User talk:Muke

Hi, I saw you created the conjugations appendix. I contributed some verbs in German and Catalan, but I am not sure if it makes sense like this. verba.org already has all thge conjugations in all the languages, we will never make it that far here. And wikibooks already has or plans to have study guides from all languages to all languages, so this here to me seems to be just redundant. Anyways, I like the projects over here, and maybe we can somehow find a way to link from one page to the other in order not to waste time but still habe a comprehensive dictionary. Would you also be interested in a project for learning? Check my page and let me know. Get-back-world-respect 16:26, 2 May 2004 (UTC)Reply

Hi Muke. Just wondering why you've changed all the Unicode double macrons. I don't have a single font where this character works but I do have fonts where some of the other double character combining diacritics work and they come after both characters to be modified - not between them. Now there are also a class of "half combining characters" which do a similar job and with these you put the first letter, the first half combiner, the second letter, the second half combiner.
So do you have a font which works the way that you've just changed these pages? If so which font? If not why did you change the pages? — Hippietrail 06:24, 16 May 2004 (UTC)Reply

Just found your comment in Talk:Rhymes:English:-uːk and looked up the Unicode standard though for me it was section 7.7. Of course you are absolutely right. But Microsoft's Arial Unicode MS font is absolutely wrong! That font works for COMBINING DOUBLE TILDE and COMBINING DOUBLE INVERTED BREVE if it comes after both characters and doesn't work if it comes between! So I'll leave your fixes and await correctly designed fonts - thanks! — Hippietrail 06:49, 16 May 2004 (UTC)Reply

The fonts that I have that display the double combiners correctly are Doulos SIL (a Times New Roman clone), Code2000, FreeSerif, Gentium and GentiumAlt, Thryomanes, Titus Cyberbit Basic. Arial Unicode MS, as you mention, is buggy here, and Tahoma is even worse—it looks like it's expecting the diacritic to go before both consonants. (But the double macrons display for me, and I'm somewhat confused as to why; apparently I don't have any font with the double macron in it!)

Hi, Muke-- Thanks for fixing up my entry on jacere/iacere. Coming from a church Latin background, the i/j issue completely slipped my mind. One small question, not a big issue: we always used the masc. sing. for the perfect passive participle. I noticed you changed "jactus" to "jactum". Why the neuter? Cheers and thanks, RSvK 01:39, 21 May 2004 (UTC)Reply

Well, I wouldn't have thought to use that—all the sources I've learned from use the supine, not the perf.pass.part., as the fourth principal part. According to w:Latin conjugation, either could be used, though I didn't know that when I edited iacere. As for i/j, it's okay, and probably better that there be a reference pointing one to the other anyway. —Muke Tever 01:58, 21 May 2004 (UTC)Reply

You requested that I kept some brackets. I do not know which ones you want to keep. So I will not change any more. Thanks, GerardM 16:07, 26 May 2004 (UTC)Reply

Hi Muke. I just noticed that you moved my new მებობარი. I got that word from a Georgian gramm site - which doesn't mean it's not wrong - but how did you find it? Do you have a Georgian dictionary? Where can I get one? (-: — Hippietrail 16:56, 1 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Well I noticed that the transliteration didn't match the Georgian text, so I went to my Georgian grammar (Georgian: A learner's grammar, by George Hewitt—admittedly not the most celebrated of books on Georgian) and its glossary (only about 55 pages, but this is a basic word) had მეგობარი instead. It matched the Wiktionary transliteration so I figured მებობარი was a typo, understandable to miss as გ and ბ are so similar. —Muke Tever 17:07, 1 Jun 2004 (UTC)

As a natie speaker, I confirm - the correct word would be მეგობარი in Georgian.AietKolkhi 15:20, 23 Jun 2006 (UTC)

Hi Muke. Just wondering why you've used "Derivation" instead of "Etymology" in Toki. I've seen this in some other articles and been confused by it.

Do you use this to mean something different to what "etymology" means? If not I think we should just stick with the established term, otherwise people will wonder what the difference is. — Hippietrail 05:42, 6 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Habit mainly, I'm sure I can be cured. What I mean by "derivation" in the case of words like toki is that words in conlangs often don't have an etymology in e.g. the full dictionary sense. (Unless, say, you're a Tolkien-type who invents language families...) Basically it's a pedantic reflex that wants to put words like toki into the same box as words like smog. I can stick to a =Etymology= heading if that's what's preferred. —Muke Tever 03:24, 8 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Hi,Mr.Muke, see JPH and J.P.H. editing users' pages

Hi, Muke-- Thanks for your comment about etymology and glosses. In bolding the glosses, I was trying to follow what I saw in pages before I started, but what you said about making the original stand out more makes sense. I'll take a look at a couple of dictionaries and see what works best.

I have a question for you. You seem to know a number of languages including Greek. Where can I find information on how to enter Greek characters and characters from other languages, besides using forms like &-a-l-p-h-a-; ?

Well,...if you're using a modern version of Windows, there's the system Character Map which can handle all of the Unicode BMP for short sessions of cut-and-paste (in earlier Windows it only handles the first 255 chars or so)... If you plan on doing extended input the best bet may be an IME, which can be added from regional and language options—for simple languages it's basically a keyboard remapping, and there's a slightly more complex interface for e.g. Asian languages... Once you figure that out, MS has a keyboard layout creator you can use if the script you need isn't pre–set-up—I used it to create a layout to enter IPA with, mapped loosely to X-SAMPA values. Apparently more info on IMEs can be found here on the Microsoft site . —Muke Tever 03:43, 11 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Hi Muke.
I'd reply in the Beer Parlour but it looks like you're still fine-tuning.
I've been thinking most about your last point. If "pH" shares a page with "PH" or "Ph" or "ph", is the directive idea still valid or still good?
I think there are a few alternatives:

1. TITLE "pH, PH"
2. Don't have an overall title at all, just one for each section which needs it
3. Have a title but don't make it the major heading so it looks like a misspelled headword. Instead, have it say "Page title: Xxxx" in a less overpowering yet still usefaul manner/place

Pros and Cons: Number 1 might suffer on pages with more than 2 forms
Number 2 will make it difficult to tell people which page to look at
Number 3 only requires content change without code change but pages without the "workaround" will lack headwords

Now that I've written this all, #3 is starting to sound pretty good. What do you think? — Hippietrail 14:30, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)

#1 is a good solution for the sharing-pages problem that I hadn't thought of.

#3 is also a good idea, and has the advantage of not needing code change either (a change to monobook.css could accomplish this, at least for browsers that support CSS2 code like H1:before { content: "Title: " })

#2 I'm not so fond of anymore; as said, pages without the "workaround" will lack headwords—which includes all the hanchars! —Muke Tever 14:50, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)

There are some updates to Wiktionary_talk:Princeton wordnet that might be of interest to you. --Wclark 22:20, 12 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Hi, Muke. In two edits to Latin numbers, I see you put in a link at the bottom of the page that looks like this: "la:Quinque". What's the purpose of this? It doesn't seem to show up at all on the displayed page. Thanks. RSvK 17:52, 7 Aug 2004 (UTC)

It creates an interwiki link to the corresponding entry in the Latin Victionarium. The link is visible in the Monobook skin on the left beneath the toolbox in a section called "other languages" (in the Classic skin, it is displayed above and beneath the article); for la: links it should say "Latina". —Muke Tever 21:18, 7 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Copy of message in Beer parlour. Please reply there for all to see.

Can you point us to a copy of the ISO639-3, please --Richardb 11:41, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Darn fine work archiving that mess. Kevin Rector 21:51, 1 May 2005 (UTC)Reply

thx. —Muke Tever 02:28, 2 May 2005 (UTC)Reply

Hi. I noticed you're adding a lot of these 'hiragana spelling' entries. You may want to take a look at Wiktionary:About Japanese, in particular the section on Furigana. --Dunhamrc 03:24, 12 May 2005 (UTC) 'Reply

"Furigana" doesn't really suggest anything to the average person who doesn't know about Japanese. In any case (regardless of whether I like it or not) I don't have the data to make full entries according to that template. —Muke Tever 04:01, 12 May 2005 (UTC)Reply

I don't mean to suggest you should always put in a full entry - something is better than nothing, after all. For example look at こうもん. Per the discussion on Wiktionary talk:Language considerations ja, the operating assumption is that a person looking up Japanese words would know something about Japanese, including the meaning of Furigana. If not they can look it up, though certainly the wiktionary entry for that word needs improvement. --Dunhamrc 04:24, 12 May 2005 (UTC)Reply

But you're positing a use of "furigana" that even people who do know something about Japanese would know nothing about—nor is there any way for them to learn about it: furigana itself is only defined by a link to wikipedia, and w:furigana doesn't say anything about furigana meaning spelling Japanese words in hiragana, it only describes the (usual) sense of being a guide for kanji pronunciation, especially unusual ones. In the case of these articles, the user already has the hiragana—and keeping the assumption of users who know something about Japanese, they have the pronunciation as well—and so "furigana" as "pronunciation key" doesn't apply at all.

Incidentally, what point is there in numbering the kanji with # ? There's no progression of senses as there is in, say, a word's definition list. A bulleted list is entirely sufficient.—Muke Tever 05:06, 12 May 2005 (UTC)Reply

I think it would be a good idea to move this discussion to Wiktionary talk:Language considerations ja, since you have strong arugments against the format that has been agreed upon there. For me, "spelling" is something you do with the letters of an alphabet, not the characters in a syllabary - so "hiragana spelling" sounds strange. --Dunhamrc 12:49, 12 May 2005 (UTC)Reply

If a word is written predominantly in kana, it should have a full definition in a part of speech section of the kana entry. The list under the "furigana/hiragana spelling" section should be words for which most of the times you see hiragana will be in elementary texts or reference works. The list serves as a way to go from the pronunciation to the word as it is usually written - in case for example a user has heard the word but not seen it in print. Thus "furigana" as "pronunciation key" makes sense to me.

As for numbering - no, there is no progression of senses in こうもん, but there could well be. The same goals for numbered definitions laid out at Wiktionary:Entry_layout_explained#Definitions could be applied to this list of kanji: ordered by age and frequency of usage. But even without a justification, numbers make the list items slightly easier to refer to. --Dunhamrc 22:01, 12 May 2005 (UTC)Reply

If you wouldn't mind defining the latin phrase in the etymology section of ka, I couldn't find what tense fricatem is, so perhaps you know, or know the idiom/strange construction. - TheDaveRoss

Thanks for the comment about my score going up. One of the coolest compliments I've received in quite a while.

Now if only an increasing score would help me make sense of the "e-dictionary" controversy ... -dmh 05:25, 28 May 2005 (UTC)Reply

THANK YOU!!! If you'd like to help out more in those departments, check out Category:Pronunciation stub and Category:Etymology stub. -- Bennmorland 02:05, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Cleaned it up. What do you think? -- Benn M. 01:02, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Etymologies shouldn't include alternate terms. These should be either in the "Alternate terms" subsection, or alongside the term itself under its appropriate definitive subsection. The "weird" semicolon of which you spake in "Jessica" was part of the format I use for etymologies. I don't mind if you change it; I have no grounds for complaint. But Wiktionary, I don't think, has an official standard for laying out an etymology. So long as it's clear what is meant, it's fine. The etymology for Bislama is a bit fuzzy. I assume "Bislama Bislama" means the word comes from Bislama, which, in Bislama, is Bislama. It is a bit confusing a format. -- Benn M. 19:52, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The semicolon is ungrammatical. In ordinary etymology style, "Hebrew" would be an adjective describing "יִסְכָּה" and a semicolon between them would be as unthinkable as "The clowns came out of a red; car". Presumably you are treating "Hebrew" as a noun, in which case the semicolon is still strange: it is like saying "This word came from Israel; יִסְכָּה".

I havn't included any alternative terms for Bislama in the etymology for Bislama. I was defining the etymon: French "bêche de mer" is "a kind of sea cucumber, in English called also bêche de mer or trepang".

Any case, I wrote Bislama ''']''' (exactly parallel to French ''']'''), and not Bislama '''Bislama''' as you say ... I will edit the link to make it clearer what was meant. —Muke Tever 20:06, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for consulting me. I'm new to Wiktionary so I feel kind of honored; I've only been here for a couple of weeks. Anyway, here are some of my suggestions. I would not suggest that you create a common serbian, bosnian, croatian header. This is because sometimes the word is not the same in Serbian and in Bosnian or Croatian and this is why there is a large controversy over whether these are the one and same language or three seperate languages. I would also not put both forms in the title. I think that it would be a good idea to link them. What I do with Serbian entries is create duplicate entries like Četvrtak and четвртак, but, this is why I do it: sometimes, entries might be the same, but the meaning is different and sometimes entries need to be different (for example: in Serbian, Wednesday is Sreda, while in Bosnian it's Srijeda). So I think it's best to create duplicate entries that link to each other and that show that there are two different scripts used. I would like to hear what you decide to do... --Dijan June 27, 2005 01:50 (UTC)

Hi, yeah, I understand now what you're saying. I think that it would be best to create one article with latin script as the title of the article, but in the article create a ===Cyrillic text=== or some similar tag to show that Serbian is written with both scripts. --4.138.123.149 27 June 2005 05:08 (UTC)

Hi Muke. I've just posted a comment on the article now known as tabvla but would like your expert opinion please. — Hippietrail 16:19, 21 July 2005 (UTC)Reply

The default setting is to not distinguish upper and lower case page names (not just "entries," but all page names in all namespaces, even categories and templates). To change it you need to get the support of the sl.wiktionary community and request it to be changed. —Muke Tever 20:29, 21 August 2005 (UTC)Reply

Tnx for answer. At sl.wiktionary are only three active users at this time. How and where can we put request for setting? And how and where can we (I) put request for admin rights on sl.wiktionary? --Andrejj 20:50, 21 August 2005 (UTC)Reply

To request adminship, go to m:Requests for permissions. To request lowercase titles you will want to speak with a developer, they can often be found in #mediawiki on freenode (see m:IRC instructions if you need help connecting to IRC); Brion for one has also been known to frequent the #wiktionary channel. It's also possible it may be done by filing a bug request at bugzilla.wikimedia.org but you may need to find a developer anyway to draw their attention to it. —Muke Tever 22:11, 21 August 2005 (UTC)Reply

Hello Muke,

I know you've been excited about unifying wiktionary languages in the past; perhaps you can help get the word out about discussing this actively on en and other wiktionary projects (and not just on the mailing lists or meta) : Wiktionary:Project - Unified Wiktionary outreach.

Hopefully there will be some code to inform the discussion soon.

Cheers, +sj + 16:34, 23 August 2005 (UTC)Reply

Hey Muke, could you comment on this outreach project? +sj + 23:35, 7 September 2005 (UTC)Reply

I dunno what really to say there. Unifying the wiktionaries, afaik, is one thing I've consistently been against. —Muke Tever 00:14, 8 September 2005 (UTC)Reply

I just wanted to formally and publicly say thanks for creating RFV and then going the extra step and hunting up citation after citation and so make RFV meaningful. Wiktionary is fun again! Thanks so much. -dmh 15:27, 17 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Shucks, thanks. —Muke Tever 18:14, 17 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Hello Muke!

It has been a while since I've been on IRC. Anyhow, any progress on the archive of failed RFVs and/or a shoot-on-sight list? Thanks,

Connel

I noticed you removed the link I added to Template:fr because French is considered a common language. Can you tell me what languages are considered common here?

And may I ask what harm it would do to link all language names? It's just a little service to the reader. --Benne 18:21, 15 January 2006 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for your reply. Am I right when I assume that only articles and prepositions should not be linked? Or does that also apply to adjectives? I can't seem to find the answer in the policy page to pointed out. --Benne (talk) 18:55, 15 January 2006 (UTC)Reply

Sorry about that. I was trying to convey the sense of the word, and got too excited. I now can't get back on that page to explain myself. Andrew massyn

WOW Its huge and ugly ! --Jic 21:08, 16 January 2006 (UTC)Reply

Hey I'm wondering if the etymologies of Mascot (from French I believe) corresponds to that of Masculinity? If so it would really help me make a point in a term paper of mine. Please email me your thoughts at [email protected] if you don't mind, thanks! 64.32.131.232 17:47, 31 March 2006 (UTC)Reply

Hi Muke,

As our resident etymology expert, could you have a look at pneumonia, please? The format is wrong, the Greek is in Latin script and the content is dubious. Thanks. — Paul G 13:36, 21 April 2006 (UTC)Reply

Good day. You have been nominated (a while ago) to have checkuser rights. Do you show any interest? — Vildricianus 14:32, 21 April 2006 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, but I doubt I can spare the time. —Muke Tever 14:55, 21 April 2006 (UTC)Reply

Can you help on this one please? --Connel MacKenzie T C 15:17, 18 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Do you know from which works these two quotes are? If so, we can list them as quotes instead of example sentences (which would be better). —Vildricianus 13:00, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, quotes would be better, but it's examples that were requested. I got the quotes from Webster 1913 but the works are online and googlable so. . . —Muke Tever 22:00, 24 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

While I respect your devotion to providing attestation to dubious term, I also request that you stop egging on User:Primetime. --Connel MacKenzie T C 00:13, 31 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

It isn't a personal thing, it's just that due to time constraints I only do RFV cite gathering for words I'm already familiar with. —Muke Tever 21:40, 31 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I just noticed that you did a conjugation table on Πολύς, which I may have by now moved to πολύς. Anyway, I noticed that you did it in nom, acc, gen, dat order, which is contrary to the standard nom, gen, dat, acc order which most textbooks have. I also have a preference for that order, but it derives from an article in a relatively obscure book. I was wondering where you got it from. Thanks. Cerealkiller13 02:05, 6 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

Also, I just noticed that πολύς already has a page, which is redundant, so I think I'm going to try and merge the two pages into πολύς. You might want to take a look at my work and see if it meets your approval, and make any changes you see fit. Cerealkiller13 02:09, 6 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

The reasoning behind the nom, acc, gen, dat order that I learned is that there is supposedly a hierarchical order of declensions, i.e. if a language has accusative, it will most likely have nominative, but not necessarily genitive and dative, and if a language has dative, it will most likely have the preceding three, and so on. This may explain why the order was given as such in sources dealing with multiple languages and language development. Have you encountered any resistance to such an ordering on Wiktionary? Cerealkiller13 00:43, 7 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

Would you consider revising the definition of pluton. Pluto now seems to be a dwarf planet. Wikipedia seems to suggest that pluton is now Plutonian object or ice dwarf. Cheers. SemperBlotto 21:26, 24 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

As of 31 August, 2006 the CheckUser status vote is beginning, you have been nominated and if you are so inclined please accept your nomination on the CheckUser page. Please also read the Meta Check User policy to be sure that the responsibilities are ones you would be interested in and willing to fulfill. Tentatively the end of the election will be one month from the beginning, but that is subject to change at any time, seeing as I just made that length up and a community consensus on duration will have to be established. Thank you and good luck! - TheDaveRoss 16:52, 31 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

I've initiated at discussion at WT:AL about the lemma for Latin (and Greek) verbs on Wiktionary. I'd appreciate any thoughts you have, as one of the more experienced people here in both Classical languages and editing issues. --EncycloPetey 01:43, 10 November 2006 (UTC)Reply

Hi Muke, I went to the Interlingua page and noticed that you had provided some information on the Chinese word for Interlingua. This was a couple years ago so you might not remember it right away. Would you happen to know the Korean word for Interlingua? I have 인터링구아, and I'm just looking for verification to make sure it's correct. Thank you! – Matt 01:16, 30 November 2006 (UTC)Reply

Hey, thanks for providing those translations and checking them on Google for me. I put "인테르링구아" first. One question, are you certain that "인테르링구아" is intereuringgua and not inteuringgua? It looks like there might be an extra syllable in there somehow. – Matt 02:35, 1 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

Thanks very much, now I see where the added syllable comes from. I've used both translations – and both transliterations understanding that they are rough. Please feel very free to contribute more definitions if you feel so inclined. I noticed we're missing the Greek, for example. Thanks again! – Matt 00:31, 2 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

I believe you were interested in P-I-E on en.wiktionary. I assume you'll only partly support the vote I started, but I'm interested to hear your arguments. --Connel MacKenzie 21:52, 18 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

Hey, I noticed that most of the Ancient Greek articles with a proper pronunciation have you to thank for it. I also noticed that you're using a different pronunciation for Koine and Classical. May I ask if you have some simple chart you're working off of that you'd be willing to share? If not, then let me offer you a simple thanks for what you've done so far and an encouragement to help us out some more. Depending on when you've last looked, Ancient Greek may have expanded somewhat. Cerealkiller13 10:28, 21 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

This is being discussed at Wiktionary:Requests_for_deletion/Others.--Jusjih 15:18, 18 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

I was looking for the word epicaricacy, only to find it had been deleted. I'd like to put in a definition for the word, my workup is here: User:Evrik/epicaricacy. I found the archived deletion discussion. As you were a participant in the delete discussion, do you mind giving my work a review? Evrik 18:09, 2 May 2008 (UTC)Reply