User talk:D1gggg

Welcome

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! --Vahag (talk) 15:22, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

на первый взгляд

Hi. In the entry for на первый взгляд, you labeled the definition as hedge. I don't understand that. What does на первый взгляд have to do with a hedge (зелёная изгородь‎)? —Stephen ^(Talk) 17:09, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

I'm not familiar with a linguistic concept here: Category:English hedges

But I tried to collect strings about politeness in Category:Russian hedges.

In my understanding they are the most important in journalism. d1g (talk) 17:13, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Hmm. I don't think people (the vast majority) will understand that. Category:English hedges is very technical, and only a few specialists might understand it. I think it would be better to remove the label from the definition, and then add "Category:Russian hedges" at the bottom of the page. —Stephen ^(Talk) 17:19, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

My HotCat plugin is still glitched; for me, it was easier to hide label using the code of lb template.

We have to add category manually if we remove label

Alternatively we can convert label to some appendix in order to keep specialized content. d1g (talk) 05:32, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Mnemonic category

 Done fixed immidietly Hi. Category names are usually plural, so maybe ...mnemonics instead of ...mnemonic? Equinox ◑ 17:41, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Sure, should be fixed now. d1g (talk) 17:44, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Module:Wikidata

We already have Module:wikidata. —CodeCat 18:41, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

module hosted at enwiki differs from wd or commons, any reason for this?

I'm trying to move modules from wd, not sure if it would work. d1g (talk) 18:43, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Code from wd stopped at line 800; not sure how to fix it. User:D1gggg/wd_sandbox d1g (talk) 18:52, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

@CodeCat main reason why I copied another module is that I'm not able to get data using old one: User:D1gggg/wd sandbox2, any thoughts on this? d1g (talk) 05:22, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Module Errors

 Done stress was missing, Atitarev helped with another template

Two of your recent entries are in Category:Pages with module errors due to problems with the input to the templates. One is because you didn't provide an accented form, which should be easy to fix, but I'm not sure about the other one.

Module errors are a serious problem, because the templates don't display any information, they're alarming to users and too many of them can clutter up the category so other problems are hard to spot. If you can't figure out how to fix the errors, you need to check the instructions at the template page (for instance, Template:ru-noun+) and, if all else fails, get help from someone familiar with the template, such as User:Atitarev or User:Benwing2. Please don't leave an entry with a module error. Thanks! Chuck Entz (talk) 19:45, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

I placed my requets at Module talk:ru-noun, not sure if it was the right place.

I'm not able to edit LUA modules yet d1g (talk) 20:07, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

взгляд etc.

Hi. When you add -нулевой суффикс in an etymology, few English-speakers will understand what that is. —Stephen ^(Talk) 18:19, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

This is a rare feature, but part of school curriculum.

Even -∅ would be meaningless, unless you know corresponding rules.

Category:Russian words suffixed with ∅ d1g (talk) 18:26, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

But only in a Russian school. This is English Wiktionary, and our users do not know Russian. нулевой суффикс could be appropriate in the Russian Wiktionary, but here it means nothing. We can't put that in our Etymologies. Everything must be meaningful to an American, Brit, or Australian who does not speak Russian. —Stephen ^(Talk) 18:48, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

@Stephen G. Brown, en.wiktionary.org isn't limited to English, does it?

> but here it means nothing

I created a page to explain corresponding rules, but it was rapidly removed: -нулевой суффикс. I have no opinion where to place such page. d1g (talk) 07:01, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Entries on en.wiktionary may be in any language. However, definitions, explanations, instructions, rules, and so on, must be in English only. You might make a Russian page for нулевой суффикс (without the hyphen), if it is a phrase that is used in Russian, and if the meaning of нулевой суффикс is different from нулевой + суффикс. Even so, you still could not use нулевой суффикс that way in the etymologies, because it has to be in English on en.wiktionary. —Stephen ^(Talk) 09:31, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Stubs

Creating entries/language sections with no headword templates such as {{ru-noun}}, or with a headword template but missing required information, is worse than useless. Not only is it misformatted and lacking in the proper categories, but it would have been easier for the people who have fix them to have started from nothing. By doing this you're wasting other editors' time and actually making the dictionary worse. Please learn how to do it right, or don't do it at all. Chuck Entz (talk) 03:03, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

1. Not misformatted, but missing some important information (stress/POS)

2. You could use Template:attention to raise corresponding question (or add missing ru-noun)

3. I don't think mass rollbacks make the situation any better, see your talk page.

Best regards. d1g (talk)

Yeah, I agree! I wish that you follow the example. I actually find that quite annoying... @Chuck Entz have you tried to clean up some of the edits as well? — AWESOME meeos ！ * ([nʲɪ‿bʲɪ.spɐˈko.ɪtʲ]) 07:56, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

I don't know Russian well enough to supply the missing information. Tagging it for attention means that those who do know how to fix the entry are expected to do all the work for someone else's entries while that person goes on to make more work for them, all the while having less time to spend on creating their own, higher-quality entries. But really, my main focus was getting rid of the category built on a bogus pseudo-suffix that was universally rejected by everyone in the deletion discussion, and which was deleted by a Russian native speaker who didn't like it either. The deletions are a side issue. Chuck Entz (talk) 23:39, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

I've had a chance to look through your undoing of my reverts, and they all seem okay- at least you didn't restore the bogus category. I suspect that other Russian editors may disagree with your analysis, but it's not for me to weigh in on the issue. I haven't looked through the recreated deletions- I still reserve the right to delete anything with too much missing, especially when there are module errors, though I'm not in any hurry to do so now that the bogus etymology issue is mostly resolved. Chuck Entz (talk) 23:59, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

@Chuck Entz: Why 'bogus'? It has some meaning into it — it's really the equivalent to the translingual -∅ — AWESOME meeos ！ * ([nʲɪ‿bʲɪ.spɐˈko.ɪtʲ]) 00:32, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

No,it's not. "∅" is a recognized placeholder symbol. The other thing was text, rather than a symbol, and it was in the wrong language. By the normal conventions of dictionary etymologies, all of that says that it's a non-null actual suffix, not a placeholder. It would be like having an English suffix entry for -nothing. Even -∅ is a bit odd as an affix entry, since it represents an abstract concept with no spelling or pronunciation. Chuck Entz (talk) 00:59, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

module:multiply et al.

They don't seem to be very useful. If you are just testing things prefix module names with your username like so Module:User:D1gggg:double plus one. Thanks. --Giorgi Eufshi (talk) 05:38, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

@Giorgi Eufshi Shouldn't it be Module:User:D1gggg/double plus one with a slash? —suzukaze (t・c) 06:10, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

please stop for a moment making changes to Russian etymologies, thanks

Hey there ... you're working very fast and making a lot of mistakes, and you're also making wholesale changes to grammatical analyses that I don't consider to be improvements on the status quo. I would suggest that you stop doing this for the moment and seek consensus before making future changes. Benwing2 (talk) 02:59, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

I will stop whatever it means.

I don't think that I made that many mistakes in native language.

You should consider if grammar you think correct is actually correct, see your talk page. d1g (talk) 03:36, 19 April 2017 (UTC)