29 November 2006) applying following templates: {{trans-top}}, {{trans-mid}}, {{trans-bottom}}. They are pretty nice templates. But is these templates standardized? Please show me and other wikipedians if these are standardized. I often refer Entry layout explained, but I cannot find any description of those. I think these have possibilities to make confusions if without any consensus. Thanks.--Eveningmist 10:14, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to post a thread on Beer Parlour for discussion.--Williamsayers79 11:13, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

superlative and comparative of templates[edit]

Hello there, in the template {{superlative of}} you have added in category:English adjective superlative forms, I thought that these form of templates were not specific to English, I know they have been used in Scots articles. Is there any way of ammending the template to specify the language such as in template {{wikipedia}} where the lang= switch can be used, or should have seperate form of templates for every language?--Williamsayers79 13:24, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also I'm not totally sure of this, but I think that this template is not specific to adjectives either, since adverbs can also have superlatives.--Williamsayers79 13:29, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, yes, I was trying to bring those two templates in line with the rest of the inflection templates. I completely forgot about lang=. I had not looked at the preload templates (nor the templates they call) in quite some time. Perhaps after a cup of coffee I'll add that, if you don't beat me to it. --Connel MacKenzie 15:29, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've updates both {{superlative of}} and {{comparative of}} so that they will auto-categorise based when both of the parameters lang and POS are given. Please have a look and see what you think. I've tired them out of lower, lowest, littlest, littler, sleekest, sleeker, dowier and dowiest.--Williamsayers79 20:11, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

rel- templates[edit]

Supposedly we reserve template names xx-* and xxx-* for the languages with the respective language codes. In this case I doubt it would be a problem: rel is Rendille, spoken by about 30K people in and about Marsabit (about 200 klicks north of where I am). Even if I or someone is inspired to add the vocabulary ;-) Robert Ullmann 14:03, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Regional context tags[edit]

From User talk:DAVilla

Since you have modified all of the regional templates they now seem to take a superfluous lang parameter e.g. {{Chilean Spanish}} used in article coño now has a totally strange category of category:es:Chilean Spanish. Can we fix these? I thought that my original update would have been sufficient.--Williamsayers79 21:17, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oh sorry. Yes this is fixable. The lang parameter is optional for context/cat. DAVilla 21:19, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I'll remove it from the regional templates where I see problems with it, to be honest it should only show up in the non-English language regional templates because that would be the only time there would be lang parameter given. By the way, nice work on this one, I was sick of cattag's problems!--Williamsayers79 21:29, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, let me know next time and I'll try to work some magic!
I've already updated the regional templates in foreign languages. This should probably be done for the English ones as well, for consistency if nothing else. DAVilla 21:34, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Context and Label templates[edit]

Hello again, the category:Label templates seems to have filled up again! I thought all of them had been migrated across? Anyway am I OK to go ahead migrating them in-line with Template talk:context instructions to make new context templates?--Williamsayers79 09:34, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, there's no rush, but go right on ahead. I hadn't migrated any of them earilier, I had recategorized them temporarily. DAVilla 15:16, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Probably best left a unisex term[edit]

Your edit on cock tease changed "person" to "woman", with the edit-summary comment "It is a woman unless you saying that men are also cock-tearers!"

Well, I suppose it may also happen among gay men.

The Wikipedia entry says "a person, usually a girl". That covers both cases: the possibility of it being applied to either gender, and the probability of it being applied to a younger female. Would that phrasing, or "a person, usually a woman", be acceptable to you?

Myself, I'd prefer the last term to be "woman", or even "young woman", rather than "girl", simply to avoid any perceived connotation of pedophilia, but I must admit that the term "girl" has been applied to legally adult women as well as to legal minors. (In Chaucer's time it referred to a "youth" of either gender.)  – SAJordan talkcontribs 07:17, 24 Dec 2006 (UTC).

I think your suggestion of: "a person, usually a woman" is the best idea. Merry Christmas by the way!--Williamsayers79 19:47, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ang vs. OE.[edit]

Hi William, I am very surprised to see you changing {{OE.}} to {{ang}}, e.g. on leaf. I thought you would know that the ang template is not to be used for etymologies, right? (OE. is in Category:Etymology templates, ang is just a language template, in Wiktionary:Index to templates/languages.) henne 12:34, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I only put {{ang}} into non-English Etymologies to avoid incorrect categoriesation into category:Old English derivations, however I think I shouldn't really ahve used it at all and was lazzyness on my part, I'll go in and edit them. At some point in the future I'd like to make the Etymology language templates to a lang= parameter so that they can be used for foreign language etymologies too.--Williamsayers79 19:51, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Derivations versus inheritted[edit]

The category changes you are making are contrary to the way the categories are currently being used. The "inheritted" ctaegories for the various Romance languages were intended to house those words that followed descent, rather than being later loanwords or other borrowings. Before making the changes you seem to want, I'd poll the Beer Parlor, lest you find after making many changes that there's significant unrest. --EncycloPetey 13:06, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No probs I'll reverse some of my changes and post on beer parlour later on.--Williamsayers79 13:08, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

context labels[edit]

Woah, slow down with the contexts! The labels describe the circles in which the word is understood. I don't know of any English words that are understood by fish. That and "food" are not appropriate contexts. DAVilla 17:42, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll have to own up to {{fish}} - I see what you mean now! The food one I mearly updated since it was already there, what do you reckon would be more appropriate?--Williamsayers79 08:40, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
On good, I changed the def. to "Of food, ..." but most tags I just removed. It might be smart to use fish or food as a category template, but not as a context template. Hmm... would it make sense to put this in the definition line? Being category only, it wouldn't show there, but it does relate. DAVilla 14:49, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
There are quite a few of these templates floating about, such as {{food}} and {{fish}}. I personally think we need to evaluate on them on case-by-case basis. Mostly I suspect we'll get away with tweaking the articles that include them like you did with good. Some of them can probably go. The {{fish}} for instance is not really needed since we can just add the articles to the correct categories. I'll do this today.--Williamsayers79 14:56, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

naphthoquinone pictures[edit]

Hi there. Wikipedia has structural diagrams of these two isomers, but they don't seem to be in Commons. Do you know if there is any way we can move/copy them there? SemperBlotto 15:24, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My only thought would be to download a copy from wikipedia and them upload to commons so that we can link to it. I have not really played much with images on wiki yet! :-) --Williamsayers79 15:26, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Williamsayers79/2006&oldid=5025782"