User talk:SemperBlotto/2018

What do you mean? It's a direct quote from an English-language book. The word is italicized however. Rice makes it sound like it's a word used in international relations, regardless of the origin.zigzig20s (talk) 12:24, 1 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

• The italics are the clue - that shows that it is a foreign word being mentioned in an English-language sentence. SemperBlotto (talk) 12:27, 1 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

your 2017, Jeff? I had a great time - traveling to South America, getting a kinda promotion, joining a band and enjoying life in Catalonia. --Gente como tú (talk) 13:59, 1 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

• It had its ups and downs (that I can't mention here) - but I survived it. SemperBlotto (talk) 14:00, 1 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

p.s. There is an email link on my homepage if you want the details. SemperBlotto (talk) 14:02, 1 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. I probably won't be emailing you. BTW, there's a spelling mistake in the last sentence of this page --Gente como tú (talk) 14:07, 1 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

OK. Fixed. SemperBlotto (talk) 14:12, 1 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

And you spelled gullible wrong in the third paragraph, too. --Gente como tú (talk) 12:04, 2 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

And a Merry Xmas to you too. SemperBlotto (talk) 16:06, 2 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Pkbwcgs has contacted me regarding xyr request for AWB CheckPage addition of more than 24 hours. I noticed you have edited that page somewhat recently so I am forwarding the ping. - Amgine/ ^t·e 18:45, 4 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

• Seems OK - added. SemperBlotto (talk) 21:43, 4 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

I think I can see why you reverted my edits on the two related pages - they did have errors (which I was in the process of fixing), but I think it would have been better to not delete the edit entirely but fix it - "dicky bird" (in several forms) is recorded as Cockney slang for "word" and I think the snippet from Simple Simon was worth mentioning as an example (although it was an alternative form - that might have been the main problem?). Maitchy (talk) 21:50, 4 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

• I've added it (properly) to dicky-bird. SemperBlotto (talk) 21:52, 4 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

‎TemperBlotto (talk • contribs) --Per utramque cavernam (talk) 18:21, 7 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

• Blocked. SemperBlotto (talk) 20:18, 7 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Why did you revert my contribution, the Cambridge dictionary nuance on this is not to your liking? --BeckenhamBear (talk) 14:54, 28 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

• I thought that it was just repeating our existing definition. SemperBlotto (talk) 15:22, 28 December 2017 (UTC)Reply
  • They can be both seen as different. “reliable, trustworthy”, is not the same as "safe and certain of success" is it? Also the former is open ended as to what it defines, whereas the latter "is" defined. --BeckenhamBear (talk) 17:55, 28 December 2017 (UTC)Reply
  • This is very shoddy. You had reverted a perfectly good bolt-on referenced definition of mine, and then you reverted my deletion of a made-up word. All this without explanation, except a glib message putting the onus on me, to defend my edits, which I later did. I note also that when you realised I was correct in the latter case, there was no such word, you then deleted the non existing word, rather than rollbacking it. The nett effect was you increased your edit stat, did not accrue a delete, and wiped out my entire Wiki stat (now logged as deletes, all six in one swoop), making me look like a vandal. I asked for your justification, and got a somewhat glib answer. Then, when I gave you a full and correct justification for my change you ignored me. I also notice from your User page that you take pride in your own stats. It's not within the remit of an Administrator to deal out abrupt treatment to willing editors this way. What are you going to do about this? BeckenhamBear (talk) 16:37, 13 January 2018 (UTC)Reply
    • @BeckenhamBear: Please don't take this the wrong way. We're dealing with many shoddy edits in a day, and sometimes good edits get mistakenly reverted as well. SemperBlotto reremoved himself the made-up word not because he wanted to increase his edit stats (or at least I don't think so), but because it was a good edit of yours that he mistakenly undid. Notice that your contributions still appear in the "history" tab; by no means are they wiped out from the system.
    • The "glib message" you're speaking of is automated; we have no way to change it.
    • As for the definition you added, I think it should possibly be readded, but not in the usage notes: it'd be better to make it a third sense. --Per utramque cavernam (talk) 17:06, 13 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Why did you delete this section from the talkpage of the article woman? 31.154.8.98 23:25, 14 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

• Because it was incomprehensible. SemperBlotto (talk) 07:37, 15 January 2018 (UTC)Reply
  • This definition relates the idea that gender and sex are different traits, so a woman by one definition is not necessarily a woman according the other definition. 31.154.8.98 19:27, 15 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hey SB. Are the definitions for cathode and anode OK? The pages have been on RFC for 200 years now, it'd be sweet to remove 'em. --Gente como tú (talk) 12:25, 16 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

• They look OK to me. Most dictionaries have shorter definitions, but I think ours are better, if a bit encyclopedic. I'm going to be bold and remove the RfC section. SemperBlotto (talk) 17:12, 16 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

The summary "and no further edits" seems to imply I was banned (soft banned if you will). Am I just infringing on that? Otherwise, how is your comment supposed to be understood? Rhyminreason (talk) 21:50, 16 January 2018 (UTC) I just noticed you might have intended to say, I had not done any edits except on my user page. Alright, well, the page wasn't up for long, so there was hardly any time for edits. The pointers to WT:CFI and WT:EL don't seem very helpful if you took issue with the talk page itself, so may I ask: How should I improve on it and how can the text be retrieved for that matter? I did (in the meantime) read Wiktionary:Usernames_and_user_pages#User_pages but didn't find any objection to my draft in it. Rhyminreason (talk) 22:02, 16 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

• First, become an actual editor - add or modify words. Then add a user page that contains babel templates - these tell us how much we can trust your edits. See the user pages of other users to see the format. SemperBlotto (talk) 11:21, 17 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

As a reader of wiktionary I found your 2006 definition of assimilation (sense:phonology) much more helpful than the current. It is not my place to make alterations to english entries, but... wouldn't it be nice if your definition came back... Thank you. sarri.greek (talk) 02:03, 23 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hi! Here are your 10 random missing English words for this month.

• kennets, airgraph, PPD, biramose, audad, parises, fumados, blashy, raccahout, bugeyes

Equinox ◑ 23:30, 1 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

That's not what this word means. I thought that'd be it as well, but then I checked Google Books and it clearly is the equivalent of baroclinic (which I must confess I don't really understand) but for temperature. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 15:32, 8 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

• I have amended both definitions. I think (hope) they are accurate. SemperBlotto (talk) 17:08, 8 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

  Looks better now. Thanks. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 17:14, 8 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

• -id (taxonomic -idae) is almost always for families. I've fixed a bunch, but please go over your recent taxonomic entries again — many of them have mistakes that can be checked just by googling the word first. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 22:23, 9 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

  True of animals, but -idae is also used in the other main taxonomic system (plants, etc.) for subclasses. Fortunately there aren't a lot of those. Chuck Entz (talk) 00:50, 10 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

  There are far fewer of those, hence the "almost always". —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 01:03, 10 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

OK, but the simplest way to stop me adding bad entries is to add a good one first. See User:DTLHS for the ones I shall be looking at soonish. SemperBlotto (talk) 08:17, 10 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

I don't really have the time, although I do try to get to some now and then. But I think that you're perfectly capable of making good entries — after all, you've created a great number of them over the years. If you just look a bit more carefully, maybe search the term in Google to see what database results pop up and then in Google Books to skim the first few results to see if the context matches, then you're bound to have almost no bad definitions. It doesn't take too long the manual way, and Equinox has got some way of making it quicker that he can share if you want it. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 03:13, 11 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

Same issues with elopoid. Most of the time, you shouldn't expect the genus to be what they're referring to; these terms are usually for higher taxonomic ranks. Anyway, just searching this term on Google could have told you that they exist in modern fisheries (so not extinct) and that they include multiple genera, thus indicating that your definition was wrong. Really, looking things up isn't so hard, but if you really aren't willing to do it, you probably shouldn't create taxonomic entries. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 06:24, 14 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

That definition is at odds with everything I've seen in Google Books- it probably doesn't even meet CFI. If an IP had created that, I might very well have deleted it. Heck, you've deleted better entries than that. Why risk damaging the credibility of the dictionary by editing blind? Chuck Entz (talk)

Can you please restore the draft page of mine you just deleted? I was compiling them so that a user could look it over and you just erased 45 minutes of work. AncientEgypt23 (talk) 14:59, 13 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

I have put it in your own userspace: User:AncientEgypt23/Pharaoh names. Equinox ◑ 15:02, 13 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Equinox: Thanks. AncientEgypt23 (talk) 15:03, 13 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

And I put it in your User page at the same time. What is it supposed to be? SemperBlotto (talk) 15:05, 13 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

While I do concur about the opinion of wanting the page deleted, I disagree that the page should have been deleted so quickly. I was wondering what many others than just one editor were going to say about it. Also, now that the page has been deleted, the contents can no longer be viewed by non-admins, so a discussion is less easy because of that.

Isn't there a rule about only deleting the page after one month of discussion and clear consensus at that point, unless the entry is blatant vandalism or something along those lines? PseudoSkull (talk) 07:02, 15 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

• Which page are we talking about? SemperBlotto (talk) 07:03, 15 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

Wiktionary:Requested entries (other), sorry for not clarifying. PseudoSkull (talk) 07:04, 15 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

Well there was nothing in it. I can bring it back if you like. SemperBlotto (talk) 07:05, 15 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

Please do, and can you strike the "Deleted" too in the discussion so people know it's still quite open? It was only the obstruction of process that I was worried about; I know the page was relatively empty, but still gave a general idea of what the page was for nonetheless. PseudoSkull (talk) 07:11, 15 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hi! Here are your 10 random missing English words for this month.

• meconiums, bonspell, endomixis, formiate, eolopiles, motionate, rennes, rymmes, microbrecciated, insheltering

Equinox ◑ 00:23, 3 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

Do you know of any sources predating 2012 (or, perhaps better, 2006 to account for the French entry) for this term? That would significantly alleviate my worries about this being a possible citogenesis incident. Double sharp (talk) 06:43, 4 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

• No hits at all on Google ngrams, but there are earlier hits on Google book search - some of which are nothing to do with chemistry. I'll investigate further. SemperBlotto (talk) 09:17, 4 March 2018 (UTC)Reply
  • I've added three citations - one for each meaning as far as I can tell. SemperBlotto (talk) 09:31, 4 March 2018 (UTC)Reply
    • OK on the first two; unfortunately the third one is from 2016, so it would have been from when the term was up on Wikipedia (in English Wikipedia as an alternative name, in French Wikipedia as the main name). I have had a look and I still can't seem to find any sources using the term in its third meaning before 2012 (except for this single patent from 2010, which, having the Commissariat a l'Energie Atomique et aux Energies Alternatives as its assignee, may well have been influenced by the French Wikipedia article). Double sharp (talk) 12:03, 4 March 2018 (UTC)Reply
      • There are earlier hits on Google books, mostly popular science books about the periodic table. But they don't have full versions of the books to look at and I can't find the actual usage. SemperBlotto (talk) 12:22, 4 March 2018 (UTC)Reply
        • Thank you so much for this reassuring information! Could you at least give me the titles of the books found? I can't find any uses myself of the "carbon group" meaning before 2013 searching for "crystallogen"; I am likely looking in the wrong places. Double sharp (talk) 14:38, 4 March 2018 (UTC)Reply
          • Just do a Google book search. SemperBlotto (talk) 17:51, 4 March 2018 (UTC)Reply
            • As you can see from the link immediately above, I did. Every single one of those uses before 2013 uses the term in one of the top two meanings instead. Given this, I am pretty much forced to conclude that there really isn't any support for the term but the citogenesis incident on Wikipedia, given that exactly the same thing happens when I do the search for the French form cristallogène prior to 2013. This of course doesn't mean the meaning should be removed; now that there are actual citations, it's become a real word that merits inclusion. But I wonder if this state of affairs could possibly be mentioned anywhere. Double sharp (talk) 02:35, 5 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

Is it really that bad? It was a real AFJ; sorry about the lack of citations. I've actually seen it in a book — can't remember the title, but it was about the accidental creation of a baby universe by colliding uranium nuclei together at RHIC. 137.99.169.71 08:17, 8 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

• Sorry. But our criteria for inclusion says that a word needs three independent citations. I don't think that the April fool word could get those. SemperBlotto (talk) 10:53, 8 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

You reverted my edits and I would like to know why? I added:

• 1. an example (including translation). Was that a mistake? Was a source needed?
• 2. It's a fact that "Kushtrim" is a common albanian name. This should not have been removed, imo.

• However, Kushtrim is name, which HAS the meaning "who's brave"; >> "Kush trim". But it can have the meaning "where we spread (it)" too, bc that's what "Ku shtrim" miterally means. It just depends on HOW you pronounce it and where you decide to "cut" the name/word.
  • KUSH TRIM or
  • KU SHTRIM
• If you remove the -m, it could mean "KUSH TRI" = who's three or "KU SHTRI" = "where it lay(s)".
• However, since it's written together, it goes back to the original meaning: >> command call.
• In albanian personal names are treated like nouns, because they are nothing but nouns. Thus, there are always indefinite and definite forms of every personal name in albanian. It doesn't matter if names are albanian words or not, suffixes are always attached at the end. Same custom found (for example) in finnic.
• This means: "Kushtrim" would be the indefinite form. "Kushtrim = definite > " Kushtrim". The is the masculine definite article. Imagine it as an english "the", but masculine. Like an italian "il", portuguese "o", french "le", german "der", etc. Imagine it as " Kushtrim", " Kushtrim" in italian, french " Kushtrim", germ. " Kushtrim" or " Kushtrim" in portuguese. Now at the end: Kushtrim, Kushtrim, Kushtrim and Kushtrim. LAGTON (talk) 16:23, 9 March 2018 (UTC)Reply
  • You edited the entry for kushtrim. The name should be at Kushtrim. SemperBlotto (talk) 21:04, 9 March 2018 (UTC)Reply
    • Not only that, but giving it the definition "name (masculine)" is saying that it's an Albanian word for name (like emër or emën), not that it's an Albanian name. We also don't use an "Example" header, the Albanian quote should go first, followed by the English, the quote is longer than it needs to be (everything after"kushtrim" is unnecessary), English apparently doesn't use the phrase "command cry", so it shouldn't be linked to as a phrase, and I'm sure there are other problems. Chuck Entz (talk) 01:39, 10 March 2018 (UTC)Reply
      • First of all: albanian is not only a language. Albanian represents an own branch. This means two main dialects (tosk+gegë) built one branch, also called "albanian". Tosk/Gegë have severeal subdialects. That's a fact. Also facts: Kushtrim is an albanian word and name. The 'name masculine' - part was wrong. I see. Also true, it's not the word for 'name'. It should be changed to 'masculine name' and an example header should exist, imo.
• 2nd: Names are nouns. And they are treated like nouns, not only in albanian, but also in germanic languages, etc.
• {My} is lazy. (ENGL.)
• is lazy.
• {Mein} ist faul. (GERM.)
• ist faul.
• {im} është dembel. (ALB.)
• është dembel.
• >> WHO is lazy?
• Brother/Kushtrim, Bruder/Kushtrim, Vëlla/Kushtrim
• ■ Note the definite article in albanian, in "brother" and "Kushtrim". You cannot treat albanian like english, bc albanian Vellai is the brother, not just brother. Vëlla është dembel = Brother is lazy. >> Would be the correct translation.
• ■ vëlla është dembel. = brother is lazy.
• why should 'command cry' be incorrect? There's also the alb. word ushtimë (noise). Now tell me german "SchlachtRUF" and "battle CRY" have "nothing" to do with noises. Or german "STIMME" (f. "voice") and "uSHTIMË" (f., "noise/echo") are "not" related...?!

LAGTON (talk) 04:29, 10 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

On the matter of Gheg and Tosk: there's no absolute test for the difference between a language and a dialect, so it's hard to say what's a fact and what's an opinion. At the extremes, English is definitely a language, and American English is definitely a dialect, but it's a lot harder to say whether Scots is a language or a dialect. Since I don't speak and haven't studied either Gheg or Tosk, I'm not qualified to say whether they're languages or dialects, but I will note that this has been discussed here, and it was decided to keep them as dialects. You can discuss it at the Beer parlour if you want to request that we reconsider.

As for whether names are proper nouns or common nouns: I wouldn't know. If you look at Category:Albanian given names, though, you'll notice that they all start with a capital letter. We don't mix words that start with a capital letter with those that start with a lowercase letter, so Kushtrim isn't the same as kushtrim, just as hand and Hand are different. You can create an entry for Kushtrim by clicking on the red link, but I would advise looking at other entries in Category:Albanian given names first to see how to format it.

As for the definition: it needs an indefinite article, as in "a name" or "a masculine name". Better yet, use the {{given name}} template and it will take care of that.

As for the "Examples" header: we don't use a separate header. Quotes from sources like books are placed directly under the definition line, but with "#*" at the start of the line instead of "#", and example sentences that aren't quotes start with "#:". See our entry layout page for details. Chuck Entz (talk) 06:10, 10 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

• 》On the matter of Gheg and Tosk: there's no absolute test for the difference between a language and a dialect, so it's hard to say what's a fact and what's an opinion...《.

>> Wiki quotes: 》Albanian ... is a language of the Indo-European family, in which it occupies an independent branch. ... The two main dialects of Albanian are Gheg and Tosk.《 - You cannot compare american english with Tosk, Gegë. English is not an independent branch.

• ■ Indo-European:

- Albanian - Armenian - etc.

• • • • • No disrespect, I adore english. But note that for example your sisterlanguage icelandic built their definite articles like albanians, romanians, bulgarian, etc. We add them at the end. English speakers, germans, dutch, etc. put them in the front of the noun. In icelandic personal names have also declensions and suffixes.
• However, "elb" Tosk, "elb" Gegë (= "pus") / "esh" Tosk, "esh", Gegë (= "laugh"). Kinda satem/centum, don't you think? You could (probably) compare tosk and gegë with swiss-german and high-german. Grammar: high-german is more advanced. That's why they teach high-german at school. Swiss-germ: ue, high-ger: uh, ind / ind. However, in albania they learn the tosk dialect. Gegë preserved more than tosk dialect. Also, Gegë/Tosk grammar is not even identical.
• 》...Since I don't speak and haven't studied either Gheg or Tosk...《... hold on ... but qualified enough to claim "kushtrim" is from "ushtrim"? Alllright then: "Bob" must be from "o.b." (tampon). And the B- used as a prefix; bc it sounds "better", right? LAGTON (talk) 18:56, 11 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

I found you tend to revoke talk page access preemptively when blocking a user. What's the purpose of doing this? This's not a common practice in other Wikimedia projects (see w:Wikipedia:Blocking_policy#Setting_block_options: "editing of the user's talk page should be disabled only in the case of continued abuse of the talk page".)--Zcreator alt (talk) 05:57, 10 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

• Yes, I find it saves further bother. I hadn't seen Wikipedia's policy. I'll refrain from now on.SemperBlotto (talk) 06:02, 10 March 2018 (UTC)Reply
  • I think you should restore talk page accesses of all users you formerly blocked (probably need a bot).--Zcreator alt (talk) 06:05, 10 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

Over the years have neglected to link taxonomic plant name entries to the chemical names that are derived from them. That is despite the fact that you have frequently shown the connection between chemicals and the plants in which they were originally discovered. Would you find it useful to you for me to place such names in a category if they would be redlinks. I would use {{vern}} with a named parameter, eg, "chem=1". I could also use {{attn|topic=chemistry}} if you find that adequate. DCDuring (talk) 19:45, 11 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

• Have an experiment. I'll see what I can do. SemperBlotto (talk) 21:04, 11 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

  Everything is experimental. I'll try {{vern|topic=chemistry}}, because it is something that doesn't need modules. I'll let you know when it is going. BTW, at ] and WT:REE#M I'd added mahogany acid and mahogany soap. The are probably not "pure" chemistry. Does that kind of thing interest you as well? DCDuring (talk) 02:52, 12 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

  Oh I'm interested in lots of things. Both added. SemperBlotto (talk) 05:52, 12 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

  p.s. There are over 8,000 entries in Category:Entries missing English vernacular names of taxa - so it is rather daunting. SemperBlotto (talk) 05:55, 12 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

• I'll update User:DCDuring/VernacularNamesMissing which has shorter lists of the names enclosed in {{vern}} in order of decreasing frequency. DCDuring (talk) 11:45, 12 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

  I have this evening added derived terms headings to translingual plant genus names and placed under them some phytochemical names. If you could take a look at these (my contributions from 22:10 to 23:10 my time) and let me know whether it is worth the trouble to add them, I'd appreciate it. If you don't get to it and need some Cirrus search that gives a high yield (doesn't waste your time), let me know. DCDuring (talk) 03:09, 9 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

  Yes. I think it is worthwhile. However, I think the purists will say that "Derived terms" should be in the same language as the lemma. But I don't know how else to show them. SemperBlotto (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

  The source for the chemical names is Phytochemical Constituents of GRAS Herbs and Other Economic Plants, James A. Duke, 1992. It is a compilation from a very large number of sources, very heterogenous. In some cases, the lists include only elements other than gases and hydrocarbons; others consist almost entirely of complex organic molecules or mixtures.

I could switch to descendants. I have an analogous problem with English synonyms vs. translations. I wish we had the courage to do what MW3 did, making many technical terms "International Scientific Vocabulary". Or that we had a different L2 design for the various classes of Translingual terms. We already have a very different entry structure for CJKV characters, also called translingual. DCDuring (talk) 16:37, 9 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hey. I think you screwed up the pt. --Otra cuenta105 (talk) 22:56, 13 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

• Fixed. SemperBlotto (talk) 08:41, 14 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

Why did you delete this Hebrew letter? If I can know thanks. Gioielli (talk) 11:02, 22 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

• You defined it using Norwegian templates - so it made no sense at all. See the contents of Category:Hebrew letters for how to format such letters. SemperBlotto (talk) 11:04, 22 March 2018 (UTC)Reply
• Also, we don't create entries for Hebrew letters with vocalization, so please don't recreate it. --WikiTiki89 11:37, 22 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

I understood, thanks. If I have doubts I will tell you! Gioielli (talk) 11:37, 22 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hello. Could you block this IP please? Too many shoddy edits, he's unreliable. --Per utramque cavernam (talk) 10:31, 23 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

• I didn't think that they were too bad. Feel free to RfV or RfD any dodgy creations and then we'll see. SemperBlotto (talk) 10:34, 23 March 2018 (UTC)Reply
  • Just looking at this small slice of their edits, you can't see the overall pattern of clueless and irresponsible editing. They add inflection and pronunciation templates, labels and categories in a dozen languages they don't know very well with no clue as to whether they work for that entry, not to mention definitions and even entries that appear to be extracted from a certain nether orifice of theirs... @Metaknowledge, Suzukaze-c, Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV‎ and others have complained about them several times at WT:VIP. I created Abuse Filter 75 to make it easier to spot them, and I block them whenever I see them making bad edits (i.e., most of the time). IMO the effort required to check and fix their edits far outweighs any benefit from the trivial and usually-unnecessary material they add. I've left them alone on the Verlan edits because I had no way to know until now whether they knew what they were doing.
  • That said, they use a wide range of IPs, so I don't dare use range blocks for fear of shutting down access by most of Thailand. That also makes it hard to communicate with them, since they rarely use the same IP twice. Chuck Entz (talk) 19:20, 23 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

Good evening, Can I also create the languages on wikitionary?

 Gioielli (talk) 17:00, 23 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

• Good afternoon. What does that mean? SemperBlotto (talk) 17:01, 23 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

Re this

Aren't collapsed tables kosher when etymological hypotheses are many and occupy the bulk of the article?

If they are not, I will just add the Spanish material and that'll be it.

If it is possible to create a new language with new words and new alphabets on wikitionary? Gioielli (talk) 17:37, 23 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

We're a descriptive dictionary: we only document terms in languages that are used or have been used to convey meaning between people, as documented in durably-archived sources- made-up stuff isn't allowed. See our Criteria for inclusion. If you have sources for entries in a real language that isn't represented here, first look at our List of languages to see if we already have a language code for it. If we don't, make a request at either Requests for moves, mergers and splits or the beer parlour for a language code to be created. Chuck Entz (talk) 18:29, 23 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

Is the Syriac letter not correct? Gioielli (talk) 12:17, 24 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

You suppressed the page? why? Bianchi-Bihan (talk) 15:37, 24 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

• It didn't make any sense. SemperBlotto (talk) 16:03, 24 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

I contibuted to d'he, d'hon, and others, can I try d'e ? Exists in french too : https://fr.wiktionary.orghttps://dictious.com/en/d’e . Bianchi-Bihan (talk) 17:15, 24 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

OK. Go for it. (I've made minor formatting corrections to those two) SemperBlotto (talk) 19:52, 24 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

Erased in French recently. As were d'am, d'az, d'he, d'hol, d'hon, d'hor and d'ho. Best regards.--Prieladkozh (talk) 13:47, 12 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

You should delete this page and related ones. There is no evidence that this word exists in Breton; the entries that are on br.wikt and scn.wikt have been created by Bianchi-Bihan and looking at the page history on the br.wikt shows that there is absolutely no consensus on the existence of this word. Pamputt (talk) 14:10, 23 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hi SemperBlotto. You could not know but the above request to restore the page is actually based on malicious reasons: Bianchi-Bihan pretends this entry exists in the French Wiktionary to create it here, but he created himself the entry in fr.wikt. Here is the discussion where all Breton-speaking users in fr.wikt voted for its deletion: fr:Wiktionnaire:Pages proposées à la suppression/mars 2018#d’am ; d’az ; d’e ; d’he ; d'hol ; d’hon ; d’hor ; d’ho. This entry is actually equivalent to of the in English or de le in French (which is why they were deleted in fr.wikt). By the way, Bianchi Bihan also claimed in fr.wikt that the entry was created on br.wikt and scn.wikt to justify its creation in the French Wiktionary, whereas he created himself (!) theses entries there as well: & . I will thus tag the entry with {{delete}} and refer to this discussion. Best regards. — Automatik (talk) 22:51, 9 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

Why did you delete my wikitionary userpage and talk page? Any reason? Dajo767 (talk) 18:25, 28 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

• User pages are used by Wiktionary editors primarily to show what languages they know and what other specialist knowledge they have. You do not seem to be a Wiktionary editor, so don't need a user page. User talk pages are always started by another user talking to you. Feel free to become an editor here and only then construct a user page that contains babel entries and anything else useful. SemperBlotto (talk) 20:17, 28 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

Sorry to bother you, this needs looking at if you have a moment, please. Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 14:33, 31 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

• Yes, I thought he must be AryamanA (talk • contribs), but the ip address locates to Mexico, not India. Blocked. SemperBlotto (talk) 14:38, 31 March 2018 (UTC)Reply
  • Yeah that's not me, thanks for blocking. I'm in the United States btw. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 15:04, 31 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

I made the entry cozeulodorieso because I found it both interesting and surprising. The meaning I gave had been theorised by George Hempl, as is even stated in the Wikipedia article about 'Carmen Saliare'. It is the most widely accepted meaning of the word, and it may be strange because it is part of the oldest known text in Latin (8th century BC, during the reign of Numa Pompilius). You added to the page a request for verification saying it should be formatted and the meaning should be revised. I would like to help, so could you please tell me what would be okay to add? Mario Vivancos (talk) 17:07, 4 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

• You have already provided one quotation that uses the word. We just need two more independent citations. As for formatting - if it's a contraction, then you need to say what it is a contraction of. See Category:Italian contractions for how to format such things. SemperBlotto (talk) 17:43, 4 April 2018 (UTC)Reply
• Unfortunately, I haven't been able to find any other citation of the word, and I fear there are none aside from the one I've given. However, I've been reading about attestation criteria and minority or dead languages – of which Latin could be part – only require one quotation to meet the criterium. 37.15.159.66 09:43, 7 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

What are bombetti? Singular probably bombetto but I don't know. Zizzi restaurant is using this name for some little breaded cheese snacks but maybe it means little bombs or summat. Equinox ◑ 14:51, 5 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

• Zizzi are crap at Italian. They probably mean bombette (singular bombetta) which are pork involtini stuffed with cheese &c (and yes, it's a diminutive of bomba). SemperBlotto (talk) 17:08, 5 April 2018 (UTC)Reply
  • Bombetta can also mean "bowler hat" according to it.wikipedia. SemperBlotto (talk) 17:10, 5 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hi! Here are your 10 random missing English words for this month.

• loast, daidles, neks, screw-type, mesteso, tratts, taivert, cheero, ecumenics, conteck

Equinox ◑ 21:24, 8 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

• Added. SemperBlotto (talk) 06:01, 9 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

Er, you didn't copy "loast" from Urban Dictionary did you? Having trouble finding that one. Equinox ◑ 18:27, 9 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

Feel free to correct or improve any of my definitions, ideally by adding quotations. SemperBlotto (talk) 04:56, 10 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

That is dodging the question so I RFVed it. Since you're a fastard (PROTOLOGISM) and have been accused of taking other people's words (not actually a bad thing), here are ten more words, if you want them. (Maybe I'll create an API of some kind. Does anyone want a missing-words REST API? I could do it, I'm underutilised.) rullion maximite baywoods alkamine attuent pimas grannied cogways pangamies puggie Equinox ◑ 00:18, 13 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

I'm quite sure the reverted translations to Spanish were right (native speaker). See sources:

• comidilla: http://dle.rae.es/?id=9w40MXY
• estar en boca de todos: http://www.wordreference.com/es/en/translation.asp?spen=andar+en+boca+de+todos
• vox pupuli: http://dle.rae.es/?id=c4J6bch

Tanisds (talk) 15:31, 9 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hey: I totally understand why you would want to delete my addition to the page on 'presentation' concerning the Chinese usage. But this word is used amongst native Chinese speakers in amongst native Chinese vocabulary and grammar. When I heard it again yesterday while walking past a group of Chinese college students speaking in Mandarin, I decided the time had come to mention it on wiktionary. From my perspective, it's a loan word from English that hasn't been transformed into Chinese characters. It's an oddity, and I don't think it's Chinglish in the way that other things are pure Chinglish. Please let me know what you think I would need to do to add something about this to wiktionary or about this type of situation in general. Thanks! --Geographyinitiative (talk) 23:26, 12 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

Here's a real-life example: 如何做一个精彩的 presentation --Geographyinitiative (talk) 05:16, 13 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

Here's another discussion about an English word borrowed into Chinese: Talk:Cookie --Geographyinitiative (talk) 05:35, 13 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

I think your rollback of my edit (diff) was in error. – voidxor 03:44, 18 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

Don't forget that there's a deletion reason specifically for user pages. It's true that you have to scroll down to see it, but it specifically mentions WT:USER, rather than WT:CFI or WT:EL. Citing irrelevant pages makes it look like you're just trumping up some excuse, rather than enforcing policy. Chuck Entz (talk) 14:11, 23 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

@SemperBlotto This user (User:Carl Francis) has been always problematic in regards to my constructive editing on entries in his first language, Cebuano (see entries for the surname Ocaña and the nickname Pirot). I would see him revert my constructive editing as vandalism, or defacement, And he sometimes reports me on WT:VIP, such as one case after I created a non-existent surname (which I claim as my mistake) and he calls me an "attention-seeker" for some reason when I try to defend myself against his claims. I and that user are both experienced users, but the latter has been always overprotective on entries he creates for his native language. Is his activity already constituting edit warring if he insists on reverting constructive edits I make, and can you communicate with him directly through the user talk page?TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 12:55, 27 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

• I have no knowledge of Cebuano, so can't tell which of you is right. SemperBlotto (talk) 14:37, 27 April 2018 (UTC)Reply
  • I don't know Cebuano either, but I agree that he's far too ready to call good-faith mistakes vandalism and doesn't understand proper wiki etiquette at all. Chuck Entz (talk) 18:45, 27 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

@SemperBlotto, Chuck Entz I don't really speak Cebuano as a first language (I'm a Tagalog speaker). I just adding an etymology in a surname on his native language, but he reverts it as vandalism, for some reason I'm trying to find out. You are correct that he has that unethical behaviour of calling another editor's good-faith mistake "vandalism" and even a good faith addition or a simple fix "defacement", but we cannot jump to conclusions yet. You are free to contact him at his talk page to ask about those behaviours when seeing others edit his created entries.-TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 21:58, 27 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

SemperBlotto reversed the Hypnozoite edits. The etymology had been changed to the two Greek words concerned, given in "Malaria: Origin of the Term Hypnozoite", near the end of the article (not open access): https://doi.org/10.1007/s10739-010-9239-3 A correction made was to get rid of "merozoite". A hypnozoite has nothing to do with a merozoite. A hypnozoite is effectively a dormant sporozoite, but there is a slightly better way, technically (long story re the reasons), of putting it (which had been done in the edit). The parasitological origin of the hypnozoite is explained in "Biological Concepts in Recurrent Plasmodium vivax Malaria" (not open access): https://doi.org/10.1017/S003118201800032X At the end of the Hypnozoite page, the anagram "hypotonize" was altered to "hypnotize". IdleMan (talk) 22:44, 4 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

Do you not accept additions, or is there something I missed? 72.21.196.64 15:53, 9 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

• "Clihn Uhn" does not seem to be a word. Apart from that, this appendix is a dustbin that you can put any old rubbish in. SemperBlotto (talk) 15:56, 9 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

This one seems incorrect, cf. the Wikipedia article and -plegic. --Njardarlogar (talk) 20:50, 9 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

• Feel free to correct it. SemperBlotto (talk) 05:14, 10 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hey, I noticed you deleted this. Not sure what was there before, but why was it deleted? Shouldn't it be a soft redirect like many other groups at Special:ListGroupRights such as Wiktionary:Autoconfirmed users, Wiktionary:Transwiki importers etc etc.? — Mnemosientje (t · c) 14:05, 12 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

• It didn't seem to have any useful function. SemperBlotto (talk) 14:07, 12 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

  Well, in that case should the other pages I listed not be deleted also? — Mnemosientje (t · c) 14:33, 12 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

  Good catch. I'll get round to them some time. SemperBlotto (talk) 14:35, 12 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

  Note that, besides the ones I linked here, there's a whole bunch of additional such pages linked over at Special:ListGroupRights. (Personally, I don't really see the harm in having them, even if they only serve to allow people looking for info on those user groups to discover the Special:ListGroupRights page.) — Mnemosientje (t · c) 14:42, 12 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hello, why did you delete my question? Thanks. Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 14:52, 13 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

• It wasn't needed - the suggested change had been made. SemperBlotto (talk) 14:53, 13 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hey Jeff. I just added the above, but I'm out of my depth immediately. Should it go under a general NBOMe entry, and are you in a position to explain what it stands for or how it's pronounced? (I watched a few videos on YouTube, but everyone seems to say and explain it differently..). Ƿidsiþ 14:38, 16 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

• It's not something I'm familiar with (just smoked a bit of weed way back in the 60s). I'll investigate. SemperBlotto (talk) 15:36, 16 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

  But never inhaled right? Thanks for the assist. Ƿidsiþ 07:43, 17 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hello. You reversed all of the edits I just made to the wiktionary entries on trans and cis terminology. You then blocked my IP address for "adding nonsense/gibberish", but have now apparently unblocked me? I am a transgender academic and this is an area I have expert knowledge in. Every time I made changes I clearly explained why I had done so, and referenced guidelines such as the GLAAD media reference guide. Even if you did not understand or agree with my edits they clearly were not nonsense or gibberish and I hardly think they deserved a ban. "Trans" is an adjective not a prefix or a verb. If my explanations in the notes were insufficient I can show you many peer-reviewed scholarly citations for this. Some of my edits were in order to make the Wiktionary entries consistent with the Wikipedia entries, for example editing "trans woman" to read "a woman assigned male at birth" rather than "male-to-female". I fail to understand what is nonsensical about this. "Transmasculine" does not simply mean "trans man" as the entry now states. It means a trans person who was assigned female at birth and who is masculine. This can include trans men and AFAB masculine nonbinary people, but it does not include AFAB nonbinary people who are not masculine, and it does not include nonbinary people who were assigned male at birth. If the nuance is beyond you then I apologise but it certainly does not make my edits gibberish. This is the first time I have edited Wiktionary, and I don't have a user account yet. I edited the entries because they were unclear and inaccurate, and this is both my field of academic study and an area I have personal experience in. Whether this was your intention or not, immediately banning me for "nonsense" felt very cruel and I am quite upset about it. If this is what wiki editing culture is like then I want no part in it.

• This is a dictionary. You need to have a basic knowledge of grammar. For instance, you complained that transmasculine was an adjective, not a verb, then added a definition that was for a noun ("a transgender person..."). SemperBlotto (talk) 05:24, 17 May 2018 (UTC)Reply
• I said that trans was an adjective not a verb. The entry for transmasculine previously stated that it meant to trans "to" something. Transmasculine is an adjective to describe a certain subset of transgender persons. Clearly the previous definition was inaccurate as it has now been edited. It is still inaccurate. Why did you unblock me unless you realised that you had acted in error?
  • I didn't unblock you. That was a decision made by another sysop (we don't always agree, but try not to get into fights about it). SemperBlotto (talk) 05:35, 17 May 2018 (UTC)Reply
    • Right. Well I'm glad there's other people willing to correct your mistakes.

I did not change the written in the “Verb” section because it seems special, but each other written in the lists begins with an uppercase letter and ends with a dot.

→ The revision I would like you rollback:

• https://en.wiktionary.orghttps://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=concerning&oldid=49423218
  

--77.141.95.102 15:40, 18 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

Are these mistakes? — This unsigned comment was added by DTLHS (talk • contribs).

Yes, the correct lemma is obituarius, not **obituarus. --Per utramque cavernam 22:32, 18 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

Fixed. SemperBlotto (talk) 05:34, 19 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

This article is bogus, and part of a campaign to invent a god called "Torento/Trent" enshrined in Sakurayama (a shrine, which does exist) in Morioka. The link to ja:WP is a dab page (perhaps that's automatic); the Japanese bits of the "definition" are meaningless. So this needs deletion, not cleanup - I put a note on the Tea House, but I'm not well acquainted with the Wikt way of doing things. Imaginatorium (talk) 08:58, 19 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

• OK - deleted. SemperBlotto (talk) 09:01, 19 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. Incidentally, the user(s) involved seems quite determined, and I will keep watching... Imaginatorium (talk) 09:14, 19 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

Why were these edits reverted? I mean, I'm happy if they're changed, but I think the links to at least Gnaus and Egnatius should remain. -- TimNelson (talk) 10:51, 19 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

• I assume you mean Via Egnatia. I don't believe that those terms have anything to do with the road. My Latin is very rusty, but shouldn't Egnatia actually be Egnatii (genitive of Egnatius)? SemperBlotto (talk) 11:39, 19 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hiya SemperBlotto! I noticed you're one of the more active admins around this place, and I figure you could answer a question I have. Which user groups actually serve a function on Wiktionary? I just couldn't help but notice the lack of documentation or an application process for anything except sysop.

For clarity, and to avoid assumption, I'm not looking to apply at this time. Discovering and learning the processes and standards are important for any productive community member and I'm still trying to figure the place out. Dross (talk) 06:37, 27 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

• Hmm. I think the list includes:- autoconfirmed users, autopatrollers, bots, bureaucrats, check users, flood flag, importers, IP block exemptions, oversighters, patrollers, rollbackers, stewards, administrators, template editors, and transwiki importers. But I'm not sure if all of those are used, or if there are others. SemperBlotto (talk) 10:46, 27 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

You deleted my cross reference of Latin 'obsculta' to 'ausculta'. That was all the content it needed. Not sure if you know Latin, but this sort of word presents difficulties to students. The problem is, this is an irregular medieval spelling of a common enough word, but without the cross-ref a student will not necessarily know that. — This unsigned comment was added by 216.96.199.131 (talk).

• Feel free to add a proper entry for obsculta. It will need a ==Latin== entry and then proper formatting for the rest, See our other Latin entries for how to format them. By the way, there is no entry for "obsculta" in Lewis and Short SemperBlotto (talk) 15:25, 30 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

p.s. You can see from the Babel statement on my Userpage that I am "la-1".

Lewis and Short is great for classical Latin, but I don't think they cover medieval Latin at all. Chuck Entz (talk) 07:50, 31 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

Please move bingo bango bongo back to Bingo Bango Bongo, as the citation I used clearly shows that the game's name is capitalized. EhSayer (talk) 04:59, 4 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

• No. That just typography. The article in Golf Monthly uses it uncapitalised when it is not at the start of a sentence. SemperBlotto (talk) 05:01, 4 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

Should I re-create the capitalized page as an alternative form? EhSayer (talk) 05:03, 4 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

Only if you really want to. SemperBlotto (talk) 05:05, 4 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

Even the Wikipedia article on variations of golf capitalizes the name. EhSayer (talk) 05:08, 4 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

That article seems to use capitalisation rather randomly - at the whim of individual contributors. SemperBlotto (talk) 05:12, 4 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

Why was my edit to KERNAL reverted? I've never seen someone genuinely misspell "kernel" as "kernal" when talking about the Unix or Windows OS kernels, but that is the correct spelling of the Commodore KERNAL (there are two stories about how that came to be. Short version is, the CBM kernal is named KERNAL.) It would be nice if you quoted a rule or something about why that would be reverted, since that is a correct and useful definition of the term. TomXP411 (talk) 06:14, 10 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

• You added the text to kernal. I believe that the operating system was called KERNAL. SemperBlotto (talk) 06:17, 10 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

Nubia is a region that is split up between the modern countries of Egypt and Sudan, both of which are in Northeast Africa. Northeast Africa is a region that is intermediate between North Africa, where the Barbary lion came from, and East Africa, where the East African lion currently exists, so the Nubian lion should not merely be seen as a subpopulation of the Barbary lion of North Africa, considering that its scientific name (Panthera leo nubica or Panthera leo nubicus) was also applied to the East African lion, and where Jackie the MGM lion was from. Nobody, to my knowledge, would treat Jackie the Nubian lion as a Barbary lion. Leo1pard (talk) 17:04, 13 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hello! You recently reverted my change to the suffix -mancer, to which I had added the definion "(fantasy) A practicioner of a specific type of magic, someone who can control a specific subject through magic". As this is a fairly common usage in popular fantasy, especially gaming, (eg. "pyromancer" - someone who controls fire in Dark Souls, World of Warcraft et al., "Hemomancer" for blood in Dungeons and Dragons) but also in literature (eg. Allomancers in the Mistborn trilogy) and given that "necromancer" is now much more commonly just someone who can raise and control the dead, I must wonder why it was removed.

• pyromancer is a person who practices pyromancy (divination by fire). Similarly a necromancer practices necromancy. I have not come across hemomancer / hemomancy but the words do seem to exist - you might try adding them. OK, I'll revert the edit, as your meaning is actually used by some people. SemperBlotto (talk) 04:59, 14 June 2018 (UTC)Reply
  • See the content of Category:English words suffixed with -mancer for how to format such things. SemperBlotto (talk) 05:06, 14 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

Regarding your rollback of the wikitionary entry on "loxism", you are in error. First of all, loxism is the discrimination against all goyim (non-Jews), not just whites. Second of all, categorising the word as "white supremacy" is biased; and wording "whites" as "(non-Jewish) whites" is also biased. How many Jewish mother's remind their children that "we aren't white, we just look white"?

Hi I think your rollback is in error because shrithe is not a real word. 195.2.244.193 08:54, 19 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

• Then you should add an {{rfv}} template, create a section in Wiktionary:Requests for verification and state your views there. SemperBlotto (talk) 08:57, 19 June 2018 (UTC)Reply
  • p.s. I have done that for you.
  • p.s. It is certainly rare. Perhaps it is Old English rather than English. SemperBlotto (talk) 09:00, 19 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Your rollback of my Mandarin Chinese translation on retweet might be an error, since '转推' is Twitter's official localization of the word 'retweet'. Please lookup this word on their zh-cn localization of Twitter Rules . Thank you. Tsumikiria (talk) 01:35, 22 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

In German language, Genderismus means gender ideology. This usage in English is sometimes used by too conservertive peoples. w:Talk:Genderism --Sharouser (talk) 03:26, 22 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

• According to our entry, Genderismus is a German word, so it can't be a synonym for the English term gender ideology (unless we add an English section). SemperBlotto (talk) 04:11, 22 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

Your edits seem somewhat politically charged; I think that gender ideology was probably fine as an entry before your edits and I have reverted them again as a result. Pinging @-sche, who is better equipped (in terms of knowledge, patience, and German) to handle these entries than either Semper or I am. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 04:22, 22 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

gender ideology is always used by politically charged people. I didn't mean to make politically charged article. I expect more accurated and neutral definition for this politically charged word will be finded during RfV process. --Sharouser (talk) 10:28, 22 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

It looks like you made at least two errors:

• https://en.wiktionary.orghttps://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=third_country&diff=prev&oldid=49792516
• https://en.wiktionary.orghttps://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=third&diff=prev&oldid=49792527

Could you please roll back to the good version?

If you think the good version is wrong please use the discussion page to expose your personal view on what's wrong. — This unsigned comment was added by 77.193.103.93 (talk).

• Firstly, it is a noun. Your first definition "Not party to an agreement between two other countries" is not.
• Secondly, in your other definition "a country other than the ones around the border", the quotation uses third-country - the hyphen seems to make it an adjective.
• Thirdly, your etymology repeatedly used "presumably" - we try not to make presumptions here. SemperBlotto (talk) 18:24, 24 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

I understand there are things which are not well documented.

In your version, of third_country,

• 1/ The first definition is missing. To make this definition a noun it might be written Country not party to an agreement between two other countries;
• 2/ I wonder why some people us third-country as adjective, while wiktionary says clearly that Third country is a noun. Anyway, your version makes readers believe this word is only used in the EU, while it looks like it is also used in both as American and Britsish English, far sooner the EU. I believe every other third countries quotations use nouns, and that only this US English is wrong.
• 3/ Your etymology Presumably (...) formed as a neologism by European Union translators. used "presumably" - we try not to make presumptions here. The quotation dating from before the second world war makes in doubts your version.

Anyway, I see you have your arguments. That's why I would like to suggest you to share them on the article Discussion page to improve it.

Why did you revert my edit to kitemark? https://en.wiktionary.orghttps://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=kitemark&oldid=49842495

The additional definition is certainly in use and I can provide examples if you want.

80.6.160.174 09:31, 29 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

• I couldn't find any evidence for it. SemperBlotto (talk) 09:42, 29 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

• The more general definition is less common, but there is evidence for it - I found these three easily:

"Labour would introduce a kitemark system to recognise businesses that pay fair wages and meet their tax obligations, the shadow chancellor has said."

"The TrustSeal is the gold standard kitemark for sharing economy companies."

"The report suggests that an internationally recognised Kitemark could be the first step in ensuring the responsible use of UK citizens’ data by social media platforms and other organisations."

The more general definition is also featured in the Cambridge Dictionary

Is this sufficient evidence to re-add the definition?

80.6.160.174 10:44, 29 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

• OK - I've added a second definition. Feel free to add quotations (properly formatted). SemperBlotto (talk) 12:22, 29 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

Lots of conjugated forms that need to be deleted here. Mind cleaning it up? —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 05:18, 4 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

• All done. SemperBlotto (talk) 05:45, 4 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

"Paratu" is listed as the ablative singular of "partus", whereas it is that of "paratus". I made the correction, but you've reverted. Who is correct? Wewebber (talk) 05:01, 6 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

• You. I didn't look beyond the first of two nouns. Now corrected. SemperBlotto (talk) 05:04, 6 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

How come? JustinClarkCasey (talk) 12:44, 7 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

• It was already there. SemperBlotto (talk) 09:10, 9 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

Why are you deleting my user page? Cowboysfan3214 (talk) 16:13, 7 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

User pages should conform with our guidelines; see WT:USER. Particularly, the user page you repeatedly created for yourself was not "largely constructive toward the goals of Wiktionary." Following your block, if you wish to create a user page, please make one that is useful. Look at the user pages of other active editors for examples, and read WT:USER most importantly. PseudoSkull (talk) 17:51, 7 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

I’d like to be notified before it is deleted next time. Cowboysfan3214 (talk) 18:00, 9 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

• many words in wiktionary do not have links to Wikipedia example blood vessel how to adding links to wikipedia? — This unsigned comment was added by Amirh123 (talk • contribs).
• Use the template {{wikipedia}}. I normally add it immediately after the headword (e.g. ===Noun===). SemperBlotto (talk) 13:18, 24 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

Please see the talk page for this Wiktionary entry at Talk:in pectore. The phrase is Latin, not Italian. Thanks. Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 18:34, 25 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

You deleted the Floydering page with the only comment as "totally wrong"? I included the history of origin, and it's popularization, as well as published citations from no less than the LA Times, NY Times, NPR, Birmingham Times and the Hollywood Reporter where the word has been used in context. The word continues to be used in other published sources and across social media. According to Wiktionary policy: In contrast to protologisms, neologisms are words that have already been in public usage by authors other than their inventors. As soon as a protologism finds its way into newspapers and websites, journals and books, it becomes a neologism and merits a separate Wiktionary entry. As such I am unsure what is "totally wrong" about the entry that required total deletion, as opposed to edits? — This unsigned comment was added by 2600:1700:5370:980:794f:a6a9:cb3f:9868 (talk).

• I didn't say that the word doesn't exist - only that the content was totally wrong. You said it was a verb - but the verb would be "Floyder". You need to learn some grammar if you want to edit a dictionary. SemperBlotto (talk) 05:23, 29 July 2018 (UTC)Reply
• Seeing that you agree the word exists, instead of insulting someone's grammar, one might be inclined to think that an editor would Wiktionary:Assume_good_faith and help to correct the original entry instead of deleting it altogether? The word in common usage is Floydering and, in this context, what is used throughout the published citations. In that the word is aligned with and loitering is noted as a verb ( of ) so I followed that template. As a neologism, I chose to begin with the popular usage of Floydering (with more citations) than with the lesser heard Floyder. Will you restore the entry and allow corrections, or should we start over anew? 2600:1700:5370:980:794F:A6A9:CB3F:9868 18:52, 29 July 2018 (UTC)Reply
• I suggest that you first recreate a citations page. Note that it should show the actual text of the word being used (see Citations:hydrogen for what it should look like). You could use {{cite-book}} and similar templates to help with the formatting if you want. As for the part of speech - if it is preceded by a form of the verb "to be" then it is a present participle ("I am Floydering, was Floydering, will be Floydering" etc). If it is followed by a verb then it will be a noun ("Floydering is annoying" etc). Then we'll see about the the entry itself. SemperBlotto (talk) 05:33, 30 July 2018 (UTC)Reply
• Since the page is currently unaccessible to me, as requested I have included a recreated (and more thorough) citations page here. I have followed the format of the Citations:hydrogen page as you suggested, as well have included the web citations following each. I believe this should be sufficient, but happy to provide more if required. Please review and advise as to next steps.

Originating at the Walt Disney Studios, Burbank, CA in 2008 and widely popularized through the 2016 documentary Floyd Norman: An Animated Life on Norman's life and career. Floydering is also the title of a jazz song composition by composer Ryan Shore from the same documentary. ASIN: B01KC6T4US

• 2015 - Scarlett Stahl, MiceChat.com, Floyd Norman's 80th Birthday Celebration

  In explanation Floyd said that he found strolling around helped with creativity, much more so than just sitting at a desk and thus the word Floydering began. Scarlett Stahl (2015 June 28) “"Floyd Norman's 80th Birthday Celebration"”, in Micechat.com‎, retrieved August 31, 2018

• Lua error in Module:quote at line 2951: Parameter 1 is required.

• 2016 - Kenneth Turan, L.A. Times, Disney's first black animator looks back in the incisive doc 'Floyd Norman: An Animated Life

  He's refused to let the fact that he no longer works at the place — he was let go when he was 65 -- stop him from doing what employees have come to call "Floydering," a kind of creative loitering/kibbitzing in the Disney offices. Kenneth Turan (2016 August 25) “'Disney's first black animator looks back in the incisive doc 'Floyd Norman: An Animated Life'”, in L.A. Times.com‎, retrieved August 31, 2018

• 2016 - Frank Scheck, The Hollywood Reporter, Floyd Norman: An Animated Life': Film Review

  "He walks around the campus like he's Bob Iger or something," she comments, adding that the term she's coined for what he does there is "Floydering." Frank Scheck (2016 August 26) “'Floyd Norman: An Animated Life': Film Review”, in hollywoodreporter.com‎, retrieved August 31, 2018

• 2016 - Noor Wazwaz, NPR, At 81, Disney's First African-American Animator Is Still In The Studio

  "I decided I didn't want to work at home," he says. "I missed the camaraderie of the big studio. I missed talking to people. I miss being around the action. And so ... I found an empty office and I moved in. I was probably in violation of some rule or law or whatever, but there I was." He continued to work in the office, and his colleagues affectionately coined the term "Floydering" — it rhymes with loitering — in his honor. Noor Wazwaz (2016 August 26) “"At 81, Disney's First African-American Animator Is Still In The Studio"”, in NPR.org‎, retrieved August 31, 2018

• 2017 - Jacqueline Lara, 99u.adobe.com, Floyd Norman: It’s Not Over Until You Say It’s Over

  I had been pushed out of the game, and was determined to come back on my own terms. Part of this involved coming back to Disney and moving into an office where I didn’t belong. In truth, they could have called security and kicked me off studio property, but they didn’t, so I stuck around year after year. Animator Avi Tuchman affectionately coined what I was doing as “Floydering,” and its stuck ever since. Lua error in Module:quote at line 892: |date= should contain a full date (year, month, day of month); use |month=, |year= for month and year

• 2017 - Monique Jones, Birmingham Times How The First Black Animator At The Disney Studios Became A Legend

  In the world of animation, Floyd Norman is a verb. The term "Floydering" was developed by Norman's co-workers to describe his creative process, and it's that creative process that propelled the 81-year-old throughout his animating career. Monique Jones (2017 February 15) “How The First Black Animator At The Disney Studios Became A Legend”, in BirminghamTimes.com‎, retrieved August 31, 2018
  

--2600:1700:5370:980:F5D0:497:D0EE:8AE4 09:07, 31 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

All of those basically say that a small group of people are using a made-up word as an in-joke to refer to a single individual. What's missing is anything that shows that people outside this small group are using it in speech or text to convey meaning, rather than merely mentioning it. Chuck Entz (talk) 13:39, 31 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

• I'll send it to RfV. SemperBlotto (talk) 13:41, 31 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

I will add some more citations to show it in speech and text.--2600:1700:5370:980:F5D0:497:D0EE:8AE4 19:08, 31 July 2018 (UTC) I have now added three more citations showing variations of the word (Floyder and Floyders) being used in speech and text. I hope this is sufficient. I can provide more references or citations, respectfully however as is, it already feels like far more has been required or provided than the majority of other Wiktionary entries. --2600:1700:5370:980:F5D0:497:D0EE:8AE4 21:42, 31 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

• OK - it's now up to the greater community to decide. SemperBlotto (talk) 04:14, 1 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

You've gotta start doing this to save my sanity. If we can say "some quantification occurred" or "we demand requantification" then it's at least maybe-uncountable (en-noun|~) and maybe not countable at all (en-noun|-). You can't say "some apple was eaten" or "we demand apple". (Well, not really.) Equinox ◑ 04:25, 1 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

• Feel free to correct / improve any of my edits. SemperBlotto (talk) 04:27, 1 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

• Yes but it's been ten years and I'm tired. Equinox ◑ 04:33, 1 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

  Doesn't time fly when you're enjoying yourself. SemperBlotto (talk) 04:37, 1 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

• 05:30 on Wiktionary with Blotto is my favourite nightclub. My second favourite is the Purple Turtle but once I got thrown out and another time I was taken to a remote spot by a mystery taxi and approached for money by a man in a fake police uniform. Wiktionary is just less hassle. Equinox ◑ 04:46, 1 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

  Keep on taking the tablets! SemperBlotto (talk) 04:49, 1 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

• Even "Big Bob" from the Turtle, who sells me the tablets, uses the correct countability markup. Last night I said "give me three buprenorphines" and he said "that noun doesn't have a plural in Wiktionary, innit". Then he broke a man's back for looking at him funny. Later that night, I found a message in the onion skin in my kebab. It said: "You are the first person to Equinox ◑ 04:56, 1 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

hi how to find English verbs with verb form red links I want creat verb forms — This unsigned comment was added by Amirh123 (talk • contribs).

• There is no easy way. But, if you ask User:kc_kennylau politely, he can modify the {{en-verb}} template or module so that such red links get put in a special category. SemperBlotto (talk) 07:54, 1 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

Why did you twice delete my entry Kamut without any consultation? Eric Kvaalen (talk) 16:55, 16 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Eric Kvaalen:

1. No one is consulted before the deletion of entries that are patently incorrect. Such entries are identified as "wrong" by admins and other editors here, and removed with a minimum of bureaucracy.
2. When you re-created the Kamut entry on August 12, the software likely showed you a message, "Did you mean kamut?" That should have been a clue.
3. The entry you appear to want is listed at kamut, with a lower-case "k". Capitalization is a distinctive feature here at the English Wiktionary, and only terms that are lexically spelled with capital letters (that is, always capitalized, not just at the start of a sentence or in a title) are listed under the capitalized spelling.

I hope the above helps clarify the situation. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │^{Tala við mig} 19:26, 16 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Eirikr:: Thank you for replying. I don't understand why I get an answer from you rather than from SemperBlotto. To reply to you, no it does not clarify the situation at all. I know that Wiktionary distinguishes between kamut and Kamut. Kamut with a capital K is a trademark for a kind of wheat (as I wrote). That meaning is not mentioned under kamut, and I don't think it should be because it's a trademark (although a lot of people don't realize that and write it with a small k). Eric Kvaalen (talk) 10:29, 20 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

The US registered trademark is "KAMUT" (all caps). This quickly passed into the English language as "kamut" (no caps). SemperBlotto (talk) 10:40, 20 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

You deleted the meaning of "Albanian" in post-medieval sources, leaving in the dictionary only the contemporary meaning of citizen or ethnic Albanian. Is this the common policy of Wikidictionary?

The definition is given by Oliver Schmitt, one of the best albanologists of our era, and is this:

(in late Middle Ages Balkans) a) A speaker of Albanian language. b) A person from Albania, independently of his/her language. c) A person from rural area.< Schmitt Oliver Jens, "(2009), Skanderbeg: Der neue Alexander auf dem Balkan", p. 354.>

This use is not for this particular book, as another user claims. Schmitt, in p. 353 explains that this applies to all sources: "Ethnonyme wie "Albaner", "Slawe", ... erscheinen haufig in den mittelalterlichen Quellen. Es ist aber unzulassig, sie mit Angehorigen heutiger ethnonational definierter Gruppen gleichzuzetzen. ...".

Can you explain your opinion, and point to the relevant rule of wikidictionary?--Skylax30 (talk) 10:24, 17 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

• I couldn't find any verification of that meaning. You said it was English and that it was once used in the Balkans - I'm pretty sure that English wasn't much used in the Balkans. SemperBlotto (talk) 10:27, 17 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

If you'll check supernatural#Noun (comparison entry), you'll find that a similar addition is needed. The edit should probably look like:

===Noun===
{{en-noun}}

# {{lb|en|countable}} A person to whom paranormal powers are attributed.
# {{lb|en|uncountable}} Paranormal persons and events collectively. {{qualifier|When used with definite article: "the paranormal".}}

That would result in:

Noun

paranormal (plural paranormals)

1. (countable) A person to whom paranormal powers are attributed.
2. (uncountable) Paranormal persons and events collectively. (When used with definite article: "the paranormal".)

Is this acceptable to you?  Paine Ellsworth  ^put'r there  15:06, 17 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

• I don't think that the supernatural entry is correct either. It is just using an adjective as a mass noun - something you can do with almost any adjective in English. You might like to raise the issue in the beer parlour. SemperBlotto (talk) 15:11, 17 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

• Seems to be a noun in Merriam-Webster, also the Oxford calls it an adjective and then uses it as a noun ("an investigator of the paranormal"). So it appears that the noun entry is needed in Wiktionary, don't you agree?  Paine Ellsworth  ^put'r there  15:22, 17 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

OK, I've added it. Are you happy now ? (no reply needed) SemperBlotto (talk) 15:29, 17 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

Excellent, thank you! and the omission of the full stop from the non-sentence is a nice touch. Also, apologies for my naggina tendencies. Best of everything to you and yours!  Paine Ellsworth  ^put'r there  15:41, 17 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

fionn is derived from Proto-Celtic *windos (which is clear by the page here), has nothing to do with the old Irish verb ro-finnadar and is definitely not derived from its verbal noun finnaid. I don't know why it was ever placed on that page, but it should not be there. Please do not revert my edit again until you can provide evidence that an Old Irish noun meaning "white" or "bright" is any way derived from a verbal noun meaning "recognize." Ladysif (talk) 18:24, 19 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Ladysif: You're claiming that the verb fionn isn't descended from that Old Irish verb? SURJECTION _{·talk·contr·log·} 18:26, 19 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

No, and I just realized my mistake. I missed the second etymology there. Apologies for my impulsive response. Ladysif (talk) 18:43, 19 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

dear,

I added an ethymology on raltegravir and you deleted it. I would like to know why you deleted my edit on the page.

kind regards, — This unsigned comment was added by Zera13 (talk • contribs).

• Because it didn't make any sense. Look at the ===Etymology=== sections of some other similar words and figure out how it should be formatted. SemperBlotto (talk) 08:04, 21 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

I just want to say thank you for helping me on rocketman. CrayonS (talk) 10:27, 22 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

I removed * because it made NavFrame wrong. It separated NavHead and NavContent from <div class="NavFrame">. --Naggy Nagumo (talk) 13:55, 22 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

• OK. SemperBlotto (talk) 14:00, 22 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

Ciao, ho visto che hai inserito ormai alcuni anni fa molti lemmi in dialetto tarantino. Il problema è che il tarantino è un dialetto, non una lingua, è uno dei dialetti della cosidetta "lingua napoletana" (codice nap), che comprende tutti i dialetti centro-meridionali ad eccezione di siciliano, calabrese e salentino (che appartengono alla "lingua siciliana"). Mi chiedo quindi se non sia il caso di rivedere la questione.--Jamala (talk) 07:22, 24 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

• Tarantino has an agreed language code (roa-tar) - so is a "language" as far as Wiktionary is concerned. SemperBlotto (talk)

  p.s. All talk should be in English here, so that others may join in if they want.

  • It does not work this way, nobody in the linguistic community recognizes it as a language, roa-tar is just a code that means "romance variety-taranto", it would work also for each southern dialect in general. Tarantino fits perfectly within the Southern Italian linguistic group (gruppo linguistico meridionale intermedio) and it shares a lot of features with other dialects of the area (Apulia) and of the whole South Italy zone. For this reason it's considered to be a dialect of the Neapolitan/South Italian Language (nap), as also Barese, Pescarese, Molisano, South Latium, South Marche, Basilicata, Foggiano, North Calabrese, and so on. --Jamala (talk) 20:40, 24 August 2018 (UTC)Reply
    • The point is that- right or wrong- Wiktionary treats it as a language (see Category:Tarantino language), so treating it as a dialect would be inconsistent with the entries we already have and wouldn't work with the system of templates, modules and categories that are the backbone of our site. Feel free to make your case at the Beer parlor, but be mindful of the fact that demoting Tarantino to a dialect would require edits to about 600 pages. Chuck Entz (talk) 22:08, 24 August 2018 (UTC)Reply
      • Just to understand, are you saying that because of a previous mistake we have to accept/invent a language that does not exsist at all?--Jamala (talk) 10:25, 25 August 2018 (UTC)Reply
        • Maybe a mistake was made, but you have the opportunity to correct it. As Chuck Entz said, you can go to the Beer Parlour and explain the situation there. Per utramque cavernam 10:26, 25 August 2018 (UTC)Reply
          • I will definetly expose the issue in Beer Parlour, thank you all! --Jamala (talk) 10:30, 25 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hi! Yok is an adjective. It is the negative equivalent of var, which is also an adjective. 83.226.234.175 07:58, 30 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

Not according to the Turkish version of Wiktionary. Also, why did you change the heading, but left the headword as "head|tr|determiner"? It just doesn't make sense. SemperBlotto (talk) 08:05, 30 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

Obviously, I missed out on that one. I know Turkish. Yok is not a determiner, but an adjective (just like its equivalent var). Two of my Turkish-Swedish dictionaries also state that it is, which I find more trustworthy than the Wiktionary page... Also, I know noticed that the Turkish version does say that it is an adjective. 83.226.234.175 08:14, 30 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

How can we have a language recognized on Wiktionary so We can add the vocabulary and dictionary?

17:02, 1 September 2018 (UTC)Nathanael Everton

Make a post in the WT:Beer parlour (where policy decisions are discussed) and tell us about the language, and the Wiktionary community will look into whether it's already included (e.g. under another name, or as a dialect of another language, in which case we'd look into whether or not it needs to be separated), and if it's not, then whether or not it needs to be included. In general, any attested natural language that isn't a dialect of another language has a strong case for inclusion, whereas newly made-up constructed/artificial languages are not generally included. - -sche (discuss) 17:26, 1 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

Are edit summaries important on Wiktionary? —Eli355 (talk) 21:06, 3 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

• Some people think so. SemperBlotto (talk) 04:40, 4 September 2018 (UTC)Reply
  • What is the consensus? —Eli355 (talk) 18:38, 4 September 2018 (UTC)Reply
    • Some people think that using edit summaries can prevent one looking like a thug with a revert button as well as cutting down on unproductive revert wars. 83.216.81.71 20:28, 4 September 2018 (UTC)Reply
      • They're overrated --XY3999 (talk) 15:31, 15 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

Why do you keep undoing my edit regarding the use of "baby" on people? It should be noted that its use is marginalizing and offensive to some. All I'm doing is marking that, saying "sometimes offensive". — This unsigned comment was added by Cseyrafi (talk • contribs).

• I don't believe so. SemperBlotto (talk) 12:45, 4 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

This definition is suspect, considering that boron and borax are two different things. Isn't it just a dated way of saying boric? —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 19:23, 6 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

• I've modified the definition. SemperBlotto (talk) 05:17, 7 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

  Looks good now. Thanks —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 05:24, 7 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

i think all pages should have images. Hawson (talk) 04:06, 8 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

• You are, of course, allowed to think what you like. What sort of image would you have for, say, the? SemperBlotto (talk) 04:13, 8 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

I have already explained why the action of the user "Surjection" was incorrect on his talkpage: https://en.wiktionary.orghttps://dictious.com/en/User_talk:Surjection#Regarding_your_recent_%22undo%22_on_my_added_definition_to_the_word_%22omnipotent%22.

I even explained this in my edit. I do not understand your reasoning behind reverting my undo.

Apomimi (talk) 15:19, 16 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

• omnipotent is an adjective. Your addition ("To be capable of ...") is that of a verb. SemperBlotto (talk) 15:21, 16 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

Are you suggesting I correct that mistake and publish the definition again?

Apomimi (talk) 15:30, 16 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

• Probably not. It didn't add anything useful. SemperBlotto (talk) 15:31, 16 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

  I think "capable of anything" would be a good addition to the first definition, actually it's clearer than the current one. Helenpaws (talk) 13:12, 17 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

Sad that you spend your time reverting other people's contributions to an online dictionary! --Paris91 (talk) 12:55, 17 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

• Even sadder that you add entries with no content. SemperBlotto (talk) 12:56, 17 September 2018 (UTC)Reply
  • Sort of like sending someone a gift-wrapped empty box and complaining that you didn't get a thank-you note. Chuck Entz (talk) 13:48, 17 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hello Jeff,

I am Omri from the Hebrew Wiktionary, and something aroused my curiosity.
I know that it's been a long time since you created the Latin entry, diapsalma, but I wanted to ask if you could tell me (or refer me to search) What are the sources for the dictionary definition "(music) pause"?

Thank you --Ariel1024 (talk) 02:04, 23 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

• Seven years ago? I can't remember what I was doing seven hours ago! (It might have been Lewis and Short) SemperBlotto (talk) 05:33, 23 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

Why did you cancel my entry in "mofo"(the Italian one).I can assure you that it is correct and currently used.Probably there are editing problems or lack of grammar forms,but you could simply have noted that without deleting it. — This unsigned comment was added by 37.162.15.164 (talk).

• I couldn't find it in any of my Italian dictionaries, nor any online dictionary, nor the Italian wiktionary or wikipedia. SemperBlotto (talk) 19:52, 24 September 2018 (UTC)Reply
  • The only slang term for it in Italian that I have come across is fumo. SemperBlotto (talk) 19:57, 24 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

I (2409:4061:507:6fc3:acb2:96d1:3d0f:8583) am amazed to see your wanton intervention in my fair edits. In nationalism, I know not what were wrong with the citation of Tupac Amaru II in the examples. Hate you him? He was a great freedom fighter who strove earnestly for the Native rights till the gallows. He is indeed Father of the Quechua folk. ---10:43 AM, Wednesday, 26 September 2018 (U.T.C.)

• That's as may be, but the citation didn't add anything to the definition - it didn't help our users understand the term any better. SemperBlotto (talk) 10:59, 26 September 2018 (UTC)Reply
• Please read WT:NPOV. Wiktionary is a dictionary. It doesn't express opinions about historical figures. Chuck Entz (talk) 13:35, 26 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

As per these reverts: the spelling "char" is backed up by Eric Partridge's Dictionary of Slang and Unconventional English (based on the non-rhotic British pronunciation "chah"), which was mentioned in the edit summary. As far as I'm aware, the spelling "char" is actually more common than "cha". --Bangalamania (talk) 19:37, 26 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

• You added the definition Tea (not tea) in the verb section - totally wrong. SemperBlotto (talk) 19:41, 26 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hi. I'm not a particular fan of the spelling "tumeric", but it is an alternative spelling. You can find this on Dictionary.com. Wolfdog (talk) 20:50, 1 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

I'm going to look into a note about "stigmatized" or something of that ilk. It's widely pronounced this way and sometimes spelled accordingly. 68.229.77.9 16:33, 6 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Wolfdog; where? --Robbie SWE (talk) 16:44, 6 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

I'm sorry. I meant to say on Merriam-Webster's site. See it here. Wolfdog (talk) 16:29, 7 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hi Semper, if you feel like fixing some Italian entries I've got a list of form-of entries lacking headline templates: User:Matthias Buchmeier/List-ItalianFormOf-WithoutHeadlineTemplate. cheers Matthias Buchmeier (talk) 10:51, 3 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

• OK - I'll tackle them when time permits. SemperBlotto (talk) 10:53, 3 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

• spero sia la maniera giusta per chiedere la modifica alla intestazione errata italiana NAVAL ACADEMY nella corretta ACCADEMIA NAVALE. grazie — This unsigned comment was added by 79.40.182.22 (talk).
• Sarebbe "somma di parti" SemperBlotto (talk) 15:08, 7 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

• per favore potete inserire la traduzione inglese della parola "chiavica" come "douchebag" perchè il sistema non me lo permette in quanto considerata "bad word" mentre è tra le meno

peggio del linguaggio sguaiato/becero italiano. grazie

Hi, I saw that you reverted my edit on West Punjab. I was correcting the definition of the term and gave the rationale in the editing summary not sure why I was reverted. I was in the process correcting the definition for East Punjab and Punjab as well. Both were former provinces/states in India and Pakistan and are now simply known as Punjab. I have restored my edit for now. Please let me if there is something wrong, Thanks. Gotitbro (talk) 21:09, 9 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

Salve per favore correggere intestazione errata "terreni battutti" nella corretta versione "terreni battuti" grazie — This unsigned comment was added by 79.32.130.228 (talk).

• Done (moved) SemperBlotto (talk) 13:13, 15 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

grazie mille

per favore potete cancellare anche la scheda errata "capiredattori"grazie

Hey SB, informicolatisi is a "form of" entry which points to a non-existent entry, can you take a look? - TheDaveRoss 13:54, 17 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

per favore potete fare il controllo del perchè il vs sistema non mi consente la creazione della scheda con titolo "Tropico del Cancro" ritenendola "Error: This action has been automatically identified as harmful, and therefore disallowed. If you believe your action was constructive, please inform an administrator of what you were trying to do. A brief description of the abuse rule which your action matched is: female names vandal" grazie — This unsigned comment was added by 87.4.110.168 (talk) at 17:13, 19 October 2018.

• I created it for you with no problems. SemperBlotto (talk) 17:36, 19 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

potete dirmi perchè le parole inglesi "vitro di trina" e "mater dolorosas" esistano solo su Wiktionary? grazie — This unsigned comment was added by 79.26.122.71 (talk).

• Not true. A simple Google search (in quotation marks) shows many other usages of these two terms. SemperBlotto (talk) 14:17, 27 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

Grazie non ci avevo pensato!

It is everything legit. Try The Dictionary of the Albanian Language for a change, copy paste it to Google translate. UROR m.: Copë e vogël e një shufre çeliku, zakonisht në trajtë gjysmë rrethi me të cilën i biem gurit të zjarrit për të nxjerrë xixa. I bie me uror. Shkrep me uror.

• Janë (shkojnë, venë) si eshka me urorin (me masatin) shih tek ESHK/Ë,~A. Janë gurë e uror shih te GUR,~I.

Hi, as 'glamourous' is recognised as an alternative spelling in Collins English Dictionary, and appears in print from the 1800s onwards - albeit seldomly - I thought it was important to include that it isn't universally considered a misspelling, simply by adding a second definition. You reverted the edits I made, so perhaps I breached a Wiktionary rule; what error did I make? Thank you 149.5.89.21 10:33, 31 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

• Google ngram viewer shows vanishingly few usages. There is a fine line between a rare alternative spelling and a misspelling. I don't see the need to have both definitions. SemperBlotto (talk) 10:38, 31 October 2018 (UTC)Reply
  • A rare spelling doesn't inherently equate to a misspelling, however, which is why both definitions are valid inclusions in my opinion. 'Glamourous' is both a misspelling of 'glamorous', as well as a lesser-used but occasionally accepted form of it. I think it's in fact misleading to claim it is only a misspelling when there are respected sources (Collins Dictionary) suggesting otherwise. Providing the rarity of the alternative form is overtly mentioned in the second definition, I don't see the reasoning not to include it149.5.89.21 10:54, 31 October 2018 (UTC)Reply
    • What's the conclusion on this? Both Collins Dictionary and the Merriam Webster dictionary list 'glamourous' as an alternative spelling, not merely as a misspelling. If they consider it valid, I don't see why Wiktionary should differ 149.5.89.21 11:40, 1 November 2018 (UTC)Reply
      • We don't use other dictionaries as sources. We rely on actual usage. SemperBlotto (talk) 11:43, 1 November 2018 (UTC)Reply
        • And Google ngram shows actual and continuous usage in print since the 1800s - even if it's dwarfed by the more standard form 'glamorous'. It also has plenty of hits on Google. What's your or Wiktionary's threshold for when usage is too minimal to be considered a valid alternative? If it's just up to the discretion of users such as yourself to override contributors such as myself, that seems fairly arbitrary.149.5.89.21 11:52, 1 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hey mate, I know Wiktionary doesn't traditionally use redirects, but I was thinking that since these two corresponding lists still differ from each other that cross-linking this one to Wikipedia's list would make sense for easier comparison. Also, the Wiktionary list already cross-links to Wikipedia, so having Wikipedia's cross-link redirect back here seems more proper than it being a dead link. Cheers! Enix150 (talk) 21:37, 2 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

• OK Go for it. SemperBlotto (talk) 06:15, 3 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

I did my best to fix the Gothic aujan so that it's more acceptable and fit with in the rest of the Gothic pages. Thought I think perhaps it should be under *aujan as my source says it's a reconstruction.

Yes, it's a reconstruction, and an objectionable one at that I'm afraid. Note Talk:𐌰𐌿𐌾𐌰𐌽. — Mnemosientje (t · c) 23:09, 4 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hello, SemperBlotto. Thanks for wikifying the page I was editinf! I'm just a novice. MaximeHardyEns (talk) 15:44, 12 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hi, you have rolled back my edit on hakenkreuz. I feel its in error to roll it back. Please review. 2409:4066:8F:F33:C522:5280:491F:5081 16:14, 13 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

• The thing to do is add a {{rfv|de}} template and follow the generated link to Wiktionary:Requests for verification/Non-English. SemperBlotto (talk) 16:33, 13 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

I have made some edits on compilation, and I'm aware that it may be debatable. That is why I separated adding the translation to a second edit. Now I'm confused why you insisted on undoing both. Please at least include a summary next time? And btw, the link in question now links to "compiler" instead of "compilation (programming)". I know they are related but I think they are not the same thing? ZypA13510 (talk) 01:26, 16 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

per favore potete inserire nella traduzione inglese di "cretino", "idiota" la parola "nincompoop". L'azione mi viene bloccata come "harmful". grazie

"Milano é il capoluogo lombardo"; la terza persona singolare del verbo essere corrisponde a "è" non "é", ovviamente. Per favore, correggi tu l'errore se non vuoi che lo faccia qualcun altro.--R5b43 (talk) 21:01, 17 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hi SemperBlotto. My edit to expressive was purely stylistic; flatly I don't know the reason for the revert of a fullstop. You barely see etymologies without them, or practice has changed, or something. I need some clarification on this point if you could. Gherkinmad (talk) 22:30, 18 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

• I am of the belief that full stops come at the end of sentences. Not everyone is of the same belief. SemperBlotto (talk) 06:52, 19 November 2018 (UTC)Reply
  • One-word etymologies may not necessarily be another matter. Pardon me they do very routinely have fullstops across many language entries up to and including English. It's not me you'd be taking this up with in some kind of earnest. I won't treat any reverts as frivolities and I don't need to be kept on the ball by someone happy not only to 'see no overlap' between these things but to let it get back to me through the algorithm. Gherkinmad (talk) 01:33, 21 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

First of all, YOU should tell us what kind of "rate" YOU are thinking.

Second, YOU should prove that renewable energy is always "replenished at the same rate as it is used," every second, every minute, every hour, every day.

Because any decent one who uses renewable energies(renewable electricity) and batteries cannot think so.

-- 118.236.75.164 08:08, 21 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

No answer?

-- 118.236.75.164 08:18, 21 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

No answer? YOU haven't explain your revision at all even now.

-- 118.236.75.164 08:48, 21 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

No need to be angry, we are all trying to do our best to make a good dictionary-- what do you think of the current definition on that page? --Geographyinitiative (talk) 09:01, 21 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

Do you really think that's why he reverted? You did strange things like wikilinking the phrase "general term", as if it were something that someone would need to look up, and you took three paragraphs- formatted as if they were separate definitions- rambling, and full of grammatical errors, to replace a single sentence. Whatever the problems with the current definition, it's much better than your replacement. Also, on a web site staffed by volunteers, you can't expect people to drop whatever they're doing to reply in 10 minutes, or even 10 hours. Chuck Entz (talk) 09:49, 21 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

Why you have reverted the addition of

"

==Italian==

===Etymology===

{{suffix|it|sii|-lo}}

===Verb===

second-person singular imperative form of '''{{l|it|essere}}''' with suffix '''{{l|it|-lo}}'''

"

in the page "Siilo"?

DelvecchioSimone12 5 96 (talk) 10:23, 21 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

• It's a combined form - I have readded it with our normal formatting. SemperBlotto (talk) 10:32, 21 November 2018 (UTC)Reply
  • Reverting my edit before readding it modified when you can modify it in one step? DelvecchioSimone12 5 96 (talk) 10:56, 21 November 2018 (UTC)Reply
  • The format was temporary while I was taking the right template from the word "sii". DelvecchioSimone12 5 96 (talk) 11:14, 21 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

Why you have removed the etymology from mangialo?

The etymology {{suffix|it|mangia|-lo}} is correct. DelvecchioSimone12 5 96 (talk) 14:44, 22 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

• Because I don't believe that the "lo" is a suffix there. It is just lo in a combined form. SemperBlotto (talk) 14:52, 22 November 2018 (UTC)Reply
  • if "-lo" is not a suffix you can replace the template {{suffix}} with the template {{compound}} instead of reverting the whole edit DelvecchioSimone12 5 96 (talk) 17:49, 24 November 2018 (UTC)Reply
    • But that would mean that the etymology is exactly the same as the definition. That doesn't make a lot of sense to me. SemperBlotto (talk) 18:08, 24 November 2018 (UTC)Reply
      • This is the entry at the etymology -->{{compound|it|mangia|-lo}}<--
        with the following layout: mangia +‎ -lo
        and this is the current entry for the meaning -->Compound of {{inflection of|mangiare||2|s|impr|lang=it}} and {{form of|] form|lo|lang=it}}<-- with the following layout
        Compound of second-person singular imperative of mangiare and enclitic form of lo.
        Which in my opinion are different. DelvecchioSimone12 5 96 (talk) 22:59, 24 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

You thursday at about 16:11 (CET) (15:11 UTC) have blocked me without sending me the explicit warning mentioned at ===Explanation=== in the second period of the line betwen the examples and the section ====Patrolling==== that means that you must send me an explicit warning message, that I have not received, before blocking me (or someone else). Moreover, in point 2 of the ===Policy=== section from what I understand, it implies that before you block you must be sure that you can not use less drastic methods and sending the explicit warning message is one of them. If I understood correctly this means that you had used the user block improperly. DelvecchioSimone12 5 96 (talk) 18:29, 24 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hello, I can see you are the only administrator online at the moment. The edits that I am doing are OK, are they not? I was looking around at things to do as a beginner, and found some incorrect headers to change. I would be greatly saddened to hear it has all been in vain. --Pious Eterino (talk) 13:46, 26 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

• Yes they're fine. I've stopped looking at them. SemperBlotto (talk) 13:48, 26 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

I had added a quote from STC using "Introitive" in context as there was a related request — This unsigned comment was added by 174.118.94.174 (talk).

Your addition didn't do much for the definition and it was too long: I really don't see the point of including anything after the word introitive, since the purpose of quotes in a dictionary is to show an example of usage, not to let the author have his or her say on a subject. The added context was useless, anyway, since it would take far too much space for the context needed to make the terminology comprehensible. As it is, the quote was indistinguishable from the kind of word salad that random-text generators produce. If you had properly labeled it, though, it might have been just severely pruned instead of reverted.Chuck Entz (talk) 05:40, 27 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

Well if I'm going to go through all the work of finding the damn quote then it would seem reasonable that someone else could come along and prune/truncate it. This is why I dont send Jimmy Wales any more money. "it would take far too much space for the context needed to make the terminology comprehensible" Uhhhh ... have you ever read Coleridge?

Merely a "fan" doesn't capture the nuances of believing it to be superior. A fan can criticize it and may simply have an interest in the subject, while an "-aboo" has nuances of placing it above other things. A wehraboo will reject criticism and may believe in false facts that make it look better, that's an essential part of being an "-aboo" for something. The word "fan" doesn't carry those nuances. 84.205.36.52 11:13, 5 December 2018 (UTC)Reply

per cortesia potete correggere la parola "crisopeia" che è in portoghese in "crisopea" (in italiano). grazie — This unsigned comment was added by 79.32.129.175 (talk).

• Added. You could have added it yourself. By the way, why do you keep adding a "head=..." parameter when one is not needed? SemperBlotto (talk) 21:12, 6 December 2018 (UTC)Reply

Why did you delete all my pages? and revert the edit? The edit deleted a dead link. 12944qwerty (talk) 15:22, 13 December 2018 (UTC)Reply

• You don't merit a user page if you are not an editor - also it was far too flamboyant. Alternative forms do not need to exist in the wiki, but may be added later. SemperBlotto (talk) 15:24, 13 December 2018 (UTC)Reply

As I wrote in the edit summaries, the two bugle calls are distinct. Though they serve similar purposes in their respective countries' armed services, their melodies are utterly different. So if we're calling Taps and Last Post synonyms, then by the same logic we should be calling The Star Spangled Banner and La Marseillaise synonymous, after all each of these names a national anthem used for official ceremonies, parades, and the like.

Can you please help me understand the reasoning behind your reversions.—PaulTanenbaum (talk) 16:27, 13 December 2018 (UTC)Reply

• Synonyms do not have to be exact. In this case, the meanings of the two terms are pretty identical. The words themselves are not related so they can't be "related terms". SemperBlotto (talk) 20:48, 13 December 2018 (UTC)Reply

OK, thanks for the explanation. You're right, they are not "related" in the Wiktionary sense. But they're also not synonyms (as illustrated by my analogy to national anthems above). What they are, it turns out, is coordinate terms, and I've edited both entries to indicate as much. Regards—PaulTanenbaum (talk) 20:53, 14 December 2018 (UTC)Reply

I find it bizarre that twice you undo a needed CORRECTION and that you say I’m the one who needs to come to your talk page. I’m correcting the article and you’re being counterproductive. Please stop. 177.16.128.98

• You messed up the formatting. I have added the sense properly. SemperBlotto (talk) 15:28, 21 December 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hi Jeff, I was just wondering if it is a standard procedure to just automatically remove all the new links to external sites? In your last edit you removed the link to the definition of the word "waterfall" in Bright Child School Dictionary - why? It gives a simpler definition with lots of pictures to understand the word, and there are no ads on that site. Why this link is any worse than the other link from the "Further Reading" section that just points to the ad-only site with nothing about waterfalls, which you left intact? Thanks in advance for your answer.— This unsigned comment was added by Bright.child.school.dictionary (talk • contribs).

Even if we wanted to link to websites with basically no information beyond what Wiktionary has, your site is two weeks old and has links that go nowhere for the About page, the Privacy policy page and the Disclaimers page. Who's to say what it will be like in another two weeks? You're basically asking us to let you use our dictionary to promote your dictionary. We don't do that. Chuck Entz (talk) 07:45, 24 December 2018 (UTC)Reply

Yes, the clue is that your user name is the same as the dictionary - obvious spam. SemperBlotto (talk) 13:32, 24 December 2018 (UTC)Reply

You reverted this change: https://en.wiktionary.orghttps://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=step_ladder&oldid=prev&diff=50159981&markasread=13468890&markasreadwiki=enwiktionary Other dictionaries supporting this alternate definition: https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/stepladder https://www.macmillandictionary.com/us/dictionary/american/stepladder Sparr (talk) 20:27, 26 December 2018 (UTC)Reply

Having a separate sense for something that's covered by the original sense is absolutely silly. It's like saying that you can tell the two apart because the second one is identical to the first one... Chuck Entz (talk) 04:50, 27 December 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I've added further information on Fell, from the OED on the December Tea room page, and I think I've shown you've confused something. The OED only shows the meaning of fell without the hair as obsolete. The meaning of fell including the hair is not. 217.46.65.34 08:01, 27 December 2018 (UTC)Reply

aggettivo "rato" ….linguaggio notarile, sinon. ormai raro di stipulato: contratto rato.(Enc. Treccani) In diritto canonico, matrimonio r., matrimonio tra battezzati formalmente valido, distinto in matrimonio r. e consumato..(Enc. Treccani) aggettivo "irrito" irrito /'ir:ito/ agg. . - 1. (giur.) ≈ Ⓖ invalido, nullo (Enc. Treccani) grazie — This unsigned comment was added by 79.27.127.14 (talk).

Why do you keep on doing this to me? What is wrong the way I edit? Why do you keep changing it on me? I have been editing granduncle, grandaunt, grandnephew, grandniece, but you keep insisting that you changing it on me. CAN YOU PLEASE NOT DO IT ANYMORE, OK.

Hello! I'm pondering doing EWDC again. See User talk:Equinox/EWDC. Equinox ◑ 04:00, 31 December 2018 (UTC)Reply

as I am trying to figure out what the hell is a SOP, I have a question for you: "monaco buddista" is a SOP, "salto di qualità" is a SOP and many others SOP produced by me then what is "SPINONE ITALIANO"? Thank you very much for your time wasted for me — This unsigned comment was added by Angelucci (talk • contribs).

• I don't know what Spinone Italiano is. It doesn't look like English to me, and I'm not certain about capitalisation. p.s. Sentences start with a capital letter and end with a full stop. SemperBlotto (talk) 18:16, 31 December 2018 (UTC)Reply
• As for "sum of parts", see "fried egg test" in Wiktionary:Criteria for inclusion. SemperBlotto (talk) 18:33, 31 December 2018 (UTC)Reply