. In DICTIOUS you will not only get to know all the dictionary meanings for the word
, but we will also tell you about its etymology, its characteristics and you will know how to say
in singular and plural. Everything you need to know about the word
you have here. The definition of the word
will help you to be more precise and correct when speaking or writing your texts. Knowing the definition of
, as well as those of other words, enriches your vocabulary and provides you with more and better linguistic resources.
| This is an archive page that has been kept for historical purposes. The conversations on this page are no longer live.
|
I did a job on common, see history, which really was bizarre.
(English grammar) Said of a noun that can refer to a person of either sex, as "doctor" or "teacher".
Maybe I was delusional, but as I recall, there were multiple definitions. I do subscribe to at least one theory of the cabal. But don't see it here after review and agree with you that perhaps this was delusional. My bad.--Allamakee Democrat 08:51, 1 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
What do you mean by How does this magic work?? Please respond on my talk page. n:user:FellowWikiNews 13:46, 1 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- Yeah, come on back to IRC as Brion add this extension for us, would 'cha? --Connel MacKenzie T C 21:50, 1 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- I think a good first test (now that it is enabled) would be to add to the TOC of RFC. Just a straight list, oldest to newest, of all entries in Category:Requests for cleanup? Yes/no/maybe? --Connel MacKenzie T C 14:10, 2 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- Wiktionary:Requests for cleanup/List. See also WT:GP#WT:RFC. This list could replace the entire RFC page. — Vildricianus 14:47, 2 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
I've responded to your comment about transwikis and the import function at my talk page. I'm under the impression that transwikis do satisfy the GFDL because edit histories are copied over. Thanks. TheProject 22:06, 1 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
Good morning. Can you work your magic on RFD/RFV/RFC/TR like you did for ID/TR/BP/GP with the 'Wiktionary:Discussion rooms' thing? --Connel MacKenzie T C 14:08, 2 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- Yup. Not today, probably. — Vildricianus 14:37, 2 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
Aren't these the same language? Weren't there any slight differences or didn't it depend on POV or whatever how to call it? — Vildricianus 14:30, 4 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- Aargh, this is a complete nightmare. The answer is yes, they're the same. Anglo-Saxon is the old-fashioned name for the language. But looking at these indices, they are probably based on Webster, because ‘Old English’ here seems to refer to archaic or Middle English. That is a weird peculiarity of Webster's which has caused no end of problems. The ideal solution would be to delete the current Index:Old English (it is no use to anyone – just a hangover from early Webster-classifications), and then rename Index:Anglo-Saxon as Index:Old English. Confused yet? Widsith 14:37, 4 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- Thanks, deleted and moved. — Vildricianus 14:43, 4 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
Hello! No problem...just glad to be helping out. No, I do not have any knowledge of Tamil or other Dravidian languages. I could try to look it up and do some research. --Dijan 16:09, 4 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- I wish I spoke all these. I do know some basic Hindi/Urdu and a dash of Gujarati. Hehe! But, overall, I'm very familiar with Devanagari, Arabic, and Cyrillic scripts. --Dijan 16:13, 4 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
You wanna run around protecting commons' admins' user pages here as well? --Connel MacKenzie T C 17:40, 4 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- Bring 'em on. — Vildricianus 17:43, 4 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
Wow. Having this description page is a very good idea. I've got about twice as many in my javascript, but they're undocumented. Where do you find the time?
I'm tempted to add a link to your formatting page, for my javascript changes, just to be lazy. :-)
--Connel MacKenzie T C 21:32, 5 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- It's not very up to date. Wrote it quickly, just to have something to link to :-). Possibly you've got twice as much, but mine changes more about the pages, certainly on first sight in the diffs (adding blank lines, which looks like massive addition/removal). That's why I got that link in the edit summaries. — Vildricianus 21:44, 5 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
Even though its a bit late, I'll ask you anyhow. Where is the discussion regarding the deletion of all those categories?
The comment that the functionality is covered by an index is demonstrably false; indexes are a different monster than categories. Are you certain the one user isn't a loose cannon? That is, where is that discussion? It's not on WT:RFDO. --Connel MacKenzie T C 18:57, 6 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- You know A-cai has been experimenting with categorizing the Chinese stuff. How does that make him a "loose cannon"? He made all those categories himself. And who's talking about indexes here? — Vildricianus 19:00, 6 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- The deletion comments of some of them indicated it was deleted because the functionality is covered by Chinese Pinyin index. User:A-cai is not necessarily a loose cannon (like I'm one to talk!) but are you certain the deletions are OK with everyone that works on Wiktionary:About Chinese, or even all the CJKV "About" pages? That would be the logical place to discuss it, before mass-purging.
- My primary question is where is the conversation? I know you wouldn't just start something like this blindly, so where is the talk page that I've missed out on? --Connel MacKenzie T C 19:27, 6 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- (edit conflict) There isn't any talk. I take it as an experiment he's doing, mostly, if not completely, on his own. He's always requested speedy deletion for those categories, and I (and others as well) have been doing it ever since I became a sysop. — Vildricianus 19:32, 6 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- Lastly, wouldn't one of our Chinese speaking sysops be the right person to do those deletions? --Connel MacKenzie T C 19:28, 6 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- By the way, these categories where empty, therefore useless... Kipmaster 08:06, 7 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
Is the verb here: register formatted correctly? If not, could you show me the correct format? Thanks Kipmaster 08:04, 7 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- http://en.wiktionary.orghttps://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=register&diff=1222385&oldid=1222329
- That's how I'd do it. (And did it indeed). — Vildricianus 08:52, 7 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
Is it old Etonian or Old Etonian? SemperBlotto 13:45, 7 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- I'm quite certain it's the capitalized one. — Vildricianus 13:46, 7 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
Hi, it's nice to meet you, Vild. I was wondering- if you have a wife, and she edited Wiktionary (or does she?), would you have her make an account named "Vildricianne"? A long time ago elsewhere online, there were two people, husband and wife in real life, with the screennames of "Zovrio" and "Zolvera" online. I thought of such a matrimonial naming scheme when I saw your name, and "Vildricianne" stuck. --Takanatsu the Frippant 20:23, 7 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- Hello Takanatsu. No, I'd try to save her from bad latinizations. Actually, I'd try to save her from Wiktionary in general. It's an unwholesome place. — Vildricianus 21:17, 7 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
A capital "I" was used in place of a lower case "L" for a username this evening. Some of my CSS shows stuff in courier font, so I spotted it right away, but others were fooled for more than a few minutes.
Can you extend the CSS magic you did for me, to every page that shows a username? Or is this the sort of thing I should ask Brion to do somehow?
Sheesh, it would be nice if the vandalbots showed an extra three or four lines of blinking red text, whenever a new account is created that matched a SOUNDEX of an admin account username.
--Connel MacKenzie 03:18, 8 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- Way easier would be to preemptively create those accounts with some of the obvious L vs I, cyrillic a and o etc. nonsense characters. Perhaps later today I'll do that. — Vildricianus 08:51, 8 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
Do you not understood? I'm not troll here so you aren't should blocking me!! Pietras1988 11:03, 8 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- Since you claim to be a troll on other wikis, that may as well have repercussions here. — Vildricianus 11:05, 8 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- ...the previous bot request died because you asked to "wait to hear from some others". AFAIK, there is no "others" when it comes to such discussions, especially since Eclecticology is absent. I think it's a pity this excellent opportunity passed away. — Vildricianus 16:23, 5 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- Well, the previous request had gotten one support and one oppose before I asked that, and none after, while the second request got six support and no oppose, so I'd say that's progress! :-)
- I, too, would like to get the wt:en bot policy clarified, but evidently this wasn't such an "excellent opportunity" after all, because the discussion withered. We'll try again. —scs 16:36, 8 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- See the discussion I just started at Wiktionary talk:Bots.
- I've been pretty busy lately and it seems I'll stay busy for a while. Please remind me if I don't respond this week. — Vildricianus 21:09, 31 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
Why not?
68.148.165.213 17:07, 8 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- Sorry? You mean the =Transitive verb= stuff? We're trying to use the
{{transitive}} and {{intransitive}}templates at the beginning of the definition lines, keeping transitive and intransitive verbs in the same section. — Vildricianus 17:11, 8 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- I actually dont' think that's a good idea. I've seen definitions with long lists of meanings, & compared to putting transitive verbs in its own catagory & intransitive verbs in another catagory, it is much easier to access info in the latter.
- 68.148.165.213 03:52, 9 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
Have you already seen WT:BP#Failed RFV? Please comment. — Vildricianus 09:31, 8 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- Thanks. I have been out of CT recently. I have put a comment there. I should be back in action shortly. My ward is doing the Ukoluka and there has been quite a lot going on.
{{en-noun}} works pretty nice so far... One thing: there's some missing logic in the parameter names. I've got "sg", "pl2", "pl3"... where's "pl"? I feel that the following should work:
- {{en-noun|head=] ]|dwop blopi}}
This:
- {{en-noun|head=] ]|dwop blopi}}
...just doesn't looks right. Minor issue, though. — Vildricianus 13:41, 8 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- Done:
dwop blopus (plural dwop blopi)
- I'm quite happy with that parameter because it lets "{en-noun|pl=...}" prefix the plural with a "plural" tag while "{en-noun|''}" etc. can display extended notes without the unwelcome "plural" prefix. Rod (A. Smith) 17:23, 8 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
You have removed function from this template. Using "singular=this or that" no longer gives wikified words. See, for example, foaming agent. SemperBlotto 11:27, 10 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- Hmm, I can't remember making that change to the template. I'll check all instances and correct them. But you should use
{{en-noun}} hereafter. — Vildricianus 11:54, 10 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
Posting tags stating legimitate definitions will be deleted in 30 days if they are not formatted correctly is not helpful. Instead, why not edit the definition, that would be an appropriate contribution. 64.229.210.246 11:24, 12 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
Do you prefer conversations like this cross-posted to your talk page or do you watch the pages of your original posts? Rod (A. Smith) 19:23, 12 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- Varies. That is, I watch all pages, certainly sysop talk pages, so I follow any conversation whether I'm involved or not :-). You don't need to copy the stuff here, no. I thought it'd be fancy for my archives if I did it consequently, but I can't be bothered too much by my archives at the moment. — Vildricianus 19:26, 12 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
So, what happened to VildBot? Pumping your editcount via pywikipediabot? :-)
My Javascript (and my brain) still revert to using {{en-infl-consonant}} on a regular basis. You might want to make this one-time run, a periodic run. --Connel MacKenzie 20:18, 12 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
Uh, wow. I really didn't expect that, especially today. I'm honored that you would think of me. I am fundamentally willing, but I have a couple of concerns. First, you're entirely correct that just about everything is ill-timed for me right now. Secondly, I really am not keeping current with the goings-on in the community here, at present. That is to say that I don't frequently read the Beer Parlour nor the Grease Pit. It would be a bit like electing a senator who got things done and answered letters but didn't read the newspaper. Third, (and Kipcool can back me up on this), I'm not the most technically savvy sort here. In particular, I don't think I could evaluate proposed bots with any expertise.
Having just done my utmost to talk us both out of it, yes, I'll take the job if the community wants me to, provided that everyone is aware that my presence and focus here may be spotty at best for the next who-knows-how-long.
Oh, and one request, if you would... could you (and EncycloPetey and anyone else) please take charge of compiling the next couple of months' worth of WOTD entries, sometime soon? I need to prepare a presentation in the next couple of weeks, in addition to all the activity/chaos suddenly thrust into my life, and it would be helpful if I could get those audios out of the way in one big batch well in advance, whenever a free moment presents itself. Thanks! --Dvortygirl 00:41, 13 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- Okay, I talked about it with Kipcool, who is a bureaucrat on fr: and it sounds to me like something I can do, just so long as I don't have to have perfect attendance right away. <holds her nose and dives in>. Go for it. --Dvortygirl 05:31, 14 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
I was looking at your userpage for an example of DYNPAGELIST, when I realized, all we really need to do is rename "User:Vildricianus" to "Help:" and 95% of our documentation problems go away.
It did give me another idea though. Help:Examples/subpage1, /subpage2, /subpage3 (with more meaningful names, hopefully.)
Then again, you've done quite a lot to improve Help: already. So, if no one has said so yet: THANK YOU.
--Connel MacKenzie 05:07, 13 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- Making the whole thing better is an ongoing task. And indeed, my userpages have been a starting point for many an idea. They've become indispensable for me. Much like yours have been a major protagonist in the cleanup process :-). — Vildricianus 08:20, 13 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
Yikes, what a mess. Try now. Widsith 07:58, 13 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
Lest you think I'm acting behind your back, I'm notifying you here of the fact that I have asked both Dvortygirl and Hippietrail whether they'd accept a nomination for bureaucratship. A third bureaucrat may relieve some of the pressure that's upon you right now, during Ec's long-term absence. Cheers, — Vildricianus 18:40, 13 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- You know, I was just about to suggest we might need a third bureaucrat, but I see you're way ahead of me. Thanks. —scs 19:52, 13 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- Yes. As both users disclaimed that they might not be very available, this might not immediately solve the situation. — Vildricianus 20:19, 13 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
I like this a lot. I did not expect it to be useful, but in fact it is. Very. --Connel MacKenzie 19:46, 13 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- It is indispensible for me. Though I didn't write it myself, of course. — Vildricianus 20:22, 13 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
Hi, thanks for that. I'll probably only come here to do some Commons-related image things, so I'll wait a bit before registering, see if I come here often. I've already got about a dozen Wikimedia-wide accounts and keeping track of them is getting quite hard. commons:User:NielsF aka 82.73.8.151 23:02, 13 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
I've got my self confused around pejoratives!
I noticed that the pejoratives in the Category Pejoratives were not all English under the Category English language. There is also another Catgeory Pejorative which seems to perform the same function!
I've tried to make an English pejoratives template but made a total cock-up of it, could you delete this template for me? and I'll stay away from templates until I've sussed them out in the Sand Pit.
Also could the catgeories Category Pejoratives and Category Pejorative be amalgamted and would also not be more useful to have them sperated by language?--Williamsayers79 09:05, 14 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- Yes, both categories should be merged into one, and it should be for English terms only. — Vildricianus 09:09, 14 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- Would you like me to have a bash at merging the two and removing the non-English ones?--Williamsayers79 09:32, 14 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- Yes please, if you'd like to do that. Thanks. — Vildricianus 09:33, 14 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- Finished my editing and have a few things that need deletion:
- Chinese perjoratives - due to my bad spelling
- Hebrew perjoratives - due to my bad spelling also :-\
- Category:Pejorative - when catag|pejorative is used as a template the words are still goign into this category - any ideas?
- Everything should now be in the category:Pejoratives category or in a Language pejoratives (e.g. Hebrew pejoratives) category.--Williamsayers79 12:49, 14 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- Thanks, should be ok. Cattag is a bit buggy, but I'm going to debug it soon. — Vildricianus 12:56, 14 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
This presents an unusual problem. The def as it now stands redirects housebreak to the other and completely unrelated definition. Using the participle template doesnt work. I've never come across this before. What to do? - I suppose write it out in full and dont use the template. How odd. Andrew massyn 20:26, 14 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- Er, well, housebreaking here has clearly two meanings: the animal-related thing and the crime. In one sense it is the present participle of a verb, in the other it is a noun. The question is whether "to housebreak" is also used as a synonyms for "to burgle". Is it? — Vildricianus 20:33, 14 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- Each part of speech here seems to needs full, multiple definitions.
housebreak - verb (training), noun (burglary}
housebreaks - verb form, noun plural
housebroken - verb form (trained), adjective (trained, burgled)
housebreaking - verb form (training), noun [burglary)
The Wikipedia article w:housebreaking is about animal training even though I would have thought the burglary sense was more common. Good luck. SemperBlotto 20:37, 14 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- That's more or less how I saw it, but Andrew added a verb (infinitive rather than participle) meaning to housebreaking, which is not accurate. — Vildricianus 20:39, 14 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- Grammer was never my strong point. I will leave it to you to fix both entries. :) Andrew massyn 20:42, 14 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
Actually, I have a new computer that has made it possible for me to become a bit more active again. I was going to put up the first 24 words for August, but I'll see what's been done so far... --EncycloPetey 01:36, 15 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
...Well I didn't expect to see a whole month up already! It must be coincidence that you did all that work yeasterday, since it was last night that I pulled together 24 words to start a new month. I've chosen to put them into September instead, and moved the three words that were in September to later in the month (it made it easier to keep track of the various days that way). We're set for WOTD through 27 September. --EncycloPetey 03:31, 15 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
keeper is in the discussion of requests for clean-up. I've been looking at it for a few days; I asked on the rfc page, but do you think I should just go ahead with a number of changes? Sorting out translations is the big deal... Robert Ullmann 11:32, 15 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- Please be bold and go ahead! Translations should in general not work with any numbering system, but with glosses, like on the page for abstract. As for the soccer/football thing... careful. This has been a discussion point since Template:football was created, and should be dealt with carefully. Good luck! — Vildricianus 11:41, 15 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- okay, I've done everything I had thought through. The numbers on the translations were already messed up. It led me to fix the page for seeker. You might be amused by what happened while doing that: I went to check in the German wiktionary for de:Suche typed "Suche" into the Suche box, and started laughing as I hit the Suche button ... Robert Ullmann 13:27, 15 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
I think it's good idea that we keep same style in all index pages. I'll start replacing Template:Finnish alphabet with the new ones.--Jyril 11:58, 15 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
You wanted verification for stiffener, but it's slang. Phat and nigga won't be found in Webster's either, they're slang, with origins on the street. The verification is that people say it and know what it means. —HpK1029 (talk • contribs) .
- And that needs to be verified. We can't record unverifiable things here. Chances are high that if it's clearly widespread, it will go through rfv without problems. — Vildricianus 08:20, 17 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
Hello mate – can you comment on this? Widsith 08:00, 17 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- Done. — Vildricianus 08:33, 17 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
Thought you would be a good person to ask: I'm working on adding Swahili words, and I'd like something like en-noun. I'm thinking of copying template:en-noun into sw-noun and changing it; Swahili (like other Bantu languages) forms plurals by changing prefixes, and has many nouns with no plural forms. (they aren't uncountable, just the same word with count or measure words). My question is: if I copy en-noun to sw-noun and make changes, using it in several words to test, am I effectively working in a sandbox, or are there side-effects I don't know of? Robert Ullmann 15:40, 17 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- No, there are no side-effects as far as I know. You're free to copy the stuff, experiment a bit and be bold. One thing I should say, though, it's likely you won't be able to use the en-noun structure effectively, as it's designed for the English stuff. I'd say you'd better contact User:Rodasmith, who devised it, and who could probably help out. It's a fairly complicated bit of template, and even I don't really grasp what happens over there. Asking Rodasmith could save you a lot of time. — Vildricianus 15:48, 17 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- Okay, good. It ain't pretty code, but the user documentation is extremely good, and it even has regression tests! I've been coding in a few hundred computer languages for 35 years. (starting with VLSI photo-lithography software in 1972) I'll try some things, and talk to Rodasmith. Thanks! Robert Ullmann 18:03, 17 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- Seems to be about where it should be for a first pass. Thanks. The structure just needed a bit of shifting around. Robert Ullmann 21:41, 17 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
Was there a reason you reverted (like) this? 68.39.174.238 16:28, 17 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- Yes. It's not your userpage. — Vildricianus 16:29, 17 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
Heya, I'm on wikibreak until I get some things straightened out and get my cable modem back online. (Probably should have paid that bill on time.) --Connel MacKenzie 17:16, 17 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- Wow, fearsome! Enjoy your time off! Stay away as long as you need to, but not too long. — Vildricianus 17:21, 17 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- Hrm. Not long enough. :-( I think my wikibreak is about to be extended two weeks.
- Could you get around to clearing the Finnish indexes, please? (Special:Wantedpages.) --Connel MacKenzie 07:06, 20 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
Hello, I nearly had heart failure because I thought my account had been permenantly blocked! Apparently it was an impersonators, who the hell are these odd-balls and should I be worried?
--Williamsayers79 19:16, 17 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- No worries, just the usual idiots trying to scare someone. A keen sysop spots them easily and blocks them effortlessly. — Vildricianus 19:27, 17 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
Hi Vild. Please review, expand, and correct the following as necessary so we know our goals before we dive in:
Template:cattag has the following good features:
- Auxiliary templates determine categories and tag text.
- It allows entering one-off tags that lack templates.
It could benefit from the following improvements:
- Reduce the number of edit-page-footer templates.
- By default, red link templates for new tags in order to allow them to define whether to take a category
Rod (A. Smith) 06:08, 21 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- That pretty much covers it I believe. One additional thing is that templates should still be able to be used independently. — Vildricianus 07:38, 21 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
You're from Belgium so I suppose you've never heard a Model T start, being an American car. Regardless, have you heard an antique car start, which would specifically be any car from 1908 to 1927, the years the Ford Model T was manufactured? They may have made the similar "cack" sound effect. Why did you delete it? Beep, honk, vroom and sputter are also sound effects but they all stay on WT. --68.102.183.110 20:16, 21 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- Can you provide decent quotations for "cack" as used as an onomatopoeia for a starting engine? — Vildricianus 20:25, 21 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
The change in noun template creates problems for images, in that the text can become pushed way way down on the page. See silver dollar. The change in verb template does the same thing, but also, why is present participle now the LAST entry? If the templates are left the way they are, I will go back and hand code the out where they create a problem for displaying images. The templates also take two lines in what was once displayed in one. --Allamakee Democrat 21:22, 21 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- By default, there's absolutely no change over the previous standard templates, and since you haven't specified any other view than the default, you shouldn't see too much change. silver dollar displays correctly for me. Could you give any other examples of problematic entries?
- Also, present participle is not the last entry. Perhaps you're looking at an example of
{{irregverb}}, which is a non-standard, deprecated template. — Vildricianus 07:41, 22 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- Perhaps you're looking at an example of
{{irregverb}}, which is a non-standard, deprecated template. No. The template that produces ===Adjective===
'''{{subst:PAGENAME}}''' --Allamakee Democrat 11:48, 22 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- Which template is that? That looks like a pretty bad one that should be taken out. — Vildricianus 11:50, 22 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
Are you commonly on wikipedia? Radio Kirk (u|t|c) 19:13, 22 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- I check it out from time to time, but more as a reader than a contributor (some thousand-ish edits). — Vildricianus 19:15, 22 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- Ya well, expect to see me here more often as I am (excuse my language) quitting that shit! To many conflicts with User:Nookdog and his vandal gang. Well happy editing. Radio Kirk (u|t|c) 19:22, 22 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- Hell ya! I'm gonna be helping out hear much more, and I know you are a big editor here. Also, dont try to contact me on Wikipedia any more because I'm blowing that popsicle stand! Radio Kirk (u|t|c) 19:26, 22 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- Funny! — Vildricianus 19:29, 22 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- I though it was pretty good! FM 99.9 19:31, 22 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
Can you Please help!!!! User:RadioKirk is currentally undtaking in a MASSIVE vandalism spree on Wikispecies. We need an admin there NOW, pass the message along!!! 216.164.203.90 20:12, 22 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- Thank you SO SO SO much! 216.164.203.90 20:16, 22 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- Everything seems to be taken care of now, thanks. Although I wonder, what has gotten into http://en.wikipedia.orghttps://dictious.com/en/User:RadioKirk he is creating sockpuppets on many wikis and going MAD vandalizing. Someone should have a word with him on Wikipedia where oddly he is acting normal ??? 216.164.203.90 20:22, 22 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- It's obviously not the w:User:RadioKirk, but an impersonator. I'll anyway warn him of his popularity. — Vildricianus 20:23, 22 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- Well i think otherwise. BTW im http://species.wikimedia.orghttps://dictious.com/en/User:Open2universe on Wikispecies. 216.164.203.90 20:25, 22 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- He's and admin there, so if it is him, they'd better desysop him at once. BTW, why not create an account here? That'd be easier for us. — Vildricianus 20:27, 22 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- Answer: because Open2universe is a species admin himself, so would not have asked here for assistance. So you're not that person. — Vildricianus 20:31, 22 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- LOL I love it when vandals blow their cover... ;) RadioKirk (u|t|c) 06:19, 23 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
You're not my sockpuppet are you? I had my suspicions before... Wildrick--Expurgator t(c) 07:22, 23 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- What are you up to? — Vildricianus 08:25, 23 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- Haha, this is fun. — Vildricianus 08:37, 23 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
What's with the top of the current (protected) version of the Main Page (which apparently you added)?
<div style="display:none">
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
</div>
This looks like the kind of "link spam" that we wouldn't tolerate if it was for an external site. Why should we be engaging in it ourselves? - dcljr 21:35, 23 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- It's not link spam at all, it's our only way to set the meta keywords for a page. View page source of the main page and you'll get some of them as keywords. So far this has greatly boosted our Google performances. — Vildricianus 21:46, 23 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- This is exactly what link spam is designed to do. - dcljr 22:46, 23 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- There's got to be a better way of accomplishing this. The current "keywords" meta tag content is "Wiktionary:Main Page,English,GNU Free Documentation License,Wiktionary,dictionary,dictionnaire,gerrymander,GFDL dictionary,free dictionary,free online multilingual dictionary,free English dictionary". Why is it different than the "div" contents above? If this is the "only way" of setting the meta keywords, it seems to be a pretty poor method. Can you point me to where this issue has been discussed? - dcljr 23:15, 23 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- I haven't searched bugzilla yet, but I'm sure it's a registered bug. — Vildricianus 06:47, 24 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- Linkspam is when you do that to someone else's website. --Connel MacKenzie 20:00, 26 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
Sorry for jumping my block last nite. I was trying sth new out. --Newnoise (Shout louder) 15:51, 25 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
How is this supposed to work? Is there any way to clear these from Special:Wantedpages? Aren't they all supposed to just be stub entries? Or is the idea to subst: them all then delink the ones that are impossible combinations? --Connel MacKenzie 20:59, 26 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
- I'll get to it if you reactivate your random English entry. :-). — Vildricianus 14:55, 27 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
I've got a nice plain text UTF-8 list for you. It currently handles these cases:
- Uppercase and lowercase
- Normal and full width letters
- Ignore spaces, hyphens, periods, apostrophes
- A few non-letter symbols which look like latin letters
- All accents, diacritics, and ligatues I can find in use
- Greek case, accents, diacritics, and final forms
- Cyrillic case, letters which look to an English-speaker like they use diacritics, exotic modifications used in languages other than Russian
- Hebrew nikud and ligatures including Yiddish, ignore Hebrew hyphen
- Japanese small kana, half width kana, voiced and semivoiced variants
It does not yet deal with Arabic, Armenian, Georgian, Korean, or more exotic scripts.
It does not yet deal with cross-script similarites such as Roman A, Greek Α, and Cyrillic А
It does not yet deal with instances where an uppercase form of one letter looks like a lowercase form of another letter etc
These missing things are planned but need separate passes. If you can think of anything else let me know.
So how do I send it to you? It's 19,669 lines so to big to paste into a wiki page.
— Hippietrail 04:02, 30 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
So, it appears that I should not have followed your suggestion, after all. I am sorry. I could not have imagined that fondators consider WiktionaryZ so much as their baby, and you must have been surprised too. I understand technical issues: I've even begun to write a specialized wiki software, much like WiktionaryZ (but nothing to do with dictionaries). But technical issues are not everything. People's feelings are important too, all the more so in a wiki, and you understand that. I still trust you for making the issue discussed, but it will be very difficult. The sooner, the better (the discussion might have an impact on development). Lmaltier 06:31, 30 July 2006 (UTC)Reply