User talk:BigDom

Welcome!

Hello, welcome to Wiktionary, and thank you for your contribution so far. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• How to edit a page 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.
• 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 do this is to copy exactly an existing page for a similar word.
• Our Criteria for inclusion (CFI) define exactly which words Wiktionary is interested in including. There is also a list of things that Wiktionary is not for a higher level overview.
• The FAQ aims to answer most of your remaining questions, and there are several help pages that you can browse for more information.
• We have discussion rooms in which you can ask any question about Wiktionary or its entries, a glossary of our technical jargon, and some hints for dealing with the more common communication issues.

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! —CodeCat 11:48, 11 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

I didn't realise that template was on your user page, so I moved it without thinking. I'm sorry about that! —CodeCat 16:08, 14 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

No problem, you've probably saved me from moving it to the wrong place when it's finished! BigDom 16:13, 14 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

I'm wondering something though. Should inflection tables apply the Eifeler Regel? Or is it really just a natural part of the grammar that is independent of verbs? —CodeCat 16:18, 14 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

The 1st person perfect tense of accuséieren (to accuse) would be ech hunn accuséiert, but for drénken (to drink) it would be ech hu gedronk because of the Eifeler Regel, so the template needs to display something different depending on the first letter of the participle. I don't know if having separate templates is the best way to do it though. BigDom 16:27, 14 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Probably not, but I see I misunderstood what you were doing. I thought you were making the ending disappear on the verb forms themselves, such as accuséiere(n). I think for verbs with consonants that trigger the rule for words before them (like hunn) it would be better to add a new parameter. Because otherwise, you would risk having to duplicate every conjugation template - one for verbs that trigger the rule and one for those that don't. —CodeCat 16:32, 14 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Are you planning to use the same table for irregular verbs as well? If you are, then it might be better to put the table itself into a separate template called {{lb-conj-table}}, and call it from another one to provide the forms to fill in. —CodeCat 21:58, 14 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

The irregular verbs have extra forms such as a preterite tense in the indicative mood, and a simple subjunctive tense, so you can't really use the same table. In fact, creating a table for irregular verbs is going to be pretty tricky seeing as by definition they don't have the same patterns, and there's vowel changes going on. BigDom 22:09, 14 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

What I mean is to put just the table with empty cells in one template, and to give the cells their contents with another template. That way, the table looks consistent across the different variations. A lot of other languages like Dutch and Catalan have tables that work that way. —CodeCat 22:14, 14 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, I haven't done much work with templates so I don't know much about how they work. The table for irregular verbs would need an extra row in both the indicative and subjunctive, can you do this starting with the same basic table? It would need to be something like this: (ignore the 1, 2, 3 etc. these would nearly all need to be different) BigDom 22:25, 14 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

That would need an extra table, yes, unless you make the single one more complicated. But do all irregular verbs need that extra row? Because if not, then a third template would be needed that shares the same table as the regular verbs, which means splitting it would be good anyway. —CodeCat 22:49, 14 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

True, there are some irregular verbs that only have the regular tenses, just they have some irregular vowel changes. For example bannen (to bind) is almost the same as a regular verb except it becomes "bënns" rather than "bannt" in 2nd pers. sing. and "bënnt" rather than "bannt" in the 3rd person. But I see how the same basic table could be used. Like I say though, I don't have much experience with templates so I wouldn't know how to do it. BigDom 22:55, 14 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

I understand templates quite well but I don't know much about Luxembourgish grammar, so I guess we'll need to work together. :) —CodeCat 23:07, 14 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

I'm definitely not an expert on the grammar either but I'll try my best! I just realised that we'll need other templates for verbs with different auxiliary verbs. This is usually hunn (to have), but a few verbs use sinn (to be). So instead of hann, hues, huet, etc. they have sinn, bass, ass, .... BigDom 23:34, 14 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

That's more or less the same thing as with the Eifeler Regel. You could make separate templates but because the difference is independent of the different types of verb, you would need to double them every time. It would be easier to have a parameter to set it, like the German and Dutch templates already have. In Dutch you can use a parameter like aux=zijn to change the auxiliary verb, and the German templates have a similar way. So maybe something like aux=sinn or just aux=s will do. —CodeCat 23:45, 14 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Yeah, it definitely seems like having a basic table to start from is the best way to go. But for me it will have to wait until the morning, I'm too tired to start fiddling with templates now! Cheers, BigDom 23:49, 14 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Right, I've made a user page here to try and make a basic table for the other templates to call from. I just can't get my head around the #if template, specifically the aux=sinn part. I've left my attempt at parameter {{{10}}} and if you could have a look at it that would be appreciated becuase it just seems to always display sinn with the current syntax. I also added the future indicative tenses, because I can't work out why I omitted them in the first place. BigDom 13:53, 15 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

I just noticed that for the Template:lb-conj-regular it only needs two parameters rather than three. We could change all the current {{{1}}} into {{{1}}}en, and all the {{{3}}} into {{{1}}}. I think that the blank table should be all correct now so other templates would be able to call from it. BigDom 17:10, 15 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

For Luxembourgish nouns where there is a lowercase version on Wiktionary, could you include the template {{also}} at the top? For example Freed and Bijou, it would be {{also|freed}} and {{also|bijou}}. Thank you, --Mglovesfun (talk) 09:55, 16 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

OK, I will do that in future. Thanks for the tip, BigDom 09:57, 16 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

I for one (and I'm surely not the only one) am very grateful for your contributions here. Thank you. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:53, 19 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, it's nice to know the work is appreciated. I've really enjoyed my time improving the Wiktionary and hopefully I'll stay around for a while. BigDom 10:55, 19 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

I, too, thank you for your entries. Another minor request: When adding a parenthetical qualifier or context to a definition, like "uncountable" to (deprecated template usage) Kaffi's first definition, could you use {{context|uncountable|lang=lb}} rather than ''(uncountable)'', please? (I've already fixed (deprecated template usage) Kaffi.)​—msh210℠ (talk) 16:51, 20 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Yes, will do. Still learning the ropes so thank you for the tips. BigDom 17:16, 20 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Pleasure. Feel free to ask me any questions at my talkpage.​—msh210℠ (talk) 17:20, 20 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

how do u say superhero in lb?

Superheld, same as in German. BigDom 18:39, 6 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

and Held for hero, i guess?

Yeah, and Heldin for heroine. BigDom 18:47, 6 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

What sense of the word Stëft (pen) is it? If it's in the sense of a writing instrument, I could add a category for that. Thanks anyway. --Lo Ximiendo 20:31, 12 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Categories can be crucial when organizing entries, I think. --Lo Ximiendo 21:01, 12 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

How about a look at the Category:List of topics, visited by going from any category? It can be useful, I guess. --Lo Ximiendo 21:11, 12 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

I saw that you once removed the genitive line, but do you think it might be permissible to add it back with grayed links and a note that the genitive isn't used in modern Luxembourgish but might be encountered in old documents? I've no idea if they really might be encountered or how far back you'd have to go to find them, but we have done similar things for other languages. — — 19:41, 5 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Yeah, I don't see why it couldn't be added back if there was a note. To be honest, I think it would be very unlikely to find many examples of the written genitive case because Luxembourgish was only a spoken language until relatively recently, but it doesn't hurt to have the conjugations there in case someone needs them. BigDom (t • c) 19:49, 5 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Nifty business :) — — 20:16, 5 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Can you tell me what the Eifeler Regel is? And also, out of pure curiosity, how come you ended up adding Luxembourgish terms to English Wiktionary? --Rockpilot 17:51, 21 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Are you familiar with Luxembourgish phonology? If so, can you add the pronunciation of Jeeër? Thanks. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 15:40, 28 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

I'm never too confident in adding IPA for languages other than English, but if you go on the LOD and search for Jeeër there's a sound clip from a native speaker that you might be able to use. (Think you might need to have QuickTime player). Cheers, BigDom (t • c) 16:30, 28 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

OK. Thanks. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 16:34, 28 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

While used in cricket, I don't think this is a cricket only term per se, streaky in UK slang can mean lucky, as in due to good fortune; fortunate. I think a streaky boundary is a lucky boundary, which often means off the edge of the bat because a ball hit to the boundary off the middle of the bat isn't generally considered a luck shot. We should get SemperBlotto involved in this. Mglovesfun (talk) 17:35, 27 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

I see what you're saying, maybe another sense is needed for the "lucky" meaning. Obviously it does have other meanings apart from in cricket, but in cricket it does have the specific notion of a shot that comes off the edge of the bat for runs; I've not heard it used to describe any other kind of shot. It's also used in other dialects apart from just the UK in the cricketing sense as well, for example the quotes I found are from Australia and South Africa. See what SemperBlotto says, he's better qualified than me in these matters. BigDom (t • c) 17:40, 27 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

My New Oxford Dictionary of English (2001) doesn't have it, but does have two senses we lack. Mglovesfun (talk) 17:43, 27 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

I had always assumed that it referred to a shot in which the ball "streaked" away, often to the boundary. Who knows? SemperBlotto (talk) 18:47, 27 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

p.s. Do we need a bacon-related definition? Or is that covered by def#1? SemperBlotto (talk)

We probably could make a distinction between streaky as in streaks of colour and streaky as in the streaks of fat in meat. BigDom (t • c) 20:03, 27 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

Yes the bacon sense is the other sense the ODE has. The luck sense is definitely really, but colloquial and maybe regional. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:47, 28 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hi! You apologized for a translation mistake on WT:TRREQ. You didn't have to, translation is a cooperative process; you added the main contribution and I improved it (easy for me, I'm a French native speaker). Cheers. --AldoSyrt (talk) 07:27, 8 July 2014 (UTC)Reply

Salut. I just wanted to apologise to the person who'd asked for the translation in case he had used my wrong version. But you're right and thanks again for the corrections, I'll remember "se souvenir de" from now on! Cheers, BigDom (t • c) 08:33, 9 July 2014 (UTC)Reply

Hello. To be more precise. If you want to use rien , you can say je ne me souviens de rien or je ne me rappelle rien or, very usual but faulty for pedantic people, je ne me rappelle de rien. If you want to use pas , you can say je ne me souviens pas, or je ne me le rappelle pas, or very usual but faulty for..., je ne m'en rappelle pas. Cheers. --AldoSyrt (talk) 13:43, 10 July 2014 (UTC)Reply

Ah, je vois! Thanks, this is all really helpful especially the ones you say are common but not technically correct because they're the ones that confuse learners as we never get taught to use those verbs that way. Merci, BigDom (t • c) 17:14, 10 July 2014 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I got the Luxembourgish word for ex (Latin letter) from Omniglot, and I'm not sure if the majuscule letter or the miniscule letter is needed. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 16:20, 24 August 2014 (UTC)Reply

Hi, sorry for the delayed reply. I'm not 100% sure to be honest but would imagine that as a noun it will be capitalised like you've done it. BigDom 13:27, 28 August 2014 (UTC)Reply

I wonder how you could deal with adjective forms that are also verbs, such as zéien of zéi? --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 13:23, 9 April 2015 (UTC)Reply

I'll put them under separate etymologies later this afternoon; the verb being related to German ziehen and the adjective as simply an inflected form of zéi. Will add pronunciation too. BigDom 13:27, 9 April 2015 (UTC)Reply

Now how about méi of méien? --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 15:29, 10 April 2015 (UTC)Reply

What you've done looks good to me :) BigDom 15:31, 10 April 2015 (UTC)Reply

From what I've read in the conjugation table, méi is singular while méit is plural. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 15:33, 10 April 2015 (UTC)Reply

Quite correct, I've added a bit more information at méi to show that it is the singular imperative. I haven't bothered to write entries for many conjugated forms of verbs in Luxembourgish so that's why there's a couple of these examples around. Thanks for your help adding rhymes etc. by the way. BigDom 15:40, 10 April 2015 (UTC)Reply

I added the shell for the Luxembourgish verb "reien". Have some fun with it. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 05:39, 11 April 2015 (UTC)Reply

P.S. When it comes to simple present verb forms such as séis, do you mean present indicative or something else? --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 11:12, 11 April 2015 (UTC)Reply

Have added details at reien. Yeah, present indicative. BigDom 15:36, 11 April 2015 (UTC)Reply

I added an entry for an orange link verb, rueden. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 06:32, 24 April 2015 (UTC)Reply

P.S. Fill in the blanks if you could. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 06:32, 24 April 2015 (UTC)Reply

Done. Cheers, BigDom 16:46, 24 April 2015 (UTC)Reply

Is the 3rd person singular present indicative of optrieden (and other verbs derived from trieden in general) supposed to be *trët op or *trëtt op? --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 00:14, 25 April 2015 (UTC)Reply

trëtt op is the correct form, have fixed the conjugation table. Thanks for spotting the error. BigDom 05:25, 25 April 2015 (UTC)Reply

Then what about *trëts op or *trëtts op? I also created Category:Luxembourgish verbs needing inflection and expanded Category:Luxembourgish adjectives needing inflection. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 06:50, 25 April 2015 (UTC)Reply

It's trëts op, the double "t" in trëtt is orthographical (double consonant or consonant cluster = short vowel). Everything in the conjugation table at optrieden now is correct. Thanks, the entries that don't have inflection tables were generally either created before the table templates existed, or the existing templates simply don't work for them. I started working on replacements in my user space ages ago, but never got round to finishing them... maybe I will soon. BigDom 06:55, 25 April 2015 (UTC)Reply

At least I placed the pages listing the templates you are or were working on, at least to refresh your memory. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 10:15, 27 April 2015 (UTC)Reply

Yeah I saw that thanks, maybe it will jog my memory. BigDom 18:01, 27 April 2015 (UTC)Reply

I feel that the appendix of the Icelandic Swadesh list could use an update. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 11:15, 29 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

I've added missing links and pronunciations, was there anything in particular you felt needed updating? Cheers, BigDom 11:36, 2 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Nothing in particular, thank you. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 11:40, 2 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

You transcribed Lux. v- with /v/ in several words that have /f/, particularly with the prefix ver-. I've fixed them. No problem! Just be a bit more careful: When the word is obviously from French or Latin, then v will be = /v/, but with Germanic words it will be /f/. In case of doubt, just leave it :) Kolmiel (talk) 16:10, 28 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

Since you're interested in Luxembourgish etymology: you should check out this one. It's not beautiful, but amazing :) Kolmiel (talk) 23:13, 30 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

...Woah. —JohnC5 02:50, 31 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

That is pretty amazing, thanks for letting me know! BigDom 06:39, 31 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

Unfortunately I am a mono-linguist with some fluency in sailing polyglot (primarily late 19th early 20th) et un peu français.

One thing I can suggest: French is a language à la mode; it is dominated by 'stylish' ways of saying something. The term seems to be entre + jeu. My guess is l'entrejeu is a fashionable slang for multiple things such as intermission, mid-game, interruption, and possibly play or gambit. Each use might be idiomatic to time, region, and/or social setting. - Amgine/ ^t·e 16:24, 28 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

Hey. If you're ever looking for some more Icelandic to expand on, check out Category:Tbot entries (Icelandic). ATM, 240 very simple entries which have plenty of room for expansion. --Pickyevent (talk) 15:00, 27 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Thanks, I'll have a look at that category. Currently going through all the Icelandic terms and adding as many pronunciations as I can so no doubt I'll come across a few of them anyway. Cheers, BigDom 15:15, 27 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

Down to 166. The countries were easy, so I did them. --P5Nd2 (talk) 15:49, 27 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. BigDom 15:52, 27 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

If you're interested, User:DTLHS/cleanup/lemma_categorization#Icelandic. These entries are very old and usually do not have any headword templates. DTLHS (talk) 23:02, 23 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

Cheers, I'll have a look. Currently going through alphabetically (nouns at the moment, verbs next) so will probably come across many of them anyway but any left at the end I can sort out then. Thanks, BigDom 05:52, 24 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

Hi,

Sorry, I have removed your pre-1918 reform Russian spellings, e.g. глаго́лъ (glagól), etc. from WT:RE:ru. In my opinion, they have little value but they can be added by some other enthusiasts. To your question: "is accent, at least sometimes, part of the spelling, or only used for learners?" The acute accents are used in dictionaries to indicate the word stress and normally are not used in running texts, except in the literature for young or foreign learners or when it is required to avoid ambiguity. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 03:49, 8 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Atitarev: I oppose removing pre-reform spellings from the request page. If you don't want to create them, then just leave them there. If they're attested, they shouldn't just be removed. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 04:05, 8 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

There's been hardly any work on pre-reform spellings. I remove them because nobody does them (not because I oppose to having them) and I've been almost the only one who looks after the request page. User:Wikitiki89 did most of the entries in Category:Russian pre-1918 spellings. It's discouraging to see many incomplete entries in WT:RE:ru, I don't have time for all alt forms but I want to help those who are genuinely interested.--Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 04:19, 8 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Atitarev Hi there. Unfortunately, the IP who added глаго́лъ and the associated question you have so kindly answered was not me, although as a learner I appreciate the explanation. The several edits I have made to WT:RE:ru have all been while I was logged in. FWIW, I have no opinion on whether pre-reform spellings should be included or not. BigDom 06:53, 8 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

Ah, thanks. Didn't read all the diffs properly on that page. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 06:56, 8 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Metaknowledge, Atitarev: Maybe we shouldn't remove them, but I agree with Atitarev that it can be very discouraging to have a whole list filled with trivias or very marginal content. (reason why I don't really spend much time at WT:RE:fr or WT:RE:grc). I myself am sort of interested in obsolete spellings, but I'll willingly concede that entries for that are not nearly as important as new lemmas.

A middle ground could be to put them in a collapsing box at the bottom of the page. --Per utramque cavernam (talk) 09:40, 8 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

In case you haven't added WT:RE:is to your watchlist, I added four different requests there. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 09:04, 24 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the heads up, I'll have a look. BigDom 09:21, 24 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

I've done three of them (left skeggmeiti for now as I couldn't find enough usage to pass RFV) - do you mind me asking where you found these words as they're rather obscure? Cheers, BigDom 10:38, 24 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

The Icelandic version of Wiktionary. You're welcome. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 11:22, 24 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the careful work you've been doing on entries that include taxonomic and/or vernacular organism names. I watch the categories for those so I see all additions or removals. For most other contributors I have some work, usually not too much, to do after checking. Your contributions seem great. You are doing the work that I had always hoped would get done: contributors adding the macrofauna and macroflora of the places where various languages are spoken.

I would appreciate any thoughts or questions you have now or may have in the future about vernacular or taxonomic organism names entries (formatting, wording, templates, priorities, sources, philosophy etc.). DCDuring (talk) 17:09, 9 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the kind feedback. I noticed when I first started adding plant names that you made a few edits to my entries - I tried to take those on board so it's good to hear that I've saved you some work! I'll have a think about some comments and get back to you. BigDom 18:25, 9 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hello. I appreciate all of the edits you've made to our Icelandic entrie. I'd like to bring your attention to the fact that Icelandic doesn't feature phonemic vowel length (see ). Therefore, words such as brúsi are correctly transcribed as either or /ˈprusɪ/, but not */ˈpruːsɪ/. I hope you'll remember that. Thanks in advance. Kbb2 (talk) 06:18, 4 January 2019 (UTC)Reply

Good morning! Thanks for pointing this out, I was actually aware of this but decided to stick with the way that I (and @Krun, who has been around even longer than me) have been doing it for years. With more than 9,000 Icelandic entries already using the current transcription system, it seems a bit unnecessary to me to change all of these in a way that makes little to no difference to the average user (if anything, it might make things more confusing). Happy to discuss it further though if you honestly think this is a route worth taking. BigDom 07:25, 4 January 2019 (UTC)Reply

I apologize for not replying sooner.

You're right that this doesn't change much for an average user, but I don't think that it's going to make things more confusing. It's perpetuating the idea that slashes and brackets are somehow interchangeable (they're not).

We've already discussed something similar over a year ago, and that wasa regarding Luxembourgish. I find it unfortunate that you chose to disregard what I said and you still misuse the slashes. It's not a big deal but this isn't correct, strictly speaking. Kbb2 (talk) 16:21, 6 February 2019 (UTC)Reply

RMaung (WMF) 14:34, 9 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

RMaung (WMF) 19:14, 20 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

RMaung (WMF) 17:04, 4 October 2019 (UTC)Reply

Hi. It's the issue of aesthetics. I simply like to follow a certain pattern of editing and I'm pissed off when other users don't do it, so I try to impose it on them. Idc if they like it or not, just follow the pattern or I'll kill myself, thx. Shumkichi (talk) 23:08, 26 December 2019 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for all the new Welsh entries. Diolch yn fawr! Keep 'em coming. Llusiduonbach (talk) 13:17, 7 February 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Llusiduonbach Dim problem. Thanks for all your edits to my new entries too. It's been a while since I've done this much Welsh so making the most of this spurt of motivation! I'm not as confident adding the IPA so I'll leave that to your good self if that's OK. Cheers, BigDom 13:20, 7 February 2020 (UTC)Reply

@BigDom Sure! Happy to help. Llusiduonbach (talk) 13:46, 7 February 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Llusiduonbach Your recent addition of all these prefixes is making me wonder whether the pen- part some of the words I've just created (e.g. pendrwm) might be better classified as a prefix too. BigDom 13:57, 7 February 2020 (UTC)Reply

@BigDom Hard to know when a word can be classed as a prefix sometimes, isn't it? I usually go with something "official" - usually Geiriadur Prifysgol Cymru or any good grammar books I have. That said, I did create aml- because although I've not seen it listed as a prefix, it's used so often in new words to translate "multi-" that it's surely become a prefix by now. I guess I'd err on the side of GPC unless I've got a good reason like that not to. Llusiduonbach (talk) 14:55, 7 February 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Llusiduonbach It is indeed. Your explanation makes sense though so happy to stick with that. There's a few more red-linked prefixes and suffixes from the entries I've created today for you to get your teeth into too if you fancy it. BigDom 16:58, 7 February 2020 (UTC)Reply

Hey, I have a multifaceted question with respect to Luxembourgish hamsteren. I'd suppose it was borrowed from German just like the Dutch word? Would you know whether WW I would be a particularly plausible period for borrowing it and do you know around what time the Luxembourgish is attested? ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 08:24, 13 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

Hi Lingo. I'd expect it came from German like you say. The two earliest Luxembourgish dictionaries, the Lexikon der Luxemburger Umgangssprache (1847) and the Wörterbuch der luxemburgischen Mundart (1906) don't have the word, so it's definitely borrowed and WWI seems reasonable but I don't have an exact date. The Luxemburger Wörterbuch (1950-1977) does have hamsteren but doesn't give a direct German translation (it does for most words, including Hamster itself), but says "wie ein Hamster zusammentragen, und zwar besonders in Kriegs- und Notzeiten verbotenerweise sich Lebensmittelvorräte verschaffen". BigDom 09:17, 13 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, that may well be as much support as we can get from dictionaries. I've added a basic etymology (not mentioning the WW I hypothesis) and included it in the German descendants section. Do you know of any searchable online text corpora in Luxembourgish? ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 15:08, 13 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

I don't know of one, but if there is it might well be somewhere on this site. Cheers, BigDom 10:29, 14 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

Any idea about the usage examples at haldinn? Darren X. Thorsson (talk) 01:06, 21 November 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Darren X. Thorsson I mean, they're real collocations/idioms (see here and here for dictionary definitions). Þungt haldinn seems pretty common () but I can only find a couple of hits for vera haldinn skemmdarfýsn (top right p.22) and (bottom left p.5)]. I'm not convinced they're the best usage examples for the sense "held", seems like the ux's would belong better on entries for the idioms themselves. But until those exist, I suppose they're not doing any harm. BigDom 09:00, 21 November 2020 (UTC)Reply

Hi, Dom! As a Christmas present, what do you say to getting a new set of tools on this wiki? You'd make a decent admin. I know you've only been here for 9 years, so you are a n00b... Kilo Lima Mike (talk) 18:35, 24 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Kilo Lima Mike Hi there. Sure, why not - like you say I've probably been around long enough! Cheers, BigDom 18:46, 24 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

I'm not going to nominate you myself, because I'm actually a sockpuppet account of a 5-time admin rouge who has been blocked over 500 times, so some users are smart enough to oppose everything I do. And I want you to pass the vote, so I'll try to subtly get someone else to do it for on my behalf. Kilo Lima Mike (talk) 19:56, 24 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

Yeah I kind of guessed who you were (I have been here 9 years after all...), but yeah that's cool, look forward to it. Cheers, BigDom 21:04, 24 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

I'd be up for nominating you for admin, although there are quite a few admin votes going right now so maybe it is better to wait a little. ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 20:10, 10 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

Yeah no rush at all, it's not a big deal either way. BigDom 07:15, 11 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

My offer is still on the table, of course, and this month seems a better time. Do you want me to start a vote? If so, at what date? ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 19:01, 17 February 2021 (UTC)Reply

I'm happy to go for it, yeah. I won't be going anywhere for the foreseeable future so whenever is convenient for you works for me too. Cheers, BigDom 11:49, 18 February 2021 (UTC)Reply

All right, you can accept here; don't forget to check the languages and time zone and also enable the email function if you haven't already. You can also remove the {{premature}} template when you're accepting the nomination. ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 16:35, 18 February 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hey, man, thanks a lot for creating all these entries for verbs. I would never expect that there were (and probably still are) so many BASIC verbs missing. Unfotunately, Polish editors seem to have focused too much on proper nouns at the expense of other categories (well, ok, we've already added a lot of missing nouns together, which is great, but there are still such poorly developed categories as adjectives and especially adverbs). Anyway, I'm just writing to let you know that I'm impressed with your work on verbs as this is such a strenuous job, and verbs are probably the most complex grammatical category. Shumkichi (talk) 15:20, 31 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Shumkichi Hi there, you're very welcome. Speaking of basic verbs, it's funny you should send me this just as I was putting together zbić. All the words I find are either words I come across while reading (and I'm definitely not at the stage of reading really advanced stuff yet) or terms used in their dictionary definitions, so yeah there are a lot of words in daily use which we don't have yet. But we'll get there - thanks for your work too, between us I think we're definitely filling in a lot of the gaps in Wiktionary's Polish coverage! Cheers, BigDom 15:44, 31 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

How vulgar would you say that zrobić z dupy jesień średniowiecza is? Is it too vulgar to be used in a speech? ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 20:07, 10 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Lingo Bingo Dingo: It's not a phrase I'm familiar with TBH. Maybe @Shumkichi might know better? Cheers, BigDom 07:14, 11 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Lingo Bingo Dingo I mean, this phrase sounds really funny to me because I believe it was not popularised by "Pulp Fiction" (although it was very popular back then from what I've heard) but rather by the series "Świat według Kiepskich" (which is a great satire on the Polish reality with some surreal humour; once very influential). Anyway, I wouldn't say this is even a legitimate idiomatic phrase since it's rather rarely used and mostly for comedic effect (there was a time when many young people were repeating all the funny things said in the series). I don't find it particularly offensive but if someone said it to me in a normal conversation, I would immediately think of the series and assume that the person is trying to be funny. It's certainly not comparable to the traditional proverbs like "Nosił wilk razy kilka, ponieśli i wilka" etc., which have been used for hundreds of years, and such set phrases can be basically treated as single words as they have a single meaning on their own (formulaic language anyone?). "Zrobić z dupy jesień średniowiecza" is certainly not to be found in any dictionary as it is a product of our modern pop-culture. I would compare it to this American stupidity of "I'm lovin' it" - well, McDonald's is unfortunately very popular around the world but would you really say that it has the same status as e.g. "One swallow does not a summer make"? The problem with such phrases as "zrobić z dupy jesień średniowiecza" and "I'm lovin' it" is that they don't seem to be universal but are rather products of certain times that can quickly fall out of use. I'm writing all of this to say that I don't understand the idea behind creating entries on set phrases (even the very old ones like "one swallow does not a summer make") - lemmas should be instances of single grammatical categories such as nouns and verbs IMO. But yeah, it's not really vulgar; at worst, it's just very colloquial and potentially evokes certain pop-cultural associations. I would maybe say it to someone my age as a joke but certainly not to older people xd Shumkichi (talk) 07:43, 11 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Shumkichi Thank you for the explanation. It doesn't look like a suitable candidate for Foreign Word of the Day. ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 17:38, 11 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hi!

Would you mind creating the rest of the entries from these 2 lists:

- prepositional phrases,

- adverbial phrases (although this one is significantly longer)?

They are really easy to make, it's basically copy-pasting with some usage notes added occasionally. I see you've already created some yourself, so I tried to cover the rest of them but even though it's easy, it also becomes kind of tedious after some time. I'm only asking you because you seem to be a little more patient than me when it comes to creating all the boring stuff that's missing xd Anyway, I think they'd be a nice addition, especially since most of them are very commonly used and thus are pretty basic; and, as you can see, we still need to add a lot of adverbs and prepositions. If you don't have time for that, that's fine, I'll probably create the rest of the phrases myself later, at least the prepositional ones as that list isn't very long and I've already covered almost half of them. Shumkichi (talk) 19:34, 2 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Shumkichi Hej. Yeah, sure. I'll start chipping away at them (and any more I come across in the synonyms etc). Cheers, BigDom 19:55, 2 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hi, you are now an administrator. Please add yourself to the table at WT:A. — surjection ⟨??⟩ 09:32, 5 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

Re: Numberguy6 getting autopatroller rights - autopatroller rights are always handled via WT:Whitelist, where one admin nominates and another grants the rights (or objects). So please use that in the future; in the case of Numberguy6 I think some people might have objected (he is a quite careless editor, and was blocked for that just a few months ago). — Mnemosientje (t · c) 14:52, 25 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Mnemosientje Fair enough, I didn't know about that whitelist page (they should really tell you this stuff when they make you an admin!). Feel free to revert the rights change, I just did it because I see him edit pages in my watchlist all the time and they always seem pretty good. Cheers, BigDom 15:28, 25 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

No problem, and you're right that he's a good editor in some languages (afaict), but unfortunately lacks caution when editing in languages he is not (or only passingly) familiar with. Whitelisting can ofc still happen when these problematic edits stop or become truly negligible. — Mnemosientje (t · c) 15:43, 25 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hi.

I've added some entries and their approximate translations (as much as I could find but obviously not every single of them) to Requested entries (Polish), and I thought that maybe you'd like to expand it by adding some verbs? Just in case you'd like to add an entry in the future but don't feel like doing so at the moment, and that could help you easily find it later so that you won't forget about it, right? Or maybe someone else will create it, idk. I think I've made it look quite aesthetic, btw.

PS. Oooh, congrats on becoming an admin. I somehow missed that that happened, lol. Shumkichi (talk) 17:44, 5 April 2021 (UTC)Reply

Cześć. Oh cool, thanks for the heads up. I'll watchlist the page so I remember to keep an eye on it. I've actually already got a whole list of words on my laptop that need adding, just words I've come across while reading or in the dictionary definitions of other words that I'm adding. So I may add those to the page if I get round to it. I like what you've done with the brief translations, makes it easier if someone else wants to have a go at adding any of the entries. Cheers, BigDom 17:50, 5 April 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hey, I don't know who I should say this too - I joined the discord and mentioned this there too without much response, but I feel like one of the only few missing templates for verbs are perfect verbs ending with -ić. You're an admin so I was hoping you'd either know how to add it or know who could. Thanks in advance for any response :) Vininn126 (talk) 12:58, 1 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

• Also verbs ending in -ść, such as mieść or wymieść. Vininn126 (talk) 13:15, 1 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Vininn126 Sorry, I don't monitor the Discord but yeah I completely agree that we need a template for the -ić (-ię, -i, -ią) verbs. I don't so much agree on the mieść/wymieść/pleść style verbs, they seem genuinely irregular to me but in theory I guess we could make a template. I can have a go at making it, I'm not really an expert with templates but I have recently made the perfective -yć and both impf/pf -eję templates, so happy to try. Cheers, BigDom 17:53, 1 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

• Great, thanks! Vininn126 (talk) 22:35, 1 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Vininn126 I've had a go at making a template, you can see the results here. Feel free to play around with it and see if the conjugations come out correctly. There are 2 mandatory parameters unlike the other Polish verb conjugation templates - I had to do it that way because of all the letter alternations (s -> sz, b -> bi, c -> c, etc). It can't cope with a few fringe cases (e.g. zalesić, uwięzić, rozgałęzić) but I think it should catch 99% or so. @Shumkichi just in case you're interested too. Cheers, BigDom 17:05, 6 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Looks great, thank you! I hope it wasn't too much work. Btw. verbs like "mieść", "pleść" etc. are actually regular and all belong to the 1st conjugation (which is defined by the 1st and 2nd person singular endings in the present tense, i.e. -ę, -esz). The superficial irregularities are due to the completely normal alternations in the bases, and as you've probably already noticed, they all alternate between -(i)e- and -o-. So the endings are all regular but I think it would be somewhat hard to create a template that would cover all the alternations and palatalisations, and there are a lot of them, not only in the first conjugation. Oh, and there are, of course, alternations in the consonants like "pleść - plotę" but "nieść - niosę" to be taken into account, too. Shumkichi (talk) 17:23, 6 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

The tricky bit was catching all the consonants but not too much work! Ah fair enough, thanks for the heads up. Yeah looking at SGJP and Doroszewski they're all Class 11 verbs (which also includes things like wlec, ciec, wieźć, trząść and loads more sundry verbs). Looks like it would be a nightmare to make a template for them TBH. BigDom 18:13, 6 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

@BigDom Dang, thank you so much! i'll keep an eye out when I use it, especially for verbs containing a -l and -ł stem. But this should be super useful for future verbs. Vininn126 (talk) 19:04, 6 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

No problem. Well, if you both think it's ready to use I'll move it over from my userspace into the template space. Cheers, BigDom 19:57, 6 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

I did some reading about verbs such as zamieść. Turns out -ść verbs do follow one regular pattern, depending on if they are a t, d, or s stem. I did a write up in my sandbox, I don't know if that would be too difficult to make a template (s?) for, I suppose it might. My thought was we could have a imperfective/perfective template for -ść verbs and add an argument for its appropriate stem. Hopefully the system would be able to apply vowel mutation naturally. Incidentally, the conjugation on pleśc is wrong (it should be plotłem, not plótłem), and I'm not sure which argument is wrong in the form. Vininn126 (talk) 21:33, 26 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Edit, idk if the -źć and -c verbs could be included in this. You can see it all in my sandbox.

@Vininn126 Hi there. You're right, these are all Conjugation XI verbs. I'll try and knock together another template soon. Like you say it will definitely need a parameter for the stem consonant, but we'll see about the vowels (it's just the usual o -> e/ó stuff I think). BTW, I've fixed the conjugation at pleść too - there's an extra parameter called altpasttense for when the 3.m.s.past is different like this. Cheers, BigDom 06:25, 27 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

I wasn't sure if it was worth it to do so, or what. Figured I'd at least ask, appreciate the effort and the help fixing the conjugation. The altpasttense argument is some new vocab for me, very useful. Cheers. Vininn126 (talk) 06:55, 27 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Vininn126 I've had a first pass here. The vowel stuff isn't as easy as I hoped (unless I'm missing something). For example:

• there's plotę/plecie but then mogę/może so the -o- -> -e- vowel change doesn't always happen.
• some verbs only change the vowel in the 3rd person singular past and anterior participle e.g. zaleźć/zalezę/zalezie/zalazł(szy). At the moment the template can't cope with this.
• the stem consonants of the -óść verbs seem to act differently for some reason? For example, with the -d stem in odwieść the i.p. = odwiedziono (soft), but in zabóść it's zabodzono (hard). Not sure how to make the template deal with these nuances. Are there any rules to tell when it should be hard and when it's soft? To be honest, if it's only the pretty rare -óść verbs that act like this, it's probably not worth coding in the complexity. BigDom 10:04, 27 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Vininn126 OK, I've added a parameter to cope with the -leźć style verbs. prząść and trząść should be fine now too. The other tricky ones are przeć/trzeć style verbs when the prefix has an epenthetic -e-, e.g. zetrzeć -> starł. I can't think of a way to do this apart from explicitly listing every possible combination in a #switch block, e.g. obed=obd|oded=odd|...|zep=sp|zet=st etc. @Shumkichi you may be interested again too. Cheers, BigDom 12:13, 27 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

wow you're fast. I'll try it out on a few established verbs later. I can imagine that those would be trickier. I don't know if it being an -r stem helps anything. It's sorta hidden by more regular verbs. Thanks again. Vininn126 (talk) 12:34, 27 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Great, thanks! You can find the template and the documentation here: User:BigDom/Template:pl-conj-ap-XI. Any feedback welcome, good or bad. And maybe a better name before I move it into the main Template space? BigDom 13:35, 27 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Vininn126, Shumkichi I've also made User:BigDom/Template:pl-conj-ap-VII and User:BigDom/Template:pl-conj-ai-VII (examples here). Again, there may be a more user-friendly name but VII is accurate if not memorable. BigDom 20:08, 27 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Great work. Thank you very much. This should save a lot of time. And I think it's one of the last ones to be made, too. Vininn126 (talk) 09:02, 28 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

It seems this user is keen on superseding /ʀ/ in Luxembourgish. I can't say I care much although I dislike anons forcing though such changes, but do you have an opinion on that? ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 10:38, 12 June 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Lingo Bingo Dingo Sorry, been away for a few days and not seen this. Just had a look through the contributions and at first glance I'm not keen on it. It's been a few years since I worked on Luxembourgish but as far as I know, it's never realised as /r/, so I don't see the point in saying it's phonemically /r/ but just always phonetically - just seems unnecessarily complicated. Don't recall seeing any sources using it this way either to be honest. BigDom 16:17, 13 June 2021 (UTC)Reply

I don't know about the range of realisations in Luxembourgish, but sometimes /r/ is chosen as a shorthand if there are a lot of variants. Anyway, feel free to revert, the IP should have brought the change up in the Beer Parlour or another appropriate discussion forum. ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 16:40, 13 June 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hey. If you're ever looking for some more Lithuanian to expand on, check out Category:Tbot entries (Lithuanian). ATM, 67 very simple entries which have plenty of room for expansion. Roger the Rodger (talk) 22:11, 12 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

Cheers for the heads up, will get some of these sorted out. BigDom 19:40, 15 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

Just 5 to go Wubble You (talk) 19:12, 25 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

Good work! I did a few and then forgot about them to be honest, been back on Polish recently. BigDom 19:15, 25 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hello. Do you think it's possible that you could add the IPA transcription for around 50-55 names of municipal administrative centres of Lithuania on English Wikipedia or here? I'd like to transliterate these names into the alphabet of my native language according to the Lithuanian pronunciation and have been trying to make sense of its sound system, but I'm not sure if I can. --Potapt (talk) 21:40, 17 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Potapt Hi there. I'm not an expert either but happy to have a go at some of them. I'll have to check whether Wikipedia uses a slightly different transcription system than we do here (they do for most languages). Cheers, BigDom 11:32, 18 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

Thanks a lot! Cheers, --Potapt (talk) 12:33, 18 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

I'm currently working on digitizing the orthographical dictionary. It's gonna take a while, but I assume this is something that us editors'd find useful? when I finish it, how would I go about sharing it? Vininn126 (talk) 14:05, 2 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Vininn126 I'm not sure to be honest. Depending on the format, it might be something that could go in an Appendix here, or if it's a scan then you could upload it to Wikisource (but I've never used it so not sure how easy that is). Sorry to not be of much help! BigDom 14:50, 2 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

@BigDom I'd probably be able to convert it to whatever pretty easy. as of now it's gonna be a spreadsheet. I'll look into the appendix, that seems like the best place to do it. I also have a spreadsheet of phrases I might be able to add. Vininn126 (talk) 14:55, 2 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hey, I was talking on the discord, and my attention was drawn to the possibility of automating IPA, hyphenation, rhymes, etc into one template, a la this. I'm not so good with template editing, and I'd be willing to help, but I would also need your help. I think it would be worthwhile, as it would probably save us a lot of time. Vininn126 (talk) 11:27, 6 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Vininn126 Seems like a good idea. This isn't the kind of template editing I'm used to (we're going to need Lua modules, whereas I've only ever done old-school Wiki markup templates) but happy to have a go, it'll just take a bit longer. Looking at the Finnish one, we're going to need Module:pl-pronunciation and Module:pl-hyphenation. I'll have a read through the Finnish equivalents and see if I can work out what the code does. Cheers, BigDom 04:59, 7 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

Great. Please ping me if I can help in anyway. I'm going to read through that one as well later this evening, so I can try and wrap my head around what's going on. Vininn126 (talk) 07:46, 7 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

I just realized, would it be possible to add a hyphenation slot into this? Vininn126 (talk) 11:15, 10 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

PS (sorry) but also apparently rhymes should be getting a |s= for syllable count. So we've added a bunch of rhymes without that (my bad), but would be able to fix that with this template? Vininn126 (talk) 11:40, 10 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

PPS (should have just made this one big post) We should update the IPA module to include /j/ after palatalized consonants (except before x or before /ɕ/, /ʑ/ etc). @Shumkichi and Tashi both agreed, I can do that later, just wanted to run that by you, too. Vininn126 (talk) 12:57, 10 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

All sounds good to me. I wasn't aware of the syllable count parameter either, but yeah there doesn't seem much point going back through the ones that are already done, we can just incorporate it into this template. And yeah, agree with the /j/, definitely closer to the real-life pronunciation. BTW, I've only got as far as reading through the code - it's going to be a bit of a learning curve but I think we'll figure it out. Probably not going to get much done this weekend though, got visitors! Cheers, BigDom 13:07, 10 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hey! My friend might be willing to help with this template. We might create a sandbox and such tonight or very soon. Have you made any template pages yet? No worries if not, I just don't wanna double create. Vininn126 (talk) 17:51, 22 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hello! Excellent, I tried to keep up with the changes to the IPA module and I have to say I'm not quite up to speed with Lua yet. No, not started anything yet so feel free to go ahead and create them. Thanks for getting him/her to fix the wewnętrzny/zewnętrzny pronunciation btw! Cheers, BigDom 18:01, 22 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hey, I was thinking, would it be possible to make a template for verbs with vowel stems such as kuć, bić etc? I'm not sure lać would fit, as I don't recall if all -a stems have a vowel shift in them, but i think this would be one of the last conjugations templates. Cheers, Vininn126 (talk) 11:22, 16 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hey. Yeah I've been putting off doing the class 10 template because I think it's going to be a bit fiddly (it does include lać and also verbs like zdjąć and wszcząć, but for now I might ignore these and just stick to the verbs that end -ję, -jesz, etc) but I'll have a crack at it and see how it goes. Cheers, BigDom 13:11, 17 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Vininn126. I've put together a first version of the templates: {{pl-conj-ap-X}}/{{pl-conj-ai-X}}. At the moment they can only be used with bić, lać, etc. I need to think about what to do with the -ą-/-ią- verbs as they can have either -m- (e.g. jąć -> jmę, jmie) or -n (e.g. kląć -> klnę, klnie). But those are only a small proportion of the Class 10 verbs; the current templates should be able to cope with the majority hopefully. Cheers, BigDom 09:37, 18 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

Thanks! Hopefully that should be basically most of the verbs covered. Vininn126 (talk) 11:33, 18 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

I have responded. 70.175.192.217 00:55, 11 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hey, we need a way to save verbs that only do it in the third person. It could be done either through a conjugation template, but I was thinking maybe we could modify the verb header template to allow for verb forms, like the English page does? Pinging @Shumkichi, @Hythonia, and @KamiruPL for their input. Vininn126 (talk) 10:52, 18 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Vininn126 Hey. Sorry, not been editing for a few days so only just seen this. Yeah that would definitely be useful. I think the easiest way would just be something like {{pl-conj-defective}}, not sure about the header template way unless we were going to do that for all verbs and not just impersonal ones. But a new template should be easy enough to knock together. Cheers, BigDom 06:31, 22 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Vininn126 Hi again. I've coded up two templates this morning: {{pl-conj-ai-impersonal}} and {{pl-conj-ap-impersonal}}. I've used the new one at mdlić so you can see what it looks like. For now I've left out the pluperfect as none of our other conjugation templates include it, but it can easily be added in if you think it's useful. Cheers, BigDom 11:41, 24 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

Great. I agree about the plurperfect - especially given that it's entire predictable. Thank you Vininn126 (talk) 11:43, 24 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

Can we get a ban on this user? Vininn126 (talk) 08:00, 31 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

Permanent block, please. User:Wiccasiddle is continuously vandalising others' talk pages. —Svārtava 08:02, 31 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

Just been infinite-blocked, Metaknowledge beat me to it. Cheers, BigDom 08:04, 31 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hi!

You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:14, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for the cleanup. I was really unsure how to handle a verb like that. There might be one or two more like that floating out there. I'll add them like that in the future - cheers! Vininn126 (talk) 09:59, 20 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

I think you made a mistake here, right? This is an adjective entry, but you used the adverb headword template. 37.110.218.43 13:48, 25 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Yep, a little typo, good spot! Thanks for the heads up, fixed now. Cheers, BigDom 13:50, 25 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Normally I wouldn't do this but given the potential impact of the changes suggested on my talk page, I'd really appreciate if you could read the most recent discussion and provide your input. Vininn126 (talk) 13:41, 6 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Vininn126 Sorry, was away for the weekend and just catching up. Will go and have a read now. BigDom 07:27, 8 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Just so you know, Derbeth seems to have made the bot able to automatically add audio to pages but has turned it off while Ben does some work (scroll down to the part where Derbeth chips in). It's of course not a bad thing to add the audio, but it will also be done by a bot at some point, if you'd prefer focusing on other things. Vininn126 (talk) 12:41, 13 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Actually, I think there was a bot run recently which converted all lower-case c's to capital ones. 83.9.216.60 21:09, 18 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Fair enough, I must have missed that. Thanks for the heads up. BigDom 21:12, 18 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

This is actually comparable isn't it..? Asking since you listed the adverb katastrofalnie as comparable. Acolyte of Ice (talk) 12:19, 15 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

Yep, thanks for the heads up. Meant to add that when I added the adverb but forgot. I've updated it now. Cheers, BigDom 12:21, 15 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

They don't stop comin! I was wondering if you could take a look at my Polish cleanup wishlist and give me some input, particularly for #1 and #7. Thanks! Vininn126 (talk) 19:45, 13 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Vininn126 Keep them coming! I think I agree with your verdict for #1 - I'm not particularly fond of the wording but it does seem more in line with the more template-driven approach we've taken in the etymology section recently so I'm not opposed to it. #7 - I don't like this at all to be honest (assuming with the basen example that we would lose the first definition and just keep the templated one?); having to click through to the noun entry to find the English meaning of the word just isn't user-friendly compared to just having it on the adjective's entry like we do now. BigDom 19:56, 13 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

So in our definitions you prefer the information to be there. What if we were able to keep the information like with abdukcyjny, whereby glosses are turned into t='s? It saves slightly on space. We have a mix of templates like this, it seems to me - for female equivalents, we don't use the template (which I don't like either, even though it does do automatic categorization), but we do use it for dim's and aug's. Personally, I think we'd be able to cut down on a lot of excess duplication of information with it, but also sometimes we might want to be more exact, in which case maybe it's better not to. I've also asked Hythonia, who likes it, as well as Tashi, who doesn't care (btw, I don't know if you use discord, but there's an official one, if you want, feel free to join.

Also, I asked non-editors what they think about seven, and most prefer it. (They also prefer the surface analysis approach, particularly option 3, with a full stop). Vininn126 (talk) 20:03, 13 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

Yeah I definitely prefer the information to be there, and to be honest I would probably prefer it if diminutives/augmentatives had the translation there too. Using the t= is fine IMO if it means the translation appears in the definition line. Interesting that non-editors prefer the lack of information - out of interest, are they Polish speakers (who would already know what the noun means) or English speakers? Since we don't really have the concept of relational adjectives in English, I would have thought it would be fairly inaccessible to the average reader, needing an extra click through to find the translation. I don't have discord BTW but thanks for the invite! BigDom 20:13, 13 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

I asked both Polish speakers and non-Polish speakers, and they both preferred the template. t= could also allow us to link to the term, like I did with abdukcyjny in my sandbox, and you can also do it with dim's and aug's (which I do when it seems obscure). Yeah, the closest thing to a relational adjective is an attributive noun. I can definitely see the benefit of having the example there. I also think collocations can sometimes illustrate that well (some day we'll get nonu+adj collocations but baby steps). Vininn126 (talk) 20:18, 13 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

agreed Shumkichi (talk) 21:28, 13 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Hergilei Do you have any thoughts as well? Vininn126 (talk) 12:09, 14 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

I generally support the proposals except #14 (not sure what nyms are) and #7 which I have no strong feelings about (I would probably leave things as they are but don't care really). Is it possible to add a parameter so that we can instruct the IPA module to treat something as a syllable, e.g. syl=po, and the module can syllabify the rest of the word on its own? Also, does anyone think we should indicate "optional animate" nouns (or, as linguists call it, "facultative" but that may not be understood by the average reader). Hergilei (talk) 19:15, 14 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Hergilei Adding prefixes to the module is on my wishlist as well. Nyms are things like hypernyms, synonyms, etc. Also to #7 people seemed mixed, and I think both have upsides. I'm not sure if we'll switch. And you mean a word like baton? Vininn126 (talk) 19:26, 14 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

Not just prefixes. To clarify, I would like a parameter that can handle words like adrenokortykotropina if I type something like syl=tro.

or for deprecjacja: syl=pre,cja

I support the nyms proposal.

As for words like baton, I was thinking something along the lines of:

pl-noun|m-in-an-opt which would automatically categorize the words in a new category: Optional animate nouns

And if possible, a clarification in the declension table:

batonu (inanimate)

batona (animate)

Furthermore, some masculine personal nouns have two options for the plural, e.g. grajek

grajkowie (neutral)

grajki (belittling)

Would it be possible to somehow include such clarifications in the declension table?

Hergilei (talk) 21:22, 14 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

Ahhh, well, with r for example, it should be possible to have it attached to the previous consonant. As for other liquids like l, ł we'll see. But adding r to the previous consonant is also on my wishlist. As to the declension table - I think that's possible and it sounds interesting. It would be nice to be able to have one declension table instead of 2-5. Vininn126 (talk) 22:34, 14 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

Would there be any value in something like this for our verbal phrases? Vininn126 (talk) 14:30, 4 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

Actually, it was so easy I went ahead and made it. Vininn126 (talk) 17:12, 6 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Vininn126 Sorry, I was away for a few days without my laptop. Looks good! Cheers, BigDom 05:27, 7 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

(Notifying Hergilei, Tweenk, Shumkichi, Wrzodek, Asank neo, KamiruPL, BigDom, Hythonia, Tashi, Luxtaythe2nd, Max19582): and also @Benwing2

With the removal of the Male/Female categories, there is probably more use in switching Polish entries over to using {{female equivalent of}}.

Before, BigDom and I weren't as big of fans, but I know Shumkichi was. I always found it a bit odd we treat feminine words differently, however the categorization would be nice. Thoughts? Vininn126 (talk) 15:38, 15 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

I'm also in favour of keeping the male/female distinction. It has its history in Polish language in which male words are treated as default. But I ain't gonna fight over it of course yet we have to find a way to somehow categorize it, imho. Tashi (talk) 16:35, 15 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

I can live with swapping over to the template, as long as the |t= parameter is used so the reader doesn't have to go to another page to actually find out what the word means. We have to remember that most people looking up a word are learners who have come across it and want to find the English translation; we shouldn't make them go round the houses to get what should be a simple answer. BigDom 07:33, 16 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

I think I can agree to that. I also am still wondering about {{relational adjective of}} and using the t= parameter there. It should be fairly easy to absorb it. Do you have any thoughts on that template, @Benwing2? Vininn126 (talk) 08:15, 16 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

@BigDom, Tashi and others: See Wiktionary:Requests for deletion/Others § Undeletion of Category:Female people and Category:Male people. J3133 (talk) 11:17, 16 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

Would you mind putting {{lit}} on the multiword entries? My dream is to one day have SOME sort of etymology on all lemmas. Vininn126 (talk) 10:41, 21 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

Yeah sure, no problem. BigDom 10:43, 21 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

Do you think it might be better to have it as "black-browed person"? I know PWN lists specifically "man", but part of me wonders if we should treat it like other masculine/feminine pairs. Vininn126 (talk) 14:58, 23 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

Yep, fine by me. I didn't check any similar entries when I created it, to be honest, or I'd have probably just done that at the time. Cheers, BigDom 14:59, 23 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

While we're at it - I'm also not 100% on the coordinated term vs antonym on red/dark meat. I can buy either, it just feels weird to say they're strict antonyms. Maybe I'm going against the current too much here. Vininn126 (talk) 15:03, 23 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

Yeah, I wasn't sure either. I went for antonym because that's how it's listed at red meat, but I can see the arguments for both. Happy to leave it as it is for now. BigDom 15:04, 23 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hiiiii

Thank uuuueueuueueueeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee for adding all those "-ość" ending nouns, adjectives and adverbs, you know what I mean uWu They are very easy to create and it's probably the easiest way to increase the number of words, so it's good that someone is taking care of it xd But I've got a small request: could you from now on add "Derived terms" and "Related terms" sections to literally every such word you create? Even if the "Etymology" section already has the adjective from which the respective adverb and noun are derived, pls add the adjective at the bottom (see for example what I did with "wyjątkowość", "wyjątkowy", and "wyjątkowo" + "wyjątek" as the ultimate root/base word for the adjective as an intermediate root for the adverb and noun). I know it's annoying but this will make it easier to navigate between words and tidy them all up. And if you're sometimes not sure whether to add something to "Related terms", I recommend typing parts of these words (like "wyjąt" and then "wyjątk") into the PWN dictionary and a list of words should pop up. Of course, sometimes they are formally unrelated etymologically, especially when it comes to loanwords that come from different sources, but I'd say it works 90% of the time :3 Shumkichi (talk) 12:42, 22 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hi there. Yeah no problem I'll try and remember to add them in the future. Cheers, BigDom 13:21, 22 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

I see you've also taken to adding these ones! If you're wondering what I'm doing with the 1807 one, it's tricky. You can pretty easily find PDF's of it e.g. on Polona, but there's no easily linkable online version, it seems. For now I just have a link to Polish Wikisource which is incomplete, but if you click a page you can see it anyway. I should update the template to include the volume as a parameter that then prints a different year, and also maybe a page parameter. Vininn126 (talk) 09:45, 21 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hello there BigDom, I recently came across a corpus of Lithuanian-language newspapers that were published in the United States and Vininn126 told me that you would be interested in it. The corpus is hosted at spauda.org and currently covers the time period from 1886-2020 and appears to be consistently expanding. The search page allows you to search individual newspapers as well as specific time frames. I hope that it can be of help to you in any of your further Lithuanian editing. Take care. —The Editor's Apprentice (talk) 21:14, 14 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

@The Editor's Apprentice Hi there. This is great, thanks. I've dabbled in Lithuanian (mostly when I was travelling around there a couple of years ago) and still add the odd word from time to time so this will definitely come in handy then. Cheers, BigDom 06:48, 15 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

Good to hear! —The Editor's Apprentice (talk) 22:39, 15 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hi BigDom, I see you've worked on Icelandic verb templates. Specifically w1. I was trying to understand its inner workings because it doesn't give the correct tables for setja and selja, but couldn't. Any idea how that could be done? Or is it better to add bespoke templates? —Caoimhin ceallach (talk) 21:39, 22 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hi there. It's been a few years since I looked at that template to be honest. I will try and have a look and see if I can figure it out. Cheers, BigDom 20:52, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for letting me know, it seems like it's not recognizing digraphs Vininn126 (talk) 14:57, 3 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for all those Polish verb templates. They are proving invaluable as I build infrastructure for Silesian. Vininn126 (talk) 13:26, 16 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hi, the source is the 1906 Wörterbuch der Luxemburgischen Mundart, digitised as part of the LexicoLux project. You can read the front matter here if it interests you. Unless there's a particularly strong argument not too, let's pop it back, with a usage note indicating it is an old orthography. It was remiss of me forget to add that at the time. Cheers, Helrasincke (talk) 19:28, 13 December 2023 (UTC)Reply

• Hi @Helrasincke, thanks for the link. Agreed, let's put it back in with the reference and a note to say it's an obsolete spelling. Cheers, BigDom 09:29, 14 December 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hey, I've seen you pop up a few times again in RC, glad to see ya! Let me know if you have any questions about changes I've made to Polish. Vininn126 (talk) 10:43, 8 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thanks! Never really meant to go away, just fell out of the habit but got inspired for some reason this morning. I already noticed a couple of new things like the new pronunciation and adjective declension templates but if you spot anything I've missed feel free to edit the new pages and I'm sure I'll pick it back up again. Anything you think I should definitely be aware of? BigDom 10:49, 8 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

You caught the major one. I tried updating WT:About Polish with all the major stuff too. Essentially, we now have major dialectal support, including etycodes for the dialect groups. At some point I'd also like to rework the noun module/verb conjugation (also to allow support for dialects), and yeah, the new pronunciation module, which has a lot more functionality. We're still deploying it on all pages but it's on most. Vininn126 (talk) 10:52, 8 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

That's great, thanks. I'll try and read up over the changes but it all looks good from what I've seen so far. The new pronunciation template especially seems a lot smarter than the old version! BigDom 10:57, 8 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hope you'll stick around! Vininn126 (talk) 10:57, 8 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Yeah, hoping to - maybe not as prolific as once upon a time (different circumstances IRL) but not planning to disappear for a year again. Nice to hear from you and I'm sure we'll see each other around! BigDom 11:01, 8 October 2024 (UTC)Reply