User talk:AryamanA/2015

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 explained (ELE) is a detailed policy documenting how Wiktionary pages should be formatted. All entries should conform to this standard. The easiest way to start off is to copy the contents of an existing page for a similar word, and then adapt it to fit the entry you are creating.
• Our Criteria for inclusion (CFI) define exactly which words can be added to Wiktionary, though it may be a bit technical and longwinded. 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.
• The FAQ aims to answer most of your remaining questions, and there are several help pages that you can browse for more information.
• A glossary of our technical jargon, and some hints for dealing with the more common communication issues.
• If you have anything to ask about or suggest, we have several discussion rooms. Feel free to ask any other editors in person if you have any problems or question, by posting a message on their talk page.

You are encouraged to add a BabelBox to your userpage. This shows which languages you know, so other editors know which languages you'll be working on, and what they can ask you for help with.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wiktionarian! If you have any questions, bring them to the Wiktionary:Information desk, or ask me on my talk page. If you do so, please sign your posts with four tildes: ~~~~ which automatically produces your username and the current date and time.

Again, welcome! —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 18:12, 30 July 2015 (UTC)Reply

You seem to have been copying definitions from other dictionaries. This is against our terms of service and possibly illegal. Please stop! Equinox ◑ 20:49, 30 July 2015 (UTC)Reply

Sorry! If I see a definition in another dictionary, how do I go about putting them in? Should I rewrite them or use a different source? Also, where is Webster's 1913 dictionary available? Again, sorry for the mistakes. Edit: http://machaut.uchicago.edu/websters, is this it? Aryamanarora (talk) 14:44, 31 July 2015 (UTC)Reply

Yep. Equinox ◑ 23:02, 5 September 2015 (UTC)Reply

Why did you remove the related terms section and the French section? SemperBlotto (talk) 20:58, 10 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

I did? I didn't notice, I'll add it right away. Sorry! --Aryamanarora (talk) 20:59, 10 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

I don't see a French revision in the article history... are you sure I removed anything? Aryamanarora (talk) 21:00, 10 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

You have just added it back. SemperBlotto (talk) 21:02, 10 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

That is what I was just about to tell you - it was an edit conflict. Aryamanarora (talk) 21:03, 10 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Copy and pasting example sentences from is a copyright violation (the dictionary is copyrighted in 1989) and against Wiktionary policies. DTLHS (talk) 15:49, 11 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Sorry! I seem to have a problem with copyright violations, I see know that it is still copyrighted. I will clean up my mess. Aryamanarora (talk) 15:52, 11 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

I have a question – is it okay to reference the dictionary? Aryamanarora (talk) 15:56, 11 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

It's fine to reference dictionaries. Definitions can't be copyrighted, but the exact wording of a dictionary entry can be. DTLHS (talk) 15:57, 11 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Before you spend too much time developing languages from works of fiction, you should look through the Beer Parlour month subpages for a discussion we had on the subject within the past year. The upshot of it was that most of the Klingon content we had was removed due to copyright concerns. I'm not sure about where Tolkien's work stands in that regard, but you should definitely check. Also User:-sche would probably be a good person to ask for advice, since he implemented that decision.

Likewise, before you spend too much time on "derived terms" categorization, you should be aware of a failed experiment along those lines that revolved around a template called "derv" (see Template talk:derv for a sample of the rather contentious debate over it, and Category:English derived terms to see some of the remnants of the old system). It was before my time, so I'm not familiar with the details, but it would be a good idea to discuss your ideas at the Beer parlour for advice and consensus in order to avoid the pitfalls of the previous one.

Anytime I see someone come in and start to seriously rearrange things the way you're doing, it makes me very nervous: our infrastructure is very complex, and even very good ideas can run aground on the need for consensus in a wiki such as this. Chuck Entz (talk) 21:36, 12 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Codecat told me about the derived terms categorization, so I understand that. For Quenya, I'm using an online dictionary called Eldamo, and it is licensed under Creative Commons 4.0, so I think there won't be any copyright infringement - if one person is able to document around 5-6k words for Quenya, and then release it freely, than Wiktionary should be able to do the same. As you can see on this talk page, though, I do have a bad history with naïve copyright infringement, so I'll stop indexing Quenya words until I'm sure that there is no chance of infringement. Aryamanarora (talk) 22:19, 12 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hello,

Re: diff. Does Hindi really have a neuter gender?? I think it can only be masculine or neuter feminine or some hard to determine gender or can be both masculine and feminine. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 12:30, 17 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

I agree, but it appears that the only such label in the category tree is neuter nouns. Perhaps we could add a label to the module called "masculine and feminine nouns"? Aryamanarora (talk) 12:32, 17 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Is it even necessary to have categories for nouns by gender? —CodeCat 12:53, 17 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

@Aryamanarora In translations from English, you can use ..|m|f|... one gender after another, in noun entries, |g2= for the second gender, only if there are really two genders. If you just don't know, leave the gender unmarked. I recently saw a Hindi dictionary with good gender marking, so I'm sure they do exist for the majority of nouns. Borrowings are known to have variations in genders. You can also do tests on the web, e.g. "नया + noun" or "नई + noun". Thus, पेन is a feminine, even if dictionaries may not tell you that, because the combination "नई पेन" (new pen) is very common and नई is a feminine form of नया. Sometimes it works to see, which adjective, masculine or feminine works with which noun. Shabdkosh dictionary often (not always) marks genders too. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 12:59, 17 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

@CodeCat The situation with Hindi genders is somewhat similar with the Dutch, where the gender is a bit hard to determine or can be both m and f but there is no convention to use "c" (common) or "n" (neuter) in such cases. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 13:02, 17 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Please see my changes to जीन्स (jīns). It's a feminine. I got the gender from Shabdkosh.

BTW, the automatic Hindi transliteration is not perfect here. It doesn't always drop "a" when necessary. There are some failed test cases in Module:hi-translit/testcases just to show that the module doesn't always cope. You can still use manual (hard-coded) transliteration, as long as it's standard (you can preview and copy removing "a" where necessary). E.g. फ़ावड़ा (fāvṛā) should be "fāvṛā", not "fāvaṛā". --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 13:22, 17 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Yep, I see. I use and for genders and definitions. They don't have many colloquial terms though, so I see how Shabdkosh can be useful. The first one is also licensed under Creative Commons, so we can use sentences from it. Thank for the explanations! Good to see that I'm not the only one working on Hindi.Aryamanarora (talk) 14:54, 17 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hello Aryamanarora. As a proper noun, shouldn't ναζίρ (nazír) be moved to Ναζίρ (Nazír)? — I.S.M.E.T.A. 23:30, 20 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Not sure, I don't speak Greek at all. I based the definition off of Greek Wikipedia, as there were several people with that surname. Aryamanarora (talk) 01:23, 21 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Aryaman, you shouldn't create entries in languages you know nothing about. That's how errors like this happen. The lowercase is an Ancient Greek word that appears to mean "Nazirite", but I'm not sure if it's declinable. The uppercase is the (modern) Greek surname. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 01:58, 21 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

@Aryamanarora, Metaknowledge: Thank you, both. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 13:38, 21 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

"I based the definition off of Wikipedia". If I had a dollar for every time that strategy has gone horribly, horribly wrong, I could retire... Chuck Entz (talk) 14:00, 21 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ @Metaknowledge: I don't think ναζίρ (nazír) is declinable. Maybe this will help. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 14:08, 21 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

My Greek is still awful, but that looks like it's in the nominative singular, and therefore unhelpful. I just suspect that it's indeclinable because I think Hebrew borrowings usually are, but I still wouldn't be brave enough to create the entry. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 14:13, 21 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

@Metaknowledge: " just suspect that it's indeclinable because think Hebrew borrowings usually are" — That was also my thinking. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 14:27, 21 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

@Metaknowledge: This "Koine Greek lexicon" also suggests that the word is indeclinable. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 14:39, 21 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for explaining the policy! I'll stay away from Greek from now on. Aryamanarora (talk) 19:20, 21 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hi Aryaman,

Thanks for your Hindi edits! Just remember that Hindi presence at Wiktionary is ridiculously low for the number of speakers. Hindi lemmas currently stand at 3,492 total and many basic, everyday words are still missing, many are badly formatted (some don't get to the category because of missing templates). One person can make a lot of difference in that. We have very small languages with tens of thousands words. I am not asking you to make many thousands of Hindi entries but just be aware of this. :) --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 22:46, 26 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

I know, it's kind of sad - some proto-languages have more words than Hindi on Wiktionary. I have plans to get a good dictionary, but I can't do much because I'm still a student - my mornings are full of classes. Maybe one day we'll have a decent Hindi dictionary here! Thanks for the motivation :) -Aryamanarora (talk) 22:59, 26 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

I want to add that I'm appreciating it as well. I bet Hindi is among the worst offenders in speaker-to-lemma ratio around here. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 01:22, 27 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hi Aryaman,

Do you think you can add Hindi particles मत (mat) and न (na)? --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 01:30, 2 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

Yep! Just did. Aryamanarora (talk) 01:50, 2 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

Thanks! There's some grammar difference between the two, perhaps usage notes could be used, could be used (otherwise the examples you gave are fine). Also, न is also a letter of the alphabet and a final particle, something like "isn't it?". --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 02:08, 2 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

You're welcome! Whoops, I forgot about the usage of न as a final particle. I'll add usage notes. Aryamanarora (talk) 02:10, 2 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

Don't forget to add the letter न :) --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 02:21, 2 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

Is this not just Sanskrit? —CodeCat 23:13, 20 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

I don't think so - see - it is an Indo-Aryan term. It's also listed in my Oxford Hindi-English dictionary as the Old-Indo-Aryan root of फूटना (phūṭnā, “to burst”). Aryamanarora (talk) 23:15, 20 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

The Sanskrit term is phuṭaṇu - which I think is फुटणु. Aryamanarora (talk) 23:19, 20 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

That dictionary is over a century old. How is it reliable? —CodeCat 23:19, 20 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

Well, it also happens to be the only Indo-Aryan dictionary I can access. The Oxford Hindi-English dictionary is much newer (1990's), and lists the same thing. Edit: It isn't a century old. The website lists "Copyright © 1962-1985 by Sir Ralph Turner"'. Aryamanarora (talk) 23:22, 20 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

Sometimes a new dictionary copies an old one, which is out of copyright. The year of copyright doesn't prove anything. Look at Wiktionary and how it has a lot of content from Webster 1913. Equinox ◑ 03:05, 21 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

To be fair though, about 80% of that content was yours, Equinox. --Stubborn Pen (talk) 00:54, 19 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

So what? We are very definitely not the first dictionary to absorb work from older lexicographers. W1913 did it itself. Equinox ◑ 07:31, 19 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

@CodeCat It appears that it is actually Sanskrit, Codecat. Sorry for any confusion I caused, I'll go ahead and add {{speedy}} to it. —Aryamanarora ^{(मुझसे बात करो)} 02:00, 20 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

https://hi.wiktionary.orghttps://dictious.com/en/साँचा:शब्दसागर - Entirely in Hindi, but the best dictionary I've seen out there. Wonderfully done with great sources too. Literally a सागर. Also, many words have several alternative spellings, so quick google-searches will give you the most used form, but the dictionary will often point to the main form itself.

https://hi.wiktionary.orghttps://dictious.com/en/हिन्दी_शब्दावली - English/Hindi. Trust very very very warily. Half of the words are bullshit or invented right there. In fact, I would look for at least 6 verifiable sources for any of these before believing them. Still worthwhile.

http://computerhindi.blogspot.com/ - This is bilingual but the some of the words are also clearly created. Just double check them.

http://gujaratilexicon.com/ - Outstandingly superb Gujarati-Gujarati section. English-Gujarati needs some work and Gujarati-English is tolerable. But the majority of words are only in the G/G part. Just look up a little Gujarati grammar before adding words. Also, many words have several alternative spellings, so quick google-searches will give you the most used form. Also really good at looking up Marathi and Hindi words in the Marathi-Gujarati and Hindi-Gujarati dictionaries that may not appear in other dictionaries.

http://www.englishnepalidictionary.com/ - Great for Nepali words

http://www.xobdo.org/dic/fire - Wonderful for Asami and several other languages spoken near where Asami is like Bodo, Mising, Garo, Hmar, etc. Kinda slow (rather slow). Lots of words given for Asami, so be sure to look through and find the ones that aren't direct Sanskrit loans that are never used. Also, triple check the sources for those other non-Asami languages.

http://www.steets.net/ - Decent for Sindhi in the Devanagari script. I know next to nothing about the language though, so I don't know if it's at all accurate.

http://www.khandbahale.org/ - Coverage of some minority languages. Handle with care and caution.

http://olam.in/ - fantasically clean site. Naturally, the Malayalam/Malayalam part is much better, but the English/Malayalam part is pretty solid too.

I'll tell you if I find any more. DerekWinters (talk) 06:41, 22 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

Thanks! I've also found some more resources, but these are really great!

http://dsal.uchicago.edu/dictionaries/ - 23 different Indian languages are covered here.

http://shabdkosh.com/ - Entirely contributor made, but still reliable. Also has genders.

I also have a paper dictionary: The Oxford Hindi-English Dictionary. Probably the most reliable one I can get.

Thanks a ton! —Aryamanarora ^{(मुझसे बात करो)} 14:56, 22 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

Be careful with the dsal.uchicago ones. I tried it with Kashmiri and it was total बकवास. The शब्दसागर and gujaratilexicon provide gender as well. And the Oxford Hindi-English must be wonderful. I should probably invest in it. DerekWinters (talk) 21:57, 23 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

Yah, the Sindhi one on DSAL is also untrustworthy. I go the Oxford one used on Amazon - great price! —Aryamanarora ^{(मुझसे बात करो)} 22:04, 23 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

Damn, I'll definitely have to invest now. DerekWinters (talk) 22:40, 23 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

ज़रूर! —Aryamanarora ^{(मुझसे बात करो)} 23:24, 23 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

... for the links on my talk page. I'm a really bad autodidact, but I'll try anyway! --Fsojic (talk) 19:46, 22 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

No problem! Ask me if you have any questions about Devanagari. User:DerekWinters is also proficient in it. —Aryamanarora ^{(मुझसे बात करो)} 20:11, 22 December 2015 (UTC)Reply