User talk:Linshee/Archive2

Hi, I noticed you added a Proto-Norse section to ᚴᚢᚦ using the Skåäng Runestone text as a citation. However, judging from that Wikipedia article, the Proto-Norse part of that inscription consists only of the Elder Futhark harija leugaz; the rest is said to have been added in Younger Futhark during the Viking Age and thus would represent an Old Norse text, thus not counting as attestation for Proto-Norse. (A 6th century Swedish text representing a Christian burial would hardly be expected anyway: Scandinavia was still solidly pagan in that period.) If my thinking is indeed correct, my next question would be: are there any attestations of the term that are indeed from the Proto-Norse era which might be used to support a Proto-Norse entry? — Mnemosientje (t · c) 12:49, 14 June 2019 (UTC)Reply

@Mnemosientje: That's a mistake on my part; I'll convert it to just Old Norse. Anyways I did a quick search through the Runenprojekt database, which only has Proto-Norse inscriptions, and the only things relating to "god" were from *ansuz. Julia ☺ ☆ 21:43, 14 June 2019 (UTC)Reply

Alright, that solves it. Thanks for checking! — Mnemosientje (t · c) 12:24, 15 June 2019 (UTC)Reply

I think derivations from a name within one and the same language are usually treated as derived terms rather than descendants, just like how other words are treated (diff). ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 09:02, 18 June 2019 (UTC)Reply

Now you and I both know that "I definitely won't have any time for Wiktionary" was a big lie. Would you like to go for it again? Equinox ◑ 15:53, 24 July 2019 (UTC)Reply

@Equinox: Not a lie per se, just underestimated my ability to procrastinate via Wiktionary and still get my schoolwork and everything else done. Anyways I’d like the admin tools, so I’ll go for it. Julia ☺ ☆ 18:59, 24 July 2019 (UTC)Reply

Cool. A new vote is here: Wiktionary:Votes/sy-2019-07/User:Julia_for_admin. Please sign/accept it. Equinox ◑ 04:36, 27 July 2019 (UTC)Reply

Congratulations! You're now an admin. Chuck Entz (talk) 14:58, 11 August 2019 (UTC)Reply

I've undone your bad edits here. 1. Don't add blank levels in descendants trees. 2. Don't add add cardinal branch levels to derived terms (|der=1) in descendants trees. --{{victar|talk}} 02:53, 2 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

@Victar: I feel like blank levels are common practice. How is my edit any different than the trees at *xšwiptah, *ȷ́ʰánuš, *grā́mas, etc.? Julia ☺ ☆ 04:18, 2 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

I can't speak for other languages, but I can tell you for (Indo-)Iranian, that is wrong. Please desist. --{{victar|talk}} 04:22, 2 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

Re: *xšwiptah, adding blank levels is fine when it groups two descendants together. What you did was made a gratuitous line of ancestors for a single descendant. --{{victar|talk}} 04:51, 2 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

Hi Julia, are you aware of this: www.cimbern-kuratorium-bayern.de/index.php/online-woerterbuch.html ? Looks citable to me (even though I haven´t yet figured out the language codes they use). --Akletos (talk) 14:16, 4 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

@Akletos: Thanks for this, I didn't know about it. And the "Sprache" column seems to be for the three main dialects: Luserna, Sette Comuni, Thirteen Communities. Julia ☺ ☆ 01:55, 6 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the explanation; now I understand... Perhaps somenone can create a reference template that links to the respective lemmata. Would it be ok if I created some Cimbrish entries based on this Wörterbuch? What about the diacritics? They use e.g. acute and grave accents that are sometimes the only difference between two dialects; should they appear in the wkt entry, too? But I don't want to interfere with your work, so feel free to decline. --Akletos (talk) 07:46, 6 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

@Akletos: Yeah I don't own Cimbrian lol. Also I can make a reference template. Regarding the diacritics, I would just go off what's given there. For the source I'm working with now (Martalar) I remove the graves on ⟨i⟩, ⟨a⟩, and ⟨u⟩ because they're just a dictionary spelling to indicate stress (there's a pronunciation guide at the beginning). Julia ☺ ☆ 15:12, 6 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

@Akletos: Template is here: {{Template:R:CDW}}. Julia ☺ ☆ 15:37, 6 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

@Julia Since your an admin could you help in stoping this IP user "37.154.234.181", (s)he been adding images without any sense to random pages. 𐌷𐌻𐌿𐌳𐌰𐍅𐌹𐌲𐍃 𐌰𐌻𐌰𐍂𐌴𐌹𐌺𐌹𐌲𐌲𐍃 (talk) 03:41, 6 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

@Holodwig21:  Done, thanks. Julia ☺ ☆ 03:53, 6 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

@Julia Your Welcome! but he seems to have returned unfrotunately, this time with "37.154.168.159". 𐌷𐌻𐌿𐌳𐌰𐍅𐌹𐌲𐍃 𐌰𐌻𐌰𐍂𐌴𐌹𐌺𐌹𐌲𐌲𐍃 (talk) 03:54, 6 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

I realize that idiots like this are annoying, but you should never do an indefinite block on an IP. The most I've ever done is a year, and even then only when there's a stable history of similar edits proving that the same person has been using that IP address for longer than the period of the block, and that no one else has.

Also, you can do a range block by adding /nn at the end of the IP address, where nn is the number of bits your range has in common. You can click on the whois link at the bottom of the contributions page to get an idea of how large a block the ISP has allocated. In this case, it looks like /17 covers it. The system won't let you use a suffix smaller than /16 for the 32-bit IPv.4 address space (I don't remember the number for the 128-bit IPv.6 address space). With IPv.6 addresses, the normal way the ISPs allocate addresses is to give one account 64 bits, so for most ISPs I do /64 as a minimum. There are exceptions such as AT & T Mobility in the eastern US, where it's completely random and you shouldn't do range blocks. When I've looked at that range with the checkuser tool, I've seen a vandal edit from an IP address one week, and a completely unrelated logged-in user editing from it the next. Chuck Entz (talk) 04:42, 6 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the IP info. Also I'll be sure not to do indefinite on an IP in the future. Julia ☺ ☆ 04:49, 6 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

When you delete something like Template:etymtree/la/candela, you should first look at Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:etymtree/la/candela and fix any entries that use the template. That way we don't have ugly module errors like this to annoy and alarm site visitors, and you avoid getting nagged by those of us who patrol CAT:E. Grumpily, Chuck Entz (talk) 21:33, 7 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

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

RMaung (WMF) 19:13, 20 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

Hi ! By removing so much of the etymology, we are losing some of the term's categorisation. Is there possibly a way we can pare it down while still leaving some of the derivation in tact ? Leasnam (talk) 21:57, 21 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

@Leasnam: Yeah there's no perfect way b/c you either lose categorization or have a bunch of redundancy. I edited it a bit and think it's a good compromise. Let me know what you think. Julia ☺ ☆ 22:01, 21 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

I've noticed that you've removed "in turn from {{inh|enm|gem-pro|*bazją}}" from berye. While it could be seen as redundant as that information is already on beriġe and berry, it's useful to have that information on there as it adds berye to the appropriate categories (Category:Middle English terms inherited from Proto-Germanic and Category:Middle English terms derived from Proto-Germanic). Hazarasp (parlement · werkis) 05:48, 22 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

@Hazarasp: I started a discussion about this here, if you want to comment. Julia ☺ ☆ 15:16, 22 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

Hey Julia, a few comments:

1. I think I've mentioned this in the past to you -- maybe not -- but {{desc|lang|-}} should be employed rarely and in only special cases. For instance, when we don't reconstruct languages, like {{desc|hyx-pro|-}}. We do, however, reconstruct Gaulish, and by doing {{desc|cel-gau|-}} in this entry, you removed it from the Gaulish term requests category.
2. Please add |bor= and |der= to the end of {{desc}}, as intended, with the lang in |1= and lemma in |2=.
3. Please use {{see desc}} for extra-familial borrowings on Germanic and Celtic entries, like with Frankish and Gaulish borrowings into Latin. Because we use {{desctree}} on PG entries, if we have all the Latin borrowings with their descendants, it makes the list very unwieldy.

Thanks. --{{victar|talk}} 16:17, 27 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

@Victar: Re:

1. I do use {{desc|lang}} 99% of the time (I added the term requests in the previous edit and then reverted it b/c I don't know much about Gaulish and there wasn't a term request before). I didn't know the definite criteria for using it or not though, thanks.
2. I do this because it's easier to copy-paste and distinguish borrowings visually when editing. I didn't know it mattered; does this go for just this template or should you put all named parameters at the end?
3. (+ etymology ask below): Noted.

Thanks you! Julia ☺ ☆ 22:19, 27 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

Yeah, generally in every template, lang should be |1= and term should be |2=, at least that's how we standardized them. Thanks, Julia. --{{victar|talk}} 22:25, 27 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

Hey Julia, I'm all for concise etymologies, but I think you're being overzealous with some of your deletions. --{{victar|talk}} 16:28, 27 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

As I think you've noticed, they have an odd system where they include any suggestion and then rate it for plausibility. Anything on the low end of their plausibility scale is unfit for Wiktionary. Anything on the definite end can be included as usual. As for something in the middle, like tambiko, I would generally not include it, but if I felt there were some reason to do so, I would include a weasel word to match the source ("possibly", "potentially", etc). Could you revisit your WOLD-based edits to do this? —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 16:03, 30 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

@Metaknowledge: All are 1's (clearly borrowed) but tambiko, which I edited. Julia ☺ ☆ 20:04, 30 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

Great, thanks. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 21:43, 30 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

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

Hi, be careful about deleting categories as this template leaves a lot to be desired, as I have found in other edits you have done. I had to restore Saskatchewan as a category in this case. DonnanZ (talk) 19:28, 21 December 2019 (UTC)Reply

@Donnanz: Yes, Module:place is an ongoing project of mine and my goal is to get everything automatically categorized via the module, so deleting categories is part of that. I tend to jump around a bit so sometimes it's a while before I get the module edited, which I should be quicker about. Julia ☺ ☆ 19:34, 21 December 2019 (UTC)Reply

Hmm, I'm not enthusiastic about it, sometimes the wording looks a bit "wooden" anyway, and I have ended up rewriting a line, eliminating the template. I suggest that you use it sparingly until you have perfected it. Also there obviously some categories that don't exist yet - I was looking for Category:Saint Helena today but there isn't one, and being such a small place I'm not sure that it would attract enough entries to make it worthwhile creating one. DonnanZ (talk) 19:59, 21 December 2019 (UTC)Reply

The same template introduces a full stop which can't be edited out with nodot=1 or dot= when adding extra info - the template doesn't recognise these: see Clifton. DonnanZ (talk) 20:39, 25 December 2019 (UTC)Reply

@Donnanz: I should have said that implementing the template and editing module data is project of mine rather than just the module itself. Other editors created Module:place years ago. I don't write modules and only feel comfortable editing the most basic code. If you want changes to be made I suggest going to the talk page. Julia ☺ ☆ 23:47, 25 December 2019 (UTC)Reply

OK, I didn't realise that. I may ask on the Grease Pit in the morning. Cheers. DonnanZ (talk) 00:54, 26 December 2019 (UTC)Reply

I notice that you added Category:cup:Corvids and Category:cup:True finches to one entry each. There's a reason I refrained from using such categories: Wikimedia categories are navigational aids for finding entries that have something in common. Categories with only one or two members are pretty much useless. Corvids is a intuitive and taxonomically stable group that most non-ornithologists would be familiar with, so it might be worth it, even though there are only perhaps four or five species in Cupeño territory. Most lay people would, however, have trouble distinguishing Fringillids from similar groups, and most of the surviving linguistic resources are too vague to make such distinctions among the handful of remaining bird names (Cupeño was only spoken in a very small area before all of the speakers were evicted from their homeland more than a century ago, and the language has since died out). Chuck Entz (talk) 04:12, 24 December 2019 (UTC)Reply

@Chuck Entz: I was thinking that it might be easier to compare cross-linguistically if all entries had as specific categories as possible, but I agree that it's a barrier when navigating within a language and will defer to your judgement. I've recategorized some entries and deleted now-empty categories. Julia ☺ ☆ 23:51, 25 December 2019 (UTC)Reply

No harshness intended, but I've seen a lot of Egyptian Arabic IPA pronunciations added by you (like أَرْض (ʔarḍ), بَعْد (baʿd), بَاب (bāb), باط (bāṭ) before edit by Mahajaga, رَاكِب (rākib), رِيح (rīḥ), رُوح (rūḥ), زَيْت (zayt), كلب before edit by IGNETP7, قَلْب (ʾalb) before edit by Mahmudmasri, طَيْر (ṭayr), شَيْخ (šayḵ), شَرَاب (šarāb), عَيْن (ʕayn) regardless of edit by Gorobay, عَنْق (ʕanq), بَعْض (baʕḍ) before edits by anonymous IP, and حَيَاة (ḥayāh)), and sadly they've all been rather perplexingly incorrect to varying degrees. I'm just curious how you arrived at those pronunciations — were you trying to transcribe something by ear, for instance? —M. I. Wright (talk, contribs) 14:56, 28 December 2019 (UTC)Reply

She seems to be offline for the moment, so I'll chime in: Back in those days, she was going through the UCLA Phonetics lab archive and using the information there to create entries. She's since found out that wasn't a good idea (at least without independent knowledge of the languages), and has done her best to correct errors that have been pointed out to her. Given that she had just finished working on Western Apache and started on Eastern Arrente next, I think she must have been working off of their Egyptian Arabic word lists at the time. Indeed, you can find the pronunciation she added to أَرْض (ʔarḍ) here.

For what it's worth, most of those lists date to the Peter Ladefoged days, and there was a lot of good work being done then. There's no way to tell, however, specifically whose work a given list was. It might be mediocre student work for an assignment or project rather than that of someone in the faculty. I was an undergrad there from 86-88 and there were at least 2 class assignments that involved recordings, one of which was made in the phonetics lab with a native speaker- so it's conceivable they may still have something of mine in their files (I hope not!). Chuck Entz (talk) 03:15, 29 December 2019 (UTC)Reply

Thanks so much — suzukaze-c also just brought the UCLA archives to my attention on Discord, so I was coming back here to take the blame off Julia and then rant some about the database haha. I think I'm going with "mediocre student work" for this one, because there's so much that's just completely wrong...! Even though it's still a good source for audio files, I'm gonna go ahead and wipe all of the Egyptian Arabic IPA transcriptions grabbed from there, because when this much of the barrel is bad apples you stop being able to tell which ones aren't. I wouldn't blame anyone for copying stuff over from the wordlists, though — they sure seem like the kind of resource you should be able to just trust blindly, which makes their actual iffiness a shame. Of the Arabic varieties I can verify, it looks like they all have some errors here and there that make them unusable, too, but EA definitely got the worst of it. —M. I. Wright (talk, contribs) 03:29, 29 December 2019 (UTC)Reply

Sadly, the audio files are under a license that is incompatible with the Commons :( —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 05:44, 29 December 2019 (UTC)Reply

@M. I. Wright, Chuck Entz, Suzukaze-c: Sorry guys, I'm on vacation so I haven't been on the internet in a few days. Yes, that was from my first months seriously editing Wiktionary and I didn't know what I was doing. The database could definitely be undergrad assignments or something, and having just taken an undergrad phonetics course, I would not rely on anything done by undergrads haha. Now I'm only really working on Cimbrian, descendant trees, and copyediting-ish stuff. Julia ☺ ☆ 23:07, 1 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

Dear Julia, I noticed that you deleted my contribution of temperī. I am sure you did so correctly, as I find there are lots of finicky rules on wiktionary that I am often running afoul of. But would you mind telling me the nature of my error so that I can avoid making it in the future. temperī is really a Latin adverb and it really does mean 'at the right time' and it doesn't have its own wiktionary article. I assume that maybe diacritics aren't meant to be used on the pages for Latin, is that it? Thanks Tibetologist (talk) 14:35, 18 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Tibetologist: Yeah it is the diacritics, I should have explained more in the edit summary for the deletion. You seem to have figured it out though, but for clarity, we don't use macrons in page names. You can read more about how we spell Latin here: Wiktionary:About_Latin#Orthography for Latin entries. Julia ☺ ☆ 17:46, 18 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

I’m not sure about this move. We also have Category:Southern England English for instance, and keeping it Southern Sweden Swedish differentiates it from Southern Finland Swedish. --Lundgren8 (t · c) 22:52, 10 February 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Lundgren8: I was thinking it as more of a dialect within the Swedish-language area, like Southern/South Swedish is spoken in southern Sweden, Eastern Swedish is spoken in Finland and Estonia, etc. Julia ☺ ☆ 01:13, 11 February 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Julia: Yeah, I understand the sentiment but I think it becomes less clear. Just like ”Southern English” is unclear whether it refers to Southern England or Southern US or something else. That’s why we have Category:Southern England English and Category:Southern US English. ”Southern Sweden” is clearer as what country it refers to as Swedish is a pluricentric language. --Lundgren8 (t · c) 08:50, 11 February 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Lundgren8: Do you think the the category is supposed to refer to South Swedish, as in the dialect (traditionally) only spoken in Scania, Halland and Blekinge, or just words used in dialects all across the general Götaland-ish area? Julia ☺ ☆ 15:08, 11 February 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Julia: I use it in this sense, i.e. the former. --Lundgren8 (t · c) 15:41, 11 February 2020 (UTC)Reply

Hey, if you want |pos= to be in smallcaps, you can add .ann-pos { font-variant: small-caps } to your common.css file. Please don't manually add {{smallcaps}} to the param. Thanks. --{{victar|talk}} 05:01, 28 March 2020 (UTC)Reply

Got it, thanks Julia ☺ ☆ 13:44, 28 March 2020 (UTC)Reply

Why was the rest of the etymology on words deriving from Latin camisia, such as Romanian cămașă, removed? Word dewd544 (talk) 00:43, 2 June 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Word dewd544: Sorry that was like 8 months ago, I forgot I did that. I was trying to trim down etymologies, but at first I think I got carried away a bit. Now I only really remove almost entire etymologies if they're a word borrowed from English or something that goes all the way back to PIE (e.g. this ety). Otherwise it's a judgement call on whether the info would be helpful to see on that page. For the descendants of camisia, my opinion now is that the Celtic and Germanic origins would be good to show. Julia ☺ ☆ 03:37, 2 June 2020 (UTC)Reply

Ah, it's okay. I was debating that myself (about whether or not it's useful to show the origins of the word that far back, especially with borrowings at one point, since it's several steps removed and doesn't necessary indicate direct interaction with Celtic or Germanic). But okay, cool, just checking. Word dewd544 (talk) 23:57, 2 June 2020 (UTC)Reply