@-sche, if you have a second, could you weigh in here. Much appreciated. --Victar (talk) 14:35, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
As always, there is a backlog of language code discussions that could use some attention. Hardly anyone comments in a substantive way, let alone a scholarly way, on the issues I raise there, so your input is much appreciated. I'll try to clean out the ones that you've actually responded to. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 22:15, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
:) —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 18:45, 31 January 2018 (UTC)Hey. This has been on WT:RFC for 200 years, more or less. It looks to me to have been cleaned up already - is the conjugation correct now? If so, we can remove it from the RFC page. --Gente como tú (talk) 12:40, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
I have been using Moslem since I learnt how to spell, and I don't see any need to change and I don't consider it offensive. It can't be eliminated entirely, all words in all languages remember? It may be worth listening to the pronunciations here. BTW, you undid all of my revision. DonnanZ (talk) 18:56, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
Template:seemreCites in sense 1. (Also, I have some research associates in this specific topic.) - Amgine/ t·e 15:07, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
Hey. Is Wiktionary:Todo/Non-templatised genders still useful? Can it be regenerated? --Otra cuenta105 (talk) 20:46, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
Hey. I've also noticed you adding "from from" in etymologies. It's a weird mistake, but please try not to make it. Thanks for your awesome work. --Otra cuenta105 (talk) 21:01, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
"from from" insource:/rom rom/
Another question for you while I've got your attention. Why the heck does Wiktionary:Statistics/generated take so long to sort in ascending order? --Otra cuenta105 (talk) 21:17, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
Did you mean "literary"? DTLHS (talk) 02:01, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
I think your rollback is in error because there is a profound lack of clarity and bias in the definition. Let's discuss this on the definition discussion page. ~ JasonCarswell (talk)
Calling me "stick in the mud" is rude. Please desist. --Dan Polansky (talk) 15:37, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
You wrote in an edit summary: "since I'll make use of this section as part of my general opposition to what one of our more colourful users once called bureaucratic masturbation".
A cheap trick, isn't it? The responsibility for inflamming the discussion by using terms like "bureaucratic masturbation" is yours; you cannot shift the responsibility to unnamed "colourful users".
Prevalence: google:"bureaucratic masturbation".
--Dan Polansky (talk) 16:06, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
Hi -sche. When you changed the language code xmn to pal, I think you missed a few. They are in CAT:E. —Internoob 23:32, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
Hi there. I think we need a code for Kam-Sui languages. What do you think it should be? — justin(r)leung { (t...) | c=› } 02:51, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
qfa- code, like qfa-kms, or any other three letters that approximate the name of the family if you would find e.g. something with a vowel in it like qfa-kas easier to remember/use. (You may already know this, but for the benefit of anyone who doesn't, how to construct codes is documented in Wiktionary:Families.) - -sche (discuss) 03:10, 22 March 2018 (UTC)qfa-kms looks good to me. Thanks! — justin(r)leung { (t...) | c=› } 03:25, 22 March 2018 (UTC)Hi again. Do you think we need a code for Hlai languages (which is the family including Hlai and related languages, like Cun)? — justin(r)leung { (t...) | c=› } 02:51, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
The Tai-Kadai node above Kam-Sui has an ISO 639 code, "tai". Evertype (talk) 22:35, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
tai is for Tai languages which is one of the branches of the Tai-Kadai family, not the same as the Tai-Kadai family itself. Hlai and Kam-Sui are sisters to Tai. — justin(r)leung { (t...) | c=› } 03:03, 31 March 2018 (UTC)Hello! The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey. We want to know how well we are supporting your work on and off wiki, and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation. You have been randomly selected to take this survey as we would like to hear from your Wikimedia community. The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes.
You can find more information about this survey on the project page and see how your feedback helps the Wikimedia Foundation support editors like you. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement (in English). Please visit our frequently asked questions page to find more information about this survey. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email through the EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys to remove you from the list.
Thank you!
Hello, I'm confused on why you marked the template for clean up when it is quite neat in its presentation. I had to use a blank template so I can put all the correct declined words. Leornendeealdenglisc (talk) 08:15, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
Every response for this survey can help the Wikimedia Foundation improve your experience on the Wikimedia projects. So far, we have heard from just 29% of Wikimedia contributors. The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes to be completed. Take the survey now.
If you have already taken the survey, we are sorry you've received this reminder. We have design the survey to make it impossible to identify which users have taken the survey, so we have to send reminders to everyone. If you wish to opt-out of the next reminder or any other survey, send an email through EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys. You can also send any questions you have to this user email. Learn more about this survey on the project page. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this Wikimedia Foundation privacy statement. Thanks!
Hello! This is a final reminder that the Wikimedia Foundation survey will close on 23 April, 2018 (07:00 UTC). The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes. Take the survey now.
If you already took the survey - thank you! We will not bother you again. We have designed the survey to make it impossible to identify which users have taken the survey, so we have to send reminders to everyone. To opt-out of future surveys, send an email through EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys. You can also send any questions you have to this user email. Learn more about this survey on the project page. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this Wikimedia Foundation privacy statement.
I see you edited Module:languages/datax today. Could you take a look at my request at the talk page? Robin van der Vliet (talk) (contribs) 10:38, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
: The original usexes seem to have been a set of rhymes, and I'm curious as to why you changed Tyrone to Jack :p —Suzukaze-c◆◆ 06:02, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
Hi--thanks for fixing those etymologies from the non-lemmas. I included them because I didn't realize that I could just have the Etymology heading without any content, but I'm glad to know that's not necessary. --SanctMinimalicen (talk) 23:41, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
{{der}} and similar templates to link to other words in the same language, which caused them to be categorized as "twice-borrowed", which should actually only happen in a case like anime. If you just need to mention that the current word is a variant of another word in the same language, you can either just use {{m}} (it's assumed the word is in the same language unless otherwise specified), or {{cog}}. - -sche (discuss) 17:34, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
{{inh}} and the like with the same language (I had made that mistake in the past), but with some of these I had imported existing etymologies from the en entries of direct descendants (e.g. thy for þi where it was applicable (i.e. when the enm members were mentioned in the en etymologies), and in some cases I must have accidentally just changed en to enm for enm members of chains instead of fixing to the {{m}}. In any case, I'll not do that again. --SanctMinimalicen (talk) 22:22, 10 May 2018 (UTC)Do you have any idea why /æɹ/ and /ɛəɹ/ distribution differs slightly between British English and some North American English dialects lacking the Mary-marry-merry merger, such as my own? Is it due to hypercorrection, or is it due to something else? To be more specific, /ɛəɹ/ in my dialect is never where /æɹ/ ought to be, but /æɹ/ is sometimes where /ɛəɹ/ is in British English. I'm not sure if I asked you this question before, but if I did, I don't remember your answer. I'm just wondering. Tharthan (talk) 19:37, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for your attention to the edits around trans and cis terminology. I have not edited Wiktionary before and am not terrifically familiar with the platform. (Thank you as well if it was you that unblocked me - it was very upsetting having my first edits result in a ban for "gibberish" when I explained all of them and provided citations!) The entries for "transmasculine" and "transfeminine" are still not quite accurate - in retrospect I should have checked elsewhere first for clearer definitions, as on Wikipedia "transfeminine" is defined as "an umbrella term describing individuals who were male at birth but identify on the female side of the gender spectrum" and on the Gender Wiki it is defined as "a term used to describe transgender people who were assigned male at birth, but identify with femininity to a greater extent than with masculinity". Both of these are accurate and much clearer. The main idea is that "transfeminine" describes feminine trans people who were assigned male at birth; it is not exactly a synonym either for "trans women" or for "feminine trans people" because the former is not inclusive of transfeminine nonbinary people and the latter is overly inclusive (i.e. includes feminine trans people who were assigned female at birth). I don't mean to heap more work on you but frankly I'm afraid that if I make the edits myself I'll just be banned for gibberish again. Best wishes.
Hello, please delete this page to make room for a move. I have copied the information. Thank you.Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 18:14, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
Hi--thanks for fixing those etymologies from the non-lemmas. I included them because I didn't realize that I could just have the Etymology heading without any content, but I'm glad to know that's not necessary. --SanctMinimalicen (talk) 23:41, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
{{der}} and similar templates to link to other words in the same language, which caused them to be categorized as "twice-borrowed", which should actually only happen in a case like anime. If you just need to mention that the current word is a variant of another word in the same language, you can either just use {{m}} (it's assumed the word is in the same language unless otherwise specified), or {{cog}}. - -sche (discuss) 17:34, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
{{inh}} and the like with the same language (I had made that mistake in the past), but with some of these I had imported existing etymologies from the en entries of direct descendants (e.g. thy for þi where it was applicable (i.e. when the enm members were mentioned in the en etymologies), and in some cases I must have accidentally just changed en to enm for enm members of chains instead of fixing to the {{m}}. In any case, I'll not do that again. --SanctMinimalicen (talk) 22:22, 10 May 2018 (UTC)Do you have any idea why /æɹ/ and /ɛəɹ/ distribution differs slightly between British English and some North American English dialects lacking the Mary-marry-merry merger, such as my own? Is it due to hypercorrection, or is it due to something else? To be more specific, /ɛəɹ/ in my dialect is never where /æɹ/ ought to be, but /æɹ/ is sometimes where /ɛəɹ/ is in British English. I'm not sure if I asked you this question before, but if I did, I don't remember your answer. I'm just wondering. Tharthan (talk) 19:37, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for your attention to the edits around trans and cis terminology. I have not edited Wiktionary before and am not terrifically familiar with the platform. (Thank you as well if it was you that unblocked me - it was very upsetting having my first edits result in a ban for "gibberish" when I explained all of them and provided citations!) The entries for "transmasculine" and "transfeminine" are still not quite accurate - in retrospect I should have checked elsewhere first for clearer definitions, as on Wikipedia "transfeminine" is defined as "an umbrella term describing individuals who were male at birth but identify on the female side of the gender spectrum" and on the Gender Wiki it is defined as "a term used to describe transgender people who were assigned male at birth, but identify with femininity to a greater extent than with masculinity". Both of these are accurate and much clearer. The main idea is that "transfeminine" describes feminine trans people who were assigned male at birth; it is not exactly a synonym either for "trans women" or for "feminine trans people" because the former is not inclusive of transfeminine nonbinary people and the latter is overly inclusive (i.e. includes feminine trans people who were assigned female at birth). I don't mean to heap more work on you but frankly I'm afraid that if I make the edits myself I'll just be banned for gibberish again. Best wishes.
Hello, please delete this page to make room for a move. I have copied the information. Thank you.Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 18:14, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
Hi--thanks for fixing those etymologies from the non-lemmas. I included them because I didn't realize that I could just have the Etymology heading without any content, but I'm glad to know that's not necessary. --SanctMinimalicen (talk) 23:41, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
{{der}} and similar templates to link to other words in the same language, which caused them to be categorized as "twice-borrowed", which should actually only happen in a case like anime. If you just need to mention that the current word is a variant of another word in the same language, you can either just use {{m}} (it's assumed the word is in the same language unless otherwise specified), or {{cog}}. - -sche (discuss) 17:34, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
{{inh}} and the like with the same language (I had made that mistake in the past), but with some of these I had imported existing etymologies from the en entries of direct descendants (e.g. thy for þi where it was applicable (i.e. when the enm members were mentioned in the en etymologies), and in some cases I must have accidentally just changed en to enm for enm members of chains instead of fixing to the {{m}}. In any case, I'll not do that again. --SanctMinimalicen (talk) 22:22, 10 May 2018 (UTC)Do you have any idea why /æɹ/ and /ɛəɹ/ distribution differs slightly between British English and some North American English dialects lacking the Mary-marry-merry merger, such as my own? Is it due to hypercorrection, or is it due to something else? To be more specific, /ɛəɹ/ in my dialect is never where /æɹ/ ought to be, but /æɹ/ is sometimes where /ɛəɹ/ is in British English. I'm not sure if I asked you this question before, but if I did, I don't remember your answer. I'm just wondering. Tharthan (talk) 19:37, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for your attention to the edits around trans and cis terminology. I have not edited Wiktionary before and am not terrifically familiar with the platform. (Thank you as well if it was you that unblocked me - it was very upsetting having my first edits result in a ban for "gibberish" when I explained all of them and provided citations!) The entries for "transmasculine" and "transfeminine" are still not quite accurate - in retrospect I should have checked elsewhere first for clearer definitions, as on Wikipedia "transfeminine" is defined as "an umbrella term describing individuals who were male at birth but identify on the female side of the gender spectrum" and on the Gender Wiki it is defined as "a term used to describe transgender people who were assigned male at birth, but identify with femininity to a greater extent than with masculinity". Both of these are accurate and much clearer. The main idea is that "transfeminine" describes feminine trans people who were assigned male at birth; it is not exactly a synonym either for "trans women" or for "feminine trans people" because the former is not inclusive of transfeminine nonbinary people and the latter is overly inclusive (i.e. includes feminine trans people who were assigned female at birth). I don't mean to heap more work on you but frankly I'm afraid that if I make the edits myself I'll just be banned for gibberish again. Best wishes.
Hello, please delete this page to make room for a move. I have copied the information. Thank you.Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 18:14, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
Hi--thanks for fixing those etymologies from the non-lemmas. I included them because I didn't realize that I could just have the Etymology heading without any content, but I'm glad to know that's not necessary. --SanctMinimalicen (talk) 23:41, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
{{der}} and similar templates to link to other words in the same language, which caused them to be categorized as "twice-borrowed", which should actually only happen in a case like anime. If you just need to mention that the current word is a variant of another word in the same language, you can either just use {{m}} (it's assumed the word is in the same language unless otherwise specified), or {{cog}}. - -sche (discuss) 17:34, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
{{inh}} and the like with the same language (I had made that mistake in the past), but with some of these I had imported existing etymologies from the en entries of direct descendants (e.g. thy for þi where it was applicable (i.e. when the enm members were mentioned in the en etymologies), and in some cases I must have accidentally just changed en to enm for enm members of chains instead of fixing to the {{m}}. In any case, I'll not do that again. --SanctMinimalicen (talk) 22:22, 10 May 2018 (UTC)Do you have any idea why /æɹ/ and /ɛəɹ/ distribution differs slightly between British English and some North American English dialects lacking the Mary-marry-merry merger, such as my own? Is it due to hypercorrection, or is it due to something else? To be more specific, /ɛəɹ/ in my dialect is never where /æɹ/ ought to be, but /æɹ/ is sometimes where /ɛəɹ/ is in British English. I'm not sure if I asked you this question before, but if I did, I don't remember your answer. I'm just wondering. Tharthan (talk) 19:37, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for your attention to the edits around trans and cis terminology. I have not edited Wiktionary before and am not terrifically familiar with the platform. (Thank you as well if it was you that unblocked me - it was very upsetting having my first edits result in a ban for "gibberish" when I explained all of them and provided citations!) The entries for "transmasculine" and "transfeminine" are still not quite accurate - in retrospect I should have checked elsewhere first for clearer definitions, as on Wikipedia "transfeminine" is defined as "an umbrella term describing individuals who were male at birth but identify on the female side of the gender spectrum" and on the Gender Wiki it is defined as "a term used to describe transgender people who were assigned male at birth, but identify with femininity to a greater extent than with masculinity". Both of these are accurate and much clearer. The main idea is that "transfeminine" describes feminine trans people who were assigned male at birth; it is not exactly a synonym either for "trans women" or for "feminine trans people" because the former is not inclusive of transfeminine nonbinary people and the latter is overly inclusive (i.e. includes feminine trans people who were assigned female at birth). I don't mean to heap more work on you but frankly I'm afraid that if I make the edits myself I'll just be banned for gibberish again. Best wishes.
Hello, please delete this page to make room for a move. I have copied the information. Thank you.Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 18:14, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
We don't even have a definition for Minderico yet. SemperBlotto (talk) 05:20, 19 June 2018 (UTC)
To answer your comment, I never found any evidence that Minderico is anything more than a cant like Lunfardo or Polari. Most of my research was done in 2013~2014. The only linguistic information I was able to find were glossaries. I never found anything about its phonological system or syntax, and the glossaries consisted of high-content lexical items. I also remember that one of the arguments someone made in favour of classifying it as a language was that Minderico is passed from father to child rather than being learned. This circumstantial evidence convinced me that Minderico is a cant, but I chose not to nominate the langcode for deletion before I had more information.
Incidentally, I was similarly stumped when I sought material on the so-called Cafundó Creole, but some authors did something much more shady: they described some syntactic and phonological characteristics of the “creole” that proved that it was different from Portuguese, but in fact those characteristics were also found in the low-prestige dialect of Portuguese spoken in the same area. — Ungoliant (falai) 18:19, 19 June 2018 (UTC)
I've generally only done that when it's stood out as notable and recurrently used over years in different contexts. "Individual racism" is an important concept especially now with pushes to narrow the definition of racism from its previously broad past to only refer to systemic/historic ones. Fake family units are a much more notable concept than fake motorcycle licenses. The latter has not come up as the main concept of several movies and present political issues.
SoP is a potentially very broad objection which could result in the loss of many useful pages if the basis was that we shouldn't recognize compound words and just let people figure it out for themselves. ScratchMarshall (talk) 01:36, 23 June 2018 (UTC)
Hey -sche, could I get you to comment on Wiktionary:Etymology_scriptorium#Kermanic_language_codes? Thanks! --Victar (talk) 21:05, 4 July 2018 (UTC)
Re: diff. Since you ask, yes: this terminology is still used in life insurance today. But it refers not to a policy but to a life assured (a somewhat subtle difference that only matters when discussing joint life contracts). I've edited life accordingly. :-) -Stelio (talk) 10:07, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
I suspect our bad Thai IP is now using a French IP- the style of their Verlan edits and their obsession with adding inflection templates to anything that moves are very suggestive. Unfortunately, my German isn't good enough to tell if their German edits make any sense. Please have a look. Thanks! Chuck Entz (talk) 13:35, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
{{abbreviation of}} in other entries) might make... but the haphazard interests of the IP and the quick arrival at that editor's favored topic of verlan, suggest it might not be a new user at all. - -sche (discuss) 14:10, 23 July 2018 (UTC)Thanks so much for your formatting assistance on Iroquois! I'd kept trying to mark it in the IPA template itself, to multitudinous error messages. 76.10.186.58 05:26, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
{{tlb}}?Following diff. Do you think that it is only to be used for multi-sense terms, provided the categorization is not different (which it is when for example writing rare or archaic)? {{lb}} is probably more visible for you, on the other hand this largely rests on old habits and we could deploy {{tlb}} further to make it more familiar and it or a predecessor probably should have been used much earlier. Fay Freak (talk) 10:11, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
{{label}}led on the sense-line even though it only has one sense — because terms in dialects could have or develop other senses that aren't limited to the dialect, like stoop or favor do (and having the label in the same place in disco fries and stoop seems helpful to me). Whereas, something like "flavour is a British spelling" is what feels like term-level information to me, since it's unlikely flavour would develop a sense that wasn't limited to British spelling.{{tlb}} on bally is arguably consistent with what the documentation of that template says. Maybe we should change the documentation, or maybe that's how the template has come to be used / how people want to use it and and I should change my ideas about it. - -sche (discuss) 08:11, 24 August 2018 (UTC)Yesterday, you renamed a template to be {{R:pi:Sai Kam Mong}}. Now, I had decided not to give it a name like that because it is not being used in a reference section (under '===References==='), but as an expansion of '#* Quotations' in WT:EL. I had half-expected to need a prefix 'Q:', but that is not defined. Are you sure this template deserves an 'R:' prefix?
If it does, there's the group of templates that invoke it that I should probably similarly rename. I'm making the texts that I have work very hard, but as at the moment I'm just using them to confirm the spelling of known words in a less familiar script, I don't think it is unreasonable to work them hard.
Alternatively, this template, but not its invokers, deserves the 'R' prefix because it can be used to define a citation by giving it no arguments. I don't think I will use that functionality, but it's there in case anyone needs it. Please advise. - RichardW57 (talk) 13:58, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
{{quote-book}} template when I saw that that was what it was aiming at, so I posted a note on WT:RFM. It looks like it should be formatted as a "RQ" template; I will try to help you with that. - -sche (discuss) 18:49, 9 September 2018 (UTC)Ya. It's late, and I'm feeling stupider than normal after a few longer-than-normal weeks IRL. I appreciate your patience. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 05:07, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
Hi, in this edit made back in March, you left a comment "will specify with glosses shortly" under the "Verb > Notes" section of use, referring to the senses that are pronounced /juːs/ rather than /juːz/. It seems you never got back to do that, with the result that the note is presently in a somewhat unclear state. It is also not clear what "respectively" refers to, and not very clear in what situations "use" in "did not use" is pronounced as /juːs/. I could try and fix it up myself, but perhaps you may remember exactly what you had in mind and may prefer to complete it yourself. Mihia (talk) 20:14, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
-sche, how should we move forward with mw:Extension:PageNotice? --Victar (talk) 20:30, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
Hi -sche, last week you reverted my edit on gender, but your explanations did not answer my questions, so I added more details. Can you give more details? I understand that you find it "a bit tricky to define all these words" but I does not seem to me to be a valid reason to revert a change trying to make the definition clearer (by removing its circular aspects). I'm tempted to reproduce my modification and then wait for you to provide appropriate explanations for the non-change. 09:33, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
Hey -sche. I just had a question about the pronunciation of the vowel "o" in different areas.
I understand that the general rule is that the vowel is pronounced as /oʊ/ in North America (aside from in the South, where it is pronounced /ɛʊ/, and aside from some parts of the Upper Midwestern and at least one area in the Western United States where it is pronounced /oː/) and generally as /əʊ/ in the United Kingdom (except in Scottish English, where it is pronounced /oː/, and except in wholly , where it is pronounced ). I know that there are variations on these, but they are beside the point here.
My question is this: have you heard of any North American English dialects that have /əʊ/ as an allophone of /oʊ/ depending on the environment that the sound is in? I ask this, because I notice this as being a natural part of my own speech (something that I am working to correct, actually). It's hard to explain, but like I said, in some environments, I pronounce "o" as /oʊ/, whereas in others, I pronounce it as /əʊ/. For example, unless I am being self-conscious, I pronounce go as /gəʊ/. With that said, /oʊl/ is always /oʊl/, never /əʊl/ (as far as I can tell) in my speech (although that may be because, when I was younger, I had a tendency to merge /ʌl/ and /oʊl/ to /oʊl/). There are other examples of this, but I can't think of any specific examples off of the top of my head.
Do you have any clue as to what might be going on? Tharthan (talk) 18:08, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
I found an edition of the work that contained the cite with different, more modern spellings (of other words) that was published by the Hakluyt Society. Hakluyt used that spelling often in most of his works. DCDuring (talk) 23:46, 28 December 2018 (UTC)