Hello, you have come here looking for the meaning of the word
User talk:VPliousnine. In DICTIOUS you will not only get to know all the dictionary meanings for the word
User talk:VPliousnine, but we will also tell you about its etymology, its characteristics and you will know how to say
User talk:VPliousnine in singular and plural. Everything you need to know about the word
User talk:VPliousnine you have here. The definition of the word
User talk:VPliousnine will help you to be more precise and correct when speaking or writing your texts. Knowing the definition of
User talk:VPliousnine, as well as those of other words, enriches your vocabulary and provides you with more and better linguistic resources.
Please don't add interwiki links manually. Request interwiki 'bot assistance from User:GerardM instead.
Welcome!
Hello, and welcome to Wiktionary. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wiktionarian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk (discussion) and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~, which automatically produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the beer parlour or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! --Connel MacKenzie T C 21:06, 1 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
Hello,
What can you tell me about the Russian Wiktionary's LXbot? What exactly is it doing? Can it be set to delay one month behind, so we have a chance to delete the nonsense, before it stub's it on ru:? Thanks in advance,
--Connel MacKenzie 06:34, 3 November 2006 (UTC)Reply
- LXbot is a bot ruled by ru:User:Schwallex (he is also an administrator in ru:Wiktionary). It appends many good stubs (by proper templates) to Russian Wiktionary for future editing. --VPliousnine 19:37, 3 November 2006 (UTC)Reply
- Thanks. But what criteria is it using for determining if something is a "good stub" or not? Something appearing in English Wiktionary's Special:Recentchanges may be deleted in only a couple minutes, or up to two months later (if a formal RFV process is requested.) Obviously, LXbot is not deleting the bad entries it creates. Does ru.wikt: address that at all, or is it simply flooding www.google.com with links to bogus entries? --Connel MacKenzie 19:43, 3 November 2006 (UTC)Reply
- AFAIK, the bot takes cathegorized nouns, adjectives etc from other Wiktionaries and makes well-structured stubs accordingly. They contain headings like =Language=, ==Morphology==, ==Semantics==, ===Meaning===, ===Synonyms===, ===Antonyms===, Hyperonyms, Hyponyms, Etymology. All these are empty at the moment, but ready for adding actual information. You mean there are "bad" articles in the English Wiktionary (French, German etc) that contain the Category tag but still doomed for deletion? Maybe. Anyway, we don't copy the explanations - just the title words, and that is something pretty much surely useful. Al Silonov 20:49, 3 November 2006 (UTC)Reply
- It uses Category:English nouns, right? That is added by
{{en-noun}} which is stuffed in from preload templates. So yes, the majority of garbage entries that are entered here and later deleted, will appear in that category. --Connel MacKenzie 20:58, 3 November 2006 (UTC)Reply
- The word lists were generated from the corresponding categories (Category:English nouns, Category:English adverbs, and so on). The bot does not check Special:Recentchanges, nor does it even check those categories on a regular basis. The whole fun ride was basically a one-time thing whose purpose was to a) fill our ‘Категория:Английский язык’ with at least some content and b) prevent anonymous visitors from creating rubbish stubs that do not conform to our guidelines.
- Sure enough, what our human editors are doing now is revisit each particular entry and either fill it with content or kick its pathetic arse out of the door. Discussions in the community do ensue, as in the recent case of ‘fuck you money’. (Plus, I actually did sieve out some of the most obvious rubbish myself prior to feeding the lists to the bot. However, as you will surely understand, I'm not in a position to rule on the validity of each single entry all on my own.)
- Lastly, rest assured that I don't forget to check RobotGMwikt's edits for the word ‘removing’ every once in a while.
- The bottom line is that rubbish that has been added is being gradually disposed of, while new rubbish is not being added any time soon. (As far as English is concerned, that is.)
- --Schwallex 21:29, 3 November 2006 (UTC)Reply
- Fantastic. Thank you for the explanation. I can't wait to see the corresponding thing done here on en.wikt: for Russian nouns. (Each tagged with
{{substub}}, of course.) --Connel MacKenzie 21:35, 3 November 2006 (UTC)Reply
- Well, feel free to head straight to ru:Категория:Русские существительные — but be aware that it ain't exactly chock-full of content right now. In fact, you've probably got more Russian nouns over here than we've got over there. (>_<) (And we certainly have more English nouns now than Russian ones. I guess that's the definition of ‘downside’. Or ‘irony’. Or ‘shame’.)
- --Schwallex 22:29, 3 November 2006 (UTC)Reply
Hello. (I found you through the babel templates.) A discussion has started on Meta about the interwiki links and the bot that makes them. The discussion is meant for everyone from the various wiktionaries to participate in. We are looking for help to get the word out; if you edit on ru.wiktionary, would you be willing to post an announcement in the public dicussion space over there, and also a call for help translating the discussion as needed? The page on Meta is here: m:Interwiki.py/Wiktionary_functionality_discussion. Thanks for your consideration. ArielGlenn 02:00, 30 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
Sorry about that, viewing the edit diff (difference) it look liked you'd removed everything apart from the Esperanto. Mglovesfun (talk) 09:40, 9 October 2010 (UTC)Reply