You said quickly could only modify verbs. In the phrase, "... quickly made sandwich...," made is an adjective. Joe Webster 11:06, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
In British English, quickly-made would be correct (with the hyphen for clarity to show that the two words form one compound adjective). Dbfirs 22:32, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
American Heritage has made as an adjective. Joe Webster 11:35, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
I notice you've been adding an "Ergative verb" category and tags to a bunch of verbs. I'm 80% happy with that.
I like the category, and can imagine some things it might be useful for. I love the fact that, almost by accident, it's serving to tag a bunch of verbs whose entries need a huge amount of work done on them.
The part that makes me 20% unsure is the definition tags. Even if the tag linked to the definition of ergative verb, it's still such an arcane term as to be useless to 99.99% of our users. I think that the best form for most of these verbs to take will eventually be pairs of transitive and intransitive senses, with example sentences. For example:
It's probably a mistake to try to abbreviate that as something like
That's way too terse and unintelligible for most readers, even if it had a link to an explanation of "ergative".
I haven't seen anything you've done so far where tagging the definition made the existing entry worse. But please tread carefully, and please don't change any "transitive" or "intransitive" tags that might already be in an entry -- at least until there's a community consensus on the right way to handle verbs like this.
Thanks for taking on this highly unglamorous side of Wiktionarying.
-- Keffy 00:45, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
I deleted this, since there is no such thing as a "pluralization template". We use the "noun inflection template", and there is already a category for words that lack this template. --EncycloPetey 01:36, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
I would strongly recommend Cat:Alternative spellings instead, since that is the standard header form we're supposed to be using (WT:ELE), not that it's always used of course. --EncycloPetey 05:02, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
{{alternative spelling of}} template in the definition line is not intended to be the primary way alternative spellings are handled. There's a page somewhere that lays out this policy, but there's also bucketloads of debate lying around. The feeling is that each spelling potentially has it's own etymology, own quotations, and own regional usage, so each gets its own full page crosslinked via the ===Alternative spellings=== section. --EncycloPetey 07:17, 12 February 2007 (UTC)Please do not invent new "part of speech" headers without discussing them first. The appropriate header for what you are doing is Symbol. --EncycloPetey 18:23, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
We decided some time ago not to use Noun Phrase as a POS header. See WT:POS. --EncycloPetey 01:06, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
As you seem to be into mathematics - can you help with Kelvin function? It is being discussed in RfV. SemperBlotto 23:03, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Aren't these also adverbs? "We walked lakeward." or "the path led lakeward". SemperBlotto 22:35, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
Language Lover, please sign your comments with the four tildas (~~~~). Thanks. Atelaes 05:48, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
Please sign your comments with ~~~~! The links and timestamp are important, both so people can find your user and talk pages, and so that archiving works properly. Robert Ullmann 11:40, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
...to Wiktionary:Votes/2007-03/BD2412bot. Cheers! bd2412 T 04:35, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
Can we get you aboard the admin-ship? I'll start a vote for you if you want - I reckon I am up to it now. --Keene 22:56, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi. I removed "batlike soul" from Wiktionary:Wanted entries, as I was unable to find any idiomatic meaning with which to define the term. I determined that it was coined by James Joyce in his 1916 A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man, where he wrote:
Virtually all other references are analyses or allusions to the line by Joyce, but there is nothing in that line to indicate that "batlike soul" is a set phrase, or that "batlike spirit" or "batlike conscience" would not mean essentially the same thing. In other words, a "batlike" soul is nothing more than a soul that is batlike, although "batlike" may allude to any number of characteristics. Cheers! bd2412 T 13:52, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for keeping track of imperfections in the ELE. We long-time regulars often overlook omissions in policy that result from our innovations. --EncycloPetey 04:25, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
{{ergative}}You made a bit of a pigs ear of this template the last edit made to it. I have reverted the changes. Please do not leave templates (or other articles) in a mess, either revert your last change or ask for help in editing it. DAVilla is the person you need to speak to about editting context labels, also {{cattag}} was superceded by {{context}}. Enjoy editing.--Williamsayers79 12:04, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Hey,
Are you still around? Your contributions seem to have dropped off a lot — I'm hoping you're just busy with real life or something, and that we haven't scared you off or anything?
Your amazing ability to cite every single entry on WT:RFV is going missed. :-)
—RuakhTALK 23:38, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi, Language Lover. I saw you added a "Reciprocal (for verbs)" section to WT:AJ. I don't specifically object to such a new heading, but the established process for significant changes to policy pages is to hold a WT:VOTE before altering the policy. So, no offense was intended, but I reverted that addition.
I suggest you announce why you think such an addition is appropriate at Wiktionary talk:About Japanese#Reciprocal (for verbs), then assuming there are no major objections, proceed to a vote, then alter the page. I know it may seem like bureaucracy, but the feedback typically generated by such process usually is quite helpful. Rod (A. Smith) 15:55, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
How do you imagine using that category? Rod (A. Smith) 06:20, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
{{en-noun}}, (2) add {{en-noun}}, and then (3) add Category:English nouns lacking inflection template (which appears to be a synonym for Category:English nouns that lack inflection template). Could you please point to an example entry where you've used the category so I can be sure I understand your process? The reason I ask about this category is that it is just a redirect to a maintenance category. The maintenance category indicates entries to which editors should add {{en-noun}}, not entries to which editors have already added {{en-noun}}. That is, entries in that maintenance category should be removed from that category when they acquire {{en-noun}} and ideally, the category will some day be empty. Does that make sense? Rod (A. Smith) 18:48, 9 August 2007 (UTC){{en-noun}}, the human of course may add the Category:English nouns that lack inflection template or some redirecting category (assuming category redirection works as expected). Assuming you are a native English speaker, though, I expect you usually know the plural form, so I expect it would be just as easy for you to add {{en-noun}}. If so, we can expect the redirecting categories to remain empty and we should be able to delete them safely. Does that seem accurate or would you prefer not to add {{en-noun}} (or {{plural of}} for plural entries) but to add the category instead? Rod (A. Smith) 06:52, 11 August 2007 (UTC){{en-adj-lacks-template}} is a great idea. The redirecting categories, however, are not so great, since they don't work very well with the MediaWiki software. —RuakhTALK 16:31, 11 August 2007 (UTC)Hi, it doesn't look like Wiktionary:Votes/2007-07/Japanese Verb Reciprocals is going to pass. There was a lot of activity on the voting page a few months ago, but now even I have slowed down my pace of new votes. It's just too tough getting everyone to agree. Anyways, do you mind if I close it early? DAVilla 06:56, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
Hi. No prob. It's been on my "do" list for a while. I'm also going through all the adjectives adding the "derived" verbs and nouns, as most of them are -ness nouns or -th nouns. It's an interesting vocab set, in many aspects. Algrif 14:32, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Please do not make unilateral changes to Wiktionary policy pages. Any substantial edit to a policy page requires a formal discussion and vote; see WT:BP#Noting categories in WT:ELE. --EncycloPetey 10:27, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
Your "personal motivations" subpage has a pretty misleading name; moving it might help dissuade silly stuff hapenning to it again. Don't know why I thought it was you, logged out, editing your subpage...I should have looked at the diff. --Connel MacKenzie 07:48, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
P.S. Your Special:Emailuser link doesn't work.
P.P.S. I think that Wiktionary:What Wiktionary is not takes a dim view of such personal pages (but I could be wrong). SemperBlotto 08:02, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
I've just added this verb, but I'm not sure if it is ergative or not. I am glad you have made this category by the way. As a TFL in my spare time, it is useful for teaching verbs that do not need a passive voice, and that can be coupled with won't meaning refuse to do, as in My car won't start or the window won't open etc. Algrif 15:36, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
I'm assuming you were trying to put this at Wiktionary:Votes/The Joy of Categories? Regards --Keene 14:12, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi there. If you don't know the meaning of a word, you should add it to the requests - not add a stub with no definition. In this particular case I don't think it is even English - try the "language not known" list. Cheers. SemperBlotto 12:14, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
Could you please format your entry like the example, and include your tally of the score? If you need another example of the format, the Wiktionary:Easter Competition 2007 has several such entries. --EncycloPetey 05:13, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Why not move the entry for Jedi mind tricks to the singular? 84 raw g.b.c cites for that, many not books from "Star Wars series". Should meet RfV more easily than most Star Wars terms. And then we change the redirect to a "plural form of". You can put quotes on both pages if you need. DCDuring 03:44, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Sure, but that was a difficult one to define. --EncycloPetey 05:49, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Is it used attributively ? I should have a look at MS Excel, Word, Outlook etc - I would expect similar usage. —SaltmarshTalk 15:47, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, some "-phyte" words may be limited to a rather specific scientific group in society, I'll admit. If you feel that they are not really in the general vocabulary, I won't feel hurt if you delete the article :DDD Remember, this isn't wikipedia, ha ha. Phantommine 17:25, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi LL, I was wondering if you would be interested in adminship? You've been here a couple of months more than me, and been online a bit more regularly than me. Can I nominate for adminship, or do you want to wait for a bit more experience? I appreciate your support for me in my attempt, and figure that you ay have a better chance, with plenty of useful additions and useful threads contributed to in the Project: namespace. Are you keen? --Keene 13:53, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi there mathematician. I can't find a definition of translog - does it mean transcendental logarithm (doesn't get me much further). I'm coming from the Italian adjective translogaritmico and have found funzione translogaritmica in the Italian Wikipedia - but there is no link to the English wiki. Cheers. SemperBlotto 16:51, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
You have stepped into an extremely serious issue; please enable email. Robert Ullmann 02:43, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
I have reinstated the sense, as it seems to have support from a number of established users (on the rfv page). However, I have retained the rfv tag on the sense, so if you would like to see the sense last more than a month, I suggest you get crackin' on finding some cites. In the future, the BP is probably a better place to get community attention than WT:VOTE. -Atelaes λάλει ἐμοί 22:02, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
I've been finding many more good citations for number two pencil than for number 2 pencil. So, if we need to cite a non-SoP sense that has these "associations", it's much more likely to be under "two" than "2". DCDuring TALK 21:31, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
I'm not sure that (for all of these words) the definition you are giving is the best or only possible sense. See, for instance, the entry I just created for (deprecated template usage) batsmanship, which is a skill/quality rather than a state/condition. --EncycloPetey 01:04, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
I've deleted this, as it's not a word or character or anything relevant to a dictionary, it's a control character for Unicode. Any questions or comments, I am of course open to them. -Atelaes λάλει ἐμοί 06:19, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Compare Category:English verbs which are their own past participle and Appendix:English verbs with base form identical to past participle. Why not just have the appendix? DCDuring TALK 23:20, 18 October 2009 (UTC)