Wiktionary talk:Sysop deleted

Well, the 'namespaces' thing failed again...so deletions will certainly be increasing again. May as well have a cleaner way of "helping" people. --Connel MacKenzie 18:52, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Why

So what's the best way for me to find out why an entry I wrote, and it's talk page, were deleted? It was Winchell Mathiastck 18:50, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

The deletion log says "use limited to Heinlein". If you doubt that you can request to have it restored at WT:RFD. DAVilla 06:02, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Why limit? Soannello (talk) 15:34, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

Grammar

Article has "criteria is held"; should be, I suppose, "criteria are held". Equinox 22:02, 22 September 2008 (UTC).

I suggest the start of "5. Unlike Wikipedia, we do not use redirects almost at all." should be reworded as: "5. Unlike Wikipedia, we almost never use redirects.". Trafford09 12:00, 20 January 2009 (UTC).

Re: Some people think this is Wikipedia. But it is not. Therefore, do not enter redirects.

Well, if I find a misspelling, I can create the new (correctly spelled) page, but I can't remove the old (misspelled) one. Making the old page a redirect to the new one seems to be the best course of action, pending a deletion by somebody with those rights. In other words, redirects could be entered without the user believing this to be Wikipedia.

I therefore request this language be improved. Reason: It is condescending towards new users.

Also, if this were Wikipedia, I would have slapped a {weasel} tag on the sloppy usage of "Some people think"... ;-)

85.227.226.177 17:04, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Firstly, you can move the page (you do have to be a logged in user). That will leave a redirect, that will be eventually cleaned up. Or you can create the new page and tag the incorrect one for deletion ({{delete}} or {{speedy}} if you are from WP ;-).

And this is not wikipedia. However, some people do think it is, even when reminded. Robert Ullmann 17:11, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Wrong word

In this entry, 'tantamount' (meaning 'effectively equivalent') is used instead of the correct 'paramount'. — This unsigned comment was added by 207.133.71.241 (talk) at 15:26, 5 November 2009 (UTC).

Good catch, thanks! —Ruakh_TALK 15:55, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Capitalization redirects, or capitalization redirects

Re capitalization redirects, point 8 says: "Generally, these are all deleted as they are found." Is this still true/policy/procedure? Wiktionary:Redirections#Redirecting between lowercase and uppercase words says if you enter a word starting with an uppercase letter in the searchbox, the software will automatically convert it. This is true, but the software does NOT convert case from links. Clicking the example of Work takes you to a page saying "Wiktionary does not yet have an entry for Work" and asks "Did you mean work?

Should the "Wiktionary does not yet have an entry for ..." pages template be changed to also say "If an incorrectly capitalised red link brought you to this page, please go back and fix that link to (in this example) work, thank you."?? Thanks, -- Bricaniwi 14:40, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

categorization

This page is uncategorized. Is it intentional?--Diuturno 11:34, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

I don't think it really needs a category, as people mainly find it in the recent changes. However, what category would we use? Mglovesfun (talk) 11:39, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

I dont know, maybe Category:Wiktionary policies --Diuturno 11:44, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

This page has several problems. Is not categorized and does not state in the lead its legimacy status, if its a policy, a guideline, and which discussions and votes approved it. In this case the page is just a draft and was never legitimized by a vote/discussion.--ShedCorner 23:50, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

It is neither a policy nor a guideline. It has no normative component. Rather, it is strictly informative, seeking to help readers understand why a given entry was deleted. (One may doubt how successful it is, however.) —Ruakh_TALK 15:40, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

hey

i got linked here from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voulez-vous_coucher_avec_moi%3F but because someone delted it i cannot find out what 'se coucher' means even though the link is there

Redirect issue

"Since we include all words in all languages, a redirect is very rarely appropriate, as the word probably exists with that spelling in another language."

This line should be stricken. It is very rarely the case that a misspelling redirect is a spelling in another language, and furthermore it is never the case that in such a circumstance, converting the redirect into a dictionary definition entry is ever seen as worthy of controversy. Besides, it has nothing to do with the main point.

"If a redirect [from a misspelling] is in place, the reader is unlikely to realize they spelled the word wrong."

This is the real issue the anti-redirect policy is trying to address. I wish Wiktionary would move away from the general attitude that redirects are bad, to a case-by-case analysis. In these situations, redirects are not appropriate. In these other situations, redirects are appropriate.

Having said that, I see no issue with Wiktionary having spelling suggestion pages in the future. --Bxj 11:48, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

WT:REDIR addresses this, but you're right to say that text isn't quite spot on. --Mglovesfun (talk) 11:52, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Furthermore I was under the impression that the main reason separate articles were preferred to prevent Americans and Britons from bickering. I see this as a highly unlikely situation, and even in this case, I still see redirect contributions as being more valuable than redirect deletion notice page. Terrible from a contributor-friendliness perspective, for no value at that. --Bxj 12:01, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

No, it's becaus we include all words in all languages, British and American spellings are all words. --Mglovesfun (talk) 12:06, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Typo

Please add the word "exist" after "may" in this clause: "the word may with that spelling in another language". Thanks. Graham87 03:48, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Fixed, thanks! —Ruakh_TALK 23:28, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Proposal: mandatory notification

A proposal that affects this process has been initiated at Wiktionary talk:Page deletion guidelines#Proposal: mandatory notification.   — C M B J   08:41, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Tosh?

Sometimes I see "tosh" in deletion log summaries, as in this deletion log entry for irony board. What does this mean? If possible, post this info in the appropriate section. Also contact me on my user talk. 108.216.28.198 00:39, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

It means balderdash. —Stephen ^(Talk) 01:12, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

See tosh. DCDuring TALK 02:05, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

And as used in deletion summaries? This is not my last name (talk) 12:22, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

In deletion summaries it means the entry was balderdash. —Stephen ^(Talk) 22:28, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

I'm assuming fatuous entries. Is this accurate? This is not my last name (talk) 14:18, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Silly nonsense. Twaddle. Have you tried looking up tosh? —Stephen ^(Talk) 03:29, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Edit request

Add "for example" before "iwb7,,r vb6ubƷ eww+teg3 yueЏvthgv31v.3fvmos7?". Johnny Shiz (talk) 01:29, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

Pinging @SemperBlotto. Johnny Shiz (talk) 21:50, 27 February 2019 (UTC)