Last modified on 7 November 2011, at 14:21

User talk:Kinamand

Return to the user page of "Kinamand".

WelcomeEdit

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wiktionary. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:


I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wiktionarian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk (discussion) and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~, which automatically produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to one of the discussion rooms or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! --Ivan Štambuk 09:50, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Template interwikiEdit

Hi,

[1] - template interwiki must not be on the template page itself, but e.g. on the talk page, or any of subpages whence it can be transcluded, like they do it on WP. --Ivan Štambuk 09:50, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi Ivan Why? Can you give me a reason for that or some policy? I don't understand what you mean with any of subpages whence it can be transcluded. You mean wiktionary should follow WP standard but can you give example from wikipedia? When I look at Template:Age on wikipedia I see interwiki link on the template page not on the discussion page. Kinamand 06:59, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Actually you see it transcluded from w:Template:Age/doc. And why are they're not kept on the template page itself? Probably due to some performance reasons. I'm not familiar with the details, just telling you about the policy ^_^ --Ivan Štambuk 07:11, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
I now understand what you mean about transcluded :-) Where can I find the policy which says that it has to be done like that here on wiktionary? Do you know a template here on wiktionary with interwiki links in a subpage? Kinamand 07:23, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
I can find a lot templates with /doc but none has interwiki on it :/ Well, I suggest you put in on the talk page instead. I don't know if that policy has been written somewhere, but if you're really eager to know why exactly is interwiki forbidden on the templates, drop Robert a note a I'm sure you'll get a satisfying answer :) --Ivan Štambuk 07:43, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
If it is not written anywhere it is not a policy ;-) The reason for WP putting interwiki on a /doc page is because the Template is protected for writing but the stroke_order template here in wiktionary is not protected so no reason to have a /doc page. Kinamand 09:49, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
There are lots of policies that are not formally written (in any project and any community anywhere, on-line or not). If you want us to write it down, fine (see [2] ;-). But you have been told more than once, and reverted more than once, and yet you persist in re-adding it? This is not acceptable behavior. You might consider this a block warning; if you add other iwikis to templates I won't bother with further discussion. The concern is that you repeatedly do something you are told not to do.
The /doc subpages are not used on WP so that templates can be protected, they are used so that the s/w does not have to parse out a large noiclude block on every single template use; and so that edits to the doc (including iwikis) do not cause a purge and re-rendering of every single page on which the template is used. We use the talk pages in the same way, but do not transclude them into the template page. It also has the beneficial effect of allowing interwikis to be added without editing protected pages.
{{stroke order}} (note, this automatically points to the doc, not the template, eh?) is now protected. You are welcome to add an iwiki to the talk page. Robert Ullmann 11:26, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
If you want people to follow policies then you of cause should write them down in a central location. That also makes it possible for people to ask questions about policies which for example can improve policies and help change policies which are wrong. We can learn from each other instead of all knowledge is in your head. I have only made revert when I has not given what I considered valid reason for removing the info I had added in the first place. I have all the time been adding useful information for good reason! As I see it instead of removing my link you should have move it to the talkpage if that is the right place to put it. Kinamand 12:02, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

āEdit

no, no ... The Pinyin heading is more for "readings" where we don't (yet) have a fuller entry; A-cai provided the full text for the interjection, please don't remove things like that.

Most will always remain just with the Pinyin header (although that is likely to end up as Syllable or somethings at some point. BUt where we have more content we want to keep it! Robert Ullmann 12:42, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

I did pick some articles at random and did think that it was ā which was not following the standard and I did just think that the full text for the interjecton is a copy of the content of so people can just read it at 啊 but ofcause the information can be both places. Kinamand 13:49, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Hanzi sectionEdit

(In reply to User_talk:Krun#Hanzi_section)

Well, the Hanzi section did contain a reading that you did not include. I don't think this reading (shào) is used for the adjective, and is probably restricted to certain compounds. This Hanzi section should serve as a general, yet Mandarin-specific, information section listing all possible readings of a character in Mandarin, in addition to containing the Compounds section. It should work quite similarly to the Japanese Kanji section, which you can see on that very same page. – Krun 11:43, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

I did check in several dictionaries and did not find shào anywhere so I assume that it must be a mistake. What is the source for your information? As far as I can see the hanzi is like the pinyin section in pinyin entries meaning something which is there untill full entry is available. When the full entry is available there are no need for the hanzi section. Kinamand 12:20, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
Btw the grade 1 kanji thing sound like some description of the character and not about the japanese language. In that case it should probably be moved to the translingual section. But I am not expert on japanese. Kinamand 12:30, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
The "grade 1 kanji thing" is indeed about the character, but is specific to the language, and goes in the language section Robert Ullmann 17:39, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

The Hanzi section is required in every entry with a Mandarin language section. (Likewise Japanese/Kanji, etc.). The entry is documenting the character both as a character (with all readings and a list of compounds) and as a word or words, with part of speech, definitions, derived terms, etc.

Please replace any Hanzi sections you may have removed, else someone else will have to laboriously research what you have removed and restore it (hopefully looking in the page history for the original entry ;-) Robert Ullmann 17:37, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

da-noun-infl-baseEdit

Hej. Du har ændret "Number" til "Noun". "Number", som ikke burde have været med stort, refererede til singular vs. plural, så det var ikke en fejl. Hvis du mener at det er bedre med en generel overskrift, er det fint med mig.

Jeg besvarede dit spørgsmål på min diskussionsside. – Leo Laursen – (talk · contribs) 12:18, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Jeg har, forsøgsvist, rettet til {{number}}, for at få konsistens i kolonnen. Hvis du føler stærkt for det, vil jeg ikke modsætte mig at du retter det tilbage til "Noun". – Leo Laursen – (talk · contribs) 14:17, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
Jeg synes ikke det giver mening at skrive number for dels behøver singular og plural ikke en overskrift da de forklarer sig selv og dels er det ikke oplagt at en cell øverst til venstre skulle referere til overskrifterne til højre for den. Cellen kunne ligeså godt referere til cellerne under den. Det er derfor efter min mening bedst at bruge den til general infomation. En anden ting ved bøjningstabellen er at den indeholder nominativ/dativ/akkusativ som altid er det samme på dansk. Ville det ikke være bedre at bruge den samme tabel som norsk se fx bog? Kinamand 15:18, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
  1. Det giver mening for mig at mig, og det giver den information at vi ikke har dualis og trialis på dansk.
  2. Det er de tider vi har på dansk, og det giver den information som du selv nævner.
Men jeg så gerne at det kom et mere standardiseret format for bøjnings tabeller, og det har været oppe at vende, så foreløbig har jeg valgt at se tiden an. – Leo Laursen – (talk · contribs) 18:10, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
Jeg så også gerne at der kom et standardiseret format for bøjningstabeller. Som det er nu med bøjningstabeller i forskellige farver og nogle højrestillet og andre ikke giver det et temmeligt rodet indtryk. Kinamand 18:55, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

hydrateEdit

Hi there. Can you add the Danish translation of hydrate please? Thanks, Razorflame 07:15, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Done :-) Kinamand 08:01, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks :) Razorflame 08:02, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Vote on formatting of etymologiesEdit

There is the vote Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2011-02/Deprecating less-than symbol in etymologies, which would benefit from your participation, even if only in the role of an abstainer. Right now, the results of the vote do not quite mirror the results of the poll that has preceded the vote. There is a chance that the vote will not pass. The vote, which I thought would be a mere formality, has turned out to be a real issue. You have taken part on the poll that preceded the vote, which is why I have sent you this notification. --Dan Polansky 17:56, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

snoeEdit

Hello Kinamand. Could you please create a Danish entry for snoe? Google Translate translates it to twine, whereas our entry for the English noun sny³ glosses it with "to twist"; it is conceivable that both senses are related. Could you clarify the issue, perchance? Thanks in advance. — Raifʻhār Doremítzwr ~ (U · T · C) ~ 12:54, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

I have now created the entry snor. The word snoe does not exists in Danish but maybe you where thinking about the Danish verb sno? Kinamand 14:06, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
OK, thanks. What does the Danish verb sno mean? We only have a Swedish entry for that spelling. — Raifʻhār Doremítzwr ~ (U · T · C) ~ 14:21, 7 November 2011 (UTC)