User talk:Qehath/Archive 2009

Per your edit of pezones, thanks for trying to clean the entry up. As Spanish has several types of plural words (nouns, adjectives, etc.) we don't use the stripped down Category:Spanish plurals, but instead the relevant Category:Spanish noun forms, Category:Spanish adjective forms, etc. Hope that makes sense. Cheers. --Bequw → ¢ • τ 10:20, 23 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi, the entry bëj (to do) is good but I was wondering where did bëva for past tense come from? I am an albanian and I never heard this!! Also it's bërë not bër. It doesn't say in your user's page there that you speak or know any albanian so why do you bother putting wrong information in here anyway? Oh, let's see...you said it in your page that we are not supposed to take anything you do seriously... --Zeke sq-N 07:10, 28 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

Such hostility is neither appreciated, nor condoned by Wiktionary practice. So please don't be a dick :p

If a conjugation is incorrect, fix it and let the person who made the error know so they can learn and be helped in the future. In fact, had I known we had a native Albanian speaker on here, I would've been coming to you to check all the Albanian entries I've been trying to work on because I don't feel that Albanian is well represented on here. If you'll notice, my main activities on Wiktionary have been focused on improving the content quality for lesser known languages like Romanian, Lithuanian, Armenian, and now Albanian. So I'm on your side. And an administrator. So watch your mouth and work with me, please. :)

For starters, you can look through my contributions for any Albanian entries and then fix anything that I may have botched. You won't have to tell me about it because they're all in my watchlist. I thank you in advance for your help and contributions to this glorious dictionary. :) — opiaterein — 18:45, 28 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

First of all stop calling me bad names, I can't be what you called me because i am a female. <:-). All right, the day i wrote the message i was under a lot of stress, i regreat that i opened the wiktionary page that day. if i had this page opened one day later i would have respond to your mistakes differently, but it's already done. We've got into a wrong foot but i admire your very, very mature response. I am very busy lately working at the Albanian wiktionary but i will do as much as i can in the future. If there's anything that you need to have it done fast, just contact me thruoght wiki e-mail (find it at my user's page).--Zeke sq-N

One way you could help me is by telling me which cases (nominative, accusative, genitive, etc) are still used in modern Albanian so I know what to put in noun declension templates. That's my next major project. — opiaterein — 19:31, 29 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

Ric, I am very busy with real work and also wiktionary in albanian. Please, check this Zeke's disscussions in another wiktionary page, and see if you can find something useful. I hope that in the future I can help you more but for now I am afraid I can't do much. --Zeke sq-N 08:38, 30 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

As the resident Romanian expert, can you cast your eye over mamaliga for me, please, which I found from Brian's Hotlist (whence I learn a lot of interesting new terms which I would have otherwise never encountered)? Where does the Romanian word mămăligă come from? Are there such words like mămă or ligă? Also, have you eaten this before? I was in Romania for a month or so during my twenties, but I don't think I ever tried this. Is it good? --Jackofclubs 19:10, 10 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Never had it, but it looks good :) The Romanian word doesn't seem to have a known etymology. Mamă means mother and ligă means league, though. lol — opiaterein — 19:39, 10 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi. You seem to be good at creating inflection templates. Can you stretch the contents of Template:hy-conj-ել to the full length of the dropdown list's header? I want it like in, say, Template:lt-adj-as. --Vahagn Petrosyan 01:26, 17 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

I noticed you working on that template earlier and actually thought about playing with the Armenian templates more :) Unfortunately, I'm not sure what you mean on this one... could you be more specific? — opiaterein — 01:30, 17 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

I'd be happy if you play more with Armenian templates. Because I botched them hundred times until got what I wanted. Almost what I wanted. Look at the entry քայլել. See the white margins at the left and right sides of the conjugation table? I want them gone. Like in geras. --Vahagn Petrosyan 01:36, 17 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

I'm not sure if it's my browser, my screen or what, but I don't see the margins you're talking about. However, I think I know how to fix that, so let me know if the change I just made worked. — opiaterein — 01:38, 17 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Yep, that fixed it. Thanks. By the way, if you decide to make an Armenian template, making a declension table for nouns in definite case will be the most important thing to start. Because Template:hy-decl-noun is for the indefinite one. I can eventually do that, but being a native speaker and not having spent a single day thinking about the formal structure of the language makes my job difficult. --Vahagn Petrosyan 01:49, 17 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

It's been a while since I've had the resources to study Armenian, so I got back into Lithuanian. But I think I have enough now to be able to make a declension template like that. I'll just have to do some review :)

On another note, you've been doing an absolutely kickass job with the Armenian stuff here. To think I hadn't noticed - it was a great surprise :D — opiaterein — 01:52, 17 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Are you sure about transcribing ա as ? I am in doubt which of these is closer, w:Open back unrounded vowel or w:Open front unrounded vowel ? Different on-line resources have both versions. Wikipedia's pronunciation of sounds closer to my ear but neither of two seems similar enough. --Vahagn Petrosyan 08:45, 17 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

At least when I compare the sound of ա to something like the a in Spanish, it definitely sounds more like than the definite that Spanish has. When I first heard the Armenian ա, I almost thought it was a sound like . I'm almost positive that is the right sound. — opiaterein — 12:22, 17 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Jesus Christ, how many ways can Lithuanian inflect masturbate? Wait; that's not what I was going to say. You just added a "realis" form, and we don't have realis. There's w:realis, but the word is new to me and I can't even tell whether it's a noun or adjective. Do you think you could add an English entry for it? Equinox ◑ 20:39, 20 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

:D Lithuanian has a... very rich participle system. I haven't counted, rather, had the patience to count how many forms a verb and its participles can take, but I do know that comparable adjectives have about a hundred and fifty three.

Realis is a new one for me, too, but I'll do what I can :) — opiaterein — 20:41, 20 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Alrighty, realis, realis mood and irrealis mood are all good to go :] — opiaterein — 21:04, 20 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Looks good! Equinox ◑ 23:47, 20 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

It might be useful if you mark the inflected verb forms as minor edits, because there are so many of them for the same word and they tend to overwhelm the Recent Changes. (Also, for your own sanity, I hope you have some systematic way of doing these; are they perhaps regular enough to automate?) Equinox ◑ 23:47, 20 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

They are, but I think I might be too lazy to operate a bot to automatically add them. :(

Also, they aren't technically all direct forms of the same word. Some are forms of forms of that one word. Fun stuff (: — opiaterein — 23:58, 20 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

If the forms-of-forms are also standard (within some predictable parameters), and if your fingers are getting tired, I might be able to help you with automation. (This would be subject to the usual Wiktionary bot rules, whatever those are. The value of your investment may go down as well as up.) Send me an e-mail if you're interested in that and if you don't feel you could do it yourself: I don't know how technically inclined you are. — Oh, it's opiate rein, isn't it? I was reading it as some kind of weird German verb. Equinox ◑ 00:05, 21 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Fingers aren't getting tired; copy/paste is magic if you know how to use it effectively :D But in the case of those Litho participles, at some point I'll have to get a bot, so I guess it's just a matter of me taking the initiative to learn that. As far as technical inclination, I've made quite a few of those declension and conjugation templates, so... what I don't know, I can learn :p

And the name, think of it more as opiate rain. — opiaterein — 13:00, 21 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Well done. Your bot seems to be working OK. You can run it when logged in as Opiaterein if you want to, or even as the bot name for a while (then we can progress the vote quickly). SemperBlotto 12:27, 24 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

It's exciting :) I'd thought about bot work before, but it wasn't until Lithuanian that I really needed it. I'm gonna fix up the main file a bit and run a couple more tests, and then I guess the botflag vote can follow. — opiaterein — 12:29, 24 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

I am planning to replace soon the base Template:hy-decl-noun by a more complete and bigger base Template:hy-decl-noun-exp. However, I'm afraid it won't be possible to squeeze long Armenian words with transliterations into the templates linking to it (e.g. Template:hy-noun-thing-ի-եր-exp). Do you know how to set the font size below default? Or is there a piece of code overriding the effects of {{Armn}}, which increases size by 20%, only in terms of font size? --Vahagn Petrosyan 21:28, 27 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Check out the changes I made. Think this could work? Maybe even make the transilerations <small></small>, so they take up a bit less space.

Good, now long words fit. Even after I removed <br>s: they stretch the table vertically too much. By the way, why did you change transcription of ճ to from ? I know has been deprecated, instead should be used, but template {{IPA}} makes the tiebar stray to the left: t͡ʃ. See? --Vahagn Petrosyan 22:23, 27 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

works just as well as the , but the arc just creates extra shit to look at. So, since the is depracated, I just use .

I liked the <br>s, they made it easier to follow for me. The vertical stretching is why we made declension and conjugation templates drop-downs in the first place. :) — opiaterein — 22:36, 27 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Fine, I'll return <br>s after remaking the templates once again. Turns out linguists are not sure how many cases of declension modern Armenian has got, 5 or 7? Five makes more sense and makes my life much easier. I'm uniting Accusative with Nominative and Dative with Genitive. --Vahagn Petrosyan 23:34, 27 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hey there.

You said to put this on your talk page, so here is what the format for the Hiligaynon noun template should be, with the parameters pretty much obvious.

{{hil-noun|stressedform|pl=form|pl-stress=form|pl2=form|pl2-stress=form|dim=form|dim-stress=form}}

Obviously, pl2 and pl2-stress won't be used very often, but I'm pretty sure that there are a few places it is used. Thank you ever so much for this. --Neskaya kanetsv 22:56, 30 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Don't you think declension templates are too big now for putting them first? I'm afraid one may not notice other headers under so fat a table.
Also, could you please look at my request at the bottom of Template talk:suffix? Maybe you can help? --Vahagn Petrosyan 13:28, 2 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

There's always the table of contents, and since the tables are collapsable, I think they should be ok. I'll look at {{suffix}}, but it wouldn't surprise me if someone had to fix it if I mess something up :D It might even be too complex for me, already — opiaterein — 13:31, 2 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

To me, it looks like a problem of using templates within the template. I'm not sure I can figure it out, but I'll ask my friend to look at it. — opiaterein — 13:39, 2 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

OK, thanks. --Vahagn Petrosyan 13:43, 2 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hey! That template seems incredible! Perfect! Thank you very much! But I saw a mistake.. In "Positive - Interrogative" part; koşacak muyum? koşacak musun? koşacak mu? koşacak muyuz? koşacak musunuz? are all wrong, they must be respectively: ...mıyım?, ...mısın?, ...mı?, ...mıyız?, ...mısınız? I'll try to correct it myself but if I can't, I'll ask you for doing it, if I won't disturb you =) Best wishes, Sinek 17:09, 4 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Oh man, I never saw that. I'll take a look at it, and if you can't find the place to fix, I'll try. — opiaterein — 17:12, 4 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Pfff, as I thought so, when I cicked "edit", nothing made sense to me... LOL Sorry, I'm untalented. Can you do it for me if I say the rule? Well, in future tense, if a verb ends in "-ecek", in it's interrogtaive form the words must be "miyim?", "misin?", "mi?", "miyiz?", "misiniz?", "-ecekler mi?". And if a verb ends in "-acak", they would be "mıyım?", "mısın?", "mı?", "mıyız?", "mısınız?", "-acaklar mı?". Thanks in advance! By the way, how much Turkish do you speak? =) Sinek 17:16, 4 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Not enough to have a conversation, I just know about vowel harmony and consonant stuff... basically the theory. I don't know that many words or anything :( It's probably something simple that I have to change, I just have to think about what I did wrong lol— opiaterein — 17:18, 4 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

I see, well don't care =) If you want to know anything, just ask me :)) By the way, tere's another problem about simple future's positive interrogative as well... It's written "müyüm?", "müsün?"..... If you can fix them as I wrote above, I'll be very glad =) You're the best!

Man, I messed up there because the template thinks that the vowel before those isn't a or e. bah :p lol I just fixed that, it was all one problem that could go different ways. It should all be good now... — opiaterein — 17:25, 4 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

:::::Just another little one, "ölmüyorler miydi?" (past continuous negative interrogative of "ölmek") is false, it must be "-lar mıydı?".. LOL how terrible suffixes! D'Oh! I would never be able to do that without you! XD Sinek 17:28, 4 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

<un-indenting> Damn, How does this keep happening! lol... I have a couple forms I have to add really quick, but I'll get to this as soon as I'm done. — opiaterein — 17:33, 4 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Heheh sure, whenever you're fine xDD Sinek 17:35, 4 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

While I'm trying to figure out how to fix that one, don't forget to put conjugation tables under ====Conjugation==== ;) like on ölmek — opiaterein — 17:40, 4 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Ok, it should be fixed now. Let me know if you find any more :) — opiaterein — 17:44, 4 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Arg damn! True!! Conjugation ;) Well actually yes I found one more about decension of oturmak. It says "otururım", "oturursın", "otururız", "oturursınız" (simple present, positive) and "oturur mıyım?", "oturur mısın?", "oturur mı?", "oturur mıyız?", "oturur mısınız?" (simple present, positive interrogative"). All the "ı"s must be "u". Well, if a verb's last vowel is "u", we add "-um", "-sun", "-uz", "-sunuz" and "muyum?", "musun?", "mu?", "muyuz?", "musunuz?". I'm going to check the template with all vowels like this, argh it's really horrible xDD Sinek 17:50, 4 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Same problem with the verbs whose last vowel is "ü"

"-üm", "-sün", "-üz", "-sünüz"

"müyüm?", "müsün?", "mü?", "müyüz?", "müsünüz?"

(They're written as "-im", "-sin", "miyim?"....) Sinek 17:55, 4 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Dammit, how many things did I miss in all that coding...lol

In oturmak, you had a when the last vowel of oturur is u, maybe that was it? lol — opiaterein — 18:33, 4 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Shoot! Whoopsies on my part xDD Heyy I have to tell you something, in simple past, you know that suffixes are -dım (-dum, -düm, -dim), -dın ... But verbs that end it f, s, t, k, ç, ş, h, p such as "yatmak", they become

-tım, (-tum, -tim, -tüm) --------> yattım, tuttum, içtim, öptüm

-tın (-tun, -tin, -tün) ---------> yattın, tuttun, içtin, öptün

-tı (-tu, -ti, -tü) -------------> yattı, tuttu, içti, öptü

-tık (-tuk, -tik, -tük) ---------> yattık, tuttuk, içtik, öptük

-tınız (-tunuz, -tiniz, -tünüz) -> yattınız, tuttunuz, içtiniz, öptünüz

-tılar (-tular, -tiler, -tüler) -> yattılar, tuttular, içtiler, öptüler

Is there a way to fix the template for these? It'll be amazing if so =) Best wishes Sinek 16:51, 5 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

It's already in the template :) look at öpmek — opiaterein — 20:51, 6 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Shoot xD that's my fault, sorry xDD

Hello again! How are you? Well, I have just noticed that the third singular person was written as "on" in the template. It must be "o", and yep, I couldn't notice that till now (oopsies =/ ) Can you fix it? Thanks a lot! See you! Sinek 15:26, 15 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

I always forget that in singular it's "o", probably because of the plural "onlar". Thanks for pointing this out, I've fixed it now :) — opiaterein — 15:29, 15 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hehe, yes, it's a common mistake :) sure, that's why I'm here =)) have a nice day! Sinek 16:02, 15 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

The bot goes wonky. Maro 16:32, 5 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Oh this is going to be fun. — opiaterein — 17:13, 5 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hey, I want to make Armenian form-of templates and I need to create two or more separate lines with one {{hy-form}}. Look at Template:hy-form-noun-exp2 to see what I'm talking about. Can you make the wordings "first line" and "second line" appear on separate lines (as if they had # before them) without repeating the {{#switch}} thingie? --Vahagn Petrosyan 20:43, 6 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

I'm not quite sure what you mean. Could you make an entry as an example? — opiaterein — 20:49, 6 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Is this helpful? --Vahagn Petrosyan 20:53, 6 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

I've thought of doing something like that, but I realized something that I don't remember now that made it not work. Are the two lines for like nominative and accusative, genitive and dative? Romanian has the same mix, and I just repeat the template with 'g' in one and 'd' in the other — opiaterein — 20:56, 6 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Yes, two lines are exactly for those. I too will have to repeat the lines if I don't figure something more elegant. Nothing terrible. --Vahagn Petrosyan 21:05, 6 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

It's probably the easiest way to do it. I think for Armenian, you could use 1=definite or indefinite (you could use d and i), the number (s or p) and the case (n, a, g, d, i, l) So it'd look something like {{hy-form-noun|i|s|n|main form}} — opiaterein — 21:09, 6 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Made it so. Only in case, number, def/indef sequence. Now, how would you call in English forms like գիրքս (my book), գիրքդ (your book)? Possessed, possessive? --Vahagn Petrosyan 11:36, 7 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

(unindenting) I always thought Armenian just used possessive pronouns :( maaan. Possessed is usually used as an adjectival past-participle, like possessed by the devil. I'm not sure what besides possessive it could be called in grammar, though... — opiaterein — 11:39, 7 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

You can use either possessive pronouns or possessive suffixes, depends on a taste. I too thought "possessed" sounds too eerie :) will change to "possessive". --Vahagn Petrosyan 12:10, 7 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hello! Thanks for the adds and edits on the Hindi entries you've done. However, please make sure you distinguish between letters ख़ x and ख kʰ (example: ख़ून (khūn) is the proper spelling and not खून (khūn). They are not pronounced the same way. --Dijan 23:35, 13 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

It must've been misspelled in the dictionary I use. On that note, though, is there any place online that I can find the genders of nouns? — opiaterein — 00:21, 14 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Your best bet on the gender of Hindi/Urdu nouns is to look in the John T. Platts A Dictionary of Urdu, Classical Hindi, and English. The only problem with this dictionary is that words of Persian and Arabic origin, such as ख़ून, will not have a Devanagari spelling, only the Arabic/Persian. --Dijan 00:28, 14 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Thanks a bunch :) I'll try to work around my lack of knowledge of the Arabic writing systems — opiaterein — 00:32, 14 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Also, why do you keep removing the bold feature from the Hindi noun template? The only reason I've inserted them is to match with our current {{infl}} template. Take a look at रक्त for the example where the adjective (because we don't have a template for Hindi adjectives yet) uses the {{infl}} template and for the noun it uses the {{hi-noun}} template. With your edit on the template, the adjective entry is bolded, while the noun one is not. --Dijan 01:47, 14 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

I remember quite some time ago there was a vote about bolding and italicizing foreign non-Latin scripts and that it wasn't supposed to be done or something... but I mostly do it because it makes it so much easier to read without making the font gigantic. — opiaterein — 01:49, 14 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Yes, I remember the vote. However, it's still done if one uses "infl" and it just looks bad. Hopefully when that's fixed, then we can remove the bold from the other templates as well. One more thing, the Platts dictionary is a great reference, however try not to copy the Arabic script from their dictionary because they use older fonts which are meant only for the Arabic language and not for Urdu or Persian. For example, they use the dotted "ya" instead of the dotless "ya", etc. Another problem with it is that it uses obsolete Urdu letters as well, such as ڙ instead of ڑ to represent ɽ.

Yeah, I've been wanting to include them, but I've been hesitant about it. I probably won't anymore now that you've mentioned this :D

There should be a way to fix infl so that if sc= is specified, the bolding won't happen... but I'm too tired right now to look at it. I'll have to try to remember in the morning, and if I can't figure it out myself, I'll ask Conrad to look at it. — opiaterein — 02:01, 14 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Umm, I'm pretty sure that that is how it works. Any time that a script parameter is specified, {{infl}} doesn't add bold. -Atelaes λάλει ἐμοί 02:09, 14 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

It hasn't been doing it that I've seen for Devanagari or Cyrillic. — opiaterein — 02:12, 14 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

(Removed, causes script errors —CodeCat 19:26, 4 May 2013 (UTC)). I'm seeing no difference between these first, but I am between the second and third. You? -Atelaes λάλει ἐμοί 02:20, 14 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Yeah, the second one is doing what it should here... I dunno why it wasn't working earlier. Or maybe I just don't remember. Hm... I'll try to figure it out in the morning, I think — opiaterein — 02:24, 14 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Including the Urdu spelling is not a problem, just make sure you apply the appropriate changes :D If you want, you can include the Devanagari part only, and I'll add the Urdu parts. --Dijan 02:03, 14 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

I'd have to learn the Arabic abjads, and I'm already learning Devanagari slowly enough as it is :D so I think I'll focus on the Deva and if you don't mind cleaning up after me, I guess we can work that out :) — opiaterein — 02:06, 14 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

No problem :D Let me know if you need any help :D --Dijan 02:21, 14 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi! Generally, almost all Hindi/Urdu words do not carry the schwa on the last syllable. Another rule is that if a word is a compound word, then it does not carry the schwa on the last syllable of each word when broken down into separate parts. Sometimes it is difficult for non-speakers to tell when it is not pronounced and when it is, as oftentimes some dictionaries follow the Sanskrit rules (which include the schwa). --Dijan 18:24, 15 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

The declension template looks great! I'm going to copy it and make the Urdu version of it! Excellent work! --Dijan 19:49, 15 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Yaaay how exciting ^_^ Now I have to get more used to some other kinds of nouns and make more specific ones. This should be fun :) — opiaterein — 19:50, 15 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Almost forgot, we used to have "Alternative spellings" as the heading for the Perso-Arabic and Devanagari script variants in the past, and the current form was the outcome of the debate that followed. I think having both scripts on the same page is necessary to indicate the mutual intelligibility (as well as precise closeness) of these two registers of the same language. However, listing the scripts under "Alternative spellings" indicates that the two are "one language" and causes more outrage as it did before. The current setting clearly indicates "Hindi" / "Urdu" spelling, not making it clear whether they are one language or two. So far, we haven't gotten any vandalism or complaints about this representation. --Dijan 20:18, 15 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Ew politics...I don't want to mess with that :D — opiaterein — 20:35, 15 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

One more thing: in pronunciations, there is no distinction between श and ष. Both are represented by ʃ. --Dijan 00:07, 20 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Somewhere I read that श is pronounced in most cases, but in front of some letters. So... I've just been putting everywhere :)

On another note, wtf is the difference between विज्ञान and शास्त्र? — opiaterein — 00:12, 20 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

There's not much difference between them. विज्ञान means "understanding", "knowledge", while शास्त्र "study", "code", "rule". Both loosely translate as "science". --Dijan 00:44, 20 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Oh yeah, there was one more thing - how do you pronounce ज? The Wikipedia entry on Devanagari lists it as jñ, but I noticed you changed that to 'gy', which I've also seen other places. — opiaterein — 01:03, 20 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

ज्ञ is another cluster inherited from Sanskrit. However, the Sanskrit pronunciation "jña" is not used in Hindi. Hindi pronunciation is "gya". --Dijan 01:08, 20 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Thanks :)

I think the usual name structure would be hi-noun-form. --EncycloPetey 21:18, 15 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

That already exists for the inflection line. hi-form-noun is for the definition line, because {{inflection of}} doesn't have an sc= option. It also takes up less bytes — opiaterein — 21:21, 15 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

For the sake of consistency I was planning to use what is now {{ru-decl-noun-1}} as my base {{ru-decl-noun}} template (it has the same sequence of parameters which we use for other languages). If I swap their contents, can your bot change all entries linking to {{ru-decl-noun}}, to link to {{ru-decl-noun-1}}, and the ones linking to {{ru-noun1}}, to link to {{ru-decl-noun}}? I don't know what efforts this requires, so if it's long, we can leave everything as it is now. It's not a big deal, of course. --Vahagn Petrosyan 17:44, 16 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

I moved your ru-decl-noun to ru-decl-noun-1 to make it simpler to switch ru-noun to ru-decl-noun. Switching these others might be a little different, though, because of the order of the parameters... I'd have to look at them more closely to switch them without putting some forms in the wrong places and stuff. — opiaterein — 19:49, 16 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Can you edit {{ru-noun}} to display feminine/masculine counterparts when you have time, like in Hebrew איש? I mean something like this:

бегун (begún) m (plural бегуны, feminine counterpart бегуня)

f= and m= are good parameter names for this. --Vahagn Petrosyan 17:56, 25 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Is it a good idea to keep changing ं / ँ, ङ, ञ, and ण all into ã, ĩ, õ, etc in transliterations? The problem is that they should be transliterated as ṃ, ṅ, ñ, and ṇ. --Dijan 06:14, 17 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Each one should have a specific transliteration, especially if there are differences in the pronunciation. But I'm not sure on the subtleties of that one, and Wikipedia isn't particularly helpful on the subject. — opiaterein — 12:00, 17 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Sorry for taking so long to get back to you on this. The pronunciation of each is different, influenced by the following consonant. The difference is in articulation caused by the proximity to the following consonant. Actually, the table on Wikipedia is an excellent guide (even though they do not explicitly mention this). Just follow the consonant table on Devanagari. These are the nasals: म "m" m, न "n" n, ण "ṇ" ɳ, ञ "ñ" ɲ, and ङ "ṅ" ŋ. The use of each depends on the following consonant. म् is used only before the labials: प, फ, ब, भ and म. न् is used only before the dentals: त, थ, द, ध and न. ण् before the cerebrals. ञ् before the palatals. ङ् before the gutturals. And of course, these rules do not apply to the fricatives and the approximants (look at their location on the table). In Hindi, the usage of this rule is clouded by the use of anusvara (bindu) and candrabindu at the writer's discretion (resulting in incorrect spellings, even in many Hindi learning books), for sake of simplifying the script by shorting it of one character. For example, the more correct form of the word "Hindi" is हिन्दी, while the less correct form is हिंदी. The rules for using the bindu and candrabindu are shown on Wikipedia and you can read about that (located under the vowels table). I hope this helps. It was one of the first rules I learned when I started learning Hindi and Urdu six years ago. --Dijan 05:37, 19 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

So basically the nasalization matches the pronunciations of certain letters based on the pronunciation of the next letter... alrighty, I think I've gotcha. What should we do about the nasals at the ends of words? I guess leaving the tilded vowel characters wouldn't be a bad idea, since the next consonant sound isn't specified? — opiaterein — 12:53, 19 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

The anusvara and the candrabindu should be transliterated as "ṃ" if there's no consonant following. --Dijan 21:31, 19 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Lol I like that change you made. How about a vowel with a tilde and the ṃ, so there's an actual visual of the nasalization of the vowel? — opiaterein — 22:04, 19 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

LOL sorry. I'm looking at way too many things at once and looking over my notes for a bit and for a second even I got confused. I meant to keep the early response. Using just the vowel with the tilde is perfect. There's no need for "ṃ". :D --Dijan 22:31, 19 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

That works, too :D

I keep worrying that I'm adding incorrect declensions to noun entries because I don't think the different forms are getting enough google hits. It freaks me out some, so I haven't been adding the form-of entries — opiaterein — 22:36, 19 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Any particular words you're worried about? --Dijan 22:40, 19 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

(let's unindent lol) The last one I did was धर्म. I think पर्वत was one, चीज़...lots of random ones lol — opiaterein — 22:45, 19 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Looks fine to me. As far as I know, very few words have exceptions to the general declension rules, and most of them are inherited directly from Sanskrit, Persian and Arabic (and the exceptions usually come in inherited plurals). Don't get discouraged just because you aren't getting many hits for a vocative form of धर्म! I mean how many people do you know that use a vocative form for the word "religion" in any language? :P --Dijan 23:26, 19 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Oh religion, how you fulfill me! I dunno haha... I try mostly to search for the indirect plurals, since that one tends to be the one that changes and I have a chance of finding... — opiaterein — 23:31, 19 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

I see you're doing some work on {{es-conj}}. Great! Since I never finished my first attempt, I thought I'd share with you what I was at least thinking. This template should be created for a number of reasons:

1. We can consolidate the layout information in one place for easy standardization and changes.
2. Consolidate the "reflexive" support. This would hopefully extend this capability to those templates that current don't have it. The minor complication with this is that there are two current methods for determining what the accented stem should be when adding the pronouns at the end (like on positive commands). Some templates (e.g. {{es-conj-ar (o-ue)}}) can figure it out so we just pass in ref_obj=y. Others (e.g. {{es-conj-ar}}) can't, so we have to pass in ref_stem=abcdefg.

The issue that really stopped me from continuing was that I wasn't sure of an elegant way to handle templates, such as {{es-conj-ir (abolir)}}, that currently show a conjugation but have it grayed out (especially when trying to handle the reflexive pronouns as well). It would be easier if we could just not list those conjugations (just show a "-" for instance), but I'm not sure how others feel about this. Another thing that will help is that the variables should be named not numbered (like {{fr-conj}}). This way the template invocation can span multiple lines w/o having the line breaks show up in final presentation. Was this along the lines of what you were thinking as well? --Bequw → ¢ • τ 01:59, 19 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

I think maybe reflexives would be easier to do in the subtemplates of 'xx-conj', but I didn't want to get ahead of myself - I wanted to make sure the template had its basic shape down before I started getting into more complicated stuff. Truth be told, I'm hesitant to work on much of Wiktionary's Spanish stuff because of some of the mess that already abounds.

I always use numbers instead of names because they're easier to see and use... all the little dots and letters can get confusing. There's a way to make both names and numbers accepted by the template, but for now I'll leave the numbers. Another thing I do is, to avoid the multiple line thing like you mention, I always specify |1= in the sub-templates, which effectively gets around that problem.

On the other issue, I only just recently found out that Spanish even has defective verbs... so that's another thing on the 'too-complicated-to-worry-about-just-yet' list. :| — opiaterein — 12:44, 19 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

That was my own vulgarity, BTW. DAVilla 22:00, 21 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Lord have mercy on my soul — opiaterein — 22:04, 21 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hello, thanks for the creation of the entry, but please reconsider adding the Turkish claim. I know it is the propagated trite version, but in the grammar of Serbo-Croatian which I am reading (Гудков, Сербохорватский язык, М., 1969, изд-во МГУ and МГУ is an outstanding institution in scientifical research) the word is described as græcism. I am discussing this with Flyax, join it, if you are interested. So my conclusion/impression based on the book is that καλντερίμι is the source for the Turkish, Romanian, Bulgarian and Serbo-Croatian words. The only remaining quæstion is from which Ancient Greek word this one descends and there Flyax may help us. Regards. The uſer hight Bogorm converſation 14:35, 24 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

I only add what the Romanian etymological dictionaries tell me to add, so if you want it your way, you make the entry :p

kaldırım gets 3.360.000 google hits, and since Romanian has its fair share of Turkish derivations, I have no problem putting it in the etymology - especially when that's the etymology that Dicţionaru Explicativ gives.

Regardless of the absolute origin of the word, according to the dictionary, the Romanian descendant comes from Turkish - not straight from Greek. — opiaterein — 14:44, 24 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

I know about the Turkish words of course, the Bulgarian language was also infested and I am not contesting the Turkish spelling, but I am eager to lay bare the ultimate (Ancient) Greek origin. The uſer hight Bogorm converſation 14:53, 24 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

My point is that while the Ancient Greek word may be the absolute source of the Romanian, it didn't get to Romanian directly. It had to pass through Turkish. — opiaterein — 14:55, 24 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi again, why did you remove the word from the requæsted entries? Here in this Romanian monolingual dictionary it is given and although I do not speak Romanian, words like Stâlp, metalic, navă hint at mast, as is the meaning of the SC æquivalent. Does it have an alternative spelling? The uſer hight Bogorm converſation 16:07, 24 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

I removed it because I added it. — opiaterein — 17:43, 24 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, I had not noticed. The uſer hight Bogorm converſation 17:46, 24 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

It's important to specify when French has simply borrowed a word from Latin, to distinguish from those which are natural descendants. E.g. (sticking with genital anatomy), gaine and vagin both come from Latin vagina, but only one is a descendant. Or at least, that is what ‘Descendants’ means to me.....anyway the point is that Etymology sections for Romance languages should, when dealing with Latin, always specify when the word is a borrowing. Ƿidsiþ 17:26, 26 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

So how do you know which is which? — opiaterein — 17:29, 26 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Well, the same way you know anything for an etymology section, I guess – good sources. The online Trésor de la Langue Française has good Etymology info, and I also have a nice copy of the Robert Etymologique du Français. Ƿidsiþ 17:32, 26 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Thanks :) — opiaterein — 17:35, 26 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Oh my gosh! I tried to make a template like these but failed. I thought I had to write each word for eveeeer xD That's really wonderful! Thank you very much! Aah OK, I'll use that template after this =) Thanks again! Best wishes! Sinek 15:18, 30 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hmm, I can help xD Actually they're similar, it's just in Azeri, suffixes "-de, -den, -e, -ler, -lere, -lerde, -lerden" are written as "-də, -dən, -ə, -lər, -lərdə, -lərdən" if the word ends in e, ö, i or ə. And in Azeri, -dən, -də don't become -tən or -tə. Lastly if the root of the word changes, it changes into "y", not "ğ". For example örümcek (spider, in Turkish) becomes "örümceği" in accusative case, but hörümçək (spider, in Azeri) becomes "hörümçəyi". I think that's all, if I didn't miss anything =) Sinek 15:39, 30 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Heheh, I love you too! xD Yeah, you are perfect! xD See this:

• Vikipediya (nominative)
• Vikipediyayı (accusative)
• Vikipediyaya (dative)
• Vikipediyada (locative)
• Vikipediyadan (ablative)
• Vikipediyanın (genitive)

• As you see, we don't use apostrophe with proper nouns, unlike we do in Turkish. Sinek 15:48, 30 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Ahamm, congratulations, the template works great! I tried it with qaçqın. Cool! Sinek 16:30, 30 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hahhahhh I didn't even notice that I used the tr-template xDDD hmm sooo in peyğəmbər it works great x) Sinek 16:40, 30 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

These templates are really useful. I must go now, but I'll check them as soon as possible. By the way, can you take a look at "akvaryum"? It says "akvaryumı" for the accusative case; it must be "akvaryumu". Did I do anything wrong? Thanks in advance! See you! Sinek 16:49, 30 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi, there seems to be a problem with the accelerated creation of the definite genitive forms. 50 Xylophone Players talk 17:19, 30 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Yes, I've noticed. I can't figure it out, though, so put off making those until I've talked to Conrad about it. — opiaterein — 17:20, 30 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Have you seen Wiki-romanization section of Wiktionary:Transliteration? I think it's a result of Wiktionary:Beer parlour archive/2008/April#Wiktionary:Transliteration discussion. For what it's worth, I too would keep only one page on transliteration and force everyone to follow it under pain of execution by hanging :) --Vahagn Petrosyan 00:09, 1 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

I'm trying to make it more standardized so we (and by we, I mean I, because this started as a selfish project :D) can have an easy place to find our transliteration standards, instead of having Wiktionary: here and Appendix: there and all sorts of other shit everywhere. :D I'll do a category for Armenian here in a second. Have you seen {{translitreq}}? — opiaterein — 00:12, 1 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

I support merging all alphabet-script-romanization-transliteration related crap. Hope you finish it before someone pops up here to kick your ass :D. And, yes, {{translitreq}} is good. --Vahagn Petrosyan 00:20, 1 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Fuck the naysayers, I'm always right!! ;) It seems to have been well-recieved so far, though, so fingers crossed for the future :) — opiaterein — 00:21, 1 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

FYI. If you need a hand fixing the ones you've made so far, give me a buzz. Conrad.Irwin 09:42, 1 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for editing творение, I'll use the Template:ru-noun in the future. Are there any guidelines as to the transliteration to be found anywhere? --Joti 15:55, 2 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Ah, I should have guessed that one. I got myself a Babel, too. --Joti 16:08, 2 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

This is not a lemma form in Latin. It is always better to take the etymology back to a lemma form. See WT:ALA#Romance language verbs. --EncycloPetey 16:03, 2 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

I didn't check the entry to see that - moving too fast as usual — opiaterein — 16:05, 2 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Pretty much any LAtin verb ending in -are, -ari, -ere, -ire, etc. is not a lemma. Verb lemmata in Latin normally and in -o or -or. --EncycloPetey 16:07, 2 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

I remember, I just wasn't thinkin' about it. :o — opiaterein — 16:09, 2 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

I had considered adding some Ladino words at one point, but my sources disagree about the appropriate alphabet for writing the language. The best book I've found on the subject says it's using its own Latin transcription for ease of most English readers, but that Hebrew script is normal (as it was traditional). Various Roman-alphabet transcription schemes exist, but if we're going to use Roman script, then there ought to be a Wiktionary:About Ladino somewhere identifying the system we're using and justifying it. --EncycloPetey 19:42, 2 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Re:Asturian colors: the same color scheme is in use on Spanish, Portuguese, Catalan, Italian, and Latin conjugation tables, at least. The same colors, for the same moods/tenses. Changing that would be breaking with uniformity. --EncycloPetey 19:42, 2 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Ladino Wikipedia seems to be written in mostly the Latin alphabet, so it's good enough for me. My setup doesn't make it impossible to have 'alternative spellings' and whatnot. I just can't read much Hebrew.

Uniformly unattractive templates aren't my style. I had thought of improving at least Spanish, Portuguese and Catalan templates, and even started with {{es-conj}}, which Bequw and Nadando seemed interested in... but apparently the uniformity of colors between separate languages is of more importance. Out with the new! — opiaterein — 19:52, 2 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Re:Ladino. OK, but there does seem to be more than one Latin system in use for written Ladino. Do you know which one is being used on the Ladino Wikipedia? --EncycloPetey 19:55, 2 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

No idea. — opiaterein — 19:57, 2 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Pity. It'd be nice to have a standard to guide contributors. --EncycloPetey 19:59, 2 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

I personally wasn't planning on being incredibly active in the Ladino section, I just found an interesting grammar and wanted to add a thing or two. I figured a noun template would be a decent start. — opiaterein — 20:00, 2 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Why did you block me (IP was 81.185.159.97) for three days just after one edit in the sandbox? Isn't the sandbox made for testing? 77.192.55.215 22:20, 3 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

I usually block for longer than that. And I don't think "IMA CHARGIN MAH LAZAR" can really be considered testing. It's the kind of thing I'd expect for the vandals we get. — opiaterein — 22:48, 3 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

That's wrong. "IMA CHARGIN MAH LAZAR" was not written by me (IP 81.185.159.97), but was by the IP that made the edit after. Look at the page history. Mine was just random words/characters to see what "<big></big>" could look like. 77.192.55.215 06:56, 4 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

It's interesting to note how similar your edit was to previous sandbox editors, some of whom are also in your subnet. , , , , . There are other previous edits (from your subnet again) which consist only of adding stupidly "BIG" words to the sandbox, thus rendering it next-to-useless for other people without undoing the added rubbish (particularly early on, mouse-lovers will have had a moment of difficultly in trying to click the edit button as it was hidden behind the added text). I see no problem with this block as you are highly likely the person who has been doing this. Conrad.Irwin 07:32, 4 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

In fact it is me who added gigantic rubbish with different IP, but not me who added "IMA CHARGIN MAH LAZAR". Block me for doing that if you want to, I perfectly know it's rubbish, but not for edits I haven't done. PS : how did you do to change this despite the big characters hiding the edit buttons? By editing a previous version in the history? 77.192.55.215 09:53, 4 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Here's a thought. If you were actually planning on contributing something useful and you don't want to get blocked for screwin' around in the sandbox, make an account and make good edits to something other than the sandbox. — opiaterein — 13:22, 4 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

There should be a robot that automaticly cleans the sandbox regularly. They have one on Simple English Wikipedia and it works well. 77.192.55.215 18:19, 4 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hey there! Sorry, I've been absent a bit lately (busy with finals). I wanted to warn you about entering Hindi/Urdu words that end in ा/ہ that are derived from Persian/Arabic (Persian: ه, Arabic: ة). Although the Devanagari spelling shows an आ (ɑː) at the end of the word, the pronunciation is that of the shorter अ (ə). Also, please note that the Urdu ہ "he" is a different Unicode character from the Persian/Arabic ه "he". --Dijan 08:57, 4 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Words ending in -like cannot be SOP as long as they are (attestably) single words. Otherwise, you might as well call headache or yearbook or grapevine SOP. Merely being able to recognise the separate parts doesn't reduce their grammatical status! Equinox ◑ 01:03, 6 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hey, that sounds great! I did everything you said, but I don't know whether I could do it correctly or not. How can I try? Sinek 14:23, 6 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

My gosh! That's great! Thanks a looot! Sinek 14:30, 6 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

You are the best! XDD Sinek 14:33, 6 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

I tidied it and created a plural because it seemed to have a fair bit of usage. Do you think it's not enough? (If not, plural should go too.) Equinox ◑ 15:35, 8 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

When I deleted it it just had some tosh business on it. If you want to make it fancy, I don't mind you re-creating it :) — opiaterein — 15:36, 8 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Good work on user scripts. I added Category:User Cyrs and the old Cyrillic templates. Comments:

• The default form for the main Latn category reads “these users read Latin,” which is probably incorrect. Etc.
• The concept of “native script” feels a bit strange. We all learn language as tots, by osmosis, and it becomes practically innate; native. But most of us learn to write with formal lessons, the same way we learn non-native languages. We may have one or more that we learn first, but writing is not native in the same way as language.
• Native also implies supreme proficiency, but this is incorrect. Although I learned the 26-letter English alphabet first, I am only familiar with the orthographic conventions of a few European languages, and completely ignorant of some other letters which might be used in dozens of languages scripts.

Cheers. —Michael Z. 2009-05-13 01:07 z

• The main category reads "These users read Latin" because I don't approve of a red link to a page titled "the Latin alphabet" and I haven't had the motivation to add fanciness to the UsersRead template to allow a differently linked situation.
• The concept of native script doesn't seem strange to me - it's simply the first you learn. Or the first few, in whatever cases.
• Native doesn't imply supreme proficiency by any means at all. Native speakers of English very frequently mutilate it to the point that other native speakers can't understand half of what they say. The context of your "native script" is filtered by the information of your "native language". With an alphabet like that of Latin which is used for very many languages, variations of course occur. However, it's essentially the same as a native speaker of American English not knowing what a torch is in its British use. — opiaterein — 01:13, 13 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Well, I don't read Latin. Maybe if you allow editors to enter a link manually, that would avoid the inevitable red link when they correct the text, as in Category:User Cyrs. The link could variously be a definition, a Wiktionary appendix, or a Wikipedia article. —Michael Z. 2009-05-13 01:31 z

— opiaterein — 01:32, 13 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Oops, I just spotted that. But it leaves an awkward bold “the” in e.g. Category:User Latn. Why add a hidden parameter when we all know how to make a wikilink? —Michael Z. 2009-05-13 01:34 z

Just because we know how to make them doesn't mean we have to be bothered doing it manually if there's no special reason to. — opiaterein — 01:37, 13 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

The boldfaced word the looks like a careless mistake, and there's no way to work around it. If the template can't accommodate sensible formatting of the link and title otherwise, then I'll just remove the bold formatting from it. —Michael Z. 2009-05-13 01:45 z

Category:User Hebr — opiaterein — 01:47, 13 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

or alternatively, there's a way that's so easy to work around it, it's fucking ridiculous. Your pants are on fire, douse them. — opiaterein — 01:50, 13 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

So we should look like remedial web design students rather than careless typographers? No one would choose to link the word the unless they were hobbled by a limiting technology. —Michael Z. 2009-05-13 01:55 z

If all you're going to do is bitch about the template, can you find another template to have an issue with? I'm pretty sure I was the one who did all the work to set the shit up, so your petty issues with the typeface aren't impressing me. I don't contribute to Wiktionary because it keeps me young - I do it because I enjoy it. But this kind of silly shit makes me enjoy it a lot less. So if you're going to whine, at least do it constructively. — opiaterein — 02:00, 13 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Whoops, I just thought you might be interested in suggestions how to make it better. Sorry, just forget I said anything. —Michael Z. 2009-05-13 02:02 z

(unindenting) "So we should look like remedial web design students rather than careless typographers?" Yeah, way to suggest. I realize I'm being snappy, but the fact that this issue is so minor reminds me of something else that's being blow out of proportion, and I didn't want this to get as out of hand as that nonsense. — opiaterein — 02:06, 13 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

I was reacting to what looked like your arguments against making improvements. Seriously, I am sorry about this, and my first purpose was to come here and congratulate you on the good work. —Michael Z. 2009-05-13 02:09 z

I draw somewhat fine lines between improving and making-unnecessarily-complicated. I doubt many people venture into the User lang/script categories, and I also doubt that the typeface of the info box will make them think Wiktionary is silly or unprofessional.

But I do appreciate that you were impressed by the project, I don't get that particularly often. Sorry for my grouchiness but seriously, look at that conversation and keep in mind that the whole thing came from someone changing two numbers that have absolutely nothing to do with the actual criteria for inclusion, and that no Wiktionary vote could or would ever change ISO codes. It's frustrating to see such ridiculously bureaucratic nonsense on Wiktionary. — opiaterein — 02:13, 13 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi. I see you were one of the active users of this template. What happened? Is something wrong with it that no one uses it anymore? It’s convenient for Armenian entries, by letting me have the IPA notation and Audio link in the same line. --Vahagn Petrosyan 14:55, 13 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

I haven't been using it because I haven't been making audio recordings - otherwise I'd say it's definitely the way to go. — opiaterein — 14:56, 13 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hello again. As far as I know, the imperative ending for आप / آپ (āp) uses "-ie", unless the last sound of the root is a vowel, in which case "-iye" is used. For example: The correct form is कीजिए / کیجئے (kījie) as you have it listed now for करना (karnā). It is incorrect to write देखिये / دیکھیے (dekhiye) as it currently displays for देखना (dekhnā). The correct form is देखिए / دیکھئے (dekhie). --Dijan 05:49, 15 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

I got the -iye forms from w:Hindi-Urdu_grammar#Verbs. :s — opiaterein — 11:32, 15 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hey there! How is it going? Well, I was working on çatlak and a meaning of it is a little fracture or damage on a bone, but I couldn't find the exact English word. As you are a native speaker, I think asking you is the best idea. What's the exact word for this? Not a fracture, less than it, but more than an injury, like a crack on a bone. Thank you very much in advance! Sinek 10:06, 16 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

I know there's a kind of fracture called a "hairline fracture", but this is kinda specific. I think "a crack in the bone" would be enough until someone who knows a medical term comes along. — opiaterein — 13:25, 16 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Ah, sorry for my belated answer but I noticed your respond this evening. OK, thanks a lot, I've added it to the article. Good night =) Sinek 22:21, 22 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Please see the ongoing discussion in places like WT:RFDO on "context" templates like Template:fruit. Such templates are all being considered for deletion, as they apply definition into the context tag, rather than into the definition. A context tag is supposed to indictae a restriction in usage, not a definition. --EncycloPetey 01:33, 17 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Unnecessary distinction. Anyone with half a brain should be able to tell the difference. — opiaterein — 01:34, 17 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

nevertheless, such templates have been abused, and there is a move to prohibit them and delete them. I thought you should know before beginning a major editing spree that any work you might do with such template might be for naught. --EncycloPetey 01:37, 17 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

I love when Wiktionary steps backward rather than stepping sideways. — opiaterein — 01:40, 17 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi Opiaterein,

Two things:

1. Re: ]: At an entry for a specifically non-defective spelling (such as מילון), I don't think it's a good idea to give the defective spellings for inflected forms (such as מלון); that just seems incredibly misleading and/or confusing.
2. Re: ] etc.: I don't know whether it's a good idea to give a transliteration that doesn't correspond to the niqqud. Maybe that is just the best way to do it, but personally I'd feel more comfortable if we've discussed the issue at Wiktionary talk:About Hebrew before going off and doing anything. :-/

Thanks,
—Ruakh_TALK 17:56, 19 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

On the first point, it's not my fault that Hebrew doesn't write vowels and has to use yod to disambiguate. The Hebrew wiktionary completely redirects מילון to מלון and doesn't use the extra yod because the niqqud shows it already. I was a bit iffy on how to do that, but eh.

On the other, the way I understood it, the form גנבתן shouldn't have the shva, anyway. I learned 'ganavten' from a native speaker, so if it's a biblical difference, then maybe Hebrew and Biblical Hebrew need to be split up like Greek and Ancient Greek are. — opiaterein — 18:04, 19 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Actually, now I have to check on this, since I can't get ahold of said native at the moment. I have to go back over my notes, it seems like I might've been hasty somewhere :) — opiaterein — 18:20, 19 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

On the first point, I'm not saying it's your fault, I'm just saying that there are good solutions to this issue — and your approach is not one of them. A number of us have been thinking about these entries for quite a while, and you can make use of our collective experience; you don't have to try to re-invent the wheel.

On the second point, you understood it wrong: any dictionary or grammar-book will give you the shva spelling. We do pronounce it /gaˈnav.ten/, at least in colloquial speech, but it's not obvious to me how we should handle these transliterations where the grammatical pronunciation and colloquial pronunciation do not match. Hence my suggestion that we discuss it before proceeding.

—Ruakh_TALK 19:10, 19 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

I'm supposed to be on your side, so I'm not sure how to read your tone. I don't recall trying to reinvent the wheel, but I do recall just starting to learn Hebrew around a week ago. So all things considered, I think I'm learning much more quickly than I anticipated. But if you really feel that my contributions to Hebrew are so poor, and that you have the language under control, I'm sure I can find a way to stop myself from trying to contribute to that bit of Wiktionary. — opiaterein — 19:22, 19 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Read my tone as: I am not at all criticizing your Hebrew, and I am not at all trying to discourage you from contributing to Hebrew entries here — in fact, I'd welcome the additional help, as would (I'm sure) the other Hebrew contributors (after all, we are a wiki); but some of your contributions have been so poor, as you put it, that I'd appreciate some trust here. I think my first comment here was polite, and calmly explained that I thought there were some problems with your edits; but your response seemed basically defensive, saying that it's not your fault, it's Hebrew's. And, well, yes, in some sense that's true: it's not your fault that some properties of Hebrew and (especially) its writing system are difficult to incorporate into a panlingual dictionary. But in another sense, there are better ways and there are worse ways to do so, and if you were to refuse to listen to other editors' input, then that much would be your fault. (Likewise, if we refused to listen to your input, that would be our fault — as someone just freshly learning Hebrew, you surely have valuable insights on how to present Hebrew words in a way that's useful to English-speakers; and often new speakers notice idioms and patterns that established speakers don't even notice any more.) —Ruakh_TALK 19:49, 19 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

It's somewhat difficult to believe that you'd welcome my help, considering all of {{he-conj-pa'al-'ef'ol-sh'leimim}}. So, I shrug and wander off. C'est le tien. I'll keep my Hebrew minor from now on. — opiaterein — 21:59, 19 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Sorry. —Ruakh_TALK 00:53, 20 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Don't be; my fault. — opiaterein — 01:01, 20 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

I edited {{bg-noun}} to make it collapsable. Now that design hides table borders within (see this screenshot). Any ideas? --Vahagn Petrosyan 23:50, 22 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

I used to have a template that had nice little borders... let me see if I can find the old version of it to remember how I did it. — opiaterein — 00:00, 23 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Nevermind, I remembered how and fixed it :) see палец — opiaterein — 00:02, 23 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Thanks! --Vahagn Petrosyan 01:17, 23 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

My pleasure :) — opiaterein — 01:20, 23 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Can the Romanian word cumva have the definition "by any chance" or "by chance"; or are they just minor extensions of the first line definition? Caladon 13:35, 25 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

They're basically minor extensions that would be the Romanian equivalents depending on the context. Like "By chance do you have..." in Romanian would be "Ai (or aveţi) cumva..." — opiaterein — 13:38, 25 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

I thought that in languages that don't have a phonemic distinction between close-mid vowels such as and , and open-mid vowels such as and , the normal practice was to use close-mid symbols such as /e/ and /o/ to denote the phonemes. Was I wrong? —Ruakh_TALK 13:41, 30 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Well, RP doesn’t have , yet our and others’ transcriptions still use <ɔ> invalid IPA characters (<>) (though perhaps because of ). French uses <ʁ> invalid IPA characters (<>), despite it being the only /r/ the language has. Also, we voted long ago to use <ɹ> invalid IPA characters (<>) and <ɻ> invalid IPA characters (<>) instead of Lua error in Module:parse_utilities at line 549: Modifier <⁠r> lacks a prefix, should begin with one of '⁠a:'⁠, '⁠aa:'⁠, '⁠q:'⁠, '⁠qq:'⁠, '⁠qual:'⁠ and '⁠ref:'⁠: 1=<⁠r> in our English pronunciatory transcriptions, lest the latter be confused with the actual voiced alveolar trill . Seeing as we’re an omnilingual dictionary, it makes sense for us to use the phonetic characters closest to the actual phones of a language’s phonemes, even if that language does not phonemically distinguish them, for the sake of other languages (diacritics and other IPA suprasegmentals notwithstanding). † ﴾^(u):Raifʻhār ^(t):Doremítzwr﴿ 14:41, 30 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

O.K., point taken. In this case, my understanding is that and are more open than the phones in question, and and are more close. What then? —Ruakh_TALK 14:53, 30 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Aah, I see. Well, you could always use <e̞> invalid IPA characters (<>) and <o̞> invalid IPA characters (<>) or <ɛ̝> invalid IPA characters (<>) and <ɔ̝> invalid IPA characters (<>)… † ﴾^(u):Raifʻhār ^(t):Doremítzwr﴿ 15:06, 30 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

That just seems incredibly misleading … the use of those diacritics in a phonemic transcription would imply that they distinguished phonemically from the undiacriticked version, no? (BTW, I thought angle-brackets were used to indicate orthography; as in, say, "French <g> sometimes represents /g/ and sometimes /ʒ/.") —Ruakh_TALK 15:09, 30 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hmm, I suppose so (for the <1% of our users who are that proficient in the IPA); I guess you could always opt for narrow, phonetic transcriptions (works for Irish, French, &c.). Failing that, I don’t suppose it matters which character you use if you’re only approximating the phone (as long as the usage is consistent, so as to avoid giving the impression that and are distinct phones in the language in question).

“I thought angle-brackets were used to indicate orthography” — Indeed; I was talking about the diacriticked characters, rather than the phones or phonemes to which they refer. † ﴾^(u):Raifʻhār ^(t):Doremítzwr﴿ 15:26, 30 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Well, looks like you guys have gotten a lot more in on this than I lol... anyway, regardless of the phonetic distinction between and within a language, the distinction still exists... so had I just started learning Hebrew and had never heard it, since I know IPA, I would prefer to see the more correct character, so I can pronounce things as well as I can from the beginning, indeed, for any language. — opiaterein — 16:47, 30 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

I think you meant to say “regardless of the phonemic distinction between and within a language, the phonetic distinction still exists” — that was the point that I was trying to make; however, Ruakh seems to be suggesting that the actual phone falls somewhere between and — is this is case, or did I misunderstand him? † ﴾^(u):Raifʻhār ^(t):Doremítzwr﴿ 17:40, 30 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

You understood me correctly; but I'm not speaking with total certainty, because I don't know exactly what a "pure" and would be, if we ignored all specific languages. In English terms, it's definitely between the diphthong of "mace" and vowel of "mess", and I'd judge it closer to the latter; but in French terms, I think it's closer to the vowel of "mes" than that of "messe". And of course, there's lots of allophonic and interpersonal variation; and I don't think all Modern Hebrew speakers have fully merged the four traditional vowels in question (בֶּ , בֵּ , בֵּי , and בְּ ). (That is, I don't think any Modern Hebrew speaker has fully merged all four, what with length and stress and such, but more specifically, I think there are speakers who don't use the exact same vowel quality for all four.) I wonder if maybe we should post this sort of question at one of Wikipedia's village pumps; I'm sure there are Wikipedians with training in Modern Hebrew phonetics. —Ruakh_TALK 19:00, 30 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi. I would appreciate your input at Template_talk:hu-decl. You've created the template, after all. --Vahagn Petrosyan 00:31, 1 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

Can you have your bot replace {{oe-noun}} with {{ang-decl-noun}} in all Old English articles linking to oe-noun? It's necessary for the sake of consistency to our de facto languagecode-decl-noun naming convention. Also, how hard is it to get the bot do that? Because I have many such requests for Russian, I want to know how much I can bother you? :) --Vahagn Petrosyan 03:32, 4 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

To be honest, every time I see a "You have new messages!" thing when I get on Wiktionary I kinda say "Ugh" until I see it's you, or one of the few other people on here I enjoy talking to :D It's actually pretty easy to replace one template with another. The less optional parameters there are, the better. I think Russian should be pretty easy, from the templates I've seen...

An example on what I mean about the parameters is when I recently did this for the Romanian templates. First I moved ro-noun to ro-noun-old, then for the switch to the new version of ro-noun I did something like

-switch {{ro-noun-old|gend=f|pl=, {{ro-noun|f|

-switch {{ro-noun-old|gend=m|pl=, {{ro-noun|m|

so the order can make a difference with stuff like that. But yeah, long story short, I'd love to do this :) I like being able to use the bot and I haven't felt like doing any batch-upload stuff recently. — opiaterein — 14:42, 4 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

Nice! Then you can rename {{oe-noun}} to {{ang-decl-noun}} and start replacing {{oe-noun| with {{temp|ang-decl-noun| without any parameter changes, until I formulate what needs to be done with Russian. --Vahagn Petrosyan 14:54, 4 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

Another request: can you replace sc=Hayeren with sc=Armn, please? I want to delete {{Hayeren}}. --Vahagn Petrosyan 18:13, 15 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

The bot is apparently disagreeing with me when I'm trying to use the replace-text thing... it might take a while :s — opiaterein — 19:54, 15 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

Whazzup, dawg? Another request: this one’s easy and you have already done such stuff. All links to Template:ru-decl-noun-1 should be replaced by links to Template:ru-decl-noun. Can you do that? Some of the links are in the Template namespace, i.e. the ones in Category:Russian declension templates. Hope that’s not a problem. --Vahagn Petrosyan 07:38, 23 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

Lmao I can't believe you just said Whazzup dawg :p

Unfortunately, it's the same text replacement thing that I would use for this, I still have to talk to Conrad to figure out what's wrong with it... — opiaterein — 12:59, 23 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

OK then. But don’t shelve this, I have many similar important requests. The Russian template jungle must be cleaned up. --Vahagn Petrosyan 14:22, 24 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

Yeah, I have some stuff I have to do with it, too... I talked to Conrad about it a little, but he was busy with other stuff, so I'm gonna have to talk to him again so we can figure out what's going on. — opiaterein — 14:31, 24 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

How about replacing {{ru-decl-noun-1}} with {{ru-decl-noun}} now? Can the text in Template namespace be replaced too? --Vahagn Petrosyan 17:02, 2 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

Do you mean that stuff that says "This category contains Russian declension templates: Russian templates used to show declension tables of nouns and adjectives."? — opiaterein — 20:11, 2 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

I meant the templates of that category. I can see now that the bot replaced {{ru-decl-noun-1}} in the templates too. Awesome! Will be coming back for more. --Vahagn Petrosyan 09:13, 3 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

The bot was starting to go through main-namespace entries and it wasn't changing anything, and I realized that most of the links to ru-decl-noun were from templates... So I asked Conrad how to tell the bot to only change templates first, so I could go back and do regular entries that link right to it. Efficiency makes me happy :D— opiaterein — 15:22, 3 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

OK, another small one before main Russian requests. Could you replace {{a|Eastern}} and {{a|Eastern Armenian}} with {{a|hy-E}}, please? The clutter breaks my heart. --Vahagn Petrosyan 09:30, 3 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

Well we can't have you runnin' around with a broken heart, now can we? :D I hate clutter, too... It's why I like using the bot to kill redirects lol — opiaterein — 15:22, 3 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

I was told that you have a bot that may be able to handle something like this. Please see: Wiktionary:Grease_pit#Hyperlink_has_changed. Thanks. -- A-cai 19:01, 6 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

Sure thing, man. You should make a reference template (named something like {{R:Dr. Eye}} or {{R:dreye}}) that does all that heavy lifting for you. It looks like the only major change would be the access date, but there's another subst: template that does that... I just don't remember offhand what it is :D Would you like for me to make such a template to show you what I mean, in case there are others you'd like to make in the future? — opiaterein — 12:00, 7 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

That's an excellent idea that I hadn't thought of. All of the Online dictionaries that I regularly cite are listed in Wiktionary:Useful links/Chinese. Perhaps you can pick one of those as a test model. Thanks again for your help. -- A-cai 13:19, 7 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

The bot's run through, so all the hyperlinks should be fixed. I'll have to make a reference template tomorrow, I'm so tired I can't quite see, but one example we have is {{R:DEX}} which I did for Romanian. It links to the word's entry and some fancy stuff like that, if you'd like to look at it. You could also have the reference templates call {{cite web}} directly, which was my original thought, since the Dr.eye links already use it. — opiaterein — 17:27, 7 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

Re: {{he-root}}: I should have just ignored this template. I could already tell, from what you told Vahagn, that I was getting on your nerves; I should have just let this slide. (It's not like you were forcing anyone else to use it.) I'm sorry. —Ruakh_TALK 15:30, 8 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

There are people here that I like a lot less than you - I wasn't thinking of anyone specifically when I told him that. I'd really have no problem with you if it didn't seem like 90% of my attempts to add new things for Hebrew caused you some kind of offense. I don't start working on a lot of my ideas because I just expect you to oppose them. It gets frustrating. — opiaterein — 17:35, 8 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, from now on I'll try to be more laid-back. You and I have very different approaches to things, and I have to be O.K. with that. (BTW, re: "some kind of offense": don't worry. I'm uptight, but not the kind of uptight that's easily offended.) —Ruakh_TALK 14:20, 9 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

I'm a fast learner, so if I've been making any horrible mistakes, they should be significantly fewer in number as time goes on. Because we're so different, I think as long as we both keep open minds and work together we can come up with some really good stuff. — opiaterein — 12:24, 10 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

When you have the time, could you add comments under the Romanian portion of User_talk:Conrad.Irwin#Galician_index? I'm helping Conrad to use a bot to generate updated Index pages for several major Romance languages. See Index:Galician or Index:Hungarian for an example of what the bot does. Key issues are (1) which letters / digraphs are indexed separately, and (2) what sequence is used for diacriticals. Your input would be appreciated. --EncycloPetey 17:43, 10 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

Sinek pointed out an error in the acceleration of Template:bg-noun-f-a1 to me just a moment ago. The plural definite form is created as a singular definite. Can we fix this and check that it doesn't happen with any of the other templates? Can you make sure that the definite plural uses whatever format is used at абатствата --Neskaya kanetsv 22:27, 13 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

Should be fixed now :) — opiaterein — 12:48, 14 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

About one week ago, you reverted my move from Appendix:Romanian alphabet to Appendix:Romanian letters, saying that it's about "the alphabet as a whole". Please note that the alphabetical order is information about letters, not the contrary. In my opinion, letter appendices should contain even letters outside the alphabet, such as the ones with diacritics (and Romanian Q, W and Y, if I am correct in saying that they're used and well-known, but only in foreign words). --Daniel. 08:19, 25 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

In Romanian, the letters with diacritics are considered individual letters, unlike French and (I think) Portuguese. I'm hesitant to add q, w and y without reformatting the table, even though they're now official letters, but like you said, they're only used in foreign words. But keeping on that 'only foreign words' line, there are a lot of proper nouns and official terms and whatnot, like the names of cities, that use letters that are never used in Romanian. I made Appendix:Romanian alphabet to show the letters used in Romanian words. Not every possible letter one could run across while reading Romanian. — opiaterein — 13:39, 25 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

I think the existence of letters (or letters with diacritics) outside the alphabet of a language should be noted, specially if they're widely known and used. And, if it's possible to reach a consistent naming system for Wiktionary appendices on this topic, I'd prefer to not divide them between the completeness or incompleteness of the alphabets they contain. Furthermore, there are languages with more than one alphabet (such as historical versions or multiple scripts). --Daniel. 15:09, 25 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

Consistency isn't something you're going to get when it comes to appendices for writing systems. Not all writing systems have "letters" as such. How are you going to name the appendix for Japanese writing? Chinese? Devanagari? You can still add headers such as ==Other letters== in the alphabet appendix. — opiaterein — 15:13, 25 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

Japanese hiragana, Japanese katakana, Japanese kanji, Chinese hanzi and Devanagari letters are fine. Also, the first four might be merged into Japanese script and Han script, like Latin script and Cyrillic script. But a section ===Other letters=== inside an "alphabet" appendix would be easily considered part of alphabet if unexplained and out of place otherwise. --Daniel. 15:34, 25 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

Why would someone put an ===Other letters=== section without an explanation? :S — opiaterein — 15:44, 25 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

You could ask the first person who does it. My point is that either way, an "explained" or "unexplained" list of letters outside the alphabet would probably not merit a place in an alphabet appendix. --Daniel. 16:19, 25 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

By the way, I like the limited but elegant resource of emoticons from English speakers. *o*' Portuguese speakers usually have such a mess of creative flood of characters together which reminds me of how important is to gather culture from various places. \^-^/ Including the Japanese little hearts, stars, forehead veins and sweat drops. --Daniel. 16:19, 25 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

I also have to point out that Chinese characters are only called Hanzi in Mandarin. I think it's honzi in Cantonese, but I don't remember offhand. — opiaterein — 15:45, 25 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

Chinese characters are also called kanji in Japanese, hanja in Korean, etc. I think the most generic names would be Han script or Chinese script as it's called in English. --Daniel. 16:19, 25 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi. I see that in speria you wrote "să eu", "să tu", etc. The normal order is "eu să", "tu să", etc. I can correct the article, but I'm afraid this could be a more general problem. I was surprised to find that the conjugation table is written by hand, without using a template (or maybe you substed a template). This makes fixing all the articles with the same problem much harder without a bot or something. AdiJapan 11:17, 25 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

Back in 2007 my Romanian wasn't as good as it is now :) Although I've been getting kinda rusty. Anyway, the normal conjugation templates are in Category:Romanian conjugation templates. I did the one at speria by hand because it was kinda irregular, and at that point I hadn't started doing the conjugation templates. It should be pretty easy to fix. — opiaterein — 13:29, 25 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

Nice! —Ruakh_TALK 20:39, 3 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

Just to let you know, the edit you made on 5 July broke this template, so I have undone that edit. There are pages that were being categorized in Category:English words suffixed with, which I think you can agree is a BadThing^TM. --EncycloPetey 03:07, 6 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

So you couldn't just try to fix that? I think I already see what the problem was. — opiaterein — 11:35, 6 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, but it was getting late and I didn't trust myself to parse the code as tired as I was. Simple replacements I can do while tired, but debugging templates I can't. Some of us have to sleep! --EncycloPetey 13:37, 6 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

It's alright, the revert just re-broke what I'd been trying to fix for rtl languages and I got a little snappy. But I think I've got it fixed now, so harm done :) — opiaterein — 13:40, 6 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hello! What's up? Well, I have recently created this template for possession of Turkish nouns ending in a consonant. It works good, except for accelerated creation. Actually I thought that I wrote the true information in the template but it absolutely doesn't work xD shame on me! Can you please take a look if it doesn't bother you? Thanks in advance! Take care! Sinek 21:13, 8 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

I don't think the acceleration is advanced enough yet... and I'm not sure how long it'll be before we can get something intuitive enough to work easily :\ For now, the main declension is probably as good as it's gonna get. — opiaterein — 21:25, 8 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hmmm OK then. I'd better not use the acceleration :) Thanks a lot! Sinek 21:50, 8 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

I understand from the code of this template that whenever I specify empty lang= parameter, the Category:X words suffixed with -Y should not be included. Could you please look at why this isn't so in practice? --Vahagn Petrosyan 15:00, 25 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

Currently, the logic is:

• If the current page isn't an entry, don't add it to a category.
• Otherwise, unless lang=yi or lang=he, add the entry to the category ].
• Otherwise, add the entry to the category ]. (Same as previous, but using a Hebrew maqaf rather than an English hyphen.)

Support for lang=- would not be a bad idea, and would not be so difficult; just replace

]

with

{{#ifeq:{{{lang|}}}|-||]}}

I'd suggest proposing this at Template talk:suffix and waiting a day or two to make sure there are no issues with doing that. And while we're at it, we can change the default script from {{Latn}} to {{Xyzy}}.

—Ruakh_TALK 15:35, 25 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

Template {{proto}} does not add to categories when lang= is left empty (and not when lang=-). So let's do the same here. Will the code in this case be:

{{#ifeq:{{{lang|}}}|||]}}

 ? --Vahagn Petrosyan 15:54, 25 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

In that case what you'd want is

{{#switch:{{{lang|en}}}|-|=|#default=]}}

. That will add the page to the English category if lang= is completely omitted, but will not add it if lang=- or lang= is explicitly blank. —Ruakh_TALK 16:29, 25 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

Oh, wait, I should have checked {{proto}} before replying. What it does is, it only adds the page to the category if lang= is specified (and if lang=-, it will treat - as a language code!). Sorry, but I don't think that's a good idea for {{suffix}}: it would remove many existing entries from categories. Most of our templates do assume English as the default language, and I don't think that's a bad thing. —Ruakh_TALK 16:33, 25 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

There should be a way to suppress the category if it's unwanted. Or I suppose one could use {{compound}} and simply remember to add the - before the suffix. — opiaterein — 17:54, 25 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

I'm confused. Is something wrong with the last code? I tested it with {{hy-exp}} and everything seems fine. lang=- is not treated as a "-" language code. As to why I want to suppress categories, the answer is because I write an etymology in Old Armenian with {{suffix}}, like in արագութիւն, then copy it by simply blanking lang=- to modern Armenian derivation արագություն. --Vahagn Petrosyan 18:25, 25 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

Nope, nothing wrong with it. (Sorry, I thought you were wanting something like {{proto}}, where the default is no category unless a lang is provided. For {{suffix}}, we do want the default to be English; but it would be good to support an explicit override method, such as lang=-.) —Ruakh_TALK 18:40, 25 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

Alright, lang=- works now, if not in the most elegant fashion. — opiaterein — 20:38, 25 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

OK, thanks both. I'm satisfied with {{suffix}}'s behaviour now. --Vahagn Petrosyan 06:26, 26 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

Now that I see you're online :D, could you please add the noun sense "knee" (berek or something). I'm trying to add the reflexes of Proto-Semitic word for "knee" (whence apparently ultimately Barack as in Barack Obama :D) Many thanks --Ivan Štambuk 01:09, 31 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

I gotcha covered, man. :) One knee comin' up — opiaterein — 01:39, 31 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hey how is it going? Well I have a question. I was wacthing Supernatural and a character said that he had to "clean the pipe(s)" (or his pipe(s), I'm not sure). May it be a slang phrase for masturbation, as the rest of the dialogue made me think that? Thanks in advance! Sinek 20:32, 2 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hm, I'm not really sure. I've never heard it before that I know of, and I can't seem to find it in any dictionaries of idioms... wish I could help more :( — opiaterein — 20:53, 2 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

Ah OK. Anyway thank you! Maybe it's not used much or specific to the series. It looks as if I don't have to pay much attention to it ;) Best wishes! Sinek 19:40, 3 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

English is not my first language, but I thought that Your writing shows your ignorance in field has meaning that mr. Štambuk wasn't in Serbia recently, and have no knowledge how people really talk there. I'm fully aware that he can read Serbian wiki, newsportals etc., but nothing is better than first person experience.

I had no intention to insult Ivan Štambuk, and I'm ready to apologize to him at once if either you or he feels that I crossed the line.

Even better, you wouldn't warn me if you thought that my sentence is ok, so I will apologize to show good manners, and to show you that any bias towards me as wiktionary user has no grounds whatsoever. Regards! SpeedyGonsales 22:16, 18 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

You can't bullshit a bullshitter. I'll be in touch. — opiaterein — 22:25, 18 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

AGAIN, sušena mrkva - "dried carrot", produced in Serbia for Serbian market. The first sentence Sušena mrkva se dodaje u supe i čorbe direktno, razne salate, variva i umake prema ukusu. - the bolded words supa, čorba and varivo are Serbian-only, or markedly Serbian. --Ivan Štambuk 22:28, 18 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hello Opiaterein. On my bot vote, you mentioned that you would support User:Dawnraybot, if it had pronunciations. So I have added pronunciations to the code, and my canary for testing this is for the verb forms for tabasser. Do you see anything wrong with this, or anything else I can implement into the code? --Rising Sun 14:10, 27 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

It could use //, as in /ta.ba.sɑ̃/ :) — opiaterein — 14:25, 27 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

Yep - I've already corrected it --Rising Sun 14:47, 27 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

Should be all good then. Thanks for taking my advice :) — opiaterein — 14:48, 27 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi Opiaterein, please remember that User:Robert Ullmann is a volunteer who provides some excellent services for Wiktionary. Don't go out of your way to offend him. While you may not wish to apologise, there is absolutely no reason to rub salt in his wounds, and edits like achieve nothing other than to further aggravate situations that should never have arisen. I'd urge you to be more polite in future, and hope that you receive the same courtesy in return. Conrad.Irwin 01:12, 1 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

It wasn't my intention to salt him down. I just wanted him to fix his bot. He could've just done it, right? — opiaterein — 01:16, 1 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

In this Romanian entry, 3rd person Imperfect Active Indicative Plural should read lingeau (unless I am terribly mistaken, of course), and yet, for some technical reason, it reads lineau. Could you comment on this? --Omnipaedista 08:44, 2 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

I've fixed the template responsible for displaying the conjugation. Thanks for pointing this out or I might never have caught it :o — opiaterein — 13:24, 2 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi there! :) Just noticed that the templates you created for Azeri used mixed Roman and Cyrillic scripts. I've notified Sinek already about this, but I'm also letting you know. If you could go through and check them to make sure the script is correct. Take a look on Sinek's talk page. --Dijan 17:45, 6 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

I think I only formatted them for Latin... I've never editted a Cyrillic Azeri entry. — opiaterein — 17:53, 6 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

I'm sorry. I just noticed that it was Sinek that actually copied the Latin script ones without changing the script. Sorry :( --Dijan 17:56, 6 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

No worries :D He's an enthusiastic editor, I'm fond of him. With experience he'll learn stuff like this. — opiaterein — 17:58, 6 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi! I have not yet come across this spelling. Looking online, I've only found Wikipedia and pages that link to or copy Wikipedia. Can you tell me if you have encountered this spelling elsewhere? I'm really curious. Thanks. --Dijan 04:06, 19 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

No, the Wikipedia entry was the only place I've seen it... so I added the alt spelling, but I didn't make the entry for it because I wasn't really sure about it. — opiaterein — 16:54, 19 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hello, this was kept on the grounds that someone would add what was needed, like transliteration templates. Can you have a look, please? Mglovesfun (talk) 12:36, 19 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Transliteration templates?? It already takes a parameter to show tr= if that's what you mean... I added that when Ruakh mentioned it. — opiaterein — 16:51, 19 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

No hard feelings. :) L☺g☺maniac chat? 00:10, 27 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Errr. Sure. l@l... — opiaterein — 00:30, 27 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

The ultimate reference is the Turner's dictionary. Those diverse Indic scripts present however major PITA, esp. when coupled with the general lack of online lexicographic literature on those languages, where you could actually verify those spellings.. We treat Sanskrit as the attestation of Old Indo-Aryan (even when there is a, usually a trivial, difference with actually reconstructable Proto-Indo-Aryan form, as is the case with pōstaka ~ pustaka) simply for the convenience, in order to evade creating many small appendices. So both the literary borrowings from Sanskrit ("Sanskritisms") and forms mediated thru Prakrit get listed in the ====Descendants==== section. --Ivan Štambuk 18:15, 7 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

It can be hard gathering up all the descendants, but it's fun :) It's interesting how much closer modern Indo-Aryan languages are to Sanskrit than Romance languages are to Latin... — opiaterein — 18:54, 7 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

It goofed on this word, since the Eastern is in this case referred to Eastern Catalan, not Eastern Armenian. I mark these as Eastern Catalan myself, but just plain Eastern or Oriental is not uncommon, and the major phonetic split between Catalan dialects is between Eastern and Western. Pretty much any polysyllabic Catalan word with a pronunciation section will have entries for Eastern and Western, however it be denominated. — Carolina wren discussió 04:26, 9 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

You may not have realized this, but {{accent:Eastern}} linked to the Wikipedia Article on Eastern Armenian to begin with, so if you were using {{a|Eastern}} then you were already essentially using {{accent:hy-E}}. — opiaterein — 15:03, 9 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

As I said, I've been using {{a|Eastern Catalan}} myself. Besides, the edit that originally placed Eastern was from 2006, well before {{accent:hy-E}} was written, tho it wasn't until a couple of months ago that AutoFormat changed it from hard parenthesis and italics to use {{a}}. Don't appear to be any other non-Armenian mainspace articles that use {{a|hy-E}}, so unless you sic the inflectobot on errant instances of Lua error in Module:parameters at line 573: Parameter 1 should be a valid language or etymology language code; the value "Eastern" is not valid. See WT:LOL and WT:LOL/E. it shouldn't be a problem. — Carolina wren discussió 17:55, 9 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

Serbo-Croatian inflected forms have the same peculiar issue as Slovenian and Lithuanian, with whom you have experience here, so I was wondering of your opinion on the matter: The preferred way of treating inflected forms which are spelled the same way, but are pronounced differently (i.e. have different types of accents). How to format those?

E.g., SC Latin-spelling (deprecated template usage) ȉme, genitive singular ȉmena, nominative plural imèna, genitive plural iménā.

We could generate them on separate L3 ===Noun=== sections, each with his own head= in the inflection line (and possibly as L4s under auto-generated L3 ===Pronunciation X===.

But the thing is, for most of the words the inflection tables do not contain information of the inflected forms that are spelled differently, but differ in accentuation. When adding inflections (semi-automatically), I tend to indicate these as much as possible, but nevertheless most of the words do not exhibit fully accented inflection tables (which cannot be easily templatized as in e.g. Lithuanian, because there are too many patterns, and the template language is too primitive).

To me, the best solution seems to generate them all under one L3, except when the entire accented inflection is provided in the inflection table. Entries generated by such means, when in the original inflection table the entire paradigm is marked for accents, can be updated accordingly later, e.g. split into several L4s under different ====Pronunciation X====... --Ivan Štambuk 23:51, 16 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

BTW, an awesome article on Lithuanian accentuation appeared on WP recently. --Ivan Štambuk 23:57, 16 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

Yeah, I thought of sth like that, and have already been formatting in the same pronunciation L3 info for 2 different PoS L3s (e.g. kurvinski :) In SC this is veery frequent in all the adjectives/adverbs in -ski whose only difference is in the length of the last vowel. I have a database on my computer of ~ 1 million inflected forms for Serbo-Croatian lemmata, but before any bot-readable inflected forms are generated, I need to make sure that all the bot activity is properly logged so that I can later do cleanup such as the one I mentioned (i.e. propagating pronunciation from the main inflection table to the inflected forms upon Wiktionary database dump update). --Ivan Štambuk 20:28, 23 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

As I'm sure you could've guessed, Lithuanian adjectives tend to have similar problems... but since I never quite figured out the stress patterns for adjectives, I couldn't really add their pronunciations :( — opiaterein — 20:33, 23 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

I was adding translations for this, but since I don't know any Persian at all I wanted to ask you before I added من نفهمیدم or نفهمیدم... — opiaterein — 16:07, 1 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

"I don't understand" would be: نمی‌فهمم (nemifahmam) or if you are stressing the subject pronoun: من نمی‌فهمم (man nemifahmam). --Dijan 18:42, 1 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Alright, thanks :) — opiaterein — 19:30, 1 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Should there be a connection between the ی and ف, as in نمیفهمم ? — opiaterein — 19:33, 1 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

No. It's a zero-width non-joiner. --Dijan 02:19, 2 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

It's pointless. I just hope soon enough high-IQ genes subspeciate themselves, so that I can spare my progeny of this mental torture. Unless we hit Kurzweil's singularity in 2045 first, or sth, lol. --Ivan Štambuk 16:09, 2 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

I told you, didn't I? :) Logic and reason just don't work on pseudo-intellectuals. Also, the day I start calling myself an intellectual, I want you to beat me to death with a sledge hammer. Just make it fast, I don't like pain :D — opiaterein — 16:11, 2 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Thanks very much for your Esperanto help. I noticed that on Dawnraybot's bot status vote, you opposed it for not adding pronunciations. I am pretty sure that this means that you are going to oppose my bot as well for not adding pronunciations to its' entries either. Anyways, thanks again for the help with making Esperanto definitions, Razorflame 18:33, 15 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

See also: User_talk:Opiaterein/Archive_2009#request_for_pronunciation, where Rising Sun added pronunciations.

For Esperanto, there would only be two pronunciation things you would have to add. For forms like melkas, you would need ˈmelk to make /ˈmelkas/, and for forms like melkanta, you would need melˈk to make /melˈkanta/ — opiaterein — 18:54, 15 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Ok, could you give me an example of the code that I would need to add given these pronunciation things? Cheers, Razorflame 18:59, 15 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

I don't know how to do that. When I added Lithuanian noun forms, I had the templates in text files and used the find-and-replace features to replace certain symbols (!, $, %) with appropriate text to put into the entries-to-be.

For liūtukas, one symbol was replaced with liūtuk, another with liūtùk, then one with lʲuːˈtʊk and one more with lʲuːtʊˈk. I did all the pronunciations manually, because I've no reason to believe that fully automatic is ever as good as semi-automatic in such cases. — opiaterein — 19:06, 15 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Do the pronunciation examples that you gave for the verb melki carry over to all verb forms, or just for that one? Razorflame 19:10, 15 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

The placement of the stress is on the penultimate syllable in Esperanto, so all you have to do is replace the letter with its IPA equivalent (easy) and determine the two possible stress placements (easy) — opiaterein — 19:20, 15 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Maybe I could make a separate bot to do just that...just pronunciations for Esperanto entries...hmmm...I'll see if that'll work. Otherwise, I'll add the pronunciations manually :). Cheers, Razorflame 19:31, 15 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Speaking about pronunciations for Esperanto entries, out of the last 30 or so odd pronunciations and hyphenations that I added, you only found mistakes in four of them, which means that I am getting better =D. Sure, I'm still not perfect, but I'll get there; it'll just take me a bit more time. Thanks for the double-checking that you've done for me so far, but I am telling you that I'll get it down pat pretty soon :). Razorflame 05:50, 18 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi there. You don't need to add the plurals of any word that I make because my bot will be taking care of them once it is approved. Cheers, Razorflame 21:47, 15 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Sed ĝi ne inkluzivas prononcojn :D — opiaterein — 21:54, 15 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

You needn't worry about the pronunciation. I'll be adding them as soon as my bot is approved. Thanks, Razorflame 22:01, 15 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Again, you don't need to add plurals for adjectives or nouns, or verb forms because my bot will be taking care of them. Razorflame 00:28, 16 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

For certain things, I'd prefer to add them. Esperanto phonology is pretty simple compared to most languages, but things like the devoicing of the b in absoluta, you know... — opiaterein — 00:30, 16 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Are the diphthongs "aj", "ej", "oj", and "uj" considered one syllable in hyphenation? I tried fajro as faj‧ro, but I'm not sure.
P.S. Holy crap, this language is easy to pick up. :D Ultimateria 01:20, 17 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

All the dipthongs are one syllable :) aŭ, eŭ, aj, ej... etc.

I love how easy it is... I think once I learn the little pronouns and prepositions, all I'll have to worry about is vocabulary and it'll be all downhill. My goal is to be at least eo-3 by the Summer :D — opiaterein — 01:25, 17 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

I have another question about IPA: Why do we not use periods to separate syllables in other languages? Ultimateria 02:33, 6 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

I stopped using the periods a while ago except in considerably long words because they're just not necessary and because syllabation can be argued about too easily... like with /tʃ/, should the syllable start with the t, in the middle... so I just forgo it completely. — opiaterein — 15:21, 6 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

All the The -aj and -ajn forms of this have incorrect pronunciation. The Esperanto diphthongs aj and oj are pronounced as ai̯ and oi̯. See w:Esperanto phonology. I'm also not sure that the word itself has correct pronunciation. Are spaces just ignored? --Yair rand 02:57, 17 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

/ai̯/ and /aj/ are essentially the same thing. the /̯/ simply indicates that the /a/ and /i/ are one syllable, where the /j/ represents the semivocalic approximant of /i/. I don't think I know of any language that distinguishes between the two, or if I could even tell the difference in speech. At least on wiktionary, we have a terrible lack of consistency on how to represent dipthongs, but I don't believe that using /j/ for the Esperanto j in all cases is so harmful.

When it comes to spaces between words like this, I tend to ignore them, since there is no verbal "space" in speech. One wouldn't pause between the words, they would simply continue speaking. — opiaterein — 15:15, 17 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Whaddaya think on the aesthetics of this template? To small/unreadable/monotone? I remember copying the design from one your verbal templates but don't remember which one. Anyhow, I'm about to put my glorious Serbo-Croatian conjugator to action on many a thousand Serbo-Croatian verb, so I was wondering (following a notice on your userpage) if you could spice this baby up a bit before I give it a go :D

Vahagn recently synced most of the Slavic declensional templates, but there is lots of divergence in verbal templates. I personally don't like much the "vertical" outline of {{ru-verb}} and similar. --Ivan Štambuk 15:20, 17 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Don't look at {{ru-verb}}. I am going to rewrite it. Completely. --Vahagn Petrosyan 15:24, 17 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

2 Vahagn: lmao sorry man, already looked...it is godawful :D

2 Ivan: Yeah, it looks good to me :) The only thing I would change is the width - especially with conjugation templates, I usually put it at 100%, unless there's only like 3 forms or something :D — opiaterein — 15:26, 17 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

How about {{sh-adj-full}}, any good? Being aesthetically retarded, it's all the same to me :/
On a related note: I chose to use split-row for the animate/inanimate subgender distinction in the masculine accusative singular, instead of superscripts like you did with Slovene. Stole the concept from Russian adjectival declension templates. Also, listing the genders side-by-side, in singular then in plural, seems to me more intuitive than providing inflection on gender-by-gender basis, with singular and plural forms side-by-side, as you did with Slovene. All the SC grammar I have (in SC, English, German and Russian) follow that layout, so I decided to follow it too. Learners usually learn case endings for all 3 genders together (because they're shared in lots of cases), rather than separately, and this layout emphasizes when they are shared, hence enhancing the learning experience. Another thing: do you think superlative forms need to be listed in the inflection line? Unlike the comparative, they are formed 100% regularly (with the naj- prefix), so their addition doesn't seem of value to me. None of my paper SC dictionaries mentions the superlative in the headword. --Ivan Štambuk 04:09, 25 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

{{sh-adj-full}} is very nice to look at :O I put superlatives and comparatives in the sl-adj templates just so that it would be more obvious that there was a superlative... I dunno, I just kinda did it :D — opiaterein — 14:38, 25 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi there. I just wanted to apologize for my actions over the past few days towards you. I realize now that you are just trying to help me to understand how to make the right changes and how to correctly do pronunciation and hyphenation, and I thank you for the help that you have given me so far. I promise to be more careful and to pay more attention towards adding pronunciations in the future, and if I do happen to make a mistake or two, it happens because we are only human. I will try my hardest to make sure that all of the pronunciations that I add are correctly added. Thank you for taking the time to teach me how to correctly do the pronunciations. Thanks again, Razorflame 19:44, 18 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Can I also ask if you could please add any verbs that you add to User:Darkicebot/Feed so that I can get him to add the form-of entries for the verbs that you make please? Thanks, Razorflame 19:49, 18 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Rollback is not supposed to be used to revert changes made by people who are considered trusted by the community or who are making good faith edits. It is an improper use of the tool as it was not designed to be used in that manner. Rollback should only be used in cases of pure vandalism or bad faith, neither or which was the case with my changes to nebulozo. Please don't use it on established editors in the future if they are making good faith edits. Razorflame 20:56, 18 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Your hypocrisy is at once wildly amusing and infuriating. Do not tell me, an established and tolerated (read - not necessarily well liked, but hopefully respected) contributor, how to use wiktionary tools. If I don't feel like taking the time to undo your edits, I will certainly make use of rollback, no matter what your status. In the grand scheme of things, my rolling back your edits is not going to put any sort of duress on the fabric of spacetime, regardless of the effect it has on your feeble self-regard. You are not an established editor. You are a relatively new user who has repeatedly been reprimanded for making large edits to languages outside your realm of expertise or even basic knowledge. So don't patronize me. Ever. Have a day :) — opiaterein — 13:55, 19 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

I am indeed established. I have been editing here since December of 2007 and have accumulated more than 13,000 edits. Furthermore, I am an administrator and bureaucrat on the Simple English Wiktionary and I have made more than 45,000 edits to the Simple English Wikipeida, and 16,500 edits to the English Wikipedia, so don't ever say that I am not established, because I am more than established. I have global rollback, and rollback locally on four different projects. Esperanto is not outside of my knowledge because I have been taking the time to learn it for the past few weeks. I can patronize you all I want because it is a free world. I can tell you how to use the Wiktionary tools because I know how to use them properly, which obviously, you don't. If you weren't an administrator, you'd see why it is such a big deal with misusing rollback. You should never use rollback on a user who has been editing here regularly for longer than a few months because of this exact reason. It irritates that user and it makes them wonder why an administrator would be rolling back changes of established editors. Here is what I have to say to you: Don't ever say that I am not an established editor because while you say that I am not an established editor, I can say that I am because I have been editing here for a while. Razorflame 14:03, 19 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Quality > quantity. — opiaterein — 15:23, 19 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Of course quality is better than quantity. Most of my edits here have been very beneficial to the English Wiktionary and therefore, they have been quality edits. Razorflame 17:09, 19 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

A number of different contributors have had issues with your "contributing" to various languages in which you have no skill. You caused ridiculous drama with SemperBlotto, one of our most dedicated contributors. You are a loose cannon and a bit of a narcissist. I can't think of any other users who would say that "most of their edits have been very beneficial" to the project. You seem to be remarkably misguided in that sense, as many of your edits have contained incorrect information, which is surely more damaging than beneficial. — opiaterein — 17:39, 19 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

First of all, I believe that you are talking about my run-ins with Panda10. Yes, he has asked me several times to stop making main entries (meaning base words, not form of entries) a few times, of which I have followed now. I stopped making Hungarian main entries about three weeks ago. I still make the form of entries, which he said that I could make, so therefore, that problem has been resolved. Furthermore, I have some skill in Esperanto, which you seem to not respect or recognize because you don't believe that I am telling the truth when I say that I am eo-1. I changed my babel box from eo-0 to eo-1 about a week ago after I had spent two weeks learning the basics about the Esperanto language. Now, I am starting to understand the more complex words with prefixes and suffixes such as senosta, senokula, and malkompliki just to name a few. My contributions to the English Wiktionary so far have indeed been beneficial with the exception of those few Hungarian main entries that I made a while back, which Panda10 already corrected. I've since stopped adding main entries for Hungarian entries, and all I do in languages that I don't know is to make forms-of entries for those languages. I make form-of entries for English, Italian, Serbo-Croatian, Icelandic, Turkish, and Hungarian, and I don't mess with main entries for any of those languages with the exception of Italian, because I know a little Italian as well as the grammar sense for Italian and I know how to properly format an Italian entry.

Secondly, the only other thing that I can say that I might have made a mistake on in the past was the Pronunciations and hyphenations for Esperanto words, but as of the past 12-15 hours, I haven't made a single mistake in either Pronunciation or hyphenations for Esperanto words, which means that I have gotten much better at it now, so therefore, I am being beneficial towards the English Wiktionary.

Thirdly, I revert changes that are vandalism or that are made in stupidity, as well as mark pages for deletion, both activies of which are greatly beneficial towards the English Wiktionary, so therefore, I am beneficial towards this Wiktionary. Razorflame 17:48, 19 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Panda10 is female - of this I'm about 87% certain. Aside from clearing that up for you, I don't have time to cater to your ego by letting you toot your own horn to everything I say, so I'm going to stop feeding your silly little fire and get back to the dictionary. — opiaterein — 17:50, 19 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi, good idea to add '...in English' to the phrase. Now I am wondering if it wouldn't be better to translate 'English' as the foreign language of the translation. You wouldn't ask for an English word in a foreign language as the person you ask must already know English and your purpose is to speak English.

For example the French translation could more useful like this: 'Comment dit-on...en français?' because it would give you a French word. So the translation title would be 'Request for translation into the foreign language'. What do you think? ----Thomas was here ☺ 13:30, 19 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Indeed, I had thought of that when I was moving the page. I originally was thinking"how do you say X in Y", but I thought a page title such as that would draw big waves of angry pissing and moaning from the community at large :D I used "in English" for an example, so that a user would be able to see the manner in which the phrase would be formed, since it differs so much from language to language. Also, you forget, for example, a French student asking their English teacher, "comment dit-on salope en anglais?" Ok, so they wouldn't really ask that. But you see my point, I hope :D — opiaterein — 13:49, 19 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

I still think it would be more useful not to have 'English' translated in every language but the name of the language. Isn't it what is done in books or movies? Remind me the opposite problem in the tv show Lost where a French radio message became German in the French version : ). The worse is that in France it would be possible to ask for a word in French in an English lesson as we still have this damaging 'literature way' of learning foreign language where knowing rare word without the context of a sentence is encouraged. So I suppose you will add 'Comment dit-on...en français ?' and all other languages as new pages : ) héhé ? No I'm kidding, but if we follow your logic it should go there. ----Thomas was here ☺ 21:30, 19 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Excuse me, but did you just block Razorflame for changing an etymology? What was that about? Razorflame was completely correct in changing the etymology. I think that that was a completely inappropriate use of a block. --Yair rand 20:49, 20 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

stem spark- (the entry displayed spark- and linked to sparko) + the suffix -il- + the POS suffix -o.

I'm tired of butting heads with him. That's all I have to say at the moment. — opiaterein — 20:56, 20 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Ok, how can we solve the -il- + -o problem? We could list both -o and -il- as suffixes, but that would be kind of stupid. We could list spark- as a prefix, but that also might not be a good idea. Hmmm...What do you think are our options? Razorflame 22:00, 20 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Opio remains unamused — opiaterein — 21:59, 20 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

I'm seriously trying to solve this problem that we are facing, and it would help if you could help solve it, seeing as you are a more respectable editor. Razorflame 22:00, 20 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Any message you leave me on my talk page from now on will either be stricken out, removed, or ignored. Razorflame 18:06, 21 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Ignoring messages is bad enough, but to ignore messages from an administrator is just stupid. — opiaterein — 18:08, 21 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

I will only pay attention to any messages from you if they are positive or if they have anything at all to do with helping me out. Anything else will go. I'm done conflicting with you now, so if you need to talk to me, you'll have to go through my email. Razorflame 18:10, 21 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi there. I wanted to ask you what you think of this template. It seems soundly constructed, but since I read that you are an expert on declension tables, I thought that I'd ask you if it is good to work with.

Furthermore, if it is good to work with, would you possibly be able to make a template {{io-form of}} based off of {{eo-form of}}? Thanks, Razorflame 19:36, 22 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

I am going to keep this short: I am sorry for all the drama that I have caused and I will try my hardest to work with you in your Esperanto endeavours. The only thing that I ask is if you find something wrong with an edit that I make for you to please tell me what it is and how to fix it so that I can stop making the same mistake in the future. Razorflame 04:34, 23 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

How about you stop editing in languages you don't speak fluently? This is the cause of almost all of your mistakes, and every time you apologise and promise not to do it again you just move to another language and do it again. Honestly, there's plenty to do in English. Equinox ◑ 18:05, 23 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

To add to what Equinox said: It puts an unfair and unreasonable burden on other editors to ask them to examine every one of your edits, determine if anything was wrong with them, and if so, explain to you what the problem was. The problem here is that we simply can't trust you; you make promises you don't keep, and you make edits without knowing if they're right. Trust is easy to lose and hard to win back, and continual apologies and promises don't help with the latter. (BTW, Opiaterein, as I'm sure he'll agree, is not our absolute most patient admin. If you want to become a more useful contributor here, I'd recommend not making a point of focusing on the same foreign language(s) that he's focusing on at a given time; far from "work with ", you'll probably just get in his way. Though as Equinox said, you should really just stick to English, anyway.) —Ruakh_TALK 18:48, 23 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

I have unblocked him but you may well be right on the substance. Please let me know if a problem arises so that I can understand your point of view, given that I don't understand the languages involved. DCDuring TALK 18:02, 23 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

My bot does Esperanto form-ofs, and you know it. Stop trying to interfere with everything that I try to do and start worrying about things that you need to do yourself. You've misused your blocking tool three times now, and I AM going to take action against this. Razorflame 18:56, 25 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Huh? If Opiaterein wants to use his own bot to do eo verb forms instead of feeding them to darkicebot, what's the problem? I am a bit curious though, whether alternative bot tasks require a separate bot approval. --Yair rand 19:04, 25 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Never mind. Do what you want with your bot. Razorflame 19:07, 25 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

You're just mad because mine does pronunciations. — opiaterein — 19:10, 25 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

No, I'm mad because you knew that my bot did Esperanto form ofs, yet you went ahead and decided to have your bot do Esperanto forms of, even though you knew that my bot was the one doing those. Razorflame 19:18, 25 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Ok, so yours was adding them first. That doesn't mean anything. Also

1. I'm more careful about adding correct words and
2. I include pronunciations. — opiaterein — 19:23, 25 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hey Opi, if I start pissing you off and messing up my bot's French entries and making bad edits in French, will you take over my bot? Pretty please? --Rising Sun 22:54, 25 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Lmao my French is a catastrophy, but I'll think about it. :) — opiaterein — 22:55, 25 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

"un niveau élémentaire" isn't so bad. However, I promised that the future ownership of the bot would go to the highest bidder. We're starting the bidding at one beer. --Rising Sun 23:05, 25 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

I'm stingy with my intoxicants, so I dunno :D — opiaterein — 23:14, 25 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

How about if I call you a Jew racist? Will you take it then? --Rising Sun 23:19, 25 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

(unindent) haha I love Jews :D I suppose I can take it. I always have fr.wikt to use as a reference, so if I mess something up, it's their fault :D — opiaterein — 23:23, 25 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Yes, Wiktionnaire is a perfect place to pass the blame to. I mean, seriously, a dictionary written by amateurs!? That can't be trusted, especially not one written by amateur Frenchies... Anyway, we should get back to serious work now. Or we'll miss the deadline --Rising Sun 23:28, 25 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Find out how to say jockstrap in Esperanto for me. Ready set go!! — opiaterein — 23:36, 25 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Not really related to this thread, but equally silly... I have to share this with someone. I initially misread this IP edit to (deprecated template usage) blatant. How so? I interpreted the parenthetical expression as a personal description rather than as a quotation. I will now forevermore think of the author of The Faerie Queene as Edmund "blatant beast" Spenser. I've been suffering from intermittent fits of incapacitating laughter ever since. Additionally, this incident has indirectly helped me decide what this year's Christmas competiton will be... Be afraid. Be very afraid. --EncycloPetey 00:07, 26 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

LOL that's what I thought when I saw it at first :) L☺g☺maniac chat? 00:12, 26 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Since your bot seems to have taken over the job of Esperanto verb forms, (Darkicebot is no longer active and has had its bot flag removed) are you going to set up a feed page for it, or just look through the uses of eo-conj every once in a while? --Yair rand 06:45, 26 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

I'm not sure how he had his bot working, but I have local txt files with all the basic entry guts and I do a find/replace to stick in the pronunciations and stems, so I can make a page at User:Opiaterein Inflectobot/nomnom for lists of things to be added. I guess that's essentially a feed :D — opiaterein — 16:54, 26 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Yes, I forgot about the c because I haven't been on in five days. Now that you've reminded me, I'll remember now :) Razorflame 23:39, 2 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Forgetting how to pronounce such simple things is a bad sign. Did you use none of those five days to study your Esperanto? — opiaterein — 23:40, 2 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Unfortunately, no. I was busy with relatives over the past five days, so was unable to use the computer, but I studied some words using an Esperanto-English dictionary I bought. Razorflame 23:42, 2 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Would you be willing to add the sq translation of the word hydrate (noun)? Cheers and thanks in advance, Razorflame 17:30, 3 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Thanks :) Razorflame 17:34, 3 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

I generally like the direction you're taking them, but the internal borders look totally crappy. Could you make them look more like Template:sh-decl-noun? - Krun 18:47, 3 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

I agree, they look terrible on browsers other than Opera. I did it to preserve the way they looked before I changed it, but I'd be glad to remove them if they offend you :D — opiaterein — 19:45, 3 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Opibot added some of these forms incorrectly. I've fixed them by now, but I suggest that you check Category:Esperanto words needing attention for any new entries after each batch. The eo-form of template adds words to the category if they're mistakes. --Yair rand 20:48, 6 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Most of the entries are wrong, anyway. If not "adjective" for the -ta participles, they should be "participle", but apparently we aren't so fond of accuracy. I'll fix the source file for the mis-categorization. — opiaterein — 20:52, 6 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

We don't normally use "Participle" as a heading, we use "Verb", even when the participle acts exactly like an adjective. At least, that's what we do for English... --Yair rand 20:56, 6 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Esperanto isn't English and calling a participle a verb doesn't give it a verbal meaning. — opiaterein — 20:59, 6 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Technically they're "Verb form"s, but we seem to use "Verb" for things like that normally. I'm not sure why, but that seems to be what we do. --Yair rand 21:01, 6 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Being a form of a verb doesn't make something a verb-form. Now get off my page and do something productive. — opiaterein — 21:04, 6 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

I had to create that green link on that page. It was bothering me for a week, so I had to create it. Otherwise, I wouldn't have, but it was really starting to annoy me. Razorflame 20:52, 6 December 2009 (UTC)Reply