wht does LA means ?

LA can mean Los Angeles or Louisiana. --EncycloPetey 01:15, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

For the record, when I upgraded to Firefox/2.0.0.4, the handy wiktionary (alt-F, alt-P, alt-S ...?)keyboard short cuts stopped working. Perhaps someone understands the interaction and either can suggest a fix, or connect the right parties at wikimedia and firefox. Makearney 15:02, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

In their infinite wisdom, FF devs decided that "modified" keys need you to press Alt+Shift+character, instead of just Alt+. To switch them, check you about:config's UI parameters to switch them back. ui.key.accesskey and ui.key.contentaccess I think are the ones that need to be swapped. --Connel MacKenzie 15:10, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Observation: alt+shift+f and alt+shift+s work as expected but alt+shift+p opens my media player?!?. What is the about:config page you refer to. Is it the wiktionary configuration page? It does sound like it would be useful to look at though I am more inclined to just learn and use defaults. I thought I had come across it at some point, but at the moment I can't find it. Makearney 17:09, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

It's actually a page built into Firefox. Open the browser, type about:config in the address bar, and in the "filter" field, type ui.key.. You should see a list of the keys containing "ui.key." in their name, and should be able to tweak their values. (You might want to jot down their current values first, so you can change them back if something goes awry.) —Ruakh_TALK 17:20, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

And of course I could have googled or otherwise web-searched such question as well. THanks for your patience. I guess the coffee hadn't taken effect yet. Makearney 17:50, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Resolution: Open and filter on "ui." then swap the values of ui.key.chromeAccess and ui.key.contentAccess to 5 and 4 respectively. Thank you Ruakh, for picking up the slack while I was offline. Yes, Makearney, GIYF. :-)   --Connel MacKenzie 08:17, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

IS THERE ANY WAY TO FIND SOMEONES EMAIL ADDRESS ON THIS SIGHT? — This unsigned comment was added by 24.44.190.140 (talk) at 03:51, 3 July 2007 (UTC).

No. Have a nice day! If you need to contact a specific user, use the "User talk" page for that user. Some users also have email enabled, so you can click "email this user." However, email addresses are never displayed.-- Visviva 04:20, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Hello all wikipedians, wiktionarians, and other wikiens,

First, let me congratulate you all for your interest in sharing the knowledge through the platform of wiki projects, like wikipedia, wiktionary, wikibooks, wikimedia etc.

In an effort to foster the parallel growth of multilingual dictionary projects of wiktionary in all languages available, we have come out with a concurrent development plan. Participation of dedicated knowledgeable wikiens from all languages is expected in this ambitious step. The detailed plan is as follows:

1. The common knowledge-sharing site is decided to be of English wiktionary at the web address http://en.wiktionary.org.
2. Daily some quantity of words, to begin with say one (1), would be selected, in English language. Experts from each language should go to English wiktionary site every day and provide extensive and most accurate translations of selected words from English wiktionary into their own language. In due period of time, when we start receiving contributions from all languages at regular rate, the target of number of words per day would gradually be increased. For the moment practically it is kept just one (1).
3. The form of translation that an expert of a language, say xyz, should provide is like:
   • English name of the xyz language in English script (original name of the xyz language in xyz script) : translation of word in xyz language in xyz script (pronunciation of this translation in English script ); translation of word in xyz language in xyz script (pronunciation of this translation in English script ); translation of word in xyz language in xyz script (pronunciation of this translation in English script ), ...
   • For example, if one of today’s words is ant, experts would go to the page of ant in English wiktionary and update in the following manner. French experts would place the following entry on the page on ant.
   • French (Français) : fourmi (formi)
   • Russian experts would do it in the following way:
   • Russian(Русский) : муравей (muravéj)
   • And so on.
   • The translations must occur in the format as specified.
4. The languages should occur in the alphabetically ascending manner. For example, French entry would come prior to Russian entry.
5. If translations in your language for that word already exist on English wiktionary, you are requested to check their accuracy and exactness. If they are accurate and exact, it is very fine or else they should be accordingly corrected.
6. Please do not mix translation with different meanings at same place. If the same word in English has two meanings, we would be constructing two different tables on the same page and each meaning of the word should go in appropriate different table.
7. Please give as many different translations in your language as possible. This would be enabling rich widespread of your languages on all wiktionaries by contribution at only one common development site of English wiktionary.
8. The next activity is of multi-locations. What is expected is that after updating of all translations for a word on English wiktionary is over in specified period of one day, on the very next day, expert from all languages would be able to pick up these translations from English wiktionary common development site and copy-paste these on their own language wiktionary page for their language word. This would enrich English wiktionary in first go and all wiktionaries in parallel.
9. If, due to some reasons, experts of one particular language, say xyz, are not able to provide translations for today’s selected words in specified period of 24 hours, then it is expected that they should clear this backlog at the earliest. As and when they provide these backlog translations on English wiktionary, they should necessarily make a note on special page http://en.wiktionary.orghttps://dictious.com/en/Wiktionary:Requested_articles:English that these translations have been updated and are available for all others to copy-paste on their wiktionary sites. But, except in real short of time or other resources like net-connection availability, it would be of more pleasure to avoid such situations.

This is genuine appeal to all wiktionarians of all languages that do contribute on English wiktionary regularly as per plans. Your language would reach widely to all other languages and all other languages to your language. We can overcome extra burden of isolated efforts and reach maximum accuracy through well-planned efforts like this. Particularly, we appeal to the concerned various language wiktionary administrators to take care that their language doesn’t remain behind by supporting this Parallel Development Project.

The Project begins from 15th July 2007. All language persons kindly note and contribute regularly. The selected word in English would be declared on http://en.wiktionary.orghttps://dictious.com/en/Wiktionary:Requested_articles:English one day prior for every day.

Thanking and once again expecting regular contributions from all in planned manner,

श्रीहरि 19:45, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Ummm... We already have a Translation of the Week project, thank you. If you have suggestion to add to that project, you may do so. There is no need to start a whole new project. --EncycloPetey 21:24, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

For information:

• The same message can be found in the French wiktionary. Without any discussion? Very strange...
• The pronunciation of fourmi is not formi. Lmaltier 16:46, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I just spent 15 minutes looking for the answer to this question. Either it's not answered, or it's well-hidden.  :-)

I simply wanted to add to the slang terms listed in a Wikisaurus entry. But the edit button does not appear in Wikisaurus. Why not?

No idea. Which page were you trying to edit? --EncycloPetey 01:53, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I have two questions. The first is: is there a way for me to input a Chinese character, if I don't know what it is? If I have an electronic, Unicode copy of an unknown character, it's a simple matter to find the meaning (copy it, and paste it into a search engine). What if, however, I have a piece of paper with a Chinese character on it (or an electronic image, for that matter)? I do (and my second question is: what is the character? / ), and that is what brought about this pondering (I think the bottom-left character is 方, by the way). I can't seem to pull it up by the four-corner method. — Beobach972 05:15, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

There are ways; any good Chinese-character dictionary (online or in print) will allow you to look up characters by radical, stroke count (a brute-force last resort), or pronunciation. Unfortunately from the images provided I can't really venture a guess at any of these (it doesn't look anything like the sort of Chinese characters I'm familiar with, and out of context I wouldn't even have supposed it was Chinese in origin). If you can venture a guess at the top radical, we might be able to get somewhere; I think the figures in the bottom are 刀 and 口, but those aren't likely to help much. -- Visviva 04:33, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm far from an expert, but the radical (at the top of this character) looks a little like a distorted 艹. Based on that, the character may be 䕒. Rod (A. Smith) 05:49, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Good one! 艹 had crossed my mind, but I couldn't find anything that came close. "The name of a variety of grass," eh? Seems I need to upgrade my 옥편... And I guess the radical in the corner is 力, so Beobach and I were equally wrong.  ;-) -- Visviva 08:13, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

This looks like 穴 cave + 口 mouth + 茄 eggplant, but I can't find the composed character. Some specific species of Chinese eggplant? Is definitely drawn a bit strangely at the top ;-) Might also be 苦 bitter + eggplant, but the top component isn't as close as the cave radical. Robert Ullmann 09:32, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, just a thought: if the middle radical was simplified from bamboo rather than grass, then the lower character would be 笳 and the whole might be Reed Flute Cave. It is usually written 芦笛岩 (referring to the park), but that may be that the specific character is unavailable on the computer ;-) Where did this come from? Robert Ullmann 10:07, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

In answer to your question: a teacup or China, depending on what you're asking :-)   see my comment below. As for distortion, I can only assume it is artistic licence (?). Thank you for your suggest below, on strokes... four-corner method and total stroke count were all I could figure, I looked through the indices quite a bit before posing my questions, and I was assuming the pages à la Index:Chinese radical/艸 + 5 strokes meant top-left or bottom-left + strokes (erm... don't ask where I got that idea, by the way). Actually, I was secretly hoping that any random radical + strokes would list all forms. I'd never have guessed it was middle, so that's very good to know. Is that the standard (here on the Wikt and/or everywhere)? — Beobach972 05:03, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Your assumption was essentially correct, the index lists the characters with the radical on the left or top (or as enclosure); radicals don't appear in the middle. I was just looking for the bottom half of the character, on the theory that the whole character was composed of two others. (Or really was two, copied in error as one.) Robert Ullmann 10:57, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

I didn't answer the question, which is how to do this in general. It helps if you look at the character and it looks like "gobbledygookeggplant" ... but suppose you were to start with the grass radical in the middle (if that's what it is). The part below to the left is two strokes, to the right is 3 (remember that a "box" is written with 3 strokes). So you want to look at Index:Chinese radical/艸 under +5 strokes, and you "easily" find 茄. From there try to figure out what the radical at the top is; I looked at 穴 in several different characters and fonts and figured it might be. As I noted, it is written oddly. Once I was thinking of cave + mouth, the idea of the reeds (bamboo) growing around the mouth of Reed Flute Cave wasn't far away. And sure enough, Index:Chinese radical/竹 + 5 strokes gives me 笳 which means reed leaf flute, a character I did not know before. This is a lot harder than usual! Robert Ullmann 10:59, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

It must be 嘉 :). One possible way to find it would be installing Microsoft Japanese IME and using the handwriting recognition function included in it, though of course it can't recognize ones that aren't in Japanese writing. --Tohru 10:43, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

If context helps you any, this is the 'watermark' on the bottom of a (presumably 100+ years old) teacup & plate set, which featured a scene of a ?house?, a mountain, some trees, and a river on the front, and which was almost certainly made in China. On a hunch, I poked around various internet auction sites for china, to see if this was a common watermark that would be identified somewhere (look at me, always trying to find easy ways out!), but I came to the conclusion that plates generally have 4-6 character watermarks. By the way, cf Wiktionary:Translation_requests#Chinese_to_English; User:Oda Mari suggested 壽 / 寿 as the character. What do you all think of that? — Beobach972 05:03, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the suggestion of Microsoft's Japanese IME! Trying that function will probably be my first course of action when I encounter unknown symbols in the future (and if it fails, then, it's time to try the various brute-force methods suggested above). Sigh... Chinese is such a beautiful language (er, languages) and script, it's such a pity that it's so difficult to determine the meaning of unknown terms. Ah, the double-edged sword of not having an alphabet... — Beobach972 05:03, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

I suppose that my candidate 嘉 will also be convincing to Oda Mari-san, exactly like it was to me when I found it after several not so successful attempts. I think it is that I was just lucky enough in the cut-and-try process this time. Judging from the shape, there would be almost no room to doubt that the character you are looking for is this one or a very close variant of it. Its meaning seems to be so auspicious that it can be considered as a good-luck charm. Anyway I'm glad to hear that that function in the IME will be of some help to you! --Tohru 10:43, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Good day

I am new to this. I have just added a protologism (leaderologist). I can see it on the list, but cannot search for it.

Can I do anything to make it appear as the result of a search?

Please help.

Morne Mostert 10:42, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

The search is updated as a batch. It will eventually be in the search, but it will take a while (possibly days). Because of the size of the database that forms the wiktionary, a brute force search is impractical, the search requires a dump of the datbase be processed to produce an efficiently searchable index. RJFJR 13:49, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Here is the actual case: DISBUD, verb. I used the verb template, and it came up with disbuding and disbuded as forms of the verb. Tried for hours-- various "help" items and FAQs and info for newcomers-- never did figure out how to correct that spelling. For next time, can someone advise? Jane Elderfield 08:11, 13 July 2007 (UTC)Jane Elderfield

Template_talk:en-verb would be a good place to start. Medellia 08:22, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

there are two syntaxes you can use: {{en-verb|disbud|d|ing}} or {{en-verb|disbuds|disbudding|disbudded}}. The second of those two is preferred, as it assists searches of the inflected forms. --Connel MacKenzie 16:18, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

I would like a plain text list of all the English words in Wiktionary (just the words, no definitions). I have read some pages that talk about downloading (as far as I can make out) the whole of the Wiktionary database, but it all looks far too complicated for me to tackle. This must be a common request I guess. Is it possible? Matt 01:08, 14 July 2007 (UTC).

Fairly common. I generate this after each XML dump. --Connel MacKenzie 02:11, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Great stuff! Thanks Connel. Matt 11:35, 14 July 2007 (UTC).

There seems to be a variety of different styles in use for example sentences.

Some are in italics.

Some are in Roman.

• Some have a bullet.

I think I prefer italics without the bullet, but I can't immediately see anything about this at Wiktionary:Entry layout explained. Is there any consensus about which style is preferred? Matt 20:21, 16 July 2007 (UTC).

The current consensus seems to be italics without the bullet; we've been hammering out the details at Wiktionary:Beer parlour#Layout of example sentences, and you're welcome to join in the discussion there. —Ruakh_TALK 21:19, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

What is the correct word to put in two curly brackets, to indicate a veterinary use? When I try Template:Veterinary it shows up Template Veterinary in red, as if it doesn't like it.... Jane Elderfield 05:52, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

On a definition line, to indicate context that doesn't (yet) have a template of its own, the recommended syntax is with the template {{context}}, e.g.:

# {{context|veterinary}} an infectious ] caused by...

That would produce this:

1. (veterinary) an infectious disease caused by...

Does that answer your question? Rod (A. Smith) 06:19, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

    Thanks, Rod!  Jane Elderfield 23:05, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Should it be noted in an article that a word is a common misspelling of another? For example, the word lazar is commonly used instead of laser; should this be noted? Smurrayinchester 19:33, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes. However, a misspelling must meet far stricter criteria for inclusion than the normal WT:CFI — how much stricter is yet to be decided. If you add it, I suggest you immediately take the misspelling to WT:RFV to gather opinions as to whether it is a common enough misspelling to warrant inclusion. † Raifʻhār Doremítzwr 19:43, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Add an invalid entry with an immediate nomination on RFV? That is not an advisable course of action. --Connel MacKenzie 19:53, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

The rule of thumb, is that the misspelling should be at least one percent as common as the regular spelling, when comparing raw web hits. The guidelines have not advanced significantly at this point, due to a lack of interest. Looking at http://www.google.com/search?q=lazar, the first few pages of results seem to be proper nouns, not this meaning. I don't think I'd support indicating lazar as a "common" misspelling of laser. --Connel MacKenzie 19:53, 20 July 2007 (UTC) On the other hand, it seems clear that lazer is used frequently. --Connel MacKenzie 19:55, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Where are you thinking to note this? We don't note such things at the correct spelling; that is, laser shouldn't mention lazar. We do sometimes include "common misspelling of ___"-style definitions (using the {{misspelling of}} template), but as others have said above, I don't think that lazar is a sufficiently common misspelling of laser for that to warrant mention at lazar. —Ruakh_TALK 23:44, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Hello,

I need your help, please explain the combustion process between low octane and high octane fuels ignited the same ignition timing. Why is it that knocking/detonation occurs in low octane rated gasoline? Which one burns faster- low octane or high octane?

Thanks.
— This unsigned comment was added by Glenn sibay (talk • contribs) at 09:52, 21 July 2007 (UTC).

This is not Wikipedia! † Raifʻhār Doremítzwr 15:56, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

I notice that sometimes in the translations, the language names are links to pages about the language and sometimes it is just simple text. ie, in translations, it seems like "cree" is always a link but "german" is never a link... --Anthony5429 00:32, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Commonly known languages are not linked, but ones that are likely to be unfamiliar are often linked. See WT:TOP40. Robert Ullmann 00:38, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! That's what I needed to know :) --Anthony5429 02:52, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

You can find a complete list of languages that are never wikilinked from Translation tables at WT:TOP40

I couldn't find a page specifically for requesting a page move, so I thought I'd request a move here. My account is too new to make the move myself, but could someone please move αγεωμέτρητος to ἀγεωμέτρητος? Thanks in advance. Mike Dillon 05:06, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Done. Nice to see more Greek being added, of any sort. ArielGlenn 05:15, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Mike Dillon 05:24, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Was it ever tried or discussed creating vocabulary training programs based on the Wiktionary?

I was just curious if this will be ever possible with the actual Wiki formatting and cross-linking between languages?

Joerg Kurt Wegner 17:56, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

I don't know if Wikiversity or Wikibooks have and ESL guides derived from en.wiktionary. Many entries have a slight English learner bias. And there are side-projects like Wiktionary:Frequency lists. But I don't know of any formal effort underway. --Connel MacKenzie 18:01, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

hey everyone!

hope everybody's doing ok... i need to ask everyone a favor and if someone can help me. i would really appreciate it.

can someone translate this phrase for me in sanksrit and hebrew.

" dedicated to the one i love "

if someone can help me translate this i would gladly appreciate it.

hoping for your kindness response thank you!

marc ryan

For Hebrew, it depends on the genders of the two people. It also depends whether you want something that's recognizably a translation of that phrase, or if you want something expressing the same sentiment. In the latter case, it also depends roughly what kind of love you mean (familial, platonic, romantic, passionate, etc.). —Ruakh_TALK 23:20, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Am I allowed to have my homepage linked on my user page? Does the same apply for Wikipedia? Thanks in advance, —Scott Smith 21:39, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

In general, yes. --EncycloPetey 21:42, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks EncycloPetey! —Scott Smith 22:23, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

My first real new entry ("real" in the sense that it's more than a dump (computing sense) from an out-of-copyright dictionary) is carry the message to Garcia. Could someone please make sure it's formatted and attested properly, etc., and let me know (here) what I've done wrong? Thanks. —msh210 13:42, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Actually, looking back at my edit history, it's not my first real new entry, but is my first real new entry in English which I made a real attempt at entering completely and formatting correctly. In any event: Thanks, Ruakh, for the corrections! —msh210 19:22, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Hello, the Japanese word "hanayishiki" means what?

Maybe it is ”hanayashiki." It means "a garden park with plenty of flowers" as a common noun and Hanayashiki Amusement Park as a proper noun. I suppose the proper noun (a.k.a. "Asakusa Hanayashiki") is more commonly used than the common noun. By the way, we have a forum that serves this kind of questions. Please bookmark the location for the next time :). --Tohru 06:57, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

How do you make an entry in a language not on the list of languages. — This comment was unsigned.

In which language? --EncycloPetey 16:22, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

If the language has an ISO-639-2 code, you can just enter the language name as a level-two heading, then describe the English part of speech as a level three heading, followed by a definition line (starting with "#".) WT:STAT lists languages that we already have a hundred entries for, but does not prohibit other language entries from being entered (provided they are living languages with an ISO-639-2 code.) --Connel MacKenzie 18:13, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

I want to create an entry for the word "salar." An entry exists for it already, incidentally, as a Spanish verb. My "salar" is from earth science and means something like "salt lake" (it's one of those borrowings like "polynya" or "aa"). My problem is that I'd never heard of the word until a few days ago when I was editing a Wikipedia page, so to create aa entry here I would have to use a definition I found elsewhere. Is it necessary to credit my source(s)?

Though IANAL, as a common practice, as long as you write a definition in your own words there would not be any problem even if you borrowed the ideas behind it from copyrighted material. As far as I can see from Google search results "salar"+salty+wetland&hl=en&start=10&sa=N, there seem to be enough resources to make up a safe definition of that word. Apart from such legal concerns, including a list of authoritative external references is always being encouraged for the purpose of attestation. --Tohru 11:55, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

A Wiktionarian has accused me of copyright violation when I paraphrased a source and deleted my entry. That doesn't seem to agree with what I have read above. Does he know what he is talking about? DCDuring 03:25, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

The situation described above is not similar to your situation. The definition you entered is quite similar to the one mentioned on your talk page, though I doubt it is long enough to constitute a copyright violation. Still, what Tohru recommends above is not the same thing as copying another definition and changing one word. That tactic, whenever found, is very strongly discouraged...always with deletion and usually with a block. --Connel MacKenzie 03:43, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

If this is in regard to this edit, then yes, he does. Word-for-word copies of definitions from copyrighted works cannot be accepted here. -- Visviva 03:42, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

I am taking a critical thinking class in college and I have to find the connotative differences among these words: disinformation, misspeaking and falsifying. Can someone help me? — This unsigned comment was added by Cindi1575 (talk • contribs) at 02:36, 5 August 2007 (UTC).

The first thing to do is look at the entries for disinformation, misspeaking and falsifying. Thryduulf 11:10, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Hello,

I need help with the expression - to take companies public. I need the exact explanation what does it mean. I've looked through all available dictionaries but all in vain. I'll be greatful if anyone can help. Thanks in advance.

Regards, Maria

This isn't really an idiom; see public. (You might also be interested in Wikipedia's article on initial public offerings.) —Ruakh_TALK 19:11, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

I own a 1965 Bonneville,421 cu in,4-speed standard transmission. I want to know how many of these cars were produced. —This unsigned comment was added by 64.136.173.16 (talk • contribs) 2007-08-06T20:19:31.

This project is a dictionary. An encyclopedia would be a better place to look. Try Wikipedia's entry on the Pontiac Bonneville. Rod (A. Smith) 20:32, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Dear members i want to know the meaning of Longitudnal and transeverse polarization? because i reading phonon curves. And here in abook is written " For each wavevector there are three modes, one of longitudnal polarization and two transverse polarization.

For a phonon travelling through a crystal (for instance) the polarization is longitudinal if it is in the direction of travel (call it the x direction), or transverse if it is at right angles to the direction of travel (call it the y or z directions). You need a physics textbook for more details. SemperBlotto 09:05, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

I wish to add an entry T₂ (a synonym of Hausdorff, q.v.). Can I? How? Thanks. —msh210 17:41, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Use Unicode's SUBSCRIPT TWO (“₂”) to link to T₂ from the ====Synonyms==== section in the “Hausdorff” entry. Rod (A. Smith) 20:44, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Ah, thanks, Rod. But Unicode doesn't have sub- and superscript characters for all letters and numbers (and characters), does it? (Or does it?) There may well be others needed, like ${\displaystyle S_{univ}^{1}}$ (which may well not be entry-worthy). —msh210 17:29, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Let's deal with such entries if and when they come. I expect each such case that merits an entry will have a reasonable Unicode equivalent that is compatible with MediaWiki. If not, we can use an unreasonable equivalent and explain the discrepancy in the entry. See AbDw, -), and colon for examples. Rod (A. Smith) 18:36, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

The Unicode version I use has only a few letters in super-/ sub- script, like 'a' and 'n' but all ten numerals, which is great for common chemical formulae, like 'CO₂', 'H₂O', etc. I can think of several well-established physical and chemical constants though that should meet the Criteria For Inclusion like k(B), k(C), m(e), m(n), m(p), N(A), q(e), etc. So, how do we cross these bridges now? Thecurran

ser and estar both have the same meaning.which is to be. and from my undrestanding ser appers to represent permanent thing while estar represent temporally things.i need to know both are use to discribe things or express things. — This unsigned comment was added by 67.63.17.27 (talk) at 2007-08-09T20:33:55.

I refined the usage notes in the entries for ser and estar. Do they now answer your questions? Rod (A. Smith) 21:23, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

I've added another example pertaining to location, but the same distinction applies: permanent/continual state versus temporary/changeable state. --EncycloPetey 02:07, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

By the way, one subtlety that people often don't mention (that I'm sure you're aware of, but that might not be obvious to the anon) is that we use ser in a case like "La fiesta será mañana" ("The party will be tomorrow"), because even though its tomorrow-being isn't permanent, it's permanent relative to the thing being described. (I don't think I explained that well, but hopefully the sense is clear.) Also, ser is used for the ordinary passive voice, as in "la guitarra fue tocada" ("the guitar was played"). —Ruakh_TALK 04:19, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah. The entries for ser and estar are on my short list of key Spanish verbs with entries in need of a major reworking. --EncycloPetey 06:30, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Excellent. I added the existential/occurrence and passive senses and Ruakh's examples to ser and very much look forward to EncycloPetey's revamp of those very imporant entries. Rod (A. Smith) 06:57, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Don't hold your breath for a quick fix, though. I'm currently completing other projects I've promised myself I would do, but have set aside for too long -- like finally polishing the editing on all the entries for English names of constellations (mostly done), adding entries for all Latin words beginning with "L" that appear in Lewis & Short (about 25% done), the Appendix:English proper nouns (in draft stage), overhauling w:Marchantiophyta to try to get it up to par as a potential featured article, and editing w:The Plague by Albert Camus (which is the WP Novel Collaboration of the Month). So, ser and estar may not happen for a bit, unless I feel inspired...which does happen from time to time. --EncycloPetey 06:59, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't think the current entries explain differences that have acquired specific nuances like ser sucio (to be filthy inside = perverted) v. estar sucio (to be filthy outside = soiled). Would someone please tell me how I'm interpreting this incorrectly or how it would be appropriate to cater to these nuances? Thecurran 11:33, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

That's a good point. You get the same thing with rico (ser rico "to be wealthy" vs. estar rico "to be tasty"). I think ser/estar should mention that such adjectives exist, maybe giving one example, and the individual adjective pages should have their own usage notes. —Ruakh_TALK 16:35, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Is there a term or common identifier for words that have fallen out of general use, and survive almost exclusively in figures of speech (eg shrift, which is exceedingly rare outside of the phrase short shrift)? Incidently, do we have a list of such words? — Beobach972 01:26, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

I dunno, but my favorite example is hem and haw; originally to hem was to turn right and to haw was to turn left. —Ruakh_TALK 03:05, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

I have wondered the same thing. There are quite a few of these "orphan" words around. One of my favourites is raring to go. -- Algrif 16:30, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Where and in which format would I add the phrase "son of the manse", which technically means "son of a man from the church" but is typically used stereotypically as implying that the person is hard working, disciplined, and embodies the protestant work ethic? Thanks. — This unsigned comment was added by 71.215.241.124 (talk) at 2007-08-13T17:56:38.

I haven't heard of this before so I'm not game to do so myself, but you can create a page with just that name. I would opt for 'child of the manse' and consider re-wording the 'protestant work ethic' part because it serves to divide people on religious grounds, implying that perhaps 'hard-working, disciplined' does not describe the work ethic of those who are not Protestant. Good luck! :) Thecurran 10:11, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Um, please don't give incorrect answers when you don't know, for sure. We are very much concerned with words here, not the concepts they represent (that's an encyclopedia's job.) The idiom "Protestant work ethic" quite positively merits an entry here, just as son of the manse is the only common form, while child of the manse is rare (and should probably be only a soft redirect.) A son of the manse very obviously does imply Protestantism. --Connel MacKenzie 17:24, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

As you have all probably seen, I’ve creäted entries for all six forms; they all meet CFI (and none of them can really be considered rare, with even daughters of the manse — the rarest of the six — getting a respectable 64 hits). The primary entry is at child of the manse, not for any irrelevant PC reasons, but rather because:

1. Specific terms ought to be defined in terms of the greater detail they convey as contrasted with more general terms;
2. Our primary entries tend to be epicene (consider the great many idomatic phrases we have which use one and one’s); and,
3. Although “son of the manse > child of the manse” (623:129), “sons of the manse < children of the manse” (240:260), which makes me think that this is a phrase which has an epicene, a masculine, and a feminine form (like “autocrat / autocrator / autocratrix”), but is one where the gender is usually specified (as with “sibling / brother / sister”).

Whilst this term obviously did start off as specifically Christian — hence my noting its origin in the etymology — it would not surprise me if, by now, it had taken on the more religiously-neutral meaning — considering that, before today, I did not know what a manse was (and I believe that I have a broader vocabulary than most).

Anon, is this the kind of entry which you intended? Do you care to add citations; perhaps from the links to Google Book Search which I’ve provided?

On a final note, Thecurran, please understand that political correctness counts for very little around here — as it should. If words are used to insult, we say so. If words exist “to divide people on religious grounds”, we say so. Political agendae are for pushing in prescriptive usage notes (if they’re reasonable, referenced, and so on) — it is not OK to incorrectly define a word in order to preëmpt its intended use, however distasteful. † Raifʻhār Doremítzwr 19:34, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Re: son of the manse vs. children of the manse, huh? These are forms of an idiom; the most common form of the idiom (son of the manse) is supposed to be the primary entry. the gender-neutral and feminine forms are perhaps jocular variants of the idiom, but, as you demonstrated, capable of being cited adequately (for our broken CFI.) Normally, the others would simply redirect (hard redirect) to the primary form son of the manse. Having them cited is, admittedly, better. But that doesn't mean we should have the primary form of the idiom described on the wrong page. --Connel MacKenzie 19:49, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I am not familiar with this word; therefore, I do not feel that I am in a position to comment in an informed manner. However, I do find it difficult to believe that all of the combined examples of the feminine and epicene forms — 736 — or any considerable proportion thereof — would be intended as jocular, considering that they have a functional use. The convention that the primary entry be located at the most common form exists (despite its being contested by some), but is, as far as I’m aware, subservient to the other conventions that the primary entry be located at the epicene form (so, for example, all “my / our / thy / your / his / her / its / their” forms redirect to the “one’s” form), and that it be located at the lemma form (which means that verb forms, even if they be more common, redirect to the “base verb”). I don’t really mind though, and I accept that you may be right on this one. How about we take this to the tea room or the beer parlour, to consult the community? † Raifʻhār Doremítzwr 20:25, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Go right ahead - keeping in mind that brevity is valued highly (particularly since we no longer have automated archiving there.) Yes, for idioms, the most common form is used. --Connel MacKenzie 20:47, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I’ve started a discussion in the beer parlour, as it seems like this is a policy matter. I hope I’ve represented your position correctly (though I didn’t mention your “jocular” argument — ought I to have?), if not, please clarify there. We’ll see what they say. † Raifʻhār Doremítzwr 21:10, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Hey please settle down there, Connel MacKenzie. My reasons for saying 'child' weren't for PC's sake but for considering how use of the epicene form might be more encompassing. Please, also note that my answer was correct; it consisted of two sentences "...you can create a page with just that name. I would opt for...". The first one delineated what a user can do and the second one suggested how I would have written the article not how it should be done. I also included a note about my unfamiliarity with the term out of honesty. Everyone left that solitary remark alone for 23 days before I touched it and now we have a few new informative articles so even if you still think my answer was incorrect, it was better than nothing. I will not argue that the term 'Protestant' be stripped from the entry, because that would be fruitless, but I'll point out some minor flaws in your retort of it obviously referring to Protestantism. 'son' is often used metaphorically in religious contexts. Most sons of Adam/ God are neither considered to have been born nor fathered by Adam/ God. Besides, there are several preachers that are parents in other faiths; Orthodox Christians spring quickly to mind as do Catholic missionaries and rabbis. In addition, I could list Christian sects less than a couple centuries old, like JWs, Mormons, and Seventh Day Adventists that are on the fuzzy border of 'Protestantism'. I understand now that wikilove is not so common here and that inflammatory words have a rightful place as entries. I think that concealing them in links is usually deceitful but assuming good faith, as I must, I believe that the examples above were shown in that way for the sake of both brevity and demonstration and I have no hard feelings there. I wish you assumed good faith in me before implying that my answer was incorrect in this public forum. I wouldn't have worried if you said that my suggestion was more harmful than helpful. As always, I thank you all for the work you volunteered so charitably. Thecurran 02:45, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I often link to examples under totally unrelated words as part of a sentence, to back up assertions I make — I find it looks a lot better than a long list of seemingly random words or numerical references at the end of a sentence in parentheses; as you understand, it is never meant to deceive (well, not the way I do it anyhow).

“I wish you assumed good faith in me before implying that my answer was incorrect in this public forum. I wouldn't have worried if you said that my suggestion was more harmful than helpful” — is this meant for me?

“As always, I thank you all for the work you volunteered so charitably” — and you. I know you mean well, and that your comment in reply to the anon. hereinbefore was meant to start him off on the learning curve; the only mistake you made was to misapply a Wikipedia cultural convention. That is very understandable, and I have no suspicion that you are acting maliciously. † Raifʻhār Doremítzwr 16:35, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Having returned to this, I am curious, about what aspects User:Thecurran is incorrectly attributing to me. "Settle down?" I said "Huh?" That's not particularly animated. So, I guess I don't know what you mean. If I settled down any more about this topic, I'd be asleep. I described the long-standing way that en.wiktionary deals with a term like this. You suggested a "politically correct" removal of pertinent information: a manse is specific to Protestantism (more specifically, English Protestantism?) Likewise, you suggest the "politically correct" form of the idiom, when the gender-specific form is much more common. Both of those "politically correct" corrections are not applicable on en.wiktionary.org. As to your minor points about "Son" and less-common sects, I have no idea what you are trying to say - perhaps that a monastery isn't typical to Catholicism? Or that a manse isn't specific to Protestantism? While some exceptions can probably be found, it is just strange to hear you say that it isn't relevant. On the contrary, it seems to be central to the idiom's definition. Likewise, since monasteries and manses are typically religious dwellings for men, the idiom in a gender-neutral or female form is necessarily tongue-in-cheek. "Son" in the idiom has to be the figurative iconic exemplary person produced from such a place - not the product of some guy miraculously giving birth while living there. If a neutral pronoun form is to be used, it would be someone of the manse, not child or daughter. Note: I'm not saying we should get rid of child of the manse nor daughter of the manse. I do think that they should be marked more clearly as situational or jocular variants of son of the manse. But I still see no convincing reason not to have the primary entry at the primary form (as is the Wiktionary convention.) --Connel MacKenzie 21:12, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Furthermore, at WT:CFI#Idiomatic phrases it says "Many phrases take several forms. It is not necessary to include every conceivable variant. When present, minor variants should simply redirect to the main entry. For the main entry, prefer the most generic form, based on the following principles:" followed by WT:CFI#Pronouns, where it clarifies: "Prefer the generic personal pronoun, one or one’s. Thus, feel one’s oats is preferable to feel his oats. Use of other personal pronouns, especially in the singular, should be avoided except where they are essential to the meaning."

To me, it seems pretty clear that "sons", "child", "children", "daughter" and "daughters" are all unquestionably "minor variants." Furthermore, it also seems clear (now) that "son" is in fact, essential to the meaning. --Connel MacKenzie 07:05, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Sorry † Raifʻhār Doremítzwr, my AGF comment was to Connel MacKenzie; I have no bones with you and never have. My 'settle down' comment was directed towards calling my answer 'incorrect', when I believe a literal interpretation would show that it wasn't; at the most I was misleading.

I tried to imply that 'son of the manse' is probably the best main entry after you all helped me gained familiarity with the term. I still believe 'daughter/ child/ children of the manse' deserve entries even if they only redirect to 'son of the manse', in accordance with what you said, because their masculine, neutral, or singular forms may not be directly clear to all ESOL users.

Before gaining such familiarity with the term, I thought that the reason you claimed 'son of the manse' was 'obviously' Protestant hinged on the possibility of the minister of a parish having a child, not on the word, 'manse'. If you think manse is so clearly Protestant, please add that to the entry. The entry as it stands comprises all the homes of ministers of parishes, which are not specifically Protestant. Please note that a monastery is the home of a group of monks &c that are not necessarily Christian and that many (if not most) monasteries do not serve as houses for the parish minister and are thus not parallel to manses for people of Non-Protestant faiths, so calling the term typical to Catholicism when comparing it to 'manse' may not be appropriate.

Why did you go and say 'incorrectly' again when I didn't like you saying 'incorrect' the first time and I've already stepped back to encompass your views, conceding every point you've made beside those about myself? All I can do is AGF. I feel I 'correctly' attributed to you the aspect of calling my correct, but possibly misleading, answer 'incorrect'.

BTW, 'someone of the manse' seems hardly idiomatic and if it was, 'of the manse' would probably be a better entry. I really don't see how it could be productive to argue any of these points any more, but I do hope I satisfied the curiosity you spoke of and showed you what I meant where you said it was unclear. I've happily corrected a few of my mistakes that you have pointed out and will continue to do so but next time you want to call me 'incorrect', please do so on my user page, out of the discussion rooms, or look carefully at the grammar I used for the literal meaning first. When even a small part of our academic reputation is at stake, I feel we deserve that respect. I hope you see I'm trying to show you that respect now. Thecurran 02:46, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

The pronunciation section of the word ipsilateral causes the wrong font to be used in the rest of the article. It's not clear to me how to fix this the right way. I experimented with deleting the pronunciation line and that fixed it, but that's not the right solution. — This unsigned comment was added by Doug Hockin (talk • contribs) at 2007-08-14T06:12:16.

Fixed by using the pronunciation templates {{enPR}}, {{IPA}}, and {{SAMPA}}. The problem was an unclosed “<tt>”. Rod (A. Smith) 06:27, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

my son has a psp and it is asking for a ssid number can you please tell me what that is--69.143.73.90 02:21, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

See the entry “SSID”. Rod (A. Smith) 02:55, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Is the demerit system good for school? — This unsigned comment was added by 60.50.34.153 (talk) at 2007-08-17T03:52:04.

This is a dictionary. We do not evaluate social policies. Rod (A. Smith) 04:15, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

I am a brand new user. A feature which I would highly value would be the ability to create vocabulary lists by marking entries. Perhaps there is already a way to do this. This feature would assist in creating glossaries, etc. for specific studies. To be most effective, a user would be able to use a variety of codes, and therefor create a variety of glossaries for different uses. — This unsigned comment was added by 72.184.138.249 (talk).

I'm not certain I fully understand what you are describing, but we do have context label templates that categorise words by subject.

For example, the {{cricket}} template displays as (cricket) at the start of the definition line, to indicate that the word is used with this meaning in cricket. Furthermore this also adds the page to Category:Cricket, which contains all the words that are marked with the {{cricket}} template, forming a collection of words related to cricket. We have many context labels, see User:Robert Ullmann/Context labels for a list of all of them. Thryduulf 15:08, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

I think the user might have been asking about more specific word lists like those teachers give out to increase a student's vocabulary on regular basis. This is something from our categories and may be best suited to actually adding the pages to specific computer's Favo(u)rites/Bookmarks in appopriate subdirectories and then finding a way to export these on to other computers in a lab or to a student's home computer. I don't know an easy way for that second part though. Anyhow, when learning new languages or jargon, such lists can be really helpful. Maybe the best way would be to create a directory structure on the teacher's userpage and have students refer to that for the correct links. Thecurran 11:44, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

We keep such lists in the Appendix: namespace. --Connel MacKenzie 17:14, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

A quick question that is, oddly enough, not answered in the style guide: all definitions should start with capital letters, right? Circeus 16:58, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

This actually hasn't been decided yet. I always start definitions with capital letters and end them with periods, and it's my impression that this is the most common for English entries and for non-lemma entries; but some editors do differently, especially for foreign-language lemma entries. —Ruakh_TALK 18:39, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Correct. There is no official decision, but many editors (excluding myself) start definitions of English entries with a capital letter. Similarly, although I do not end gloss-style definitions with a period and there is no official guideline to do so, many (most?) editors do so for English lemma entries. Rod (A. Smith) 18:58, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Think you people. I'm a capitals+period type of guy, but I'll keep that in mind. Circeus 19:04, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

I personally believe that we should try to also give good examples of written English. That means, wherever possible, a full, grammatically correct sentence with capital letter and full stop, or other final punctuation mark, at the end. IMHO -- Algrif 16:27, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Note that our convention is to give only a small minority of definitions as English sentences. Most are instead given as “glosses”, i.e. a string of words that grammatically functions as the same part of speech as the entry. Since most of those strings of words lack a subject and a conjugated verb, they will not be grammatically correct sentences and, hence, arguably should not be written as though they are. This topic has been rehashed many times, though, with no consensus so far as I'm aware. Rod (A. Smith) 16:32, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Sorry. Confusing definition with example sentence. However, a good definition, when it needs to be more than a gloss, should be in grammatically correct English, imho. Algrif 12:05, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

does anyone know the origin of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend"? — This unsigned comment was added by Momynym (talk • contribs) at 2007-08-20T16:20:30.

Well, a different form of it is in Exodus 23:22, so I'd say the concept it represents is older than dirt. No idea on that exact wording, though. --Connel MacKenzie 19:42, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

You might have better luck asking at Wikiquote. --EncycloPetey 01:41, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

It seems to be fairly old in English. The earliest use indexed by Google Books is in Blackwood's Edinburgh Magazine in January 1825; in a rather rambling discussion of the writings of Benjamin Franklin, it touches on his criticism of privateers (he described them as little better than pirates), arguing both sides of the matter and concluding with, "But, after all, if you have no other way of defending yourself—no other way of driving your adversary to terms—why not let loose even the pirate upon him? or—why restrain the pirate?—Self-preservation is the first law of nature. The enemy of your enemy is your friend—so far." The idea is apparently older, though; an 1839 cite describes "the enemy of an enemy is a friend" as a Persian proverb (complete with transliteration of the original Persian), and presumably it doesn't mean that the Persians had borrowed it from the Scottish less than fifteen years earlier. Also, roughly-concurrent French works speak against it originating with the above 1825 cite; an 1820 cite puts it in the mouths of contemporary Spanish revolutionaries (in the form "l’ennemi de notre ennemi devient notre ami", "the enemy of our enemy becomes our friend"), and Thierry writes in 1825 of "cette raison populaire que tout ennemi de l’ennemi est un ami", "the popular reasoning that every enemy of the enemy is a friend". —Ruakh_TALK 04:09, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't know heaps about historical Spanish but that was a French translation of what those Spanish revolutionaries spoke, right? Did your source happen to have the original Spanish? If this request is a nuisance, don't stress. Thecurran 11:58, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure if it's de Pradt's translation of an actual Spanish utterance, or someone else's translation that he's borrowing (unlikely), or simply his articulation of what he sees as the revolutionaries' viewpoint. The latter seems most likely to me: he describes it as coming from "all mouths", and doesn't give any sort of name or citation to indicate whence it came otherwise. —Ruakh_TALK 16:25, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Actually, this "raison" is probably better translated as "logic".Circeus 15:47, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Fixed to "reasoning", thanks. :-) —Ruakh_TALK 16:25, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Is there a reference page that explains the rationale behind separate pages for different capitalisations of words? And is there an easy way of determining if the page you have found is only one of several variants and that others exist - Does the "Mark see mark" and "mark see Mark" occur automatically or does it have to be manually put there? -- SGBailey 08:10, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Personally, I blame it on the Dutch. Since capitalization is more specific in other languages, some Wiktionaries decided that they needed the distinction. A comedy of errors caused the developers to misconstrue what was acceptable, resulting in what I call the "decapitation" of en.wiktionary in June 2005.

On WT:VOTE there is a new vote starting in a couple days to load the DidYouMean extension, which does, in fact, fill in those (and many other) variants for you. --Connel MacKenzie 18:17, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

It is too late and I just couldn't remember the template to report vandalism. The word intention has a strange note in the Related terms section. It could be an honest mistake or it could be vandalism. Gbeebani 08:25, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

If there seems to be vandalism in progress, you can bring it to WT:VIP; if it's a really old edit, like that one, then there's no point (though you can bring it to WT:TR to get other editors' opinions.) But, that edit isn't vandalism; "the road to Hell is paved with good intentions" is a very common idiom. (I'm not sure whether it warrants an entry here — do full-sentence metaphorical proverbs count as idioms for our purposes? — but I'm sure it was added by someone who thought it did.) —Ruakh_TALK 08:36, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi. Could s/o please fill me in on the use of the new template I'm seeing in Synonyms and Antonyms? Thanks. — This unsigned comment was added by Algrif (talk • contribs).

See AF talk page it is something being experimented with. Robert Ullmann 18:17, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

any ideas ? — This unsigned comment was added by 86.143.230.148 (talk) at 14:31, 2 September 2007 (UTC).

Look, this is just a leap so, no offence, but did you maybe hear 'clothes made in...' like 'clothes made in Australia', etc. and interpret it as 'clothes maiden'? I ask because I don't recognise this as having any specific meaning beyond a straight interpretation of the common nouns that make up the term like, say, a maiden who works on clothes? Thecurran 12:20, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

No, no, a "clothes maiden" is a wooden rack for drying clothes. Robert Ullmann 11:45, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I just have a rather straight-forward question: what can I do to help? I would really love to help this project, because its final result is extremely helpful, but I just don't know what to do. Any ideas? 41.250.56.176 14:45, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. You can start by creating an account for yourself, then looking at Wiktionary:Community Portal which has a section on specific tasks. There is also a list of things in need of lovin' at WT:DW. I have a slew of "/todo" lists under my userpage...one easy one to help out with is User:Connel MacKenzie/typos - where embarrassing spelling errors have somehow made it into content pages of this dictionary. --Connel MacKenzie 15:14, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your quick answer! ^^ I'll try my best to help out! Zouavman Le Zouave 15:51, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi I created an account and went to sandbox to start learning only to find that my account has been blocked Surely some mistake - or is it that my isp has been blocked and so all users are as well? Many thanks Hammerbeam

Wiktionary:Sandbox From Wiktionary Jump to: navigation, search Shortcut: WT:SB

This is the sandbox, a page for experimenting with editing Wiktionary pages. Feel free to try out your skills at formatting here by editing this page. Alternatively, you may want to read through How to edit a page for explanations.

NOTE: Any content added to this page may be deleted at any time. Do not use this page for anything that you want to keep.

You have been temporarily blocked from editing for vandalism of Wiktionary. Please note that page blanking, addition of random text or spam, deliberate misinformation, privacy violations, and repeated and blatant violation of NPOV are considered vandalism. If you wish to make useful contributions, you may come back after the block expires.

--ABE ɸ ʃ 21:33, 4 September 2007 (UTC) Retrieved from "http://en.wiktionary.orghttps://dictious.com/en/Wiktionary:Sandbox"

Category: Wiktionary pages with shortcuts

— This unsigned comment was added by Hammerbeam (talk • contribs) at 2007-09-04T23:43:53.

Hi, Hammerbeam. You have not actually been blocked. The notice you saw in Wiktionary:Sandbox was a message from the template {{test5}}. It's there because you added "{{test5}}" to the sandbox in this edit. Rod (A. Smith) 23:57, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Note: It's a different user who added that template. —Ruakh_TALK 00:40, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

I know where you're coming from, user:Hammerbeam but just keep in mind that the sandbox will be used my many people and it doesn't get automatically cleared right afterwards but it does eventually every 24 hours. It would be good practice to clear it yourself before you start working on it. If you come across somehing like this again, an easy thing would be to check if it's actually editable text by clicking the edit tab on the top, selecting the text, and trying to delete it. If you can, it's certainly not a specific message to you. Thanks for bringing this up though. I hope nobody else got too discouraged from seeing that on accident. Thecurran 12:29, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Just a warning that this reminds a lot of recent trolling we got over at 'pedia from a fake "I did something bad" account. See here. Circeus 14:11, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

IP address 122.164.173.153 was blocked yesterday (for 1 day) for repeatedly updating sandbox as if it were Wiktionary:Sandbox despite being warned. SemperBlotto 15:07, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

In case, anyone is an irregular user like me, the link Circeus mentioned has moved to this location. It took a fair bit of archive trawling to find this trolling mention. Thecurran 05:39, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

I like being able to find a random article in Wikitionary and edit it. However, I only speak English. The Random Page button links to a page which has words from other languages. Not knowing said words/languages, this is annoying. Is there any way to just get a random page in the language I speak? Thanks to all who help, Three-of-Ten 02:10, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Three-of-Ten. Wiktionary:Random page notes this experimental language-specific (e.g. English only) random page feature. Give it a try and let us know how you like it! Rod (A. Smith) 05:48, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

For English-only, you can use this. --Connel MacKenzie 06:17, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

The page "Category: Wolof nouns"

Has the entry "banäna". This should be "banaana." There is no diaresis in Wolof. But how do I change the page. "Edit" does not do it. All it shows is

"]]"

I have corrected the entry itself.

Tel — This unsigned comment was added by Tel (talk • contribs) at 2007-09-07T02:35:19.

Hi, Tel. Category pages collect entries based on ] tags in entry pages. The trick is to click the link "banäna" on the Category:Wolof nouns page, then click "move" to get to the "Move page". From that move page, you type the new name, "banaana", to move it. If that doesn't seem clear, please say so and I'll move for you. Rod (A. Smith) 05:25, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

The following comment moved from main namespace entry “Andrew Mellon”:

Hi! My name is Eunice Kim and I will be using this website alot. I'm a 5th grader so I need these kind of internet encyclopedia.. thank you for making this website, but i really think you're great who ever made it... — This unsigned comment was added by 69.224.225.168 (talk) at 2007-09-08T02:03:13.

Is there or is there not some way to use the "random article" feature in such a manner as to recieve only english words as a result??74.67.228.2 13:39, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Please see the section titled "I speak only English, sadly." that's just one screen height or so (depending on your screen resolution and window size) above this one. —Ruakh_TALK 15:50, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Note also: http://tools.wikimedia.de/~cmackenzie/rnd-en-wikt.html still works, too. Until I have it completely hosted on toolserver, I do not want to add a WT:PREFs sidebar link for it, though. And that won't happen until I can convince someone to let me install GT.m there. Or until I rewrite it in PHP (qui, moi? Don't hold your breath on that one!) --Connel MacKenzie 06:20, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

A recent Time article refers to "a mal mot of capitalism". A literal translation of mal mot would be "bad word". Is there a better idiomatic translation? — This unsigned comment was added by Bookworm451 (talk • contribs) at 2007-09-08T18:43:20.

mal mot is not an actual French phrase. The Times article (“Fifty years on, the name Edsel remains shorthand for hubris and collapse, a mal mot of capitalism, right up there with New Coke, Betamax and Pets.com Except that Edsel was a real person and a pretty good one at that.”) appears to be using the term with the sense “a word or phrase that now resonates of failure”, but perhaps with intended irony, it uses mal mot itself as a mal mot in the protologism sense described here. Rod (A. Smith) 20:04, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Or maybe the Times author invented his own an antonym for bon mot. Rod (A. Smith) 20:13, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

The funny thing is, the opposite of bon "good" is actually mauvais "bad"; mal is an adverb meaning "badly". edited to add: And a noun meaning "ill" as in "the ills of the world". We here also have an adjective sense listed for it, but I'm suspicious. —Ruakh_TALK 20:47, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

mal is an obsolete adjective in French, now used only in bon an mal an and bon gré mal gré, I think. The feminine form might also be still understood in male mort. c'est mal de is the antonym of c'est bien de. Are mal and bien really adjectives in these phrases ? I'm not sure. Lmaltier 20:56, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Hello, are there any user blocked templates for users whom get indef blocked? And is there a warning template about creating pages? if not, do you have to be an admin to make one? Thanks. Cheers, JetLover 02:57, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Re: user-blocked templates: I don't think so, no. Re: a warning template about creating pages: Can you clarify what you mean? Re: having to be an admin: there are fairly few things here that you have to be an admin to do, aside from things that the software won't let you do unless you're an admin. (That said, there are some things that I might advise against doing until you have a bit more experience here. Heck, I've been an admin here for several months now, and hardly a week goes by that I don't run afoul of at least one long-standing, widely-accepted convention I'd never heard mention of.) —Ruakh_TALK 03:47, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Creating pages like...ksgbuashgbuagbWFGSHF or something, like nonsense. Cheers, JetLover 05:16, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

“Hello, are there any user blocked templates for users whom get indef blocked?” — AFAIK, there’s only one for temp blocked users ({{test5}}). It wouldn’t hurt to have one (at, say, {{test6}}), and AFAIK you needn’t be an admin to make a template, although I advise you to write a note in the Beer parlour upon its completion to let the community know about the template, and to ask whether anyone disapproves of the template’s use. On otherwise unrelated subjects, please add your edit summaries after the section link (/* Section title */), rather than replacing the entry field therewith — it provides a handy link to the pertinent section, and summaries like “reply” don’t give a clue as to what section it’s in, as such a summary could be used for any discussion. Also, <pedantry> you used “whom” incorrectly in that question — as it is in the nominative, that calls for “who”; if you’re unsure in future, try replacing who / whom with one of the other personal pronouns to see which sounds correct — so above, the fragment would become “them get indef blocked”, whereas “who get indef blocked” would become “they get indef blocked”</pedantry>. † Raifʻhār Doremítzwr 12:29, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

what is singualar and plural possessive for

Helper ______________         ___________________
country______________         _____________________
woman________________          ___________________
Dish__________________        __________________

— This unsigned comment was added by 76.224.44.29 (talk) at 03:18, 10 September 2007 (UTC).

singular	sing. possessive	pl. possessive
helper	helper's	helpers'
country	country's	countries'
woman	woman's	women's
dish	dish's	dishes'

--EncycloPetey 04:29, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Is there a script available to put a Wiktionary or Wikipedia searchbox on a blog? So the visitors of the blog can easily cross reference the information on the blog with an encyclopedia or dictionary? Word of the day or imagelinks are handy too. If there aren't isn't it a good idea to write such scripts? Thanks, Aafje

Only had a couple abstract requests so far. As long as you comply with the GFDL you can reuse content from here. Having an input box that look up a term is fine. Glomming the WOTD is cool, as long as you comply with the GFDL. I have a bookmarklet javascript:Wi=document.getSelection(); if (!Wi) {void(Wi=prompt('Type word for Wiktionary:',''))} if (Wi) location.href='http://en.wiktionary.orghttps://dictious.com/en/'+escape(Wi)+' ' that I use for more direct lookups, but as far as I know, no one has created a Firefox extension (that, presumably, has no more code than the bookmarklet above.) The other input variations would be to do a action and a action. But really, I can't picture it getting much fancier than that. --Connel MacKenzie 18:44, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Oops I'm sorry, WOTD and GFDL? You might just as well answer in Chinese. It isn't my intention to reuse any content from these pages. I was just suggesting/wondering if there was the possibility to put a search box on my blog with a direct link to Wikipedia or wiktionary. Results to be shown in a WIKi pop up window. It would be an interesting item for my visitors and a great way to make wikimedia even more known (see the hundreds of gadgets on the Internet to embed on a blog or other sites). A search box resembling the one on the left of these pages with a clear referral to WIKImedia. I put the code above (the bookmark-let) on my pages but nothing happened. I'm not really a connoisseur of codes or other computerinsides. But if a search box of the sorts is constructed in the future, I will be on the first row to put it to the test. Greetings, Aafje — This unsigned comment was added by Aafje (talk • contribs) at 2007-09-16T16:19:20.

I don't know the credit requirements, but the following HTML creates a form that lets readers search English Wiktionary:

<form action="http://en.wiktionary.orghttps://dictious.com/en/Special:Search">
	<input id="searchInput" name="search" type="text" title="Search English Wiktionary" />
	<input type='submit' name="go" value="Go" />
	<input type='submit' name="fulltext" value="Search" />
</form>

Does that help? Rod (A. Smith) 21:56, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks This helps a lot. Just what I needed. — This unsigned comment was added by Aafje (talk • contribs) at 2007-09-23T18:08:51.

I can't think of the word that used for the time when "believers" will be lifted up at one time to meet the Lord. I'm new to wikipedia and have no idea if I'm doing this right or not.It' late and I should be in bed. Sorry if I'm in the wrong place .Today I'll look at the newcomers section and read how I screwed up. In any case thanks in advance to anyone who can helop answer my query

  Bill7545

• The study of the end times is called eschatology. You may be looking for the word "the rapture", (see wikipedia article on Rapture). Is this what you are looiing for? RJFJR 14:53, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

The English version should have the number of entries noted on the main page ~! Currently, it only has the aggregate of all the dictionaries combined 500K ! WritersCramp 22:34, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

It does have the number of entries on the main page; the figure of 500K is the number of entries on the English Wiktionary. The French Wiktionary is over 400K, and there are several other projects over 100K, including the Russian, Greek, Turkish, Chinese, and a few others. If we aggregated all the Wiktionaries we'd probably get a figure over 1.5 million. --EncycloPetey 23:04, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

What's very misleading is in 389 languages. for (or about) 389 languages or about words in 389 languages would probably be better. Lmaltier 20:48, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

who does create names of this numbers which are connected weith googol? f.e. googolpetaplex, googolmejplex ect. so number equal to googolplex and some more plexes? or with which books or documents do creators of wiktionrary list of large numbers bring these names? I ask because there are a lot of names of numbers connecting with googol, googolplex etc, etc — This unsigned comment was added by 83.7.216.188 (talk) at 2007-09-18T18:44:59.

The entry for googol includes an etymology section that explains the origin of that word. Is that the type of information you seek? Rod (A. Smith) 19:18, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

yes thanks :) but where can I find names of numbers just bigger than googolmejplex or these numbers which are on web calls wiktionary list of large numbers? will be these numbers add on this list in the near future? — This unsigned comment was added by 83.7.216.188 (talk) at 19:32, 18 September 2007 (UTC).

If you are just looking for a list of names people have given to large numbers, see Appendix:List of protologisms/large numbers. If you need more information about the name of any particular large number, keep in mind that we only document terms that meet WT:CFI. We don't document the etymology of protologisms like *googolmejplex because they do not meet WT:CFI (i.e. they have not yet been used in durably archived publications by three independent authors over a period spanning three years). Rod (A. Smith) 19:57, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

but every user of wiktionary can give names to large numbers or not, or we must wait for publications of scientists? and is it possible that names of numbers bigger than googolmejplex etc. will appeare on wiktionary list? thank you for all infomations — This unsigned comment was added by 83.7.237.189 (talk) at 15:56, 19 September 2007 (UTC).

Entry of such words into the main section of the wiktionary would require waiting for durable print usage. Lists of protologisms are less stringently restricted. Theoretically, made up words could be added to the list but we do not encourage it. On the other hand, one of the main reasons we have the lists of protologisms is so we have a place to put words that don't meet CFI and not have the main space cluttered with such words. (At least that is my interpretation). RJFJR 14:09, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

If anybody can help me and give the distinct difference between rise go up & increase? Thanks — This unsigned comment was added by Issa (talk • contribs) at 2007-09-23T18:20:04.

They are similar in some senses, as indicated in the entries for (deprecated template usage) rise, (deprecated template usage) go up, and (deprecated template usage) increase. Those entries indicate senses of each word that are distinct from the others. Did you read them yet? Rod (A. Smith) 21:52, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Who is Shakeena/ Shakaina/ Shekkeena in Bible? Supposed to have lived in Jerusalem Temple??

Please see w:Shekhinah. -- Visviva 10:43, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

When this term refers to a person-like character, it can range between meaning the grace of god/ the holy spirit, through to a female deity that is separate but similar to the masculine deity, jehovah/ yahweh. Please, forgive the way I rendered these terms. It is often traditional to never write these down, but I'm constrained by having only this way to contact the asker. Thecurran 21:13, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

I wanted to request an etymology for expletive but I didn't know how. Thecurran 21:15, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Use {{rfe}} (“request for etymology”). Rod (A. Smith) 21:38, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks heaps! Goodness, I love this place! Thecurran 08:03, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

I put the tag at the bottom of that page. Is that right? Thecurran 08:06, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

No. Create a blank etymology section where one ought to be (as per WT:ELE), and add the {{rfe}} tag there. † Raifʻhār Doremítzwr 10:36, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

I saw this term in the following rudely worded comic, . I think it's an internetspeak initialism/ acronym like the rude wtf but I don't know what it means. Thecurran 21:32, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Please, tell me how to refer to discussions that're likely to be archived soon. The closest I can find to the last archived entry in each page of the WT:DR and then WT:V are: ID, TR, BP, GP, RA, BR, RFV, AN, RFD, A, RFC, VIP, & V. Aside from WT:RFV, all seem to have reached a regular frequency of monthly, yearly, or never, but the frequency has increased sporadically in the past.

I'm trying to read all the DR & V entries edited since just before last month, when I joined, so that I can be up-to-date and do the right thing. I'm worried that some of the entries I may refer to will get redlinked in the archive process, so I want to link to both where they are now and where they will be once archived. What is the regular frequency of WT:RFV and are any of these about to increase in frequency? Thecurran 08:01, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Just as a test, I tried to look up the word murió, which is the third person singular preterite conjugation of the Spanish verb morir--to die. The page for morir doesn't show up in the search results even though the page contains a conjugation chart that has the word murió. It would be really helpful if search included these charts. Is it possible to search that way? 70.184.146.67 19:01, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

• This is because the entries in that conjugation table are not wikified. Compare Italian verbs - searching for morirò will find morire. SemperBlotto 19:07, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

• Hi, thanks for your comment. This is because murió doesn't appear in the wikitext of morir — it's included via what we call a "template" — and our search feature doesn't count text included via templates. This is a problem, and we don't have a good solution yet, except to just create all those entries like murió so it doesn't matter what does or doesn't come up in the search. —Ruakh_TALK 19:34, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

• Another solution is to use a search engine other that MediaWiki's. E.g. http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Aen.wiktionary.org+muri%C3%B3 or, to search other language Wiktionaries as well, http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Awiktionary.org+muri%C3%B3 . Rod (A. Smith) 21:44, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Hello, this is my 1st post to Wiktionary. I was trying to find a word "obsidian" which I was unsure either if it existing or how it was spelt. My 1st try "obsidion" did not find anything, then I thought I would try "obs" thinking that it would bring up all words that start with "obs", but it did not. Could some-one please explain (or point me to the documetation link) why the search does not bring up all words that meet a certain criteria ie: starting with a certain string, perhaps even wildcards can be used, eg: "obs*n"? Thanks in advance... — This unsigned comment was added by 59.101.24.1 (talk) at 21:56, 26 September 2007 (UTC).

To search for all words beginning with "obs", enter "Special:Allpages/obs" (without the quote marks) in the search box and click "Go". That's about the best wildcard search we have, unfortunately. Otherwise, use Google, but add "site:en.wiktionary.org" (without the quotes) to your search, e.g. . Rod (A. Smith) 22:20, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

A bit better than that is Special:Prefixindex/obs. Kind of a pain to remember, though. —Ruakh_TALK 22:29, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

By the way, if you have FireFox or Internet Explorer version 7, a very useful setting is to have your browser search Wiktionary through its integrated search box. To do that, visit WT:CUSTOM#Browser-integrated search. Rod (A. Smith) 03:37, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

milky way choclate bars at the momment have a white centre, could you tell me if this was always the case?

Why are you looking in a dictionary website for this? --EncycloPetey 13:16, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

I am trying to find out the names of the men on the back of the 2 dollar bill. — This comment was unsigned.

The image there is of the signing of the w:United States Declaration of Independence by the w:Second Continental Congress. --Connel MacKenzie 17:10, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Specifically, http://www.americanrevolution.org/deckey.html. --Connel MacKenzie 17:12, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Whoops. The $2 bill uses a reduced reproduction of the painting here, which doesn't include the people identified as #1, #2, #3, #4, #47 and #48 in the previous diagram. Hope that helps. --Connel MacKenzie 17:16, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

There's a trivia question that asks "which person appears on both sides of a note?" which most people don't have a clue to, having rarely seen a $2 in circulation; they don't usually know who is on the obverse anyway. (Answer is Thomas Jefferson of course.) Robert Ullmann 04:37, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

I am new to "Wiktionary". Would you please advise me how I can find the origins and meaning of a specific word, not the just "dictionary" meaning. Also how do I find the Thesaurus? The word I am looking for the origin and or "root" of is Bible. Thank You. — This unsigned comment was added by Juudycootie (talk • contribs) at 16:42, 2 October 2007 (UTC).

bible has an etymology entry tracing its origin meaning "book" (i.e. the book or the good book, I suppose). The Bible entry doesn't have an etymology section.

The wiki version of a thesaurus is called the wikisaurus. You can enter your word in the search box as wikisaurus:<word> then click go and it will check that namespace. To do a search, use the search button then look at the bottom and check the box for wikisaurus (you may want to uncheck the box for the main space). Note: the wikisaurus is one fo the less complete parts of this project, it has few words entered yet. RJFJR 19:40, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

My daughter has a Science project and she chose the question- Which apple, on average produces the most seeds in the core. We have done alot of research and got some answers but I guess my question isn "What gives the seed count to each apple?" We have seeded many apples and our conclusion at this time is their are a different amount of seeds in each apple even if its the same brand. We are seeding 2 apples for every type but the all have different amounts of seeds. The only information I can't find is what gives a particular apple its seeds. Can you assist me with this? thank you — This unsigned comment was added by Jeannie Hoffhine (talk • contribs) at 20:34, 6 October 2007.

You may have come here thinking this is Wikipedia. This is actually the companion dictionary site, so it only deals with aspects of words, e.g. terminology, lexicology, orthography, and phonology. To find out the apple with the most seeds, you may have better luck at a different site. One place you might start looking is Wikipedia’s article on “Apple”, perhaps asking on that article’s talk page where to find more information resources. Rod (A. Smith) 21:14, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi. I wanted to mark a related term as an adjective using {{pos_adj}} but this appears to be incorrect. What is the right form please? Algrif 10:26, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

We usually don't show the part of speech for each -onym, but to do so, use {{qualifier|adjective}} before the related term. Rod (A. Smith) 16:39, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. But I was thinking about Derived and Related terms. I've seen and used{{pos_n}}, {{pos_v}}, {{pos_adv}} with no problem. But cannot seem to find any template for adjectives. Algrif 17:41, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Interesting. I don't at all like those templates. {{pos_n}} outputs a tag that makes it look like the gender of the referenced -onym is neuter. If you want to use them, though, the adjective version appears to be {{pos_a}}. Rod (A. Smith) 17:50, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Gender? For English terms? --Connel MacKenzie 18:16, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

I was not aware that the templates are supposed to be used only for English -onyms. Is that the case? If so, there is less room for confusion than I thought, but entries with translations use n to indicate the neuter gender, so some readers may be confused. Rod (A. Smith) 18:57, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Hmmmm. That hadn't occurred to me. I just thought it was a standard "way to do things". So what do you recommend? On the one hand it is nice to see what pos the related term is, but on the other, it needs to be clear. Algrif 18:01, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't know. Feel free to use the pos_ templates, as we can always change their output later or review Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:pos_n etc. for cleanup. Maybe we should take this to BP for advice. Rod (A. Smith) 18:07, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Good idea. Can you move this over to BP then and see what people think? (Apart from copy paste, I'm not sure how to move it :-/ ) Algrif 18:13, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

It is probably better to restate what the complaint is (since it is not clear, so far.) --Connel MacKenzie 18:17, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

The abbreviation n is confusing. The templates are not in a category, nor are they mentioned in any style guides, so I don't know where to use them. The templates they do something strange with a span (e.g. {{pos_n}} creates a span with the title "noun") but they have no documentation. What are they doing? If we like what they're doing, let's document them and mention them in a style guide. Rod (A. Smith) 18:57, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

The only place where templates like these are definitely useful is at the head of a definition line for an Acronym, Abbreviation, etc. that is used as a particular part of speech. I disfavor useing POS_X templates for Related terms and Derived terms, because it is not unusual for a word to have more than one part of speech. If someone wants to know, they can follow the link to the appropriate entry anyway. --EncycloPetey 01:15, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm not involved with this project, but I'm curious about references here. Does one not need to cite references when one provides a definition? Also, since definitions must be precise, isn't copying from existing dictionaries basically impossible? What is the equivalent here of WP:CITE? — This unsigned comment was added by 130.216.191.182 (talk).

This "problem" has no doubt been discussed on a number of occasions in the past (including the problem of referencing muti-section articles - Wiktionary:Beer_parlour#References) Others will remember more than me, but etymologies and quotations should be referenced - I am not sure about definitions. —Saltmarsh^Talk 11:48, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Definitions should be supported by quotations in which the word is used with the defined meaning. See pages like listen and parrot for examples. --EncycloPetey 13:27, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Definitions can be referenced with other dictionaries which also list the same essential sense (that is, we can reference that our senses exist in other dictionaries if they both express the same idea); however, definitions must never be copied directly (at least not from works younger than a century (or more) old), as doing so is copyright violation. † ﴾^(u):Raifʻhār ^(t):Doremítzwr﴿ 13:30, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Our best equivalent to w:WP:CITE is probably WT:QUOTE, at this point. Basically, all definitions should be verifiable through documented language use. As Doremitzwr observes, there's nothing wrong with noting that another dictionary has a particular definition (in a ====Dictionary notes==== section, for example), but this is never adequate in itself.-- Visviva 16:03, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

So what do you folk do if a definition is questionable? You could support it with quotes without having an accurate definition. For example a definition could be too narrow, but supported by a quote than uses the word in a narrow sense. In fact it's pretty easy to quote mine for any definition you'd like. 130.216.191.182 04:07, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Indeed, sometimes we gather several quotes before having an idea what the right definition is. Broadly speaking, however, this isn't much of a problem, seeing as we actually speak the language. It's not like we're trying to cheat the system by intentionally adding misleading quotes. —Ruakh_TALK 04:14, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

what's the word to describe when a student sits in a class to assess it to see if they want to enroll?--Arssra 20:55, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

That depends. In some cases that's sit in on a class. In other cases it's an audit of the class. --EncycloPetey 20:57, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi! I'm new and I notice some of the pages I have created have had requests for verification. Do I use <ref>...</ref> and ==Sources==<references/> in Wiktionary? --Harris Morgan 18:41, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

The discussion happens on the WT:RFV page. Usually, what is needed are examples of quotations that demonstrate the use of the term in context. See Criteria for inclusion for more information about the kinds of sources we consider useful (e.g. journals, newspapers, literature, but not blogs or unarchived websites). You can add the quotations directly to the page under ====Quotations====, or place them in the corresponding discussion section of WT:RFV if you need someone to format them correctly for you. We don't use the same format as Wikipedia, because our goals and needs are different. --EncycloPetey 22:34, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I have almost no idea of how we're supposed to format pages here. I added a bit to the page auriferous, but it was flagged by what looks like a style bot. Is there a mockup or guide anywhere of the standard layout? Regardless, please look over my changes, I'm trying to do the right thing. Since I don't visit Wiktionary as often as Wikipedia, would you please reply on my talk page? Thanks, Nihiltres 17:40, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Copy of reply placed on Nihiltres's talk page

See Wiktionary:Entry layout explained. auriferous had a 'related terms' heading at level 2; level 2 is reserved for Language headings by convention. The edit summary had more details and 'autoformat' added an RFC template with a message. Trying to format in exactly the way Autoformat expects it is hard, that why we have the autoformat bot. RJFJR 17:54, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Is there any article or consideration on the value of Wiktionary, as compared to other dictionaries, meaning what Wiktionary has to offer that others don't? Such an article could motivate hesitating prospective contributors. Thanks for any reference. --Daniel Polansky 21:49, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

On the "Main Page" and "http://en.wiktionary.orghttps://dictious.com/en/Wiktionary:What_Wiktionary_is_not", it is mentioned that 'Wiktionary is not an encyclopedia,....'. If Wiktionary is not an Encyclopedia then i think in the logo on the left top cprner of page should not say "a multilingual free encyclopedia".

It's supposed to be an excerpt of a dictionary, where the preceding word is "Wikipedia" - one just doesn't see the headword, only its explanation. \Mike 10:47, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

My impression, perhaps incorrect, is that the concept of participle is just beyond the awareness of many contributers. Consequently, participles get added with a POS as adjective, rather than as Verb with the appropriate definition indicating present or past participle. Wikifying participle would increase the probabity that folks would look up participle and understand that a separate adjective definition is probably not required. I say probably, of course, since there are always exceptions. Makearney 22:58, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

The English past participles should all be marked as Verb & Adjective, for the most part. That is, there should be an Adjective section for the word and a Verb section for the word. So, it is not wrong to add it as an adjecitve, just incomplete. This isn't necessarily true for all participles in all languages. Present participles in English, for example, seldom are adjectives, but often are nouns (gerundives). Latin and Greek are even weirder, so that there's been discussion of using Participle as a POS header for those languages. --EncycloPetey 13:18, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

in the futures market they talk about (what is the delta on corn.or oats and so on.How do i find information on the delta of a futures market — This comment was unsigned.

Interesting question. http://www.investopedia.com/articles/optioninvestor/03/021403.asp has some relevant information. --Connel MacKenzie 07:36, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

I have a couple of queries about the use of categories. I see two for motorsport: Category:Auto racing and Category:Motor racing (presumably to accommodate the American terminology). Should they not be merged, or at least have all their entries duplicated? They are the same thing and the current system means that a reader who looks for, as an example, pit stop will probably not see chequered flag unless they search for it. My other question relates to the entries that are not categorised but are listed at the top of Category:Auto racing – this creates a similar problem in that anyone who searches for one of those terms will not find any link to the relevant category. Is it intended to function this badly for some reason? I would like to be able improve the usability of this category, but I don't yet know enough about the conventions that govern the category system here. It seems to be quite different to Wikipedia. Adrian M. H. 16:38, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

There should be one category. (In case of difference between US and UK, we have to choose one; for example we have Category:Colors and not Category:Colours, the latter is a redirect) The "Motor racing" category was create by an infamous contributor ... should be a redirect to Auto racing, which had already existed for a year. (Or do you think it should be the other way around? Maybe we should have Motor racing, and, say, NASCAR ;-) There are templates used as context on definitions that do the categorization, one of the two should be the corresponding redirect to the other.

(was that just clear as mud?) The list at the top was probably put there just to highlight missing entries. When they are all blue, it should go away. Robert Ullmann 16:53, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

That was a very prompt reply, Robert! I was ready to be patient when I saw the low-traffic nature of this page. So I'll be doing the right thing by categorising all those uncategorised terms... that's good. Regarding the preferred category to use, I think that the most commonly used term should logically be favoured; most English-speaking countries use Motor racing or Motorsport, and they are what we now tend to favour more frequently at WP. Only the US uses Auto racing. Would you agree with that logic? I don't want to push any kind of language bias here, though, because I'm not interested in that; the international readership is more important. Adrian M. H. 17:06, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, this reply is a bit slower (I live in Nairobi so was watching a football match) Category:Motor racing seems to be a fine idea ("motorsport" as a single word is unknown to the 4.5% or so of the world that live in the US. /POV ;-) I'll set this, and see where we are. Robert Ullmann 22:11, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks again. Adrian M. H. 23:26, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

I may be mistaken, but in the top left of the page, in the graphic that is pretending to be a dictionary excerpt, there's an error in the pronunciation symbols.

"wik-shun-air-ee" looks to be pronounced "wik-shun-ree". Maybe I don't know phonetic symbols, but I think you're missing a vowel.

No, you're just expecting the US pronunciation. The graphic shows the UK (RP) pronunciation. --EncycloPetey 00:57, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

But it is incorrect for another reason — because it’s written between brackets; the actual phone pronounced is not , but rather something like (for the UK) or (for the US). † ﴾^(u):Raifʻhār ^(t):Doremítzwr﴿ 14:38, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't understand the difference between Template:derogatory and Template:pejorative. I've looked at the wiktionary entries for derogatory and pejorative, but I didn't get a sense of the difference. Could someone describe the difference for me, perhaps with a few examples? I'd like to correctly label some words like harlot and fuckup, which currently don't have information that they're considered negative qualities. -- Creidieki 16:04, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

I think a word is pejorative if it's simply an insult — "dickhead", "idiot", etc. — and derogatory if it's an insulting word for a not-inherently-pejorative concept — racial epithets, etc. —Ruakh_TALK 17:49, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Just ran into the phrase "completing interest" which means the same as "conflict of interest". I'm tempted to make completing interest an alternative spelling of conflict of interest. Is there a better way? dougher 22:28, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

If it has the same meaning, it belongs in ====Synonyms====. Are you sure it's not a typo for "competing interest", though? Rod (A. Smith) 22:36, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, just a typo on my part -- competing interest it is. dougher 00:45, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

hello all, i came up with a new word, how would i publish it? i am sure of its success if it is allowed, it involves the word for a female dogChopin131 03:31, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Add it to Appendix:List of protologisms. Rod (A. Smith) 03:38, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

I have just found this site. It'll take a while to master it. I'm stuck with a crossword clue. the letters I have are --c---s. I don't know if I can use your site in this way, but I do hope so. If I get the answer about this, I'll have a go with the other few I'm stuck with. — This comment was unsigned.

I don't know if anyone excuses that sort of question, but it isn't condoned. Might be neat to have a derivative that works by language, though. I don't know if direct (open) queries on the toolserver are working yet. --Connel MacKenzie 23:12, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

http://en.wiktionary.orghttps://dictious.com/en/bas_relief

Something about this page's formatting has caused all the edit links to be jammed together on one line. dougher 06:25, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

That's not just a problem limited to Wiktionary. The placement of any image defaulting to the right, that overlaps several editing sections, will cause this to happen. --14:02, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Making images hidden by default, showing only the caption with a button (like we have for translations and rel-tables) would solve this problem. Is this possible? † ﴾^(u):Raifʻhār ^(t):Doremítzwr﴿ 14:10, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Probably not, as the image thumbnail handling is deep within the MediaWiki software, not at a template level. --Connel MacKenzie 16:14, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

The image placement forces that shunting of the links. Using ===External links=== + {{projectlinks}} is the easiest way to move one of the images up where it belonds, at the same height as the table of contents. The second image might not even be necessary. But with the other two "float" items moved, it may shunt fewer of the links. --Connel MacKenzie 16:14, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

The problem is, and has always been, the placement of links by the CSS and software. Something I have not had time to go fix. All the shoving around and tweaking of entries isn't going to work. Robert Ullmann 23:08, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

When I try to open this page, my browser goes into an infinite loop. Does this happen to others, too? -- 84.178.240.84 10:28, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes. User names may not begin with a lower case letter, and our software is sensitive to capitalization. --EncycloPetey 14:23, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

So that means it's not a bug that the page reloads itself repeatedly, instantly, infinitely? -- 84.178.216.41 19:08, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

I suspect it is due to the use of the {{fullurl}} template. The simple link User:arceus fan gives no trouble. SemperBlotto 20:02, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Yea, because the edit window does not trigger the HTTP redirect command. I just noticed the bug because a person linked to that page from another project (meta IIRC), and when following an interwiki to a non-existing page you usually start out on the "This page doesn't exist" page. -- 84.178.216.41 21:05, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

This seems to me to be quite a serious problem - It doesn't seem to happen with any other usernames so I am lead to the conclusion that there is something very odd gone wrong - which never bodes well. The redirect seems to be in the page itself (i.e. an HTML or Javascript) redirect, as the page partially loads each time. I think we need a developer to see this. Conrad.Irwin 21:41, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

In the meantime, I've added a redirect so that the people using my Javascript auto-redirect stuff (in MediaWiki:Monobook.js) don't pound on the servers indefinitely. Definitely very strange. --Connel MacKenzie 22:31, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

• Fixed: http://en.wiktionary.orghttps://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Monobook.js&diff=3267159&oldid=3022716 . Use Ctrl-F5 to refresh your Javascript. --Connel MacKenzie 22:37, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/08/nyregion/08irish.html?em&ex=1194670800&en=1752882e6ceaae2a&ei=5087%0A

Omegatron 04:25, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

I wonder how many of those are actually right? I'm not sure suggestive similarities are really enough to establish etymology. —Ruakh_TALK 05:43, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

I would like to find where in Wiktionary I can request help for pronunciation on a couple of French-derived English words. I imagine there is a section somewhere for this but I was unable to locate it by browsing around or by searching on several variations on the terms 'help' 'pronounce' 'pronunciation' etc. N2e 20:27, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

You can post any sort of question about a particular word to Wiktionary:Tea room. A more specific option for pronunciation requests is to add {{rfp}} or {{rfap}} to the entry for which you'd like a pronunciation. Does that help? Rod (A. Smith) 20:42, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes, that helps. Thanks Rod! N2e 14:24, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

There is a ticket in the OTRS queue for Wiktionary asking if an interface as specified in rfc 2229 is available. Ticket number is 2007111010009126 and it is from Hungary. Without looking it up I don't know if this is really a dictionary server protocol or not, I'm trusting the guy making the inquiry.

Can someone look into what this is, and then discuss if it would be a useful addition to wiktionary? If you give me some details I'll answer the ticket if you can't find someone local with OTRS access. --Brianmc 16:18, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

An implementation of the DICT: protocol is not currently available. FWIW, I second the OTRS request - it is something we should have, that would be enormously useful. --Connel MacKenzie 17:19, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi! I'm new here. I think that adding examples of how the words are used to the entries is great. I added a couple of examples already, and I formatted them like this:

Tinha uma poeirinha aqui e eu limpei. (There was a little dust here and I cleaned it.)

Vá embora! (Go away!)

However, I have seen on the page de the following examples:

De rebus mathematicis — “Concerning mathematical things”

Casa mea nu este departe de aici. - “My house is not far from here.”

I would like to know if this is a convention, and if I should format all examples like those of the entry de. Thanks. Artur 19:56, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes, de is closer to the format preferred. See Wiktionary:Quotations (and it's talk page) for the latest "best practice" format conventions. (I'm pretty sure the directional quotation marks are still a no-no, but it was never good to use parenthesis.) --Connel MacKenzie 20:16, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, the question was about examples, not quotations. See estu for a good entry. The English translation of the example sentence should be on the next line. And it shouldn't be quoted. Robert Ullmann 09:03, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

What is the template to request a word be used in a sentence? I would like to see the word taciturn put in a sentence to make it easier to use the word. Gbeebani 05:44, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Hmm… we don’t really have one. However, we do have {{rfquote-sense}} — does that help? † ﴾^(u):Raifʻhār ^(t):Doremítzwr﴿ 11:34, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

It looks like one's been added. But here's a good one anyways: "President Coolidge was legendary for being taciturn: Someone told him 'I bet I can get you to say three words' and he replied 'you lose'." RJFJR 04:35, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Mainiacs (people from Maine) are notable for being taciturn; story goes that a visitor to a town opens the front door of the bed & breakfast he has stayed in to find several feet of snow, and the street completely impassable, calls out to a man shovelling snow off the roof of a house opposite: "Good morning, how are you? How did you get to that side of the street?" The answer? "Born here." Robert Ullmann 08:54, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! Gbeebani 01:23, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

That almost sounds laconic- if you ask me, but that's my opinion. Good work helping him!-Stoical Iceman

Please do not say that because I did not mean to be rude, and I highly appreciate all and everyone who answered my question and request. I had a couple of important exams so I couldn't reply in detail, but I thought that not thanking everyone in time would be the rude move. Robert Ullmann, RJFJR, and Raifʻhār, you are very knowledgeable and I always appreciate your help. I hope you don't feel the same way, and sorry if I can't find the proper words to describe it. Gbeebani 04:30, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Fear not; I believe Stoical Iceman meant that President Coolidge was more "laconic" than "taciturn", and was not criticizing the brevity of your thank-you. —Ruakh_TALK 01:00, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

The page Wiktionary:Entry layout explained says "Each definition may be treated as a sentence: beginning with a capital letter and ending with a full stop." What about definitions that are just one word (so they are not sentences), how are they supposed to be written? Artur 23:45, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

I'd say the same rule applies; but to be honest, a one-word definition probably isn't a very good one. —Ruakh_TALK 04:36, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Lots of entries for foreign (to English) languages just give one word translations; they shouldn't be treated as sentences, as they aren't. Just link the word. E.g. kipanya just says mouse, not ]. Mouse. which is misleading as to the capitalization of the word, and doesn't make a sentence anyway. Robert Ullmann 08:48, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

I'd like to have a private page with a link from my home page that contains a personal set of formatting examples. What's the right way to to this? How do I name the page? dougher 00:42, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Notes like this would be a good use for your user page, which is at User:Doug Hockin. RJFJR 01:01, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

I want a link on my user page to another page that is mine. Can I do that? What should the other page be named? dougher 04:11, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

If you like, you can create a subpage of your userpage — something like User:Doug Hockin/formatting examples. Note that this would only be a "private page" in that it clearly belonged to you; other Wiktionarians could still find, view, and edit it. —Ruakh_TALK 04:33, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Someone has entered the word "teratoid" in your dictionary as a noun. It isn't. It is an adjective. Maybe someone will fix it. — This unsigned comment was added by 76.24.161.16 (talk).

This is a wiki - you could have fixed it yourself. SemperBlotto 11:09, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

I recently tried to use my cd and dvd players and I'm being told that my shell32.dll file has been cahanged. Now niether will either play or burn or rip. I don't know what to do to correct my problem. Can anyone help me. Sorry for my ignorance. Thanks.

A dictionary is not the best place to get help. Why not contact the manufacturer or try an electronics discussion group? --EncycloPetey 20:18, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

I’ve quoted more than one work which presented text in columns. I’ve tried to represent that using spaces of various widths (from em spaces to thin spaces), but the result is inconsistent across fonts. Is there any way to present text in columns? (A way which, preferably, would not break numbering, indentation, and bulleting.) † ﴾^(u):Raifʻhār ^(t):Doremítzwr﴿ 21:33, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, it's a bit lame, but you can create tables using explicit HTML-style markup:

# Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit.
#* Curabitur massa sapien, nonummy ac, blandit nec, pulvinar eget, lacus.
#*: <table><tr><td valign="top">Fusce nisi turpis, tempus nec, suscipit eget, malesuada a, orci. </td><td width=3%></td><td valign="top">In vitae urna nec arcu consequat nonummy. </td><td width=3%></td><td valign="top">Morbi sapien purus, sollicitudin sit amet, lacinia vitae, pellentesque ac, tortor. </td></tr></table>

1. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit.
   • Curabitur massa sapien, nonummy ac, blandit nec, pulvinar eget, lacus.

     Fusce nisi turpis, tempus nec, suscipit eget, malesuada a, orci.

     In vitae urna nec arcu consequat nonummy.

     Morbi sapien purus, sollicitudin sit amet, lacinia vitae, pellentesque ac, tortor.

(text c/o http://www.lipsum.com/).

—Ruakh_TALK 08:17, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

I see. Thanks for that. How about increasing the spacing between those columns? And is there any way of preventing columnar justification? † ﴾^(u):Raifʻhār ^(t):Doremítzwr﴿ 14:34, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

you put a null (empty) column in between (this is how, e.g. {{top3}} works), I took the liberty of modifying the above rather than repeating it. Don't know what you mean by "columnar justification"? Robert Ullmann 14:58, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. “Justification” is when the spacing in a line of text is widened or narrowed so that the text is aligned with both the left and the right margins (Microsoft Word’s term, not mine). Is there any way to make the text align with only one of the margins, or to be centred? † ﴾^(u):Raifʻhār ^(t):Doremítzwr﴿ 01:31, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Okay, that's what I thought it meant (and it isn't Microsoft's terminology) I was confused by your use of "prevent"; the text above is only filled and left aligned, not justified. What are you trying to prevent? Robert Ullmann 14:20, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Hello, I recently entered the banking equivalent of e-tailing with the word eLending.

As I was formatting during a follow up edit my changes were lost, as someone else was changing it at the same time.

Then I formatted again, added babel fish translation for a few languages, and later found it completely gone.

Where is the link showing why it was deleted. It has a high search count on google and exceeds the Wiktionary term e-tailing which is similar.

Thanks

• The original article was encyclopedic and had no formatting. The second version had totally inappropriate formatting, with definitions and translations for unrelated words. That was no use to anyone so I deleted it. SemperBlotto 19:51, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Your wasting the time of new people that are interested in Wiktionary. If you have the patience, please revert it, and assist in formatting. Being in a hurry in a destructive way will discourage new visitors.. Please be more helpful. Thanks --96.232.188.7 20:14, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

I want to ask what is the difference between power processors and micro processors.

I saw some people had other pages under their own name, how can I do that with a couple of test templates? Pistachio 11:04, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Just name them anything that starts with User:Pistachio/, like User:Pistachio/test or User:Pistachio/template. To test, you can then transclude them in another page just like you would a template: {{ User:Pistachio/template | foo | bar | baz = bip }}. —Ruakh_TALK 14:44, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

thanks :-D Pistachio 17:53, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

WHERE are the stubs. i want to finish the stubs but i can't find it! — This comment was unsigned.

Where is your signature? DCDuring 23:51, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

The top of Special:Recentchanges has a one-line list of "wanted" definitions. Our Community portal has a section "Help us with entries needing attention" which might have something to tickle your fancy. Webster's 1913 entries still linger, in need of manual cleanup and migration. --Connel MacKenzie 00:00, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

http://en.wiktionary.orghttps://dictious.com/en/Wiktionary:Index_to_templates

This page should include links to the forms of the templates for the English parts of speech, e.g. all the forms of en-noun. It is very hard to find these by poking around. I've finally found them at "Template talk:en-noun", etc.

dougher 02:43, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

You want Wiktionary:Inflection templates, which is referenced in the second section of the page you were looking at. Robert Ullmann 12:38, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

I just did this:

{{en-noun|'']''}}

rather than this:

{{en-noun|'']''}}

on menfolk. It seems much more readable to the average person. Is it acceptable? dougher 03:27, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

I hope so and can't see why not. I discovered it from someone (???) earlier this week. To me it seems so good that there ought to be a bot to update all the entries that need have plurale or singulare tantum. DCDuring 03:32, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

I prefer plurale tantum to be displayed. Can this be a template tweak which displays different things depending upon WT:PREFS? † ﴾^(u):Raifʻhār ^(t):Doremítzwr﴿ 13:36, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

{{label}} was an attempt to support labels that display differently to linguists and laymen, but some project participants felt that such labels would create more confusion than value. Rod (A. Smith) 05:44, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

I prefer plurale tantum in part because "plural only" can be misleading. Consider (deprecated template usage) pants, (deprecated template usage) intestines, or (deprecated template usage) scissors, each of which represents a single physical object in most people's minds and also applies to a plural collection of such objects. Calling them "plural only" could confuse an English learner. --EncycloPetey 23:33, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

I didn't think that I found a clearer understanding of plurale tantum and singulare tantum after clicking on the wiki-link. Are there any simple, not misleading, and logically correct English-language labels for these attributes. DCDuring 23:57, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Not that I know of. We should probably improve our entry (and the Wikipedia article) to support the many links. --EncycloPetey 04:31, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Care must be taken. Many entries have both countable and uncountable forms. Premises for example, is both a true plural and a plurale tantum, depending on the meaning. Algrif 19:46, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

What MediaWiki extension do you use for the # of contributions shown in Special:Preferences? Eloc 00:25, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Special:Version doesn't list any special extension for that. Just baseline MediaWiki software. (I don't recall seeing that before - it might be a very recent addition.) --Connel MacKenzie 05:47, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

It was added sometime this year. There was a report in the Wikpedia Signpost about it. Circeus 16:30, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Can Wiktionary be used to create a list of words to use as a spell-check dictionary? Ideally, one could use the word categories to split them up into computer science, life science, law etc type dictionaries. --Seans Potato Business 17:30, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Possibly, but keep in mind that we include words in all languages, so you'd have to start by sorting them by language. Also, many of our words are not tagged according to any specific use, and many, many words have yet to be entered at all...especially plurals and forms of verbs. --EncycloPetey 01:14, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

You would also want to remove words that are "common misspellings" and probably obscure or archaic words. RJFJR 02:02, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

You might take a look at http://tools.wikimedia.de/~cmackenzie/pos.txt (updated irregularly after each XML dump.) I haven't broken out lists by tagging as no one has requested that yet. I believe the catsect tool (somewhere on toolserver) provides additional category intersections that you may find helpful (and more up-to-date.) --Connel MacKenzie 20:30, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

I just noticed a Wiktionary article that began with a lowercase letter - this is not possible on Wikipedia, yet they both use the same software. What's going on? --Seans Potato Business 19:00, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Wiktionary started out all caps, I believe, but there was a need to have lowercase and caps. Most of our entries are lowercase; be sure to place any new entries properly in regards to caps or lowercase. Thanks! sewnmouthsecret 19:02, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

There is a configuration parameter in the MediaWiki software; the Wiktionaries (almost all) have it set to not automatically capitalize titles. We also have Javascript that will take you to the other form automatically if it exists. Robert Ullmann 16:04, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

ceilidh lists the etymology as Mediaeval Irish. I don't find a template for this -- should it exist? -- dougher 03:44, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

"Medieval Irish" is not a standard term for a period of development in Irish. It should probably be "Old Irish" or "Middle Irish". See w:History of the Irish language for details. --EncycloPetey 03:48, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Is there a tag like <nowiki> which stops wikipedia from deleting white space? Particularly, one which would respect carriage returns. So if you typed:
<nowhitespace>
TEST
TEST
</nowhitespace>

...Then it would end up looking like this:
TEST
TEST

You mean like <pre>? --EncycloPetey 05:32, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi I would like the correct spelling and explanation for de javu (I feeling/ sense I have been here before) Thanx

déjà vu Jonathan Webley 10:37, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

why is there a talk page?

Talk pages are used to discuss matters relating to the particular page in the Wiki. For example the talk page for déjà vu would be used to discuss the phrase déjà vu. Talk pages are not for general chat about other matters. Jonathan Webley 11:23, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

They are also used to file discussions from one of the discussion rooms, when relevant. Algrif 19:43, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Should there be links in the text of a quotation? See the word: nasal, noun, meaning 4 for an example - dougher 02:06, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

No. See Wiktionary:Quotations. The word being documented should appear in bold, but no other words should be linked. --EncycloPetey 05:19, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

I didn't notice anything at WT:QUOTE that suggests that links should not be added for words in the quotation. While I wouldn't recommend overuse (as seems to be the case in the current nasal example), sparing use links could be useful in providing context in some cases, just as they are for the definitions. (Of course, any that are already linked in the definitions shouldn't be repeated in the quotations, as they would only distract.) ~ Jeff Q 19:21, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

The document is not complete, but you'll notice that none of the examples show links. The problem with having a few links, is that editors then think that more links would be better. I have seen some editors come through and link every word in the definitions and every word in the example sentences, and every word in the quotations. It is extremely distracting. The point of a quotation is to show use of the entry word; any additional links or such in the quotation detract from that purpose. --EncycloPetey 03:19, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Should category templates be used in derived terms and related terms?

* ] {{anatomy}}

dougher 02:08, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

No, using a category template will place the current page in that category, not the word listed befofre the template. In any case, those sections generally contain just the terms. Information about such related and derived terms will be found by following the link. --EncycloPetey 05:18, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

I often patrol some of the categories that interest me, and I often find one or two entries that shouldn't be there because of the misuse of these templates. Algrif 19:42, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Where this contextual information is relevant -- which is not the case in the example -- I believe {{sense}} is the preferred template. Thus one would write {{sense|anatomy}} (or more likely something like {{sense|body part}}). -- Visviva 16:36, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

No, {{sense}} is what you want, {{qualifier}} is used for stuff like regional, social or level marks that are added when there's already a sense template. See e.g. pissed off#Synonyms

Who normally adds 'welcome' messages for new users? Could that person please welcome User:Mehrorang if possble. Thank you. Pistachio 18:33, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Anyone can welcome new users. I do it sometimes, and so do many others. The easy way is to use {{subst:welcome}} --~~~~, though I try to add another line of personalized text afterwards, such as information about some specific aspect of formatting, or a link to Wiktionary:About Spanish (or whatever language they've added entries for). --EncycloPetey 02:34, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

I would like info on a map maker from Italy I believe ,named America F , cant remember his last name but North America and South America were named after him.

Why do you think that a dictionary would be the appropriate place to look? --EncycloPetey 15:15, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

The Wikipedia would be a better place to look? You might want w:Amerigo Vespucci. Robert Ullmann 15:21, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

How would I go about bringing up a discussion about starting an American Sign Language (ASL) dictionary on Wiktionary? Thanks --Zoohouse 03:16, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

There has been some discussion on this, with no good resolution. English Wiktionary, as you may know, has English-language entries and foreign-language entries. The English entries include translations into other languages; the foreign-language entries are essentially just bare-bones entries with translations into English. So for ASL, we's want two things: ASL entries themselves (translations into English); and translations into ASL on English entries' pages.

Let me deal with ASL entries first. The problem there is that all entries have as their page title (and, hence, end of the URL) the actual word — and there's no way to include a word of ASL into a page title. Some have suggested using the ASCII form of Stokoe notation; someone else suggested using glosses; but no good solution has been found, and we right now have no ASL (or other sign-language) entries, and no real way to add them. If you have any ideas, please voice them!

As far as translations of English words, that's much easier: just include a picture, or video, or SignWriting picture, or Stokoe-notation representation, or whatever, into a translation table. There, the only issue is one of finding such things (that we're allowed to use) or creating them. These are hard to do; so for now we have very few translations (at one, two, three, and some other number entires; I think that's it). Again, if you are fluent in ASL, or know someone who is, and are able to upload video of signs, that'd be super. Likewise if you know of any way to get images permissibly.

Some of these issues have been dealt with at Wiktionary:About sign languages, but that page is in need of help itself.

As far as I know, I was the only active Wiktionary editor who cares about sign languages until you posted this question here, and I'm not really doing anything about it (as I don't know what else to try). So any help you can provide will be great. Please voice suggestions here, in the Wiktionary:Beer parlour, or, if you like, on my talk page. (The Beer parlour would actually be the most appropriate spot, but it doesn't much matter.)—msh210℠ 17:34, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

I am keen to see what you come up because I want to get w:Auslan in here. w:Cued Speech (American) has a much more limited number of morphemes that would lend itself well to transcription as it is basically a phonetic sign language. I found it really helpful to communicate complex chemical, scientific, and mathematical terms (as well as making in-jokes across a noisy bus). Seeing as it's based on pronunciation, can we include it? --Thecurran 22:23, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Cued speech is not a language at all; if we're to include it at all, it should be as a listing among the pronunciations (I suppose) of English (or whatever) words. (Auslan, of course, is another story.)—msh210℠ 17:40, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

I frequently run into duplicated definitions for alternative spellings. My tendency (which I've never acted on yet) is to look up the spellings in http://www.onelook.com and see which one has the most dictionary entries, call that the primary entry which would have the sole copy of the definitions and make all the rest just say "alternate spelling of ...". Is it ok to just fix those I find that way without any discussion? Will anyone be upset? - dougher 01:42, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

I have been wondering about that too. Circeus 02:08, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

It all depends. The subject can lead to long discussion (see Talk:color). Some word pairs (eg colour:color) are Synchronized entries, others (eg synchronised:synchronized) are not. It is probably a good idea to minimise/minimize synchronized pairs because of the associated housekeeping. —Saltmarsh^Talk 06:20, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Not a good idea to just clean up without checking on TR for example first. If you can find the long discussions about various word pairs ( facade façade for a good example )you will discover that it is not as simple as it might seem. Generally, it is better to keep what is already there if you wish to avoid complications later. Algrif 19:05, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

That is a fine start for the alternative spelling entry (and verification from other dictionaries is often helpful and correct.) But don't be surprised if the "alternative" entry is later expanded. Not all words are controversial. Usually the simple indication of it being an alternative spelling is helpful. But there is nothing (in practice or policy) to suggest that the second entry should remain a soft-link. --Connel MacKenzie 20:16, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Hey! I'm new here and trying to contribute to some foreign language definitions. I just have one question:

When writing the article for foreign language definitions, should I give the whole definition or just a simple one?

Example:

Νέα Νότια Ουαλία <- Here I have put the whole definition for New South Wales

But:

Australie <- Here (not my contribution), it's just a single definition with one word: "Australia"

So I'm not sure if I'm adding unnecessary/proper info, or if I should just be giving a simple (often one or two word) definition of it, which will end up being redirected to the English word?

Thanks a lot and I'm really sorry if I was confusing! :) AndyPandy 19:35, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Forteign language entries should not have definitions. They should have an English translation instead. See Londra as an example. SemperBlotto 22:34, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

I always put a full definition with the gloss unless all the meanings match perfectly, which is fairly rare (proper nouns or ethnonyms are common exceptions, but see latin). Circeus 03:27, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

But that is not standard practice. We have given a translation, followed by a gloss to clarify the sense, when necessary. A full definition can be given, as a lats resort, when there is no English equivalent. --EncycloPetey 05:02, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I'm new as well and I'm trying to understand the usage scenario for the translations into other languages. It appears that you can find translations either by clicking in the "in other languages" pane or a "translations" table on the same page. It doesn't seem like there is a linking mechanism to allow a user to link from a particular word sense in English to a particular word sense in another language. So for example I'm not sure what would be the proper way to contribute the Italian translation of the "turn the aircraft" sense of "bank" vs. the "Federal Reserve" sense of bank. Is it intended that the English "Bank" page would have multiple translation tables for the different word senses? Is there a good canonical example of a word with multiple senses with multiple foreign language translations? Thanks. johnfbremerjr 11:11 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Look at run for an example, with thousands of senses. The idea is that each translation table has a "gloss" that is uniquely identifiable as one of the definitions. It is important to use the same words as the definitions, as then the automatic parsers can match the translation to the definition. Conrad.Irwin 19:19, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Okay, run was a good example. I added a couple of Italian translations for noun senses and for ski run. It seems a little inconsistent that the multiword terms link to their own pages which contain the translations, while the translations for the different single word senses are listed on the main page and referenced by sense number in the translations. Wouldn't it make more sense for each sense to each link to an individual page that contains the translation and more examples. For a word like run if you've got 50 senses each with gloss translations for 50 languages all on one page you're going to have a really big page! johnfbremerjr 11:43 28 December 2007 (UTC)

In many ways, I think it would - however I don't think many people agree. It brings a lot of extra complication. Conrad.Irwin 12:29, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

When searching for a word not yet in Wiktionary, a grid is presented, with options for different categories of word (noun, adjective etc). Clicking on the noun button provides instructions so that one knows what one is doing, while selecting adjective does not. Is there a reason for this inconsistency? --Seans Potato Business 20:10, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Laziness. I did template:new en noun intro but asked for comments/correction and never got any feedback at all, so consequently I remained lazy and never continued with the rest of them. --Connel MacKenzie 21:04, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, the only feedback I can give is that if I had decided that the phrase I wanted to define was a noun, it would have been very helpful. Actually, the explanation convinced me that it was an adjective that I was trying to define. I think it would be very useful for newbies such as myself, not used to being confronted with these templates and things in curly brackets and not knowing what to replace with what, if they were all completed. I bet some people give up before submitting their definition or a best submit a malformed entry. --Seans Potato Business 21:22, 31 December 2007 (UTC)