User talk:AryamanA/2018

*táwkma

Hey, just a few comments on *táwkma: 1. It's a confusing stem, but *táwkma is the nom.sg. not **táwkman, 2. if you copy the descendents from the PIE entry, please use {{see desc}} on said entry, 3. I think the etymologies are much improved if you list the full etymology, when you can, instead of simply using |alt= to the root, and please also add {{PIE root}} when appropriate, 4. Parthian comes before Old Persian, as the "old" is ignored. If you have any thoughts to the contrary, please let me know. Thanks! --Victar (talk) 07:32, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

@Victar: Sorry about that, in hindsight those are very obvious mistakes. Thank for fixing the entry. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 14:36, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

Oh, no worries. Just trying to make the PII entries even better. Thanks! --Victar (talk) 15:43, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

@Victar: Would that not be *táwkmā instead? The noun is masculine in Skt, Avestan and OP. The nom. sg forms are तोक्मा (tokmā), 𐬙𐬀𐬊𐬑𐬨𐬁 (taoxmā) and 𐎫𐎢𐎶𐎠 (taumā) respectively. -- माधवपंडित (talk) 01:09, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

@माधवपंडित: I (and you) moved it, but I think that might be was a mistake now, which is why I slowed my roll. According to Mayrhofer, the Avestan is neut. and the OP a fem. derivative. Monier says the Sanskrit is masc., but the nom.sg. looks to be tokma, not tokmā. Also, if it was a masc. mā-stem, you would expect the accent to be the on suffix, not the root, as you see with neut. ma-stems. --Victar (talk) 02:03, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

Then, again, Mayrhofer could be wrong. The Kurdish looks to be masc. Also, there might have been some confusion with the word for power. --Victar (talk) 02:22, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

@Victar: I see now. It had occurred to me that the ending should be *-mā́ but I ignored in favor of what I thought was apparent: all three major descendants are masculine and are declined with an ā. No idea why the masculine declension of तोक्मन् (tokman) is तोक्म (tokma) but it is. After we are sure about the OP and Avestan forms, it's your call. -- माधवपंडित (talk) 02:37, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

@माधवपंडित: Monier-Williams claims that the masc. is a derivative of an earlier neut. --Victar (talk) 06:16, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

دخالت ممنوع

از اینکه بر صفحه بحث و گفتگوی من "دخالت" میکنید، آزرده ام. خواهشمندم که دیگر بر صفحه بحث من دخالت نکنید رفتار هر کس بیانگر شخصیت و تربیت پدر و مادر اوست Ariamihr (talk) 19:10, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

@Ariamihr: You shouldn't remove stuff like that. JohnC5 had a legitimate question. And no need to talk about my parents. (btw بیت is missing an entry). —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 01:14, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

@Ariamihr:: Your user talk page doesn't really belong to you, it's for communicating with other editors. You can back it up and then remove the contents, if you wish. Your behaviour is strange, at least, considering that people haven't treated you badly. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 02:04, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

I had a go at the entry you wanted created. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 04:31, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

استرجع کنندہ

آداب محترم آریامن صاحب!

انگریزی ویکی لغت پر استرجع کنندہ یعنی رول بیکر بننے کا کیا طریقہ کار ہے؟ BukhariSaeed (talk) 04:46, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

@BukhariSaeed: آداب! رول بیکر تخریب کاری کو ایک ہی کلک میں ونڈو کر سکتا ہے۔ —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 15:05, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

محترم مجھے اس اختیار کا علم ہے اردو ویکیپیڈیا، ویکی ڈیٹا اور کامنز پر میں استرجع کنندہ ہوں مگر یہاں کہاں درخواست دیتے ہیں اس سے لا علم کرپیہ آپ مجھے بتا دیجیے۔BukhariSaeed (talk) 15:38, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

@BukhariSaeed: مجھے معاف کریں جناب، میرے لئے اردو پڑھنا مشکل ہے. استرجع کنندہ بننے کے لئے کسی منتظمین کو آپکو WT:Whitelist پر نامزد کرنا ہوگا. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 02:18, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Shiva

Hi,

can you fix ur:Shiva on urwiktionary? i don't know how to translate these words (module name?)BukhariSaeed (talk) 06:18, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

@BukhariSaeed: I see you fixed it :) I also made hi:Shiva and imported the modules to hiwiktionary like you did. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 02:49, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

I am talking about the categories, وہ سب انگریزی میں ہیں ان کو کس ماڈیول سے ترجمہ کیا جاتا ہے؟ BukhariSaeed (talk) 03:23, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

@BukhariSaeed: Oh, ur:Module:etymology. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 13:31, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

ur:शिव, same problem with category. محترم اب یہ کس ماڈیول سے ہوگا؟ـ BukhariSaeed (talk) 07:14, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

and what about Terms derived from शिव? translation module.BukhariSaeed (talk) 07:15, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

@BukhariSaeed: میں آپکی بات سمجھا نہیں جناب... سب ٹھیک لگ رہا ہے. شاید Module:sa-translit؟ —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 03:18, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

وہ سب ایک اردو ویکیپیڈیا کے یوزر نے ٹھیک کر دیا تھا۔ شما کریں کہ آپ کو تکلیف دیBukhariSaeed (talk) 04:26, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

بابو

بابو. BukhariSaeed (talk) 14:46, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

@BukhariSaeed: [1] میں نے اس لغت کا استعمال کیا۔ —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 15:25, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

آپ کی لغت بظاہر معتبر لگ رہی ہے ممکن ہے کہ میں غلط ہوں۔ رہنمائی کرنے کا شکریہ :) BukhariSaeed (talk) 16:07, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Plural on urwiktionary

آداب! محترم وزراء الخارجية میں ”جمع کا وَزِير الخَارِجِيَّة“ لکھا آ رہا ہے اور ماڈیول کی بناوٹ بھی انگریزی ویکشنری کے حساب سے ہے اسی وجہ سے ایسا ہو رہا ہے۔ تو کیا آپ اس ماڈیول کو درست کردیں گے؟ ویسے اسے "جمع کا وَزِير الخَارِجِيَّة" نہیں بلکہ "{وَزِير الخَارِجِيَّة کی جمع}" ہونا چاہیے تھا۔ BukhariSaeed (talk) 11:41، 13 جنوری 2018 (UTC)

"وُزَرَاء الخَارِجِيَّة (نقل حرفی درکار ہے) مذکر pl"

اس "pl" کو بھی "جمع" کر دیجیے گا BukhariSaeed (talk) 11:51, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

@BukhariSaeed: آداب! میں نے ماڈیول کو درست کر دیا ہے۔

—Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 15:24, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

محترم شکریہ!

اور وہ pl درست نہیں ہو پایا؟ BukhariSaeed (talk) 15:27, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

pl درست ہوگیا

اور آپ نے کوما بھی درست کردیا اب بس واوین (") درست کردیجیے وہاں اردو وکشنری پر بھی کہا ہے آپ سے :)

BukhariSaeed (talk) 16:05, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

جناب شکریہ میں نے اردو کے Module:links سے خود ہی درستی کر لی واوین کی درستی کرلی :)--BukhariSaeed (talk) 16:49, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

@BukhariSaeed: کوئی بات نہیں جناب، اگر کوئی اور مدد کی ضرورت پڑے تو ضرور پوچھیں۔

—Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 18:09, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

عادت

Someone added descendants here, I removed them as a couple were wrong and there appeared to be problems with their other edits but that was a bit hasty as it does seem as though the Hindi and Urdu sections were right. Could you check if it is now correct, please? Thanks. Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 15:50, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

@Kaixinguo~enwiktionary: They're correct. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 16:15, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 16:20, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

دعای ربانی - a favour

Sorry to bother you again, please could you just delete this, I will re-create immediately. Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 16:59, 13 January 2018 (UTC) I made a really bad mistake by copy and pasting. Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 16:59, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

@Kaixinguo~enwiktionary: Sure, no problem, it's deleted. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 17:03, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks so much :) What happened is, I wanted to make the image larger because you need to be able to see the writing so I went to the first page I thought of which has a big image and copied from there. Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 17:17, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

بپتسمہ

بپتسمہ میں میں نے مثال شامل کی ہے مگر مثال میں اردو الفاظ جلی حروف میں نہیں دکھائی دے رہے؟---BukhariSaeed (talk) 18:21, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Urdu Transliteration

Can you please make Module:ur-translit for auto transliteration like Module:hi-translit? BukhariSaeed (talk) 09:55, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

@BukhariSaeed: Unfortunately, it’s not possible for languages such as Urdu or Persian. They are only partially phonetic. The Arabic module only works with fully vocalised Arabic in about 95% of cases.Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 10:41, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

@Atitarev: Urdu can be vocalized too, even though it usually isn't here (which I find pretty strange, since it's useful to have that in a dictionary). I can try to make such a module. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 11:28, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

It's no use since there is no practice to FULLY vocalise Urdu texts, even in dictionaries, let alone finding vocalised texts. Occasional symbols are used to make the reading easier. It doesn't hurt to experiment, though. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 11:32, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

Urdu can be vocalized too, even though it usually isn't here (which I find pretty strange, since it's useful to have that in a dictionary). I can try to make such a module.

محترم بہت خوب امید ہے کہ آپ کامیاب ہوں BukhariSaeed (talk) 14:19, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

@BukhariSaeed: Good luck, you can probably use Module:fa-translit as a base for Module:ur-translit, it will require other parts to exist as well - Module:ur-translit/documentation, Module:ur-translit/testcases, Module:ur-translit/testcases/documentation. You need to assess, if it's all feasible to transliterate a vocalised Urdu unambigously and accurately. Note that if you want to distinguish pairs i/e, ē/ī, o/u, ō/ū, it may not be possible. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 05:33, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Something about linking Hindi to Persian that's been on my mind

Hello AryamanA, it occurs to me there is an issue with the way that Persian and Hindi and Urdu are linked at the moment. When a Hindi word is mentioned as being from Persian it is the Tehran or kind of standard modern Iranian pronunciation (terminology?) that the Romanisation reflects. Good examples aren't coming to mind right now, but as a recent example کتاب مقدس, the pronunciation was probably closer to 'kitab' than 'ketab', 'bach[ch]a' rather than 'bach[ch]e' etc. (as I'm absolutely positive you know). In the earlier days of editing, I supposed it was hoped that some editors speaking Dari Persian (especially native speakers), would appear and formulate their own Romanisation system, add entries and so on, but for some reason it has never happened. I wonder if an intermediate solution is to link to the words without a transliteration? There does need to be a system of showing two transliterations, one Iranian and one from Afghanistan and there are a handful of entries which are Afghanistan-only where I haven't put a transliteration as to put the Iranian one and have it there alone would be wrong. Anyway, it's just a point that I have been thinking about. Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 12:10, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

Also, I thought I was online maybe a few weeks ago and someone (I thought it was you?) put an etymology section referring to a Tajiki entry as being 'from' Persian. I looked back through your entries but I couldn't find the edit (maybe it wasn't you?). Anyway, I would view that as incorrect. Thank you. Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 12:15, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

Incidentally, that is why I think the use of the new synonyms template and change of location is not suitable for Persian. When, in the future, there willbe two transliterations for Persian entries, it will be very long to have synonyms under each line like that. I mean something like, بچه ^{bačče Iran bačča Afghanistan}. That would make more sense for the Hindi entries as well. Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 12:21, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

@Kaixinguo~enwiktionary: Hindi and Urdu tended to borrow from Classical Persian (which is closer to Dari, you're right), so I have been trying to change {{bor|hi/ur|fa}} to {{bor|hi/ur|fa-cls}}, but I don't have any good Classical Persian resources. Also, why not something like بچه (I. bačče, A. bačča)? And something similar for headwords.

Yeah, that was probably me for Tajik, I may have misunderstood the relation between it and Persian. Tajik is descended from Classical Persian, though, is it not? —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 13:15, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

一人得道，雞犬升天

Why the quotation marks here? ---> Tooironic (talk) 05:11, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

@Tooironic: No reason really, I removed them. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 16:42, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

Hindi usage

Urdu speaking Christians use مقدس and مقدسہ for their saints and what is the hindi speaking Christians usage? — Bukhari (Talk!) 15:49, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

@BukhariSaeed: संत (sant) I think. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 16:42, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

In urdu سَنْت (sant) is used for Hindu & Sikh saints, ولی (wali) for Muslim saints and مقدس (muqaddas) for Christian saints (e.g. Saint Luke, in urdu مقدس لوقا {muqaddas luka}). Aryaman are you sure there is no specific word for Christian saints in Hindi? — Bukhari (Talk!) 16:50, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

@BukhariSaeed: I'm not really sure. I've also seen सेंट (sẽṭ), and the Hindi translation of the Bible uses पवित्र जन (pavitra jan, “holy person”), but I've never heard anyone say that. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 16:53, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

ok :( — Bukhari (Talk!) 17:01, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

@BukhariSaeed: Sorry :( —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 02:13, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

बाटना

In moving बाटना, a broken redirect was left at बटाना, which was linked to from this page, which I bypassed in this diff; can you check that my edit was correct, or edit the page to whatever it should be linking to? - -sche (discuss) 23:52, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

@-sche: It wasn't correct, but it's my fault for not fixing up my mess. It's kind of complicated, I've fixed all of the pages. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 00:22, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, for that and for fixing बटाना too! :) - -sche (discuss) 01:44, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

विकिपीडिया

I'm not sure about this sentence. How would you write it in Hindi:

(You might be interested in the Hindi language Wikipedia.)

Is this correct?: आपको हिन्दी विकिपीडिया में रुचि हो सकती है। —Stephen ^(Talk) 03:05, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

@Stephen G. Brown: Not exactly, that says "You can/might be interested in Hindi Wikipedia". It's also a bit formal. Here are two possible translations (the first one is less formal):

शायद आप हिंदी विकिपीडिया में दिलचस्पी रखेंगे।

śāyad āp hindī vikipīḍiyā mẽ dilcaspī rakheṅge.

कदाचित आपको हिंदी विकिपीडिया में अभिरुचि होगी।

kadācit āpko hindī vikipīḍiyā mẽ abhiruci hogī.

—Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 11:31, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, Aryaman. —Stephen ^(Talk) 12:16, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Padmavati

Might as well in the spirit of the times right? 1 has a grammar of the Awadhi in the Padmavati, with a translation, and then much much more if you're interested. We can also use this to see what we want to do with Old and Modern Awadhi. DerekWinters (talk) 06:08, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

@DerekWinters: Great find! Hopefully we won't have to censor any quotations lol. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 15:26, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

---

انگریزی ویکیپیڈیا منتظم

نمستے!آریامن صاحب آپ کسی ایسے صارف (یوزر) کو جانتے ہیں جو یہ سرگرم ہے اور وہ انگریزی ویکیپیڈیا پر منتظم (ایڈمن) ہے۔ — Bukhari (Talk!) 15:20, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

@BukhariSaeed: سلام! مجھے معاف کریں جناب، میں انگریزی وکیپیڈیا پر بہت کم لوگ جانتا ہوں. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 20:20, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

جی کوئی بات نہیں :) — Bukhari (Talk!) 02:30, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Proto Indo Aryan lemmas

I can't tell what these recent entries are about. Excepting dʰr̥ẓḍʰás most of these (like ćʰoṭṭas) seem to be actually Proto Middle-Indo-Aryan or Proto Prakritic or something like that. Its not just because they lack a sanskrit word but rather the form and the shape is similar to the simplified and corrupted words that exist in Prakrits. You see , sanskrit words are rather complicated, reflecting earlier Indo-aryan and Indo-european words. Proto Indo Aryan is more archaic than even Sanskrit so it does not make much sense to haev words which are obviously corrupted later forms and label them as Proto Indo Aryan words. And why would you create bāppas when all dictionaries agree that Sanskrit वप्ता has given rise to these words? Regards — This unsigned comment was added by 2405:204:9387:6B0C:0:0:D9F:28AC (talk).

@2405:204:9387:6B0C:0:0:D9F:28AC: You are right, this has bothers me too. The problem is that we cannot trace back stuff like to the actual Proto-Indo-Aryan form. It could be *kṣotras, ṭṣotras, gẓʰotras, kṣoṣṭʰás, etc. and we don't know which one because we don't have the Sanskrit. Maybe we should add {{lb|inc-pro|Middle Indo-Aryan}} to the entries, or make a separate code for "Proto-Middle Indo-Aryan". @माधवपंडित.

वप्तृ (vaptṛ) can't be the ancestor, that would yield Prakrit vappa or vappu, the त (ta) would be lost.

Also, I've seen you before right? You should make an account man, you could really help out with the sorry state of Indo-Aryan languages here. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 02:06, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, @AryamanA. Yes, I was around briefly in September and a bunch of times before that.

You see, I hesitated to join because I don't want an issue of sock puppetry or spam to be created since I and User:माधवपंडित share a residence for most days of a week (we're siblings). I mostly edit wikipedia as an IP and obviously he's into this more than I am, my interest is strictly dictionary, he's more for etymology, proto Indo european and stuff like that which is why he joined and I edited sporadically anonymously.

I think that "vaptā/vaptr" can fit because the descendants seem to fit: like you said the t was lost, and no modern language shows the t. Some other example I've compiled include:

Skt. argha -> Pkt. aggha -> Hi. āgh

Skt. abhra -> Pkt. abbha -> Hi. ābh

Skt. garbha -> Pkt. gabbha -> Hi. gābh.

Similary, Skt. vaptar -> Pkt. vappa -> Hi. bāp.

Let me know what you feel. Regards again.

@CueIn: Oh, I feel so stupid, I absolutely misinterpreted that. Yeah, वप्तृ (vaptṛ) is a perfect fit. It's strange that {{R:CDIAL}} and {{R:hi:McGregor}} don't mention it all though. The short a is kind of a problem, since we have Punjabi ਬਾਪ (bāp) instead of the expected ਬੱਪ (bappa) (Punjabi preserves consonant clusters). Still, I think it could work.

Thanks for making an account! Generally, if you tell that you are on a shared IP then there's no reason to fear blocking. Wiktionary is very lenient with sockpuppets anyways, as long as you don't use them maliciously. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 04:39, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

I was definitely giving *ćʰoṭṭas the stink-eye. --Victar (talk) 06:01, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

@Victar: So is "Proto Middle Indo-Aryan" the way to go? It's better to not introduce false accuracy by reconstructing *kṣotras, as the Proto-Indo-Aryan may have been. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 06:45, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

I would like it if we had a code for "Proto-Prakrit" (essentially the same as "Proto-Middle-Indo-Aryan") and put *ćʰoṭṭas, *kuttas, *cauḍas (“wide”) under it. Kind of how we have Proto-Sogdic, Proto Armenian etc. Although wiktionary may turn out to be the only place that has "Proto-Prakrit/Proto-Middle-Indo-Aryan", we can be more accurate and save Proto-Indo-Aryan for actual PIA words like *pHtā́, *śwā́ etc. -- माधवपंडित (talk) 08:15, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

"Proto-Prakrit" is a better name since "Proto-Middle-Indo-Aryan" is too long. Perhaps all the Turner and other DSAL reconstructions can be given entries under "Proto-Prakrit/Proto-Middle-Indo-Aryan". "Wiktionary turning out to be the only place that has "Proto-Prakrit" is a troublesome thought, but better for accuracy. So perhaps trees would have the hierarchy:

Indo-European [Term?]

Proto-Indo-Iranian [Term?]

Proto-Indo-Aryan [Term?]

Sanskrit [Term?]

"Proto-Prakrit/Proto-Middle-Indo-Aryan" [Term?]

Prakrits [Term?]

Kutchkutch (talk) 09:27, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

@AryamanA, can your reverse engineer *ćʰoṭṭas to a PIA word? If so, I'd say just move that there and and have *ćʰoṭṭas be labeled a descendant. I don't mess with anything past PIA, but if Proto-Prakrit is attested in the literature, you can make a case to @-sche on it for a code. --Victar (talk) 15:08, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

@Victar: Prakrit simplifies clusters too much, it's just not possible to project backwards to PIA. I made the code pra-pro myself, since it's non-controversial and we already have pra for Prakrit. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 16:25, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

The point is that there are many PIA forms which this Proto-Prakrit term could have derived from and we definitely do not want to get speculative, especially with titles of pages in the reconstruction namespace. A Middle Indo-Aryan word need not necessarily have a PIA/Sanskrit/IIR etymon; innovations are found at every stage of language development. *ćʰoṭṭas may be such a word with no real PIA origin. -- माधवपंडित (talk) 16:15, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

@AryamanA, you should really run new codes by the Beer Parlour first, regardless of whether they're disputed or not. --Victar (talk) 16:34, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

@Victar: Yeah, you're right. I've made a discussion and pinged some people. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 16:49, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the analysis, @AryamanA. There are two possible explanations for Punjabi, firstly, it may be from Hindi, or this may be a legit PIA lemma. Hindi Sabasagara (the one which you introduced me to several months ago at the discussion for भाथा) gives वप्तृ as the origin, but I now see that they have gotten etymologies wrong on other words so this may not be correct. CueIn (talk) 13:51, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

@CueIn: If we do move it to the Proto-Prakrit namespace then we can mention the possible Sanskrit Etymology there. Hindi Shabdsagar is generally okay, since it was actually written after Turner's CDIAL and so may rely on newer research. I wish we had better resources though, Turner's CDIAL is in need of an update.

@Kutchkutch, माधवपंडित: Looking at Google Books, Proto-Prakrit has been an idea since the 1960s, and many scholarly papers at least mention it. We wouldn't be the first to document it. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 14:47, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Wow! Does this mean we're going to get another new language? I sure am eager. -- माधवपंडित (talk) 16:15, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

घंटा

Hello User:AryamanA, I noticed that you reverted my edit to घंटा. If you look at any classic dictionary of Hindi-Urdu/Hindustani, the original spelling of the word in Urdu is گھنٹا, which is widely used. The spelling you reverted to is a modern Arabisation of the original spelling. This article actually does a good job of explaining why the alternate spelling گھنٹہ exists. In light of this information, I am going to restore the proper version of the article. If you are able to do so, I would also recommend moving گھنٹہ to گھنٹا so that گھنٹا is listed as the primary entry/spelling and گھنٹہ is listed as the alternate spelling. I hope this helps. With regards, Anupam (talk) 15:39, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

@Anupam: گھنٹہ has >500,000 hits on Google while گھنٹا has only 20,000. I agree گھنٹا is more true to the etymology, but since we are a descriptive dictionary we document what's currently in use, not what's "correct". So I will not move the form, even though I agree گھنٹا is more "correct". Also, classical dictionaries like Platts and Fallon are hugely unreliable since they rely on outdated scholarship. I used to refer to them a lot before, but I've seen now that their etymologies are usually very wrong and the definitions are imprecise. Modern dictionaries like [2] and [3] are much better. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 18:37, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

But we're not exactly a descriptive dictionary are we? That's why we keep the nuqta forms as the main lemma, even when nuqta-less forms are significantly more popular on the internet. DerekWinters (talk) 20:40, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your thoughtful reply User:AryamanA. What are your thoughts User:DerekWinters? I think that the original spelling گھنٹا should be the primary article title with the recentism گھنٹہ listed as an alternate spelling. I also agree that it is very important to keep the nuqta forms as the primary article title, despite the fact that many publications (though not all) carelessly omit them. With regards, Anupam (talk) 21:13, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

@DerekWinters: That's because it's not convenient to have add a nuqta using most input methods. There's also a problem with the chandrabindu; I just switched to Gboard for Android and it doesn't even have a button on the Devanagari keyboard for the chandrabindu. Whereas ا and ہ are both easy to type on Urdu keyboard.

The nuqta is also important because it reflects pronunciation. (I also think we should have vocalization for Urdu, but that's another topic)

@Anupam: Even if we restrict to news articles, there are 285 hits for گھنٹہ and only 4 (!!) for گھنٹا. This leads me to believe that this "recentism" has become firmly adopted into formal Standard Urdu. I will make a proper redirect page for گھنٹا though. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 22:14, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

However the same articles that have the nuqta (not necessarily thought of as such though) under ड and ढ omit it for Arabic/Persian terms as a choice. I'm fully in favor of having the nuqta for those lemmas, but I do think we're certainly not as descriptive as we like to seem. DerekWinters (talk) 23:43, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

@DerekWinters: Yeah, you're right I guess, non-nuqta spellings are used way more often. One idea is to move the nuqta entries to non-nuqta forms and have a |head= in the headword template. That would be a lot of work though. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 23:59, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

I think it is better to be only partially descriptive, otherwise all misspellings and grammatical errors would have to be accepted. The nuqta spellings are better. DerekWinters (talk) 00:02, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

The nuqta forms should remain. Removing the nuqta often changes the word as a whole. For example, ख़ाना means place while खाना means food. I hope this helps. With regards, Anupam (talk) 02:08, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

Our Chinese entries have the lemmas at the traditional spelling rather than the more common simplified one because it's much simpler to convert traditional to simplified than the other way around, which is the same idea as that behind choosing the nuqta spelling as lemma. A lemma is a theoretical construct used for convenience and to avoid problems with keeping separate entries in synch on a wiki. That's not the same as choosing a main vs. alternative form based on "correctness". As for misspellings: we do have entries for the common ones, and some that are sanctioned by usage are treated as the main form. Chuck Entz (talk) 05:23, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

EWDC #4

Hi! Here are your 10 random missing English words for this month.

• seckle, wolvers, ingram, minorship, blackgums, sharp elbows, rightos, backwork, reseau, plowback

Equinox ◑ 23:30, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Article

1 You might like this. This website also has many other Indian linguistics papers. Also check out shodhganga if you get the chance, they have a huge selection too. DerekWinters (talk) 19:10, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

@DerekWinters: Wow, that's really interesting stuff! Shodhganga looks neat too, since it has so many papers in Hindi (and other non-English languages) that are hard to find elsewhere. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 19:16, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

And this 2. @माधवपंडित as well. DerekWinters (talk) 20:18, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

@DerekWinters: Looks interesting, thanks! -- माधवपंडित (talk) 01:58, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Kachchi (and Sindhi)

@माधवपंडित The majority of sources indicate that a Vrachada (व्राचड) Apabhransha is the ancestor to Sindhi (and thus Kutchi). But some sources seem to say that व्राचड is from Paishachi prakrit. I don't know if we can find any material in Vrachada, and I think there's nothing extant in Paishachi. What do you think? DerekWinters (talk) 00:16, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

@DerekWinters: I think Paiśācī (and Avantī and Prācyā) probably deserves a code, but since we don't have any real corpus for it, I'm not sure if adding it as an ancestor of Sindhi is a good idea. Also Grierson says that Paiśācī existed parallel to Vrācaḍa, so the progression is unclear (but Grierson is also a very outdated resource).

About Vrācaḍa Apabhraṁśa, it definitely existed at some point so it deserves a code and should be marked as an ancestor of Sindhi et al. Probably inc-vra would be good.

On an unrelated note, I think the Eastern Hindi dialects actually arose from Ardhamāgadhī and not Māgadhī. The most obvious evidence is that Eastern Hindi lacks the merger of the sibilants to ś, it merges it to s like Ardhamagadhi. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 02:28, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

The ś may have also evolved into s after contact with Western languages, but that's only speculation, I have no time-frame to look at this from.

On an unrelated note, would it be fair, under चतुर्, for the cattāro prakrit forms to be descendants of the Ashokan prakrit term? DerekWinters (talk) 03:22, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Whoops, didn't look at your tag. DerekWinters (talk) 03:25, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

@DerekWinters: I doubt it since Old Awadhi didn't have ś either (but Bihari might, IDK). We'll see later.

The given Ashokan form is undoubtedly a northwestern dialect form (it has tp, the other dialects would have tt), but yeah it should be okay. Let's see what others have to say on the BP discussion before making it official though. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 03:27, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

That's true, and we can also reconstruct the other dialects, especially from evidence of phonological processes determined from other words. DerekWinters (talk) 03:29, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Also, we should make dialect-tagging (like in Coptic) mandatory with Ashokan Prakrit, even if the lemma is cited somewhere other than its main entry. DerekWinters (talk) 03:39, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

@DerekWinters: I agree. I already added dialect tags to all my earlier entries and made the labels as well as MOD:inc-ash:Dialects for {{alter}}. Check out CAT:Regional Ashokan Prakrit. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 03:40, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

MediaWiki

آدابمحترم پتا نہیں کیوں مگر انگریزی میڈیاویکی کی طرح اردو لغت کا میڈیاویکی نہیں بن پا رہا ہے۔ انگریزی میں ایک خاص قسم کا بوکس بن رہا ہے مگر وہ اردو میں نہیں بن رہا ایسا کیوں؟ — بخاری (گفتگو!) 12:26, 5 فروری 2018 (یو ٹی سی)

@BukhariSaeed: آداب. دیر لگانے کے لئے میں مافی مانگتا ہوں. میں میڈیاویکی کے بارے زیادہ کچھ جانتا نہیں، مگر WT:Grease pit لوگ ہونگے جو آپ کی مدد کر سکتے ہیں. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 17:34, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

کوئی بات نہیں ویسے بھی اب معاملہ سلجھ گیا ہے :) — Bukhari (Talk!) 17:39, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

@BukhariSaeed: بڑھیا! —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 17:41, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

तरकारी (tarkārī)

The author of the book I got it from learnt Hindi in Benares, so it may be dialectal: I do not know myself further than that.

The page in question: https://ibb.co/haAqLc

I think it is, I've never heard it before. Delhi dialect uses more Persian borrowings generally; even शाक (śāk) is rare, सब्ज़ी (sabzī) is by far the most common. The prestige dialect of Urdu is in fact the dialect of Delhi so that might have something to with the Persianization. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 22:30, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

The Bengali তরকারি (torkari) is quite common. DerekWinters (talk) 22:33, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

@DerekWinters: Dasa says Persian تره (tare) + -कारी (-kārī). —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 22:27, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Request for help (again)

Hello, sorry to bother you but could you possibly delete this edit of mine https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Wiktionary:Requests_for_verification/Non-English&diff=prev&oldid=48965095, and the following ones that show the same text? I would really appreciate it. I have also asked User:Chuck Entz. Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 14:37, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

@Kaixinguo~enwiktionary: Sure, no problem. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 14:40, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Thank you :) Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 14:50, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

69.179.11.140 (talk)

Has a couple of edits in Urdu and Sanskrit that need review if you don't mind. Thanks. Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 23:46, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

@Kaixinguo~enwiktionary: It's a sock of User:Gfarnab. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 14:43, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Need Help

Can you please help me in removing transliteration of Urdu, Persian & Arabic languages from Urdu Wiktionary? (e.g. ویکی‌پدیا نقل حرفی درکار ہے) — Bukhari (Talk!) 11:41, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

@BukhariSaeed: I'm not sure, I have the same problem on Hindi Wiktionary. You could ask at WT:Grease pit. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 11:22, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

@BukhariSaeed:: What do you mean by removing transliterations? In order to remove, it needs to be automated but it can't be automated for these languages. How do automatically transliterate ہمت? It can be "himmat, hemt, himt, hamt, hammit, humut, hamat", etc. There is no infrastructure for this to happen. As far as I am concerned, Urdu, Persian and Pashto will always require manual transliterations. Arabic is already automatically transliterated but only on fully vowelled forms and not in all cases but in about 95% of cases. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 11:32, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

@Atitarev: BukhariSaeed is talking about Urdu Wiktionary. The imported modules there cause Urdu entries to say "transliteration needed" but that shouldn't be necessary because it's the Urdu Wiktionary. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 11:34, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

دھنیہ واد محترم آریامن! — Bukhari (Talk!) 11:56, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Caodaism

Can you please tell me the name for Caodaism in Hindi? — Bukhari (Talk!)

@BukhariSaeed: I think काओडाइ धर्म (kāoḍāi dharm) or काओदाइ धर्म (kāodāi dharm). —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 11:26, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Thank you :) — Bukhari (Talk!) 11:56, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Niya Prakrit

This may interest you. DerekWinters (talk) 17:00, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

@DerekWinters: Great find! Nowadays Niya Prakrit is usually called "Gandhari" (pgd). —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 17:47, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

I'm fairly certain that Niya is in the Tarim basin, so wouldn't that not be Gandhari? DerekWinters (talk) 18:11, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

@DerekWinters: Oops, I was misled by [4]. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 22:52, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Interesting. I see that they're related, but I'm fairly certain they're different, esp with Niya being much more conservative. DerekWinters (talk) 22:55, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

@DerekWinters: It should probably get a code then. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 22:58, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

@DerekWinters Hey, I didn't want to spam your talk page, but this Bundeli grammar is really cool. Bundeli also has a long history tho, so it may have the same problems as Old Braj and Old Awadhi vs. modern Braj and Awadhi.

That is quite cool, yeah we'll have to dig into the literature to see what we should do about it. DerekWinters (talk) 00:00, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Maybe we should make a Indic-languages discussion page, since otherwise everyone has to pinged repeatedly...—Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 23:57, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

That's not a bad idea tbh. DerekWinters (talk) 00:00, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

gẓʰ

Sorry for spamming, but, for the gẓʰ sound in Proto-IA, which I presume lasted into other dialects of Vedic before forming Prakrit झ, what do you think of using ग्ष़ (ग्ष़ापयति) to transcribe it? Obviously this conjunct never existed historically, but it's no different than using gẓʰ in it's Romanization. DerekWinters (talk) 15:37, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

@DerekWinters: I think we would have to use ग्ष़्ह because it's aspirated (*gẓ is also a thing by itself). But yeah, I think it would make sense to have that. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 16:38, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Locking threat

So, even though I created the entry, you're going to threaten to lock it because I'm using the declension template used in over 90% of Sanskrit entries, instead of the new, buggy one, which has yet to garnish unanimous community acceptance? That seems rather petty and an abuse of admin tools. --Victar (talk) 03:22, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

@Victar: No, no, no, I didn't mean it like that. I *could* have locked it, but I want to reach a consensus, so I just commented it out. I really appreciate your work and would never abuse my admin tools like that in a disagreement. I'm really sorry for sounding threatening. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 03:24, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

When is it buggy? —*i̯óh₁nC^[5] 05:35, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

• garnish ≠ garner —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 03:50, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
  • On the contrary, I think unanimous community acceptance would look much better with a sprig or two of parsley. I'm just glad this is in my native language, because I've studied dozens of languages and taken classes in a fair number- but I'd have trouble saying much in anything but English...

Discord

I guess you don't keep discord open on your computer. :p --Victar (talk) 04:57, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

template:also and Devanagari

Hello. I've finally started learning the script (still a long way to go though), and I'm curious as to what the rules are for the {{also}} template. बिन्दु (bindu) links to बन्दी (bandī) and बन्द (band) (i.e. matras are ignored?), but not to बिंदु (bindu) (i.e. anusvara and the न conjunct are treated as different?).

Besides, neither बिन्दु (bindu) nor बिंदु (bindu) link to bindu. So I'm not sure this was correct?

Another question: what do you think of this? Can you have a mixture of anusvara/bindu and conjunct in the same word (चन्द्रबिंदु (candrabindu), चंद्रबिन्दु (candrabindu)), or do you have to be consistent (चंद्रबिंदु (candrabindu), चन्द्रबिन्दु (candrabindu))? --Per utramque cavernam (talk) 20:29, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

@Per utramque cavernam: That's great to hear! I actually had to learn Devanagari on my own as well.

बिन्दु (bindu) ⟨bindū⟩, बन्दी (bandī) ⟨bandī⟩ and बन्द (band) ⟨banda⟩ all have the same sequence ब-न्द- (bVndV) with different vowel matras (V) added to it. {{also}} for Devanagar was added by bot a while ago (I think by User:Octahedron80).

On Pali bindu the alternative forms drop-down already links to the Devanagari form बिन्दु (bindu), which I think is sufficient. The {{also}} is kind of redundant. (But maybe बिन्दु (bindu) and बिंदु (bindu) would benefit from a link there)

The current standard I'm following for Hindi is the main entry having all anusvara with the conjunct entries as altforms. You don't have to be consistent (चन्द्रबिंदु (candrabindu), चंद्रबिन्दु (candrabindu) have lots of Google hits), but I would say spelling like that is nonstandard. I don't think having entries for those spellings is necessary, and eventually Mediawiki should ideally redirect the standard forms. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 20:42, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Ahah yes, so I've heard! You did have the advantage of already knowing Hindi though :p. As for me, even producing the sounds is a challenge, so I don't really have anything tangible to which I can map the letters. (don't mistake me: I'm not saying that just because you knew Hindi, learning the script must have been "easy"!)

I see. But what's the logic behind only taking the consonantal skeleton into account? Is it because the matras are only seen as "modifier" letters?

As for bindu, it's not the best example, precisely because there is a Pali term. But what about gram (or even grām) and Hindi ग्राम (grām), where the resemblance is purely coincidental?

I'm still thinking too much in terms of transliteration, and am not considering the script in its own right yet. That's a real problem, since translit is not language-independent: Hindi ग्राम (grām) vs. Sanskrit ग्राम (grāma). Still, I see two issues:

• ignoring the vowel matras amounts to linking bindu, bandi and banda in the Latin script;
• Hindi ग्राम (grām)–gram, Sanskrit ग्राम (grāma)–grama are left unlinked, while we link gram to grām, and would link grama to grāma if it existed.

Perhaps {{also}} is simply not appropriate when the scripts are too different? --Per utramque cavernam (talk) 21:38, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Ah yes, about your last point (consistency): duly noted. Thanks for the answer! --Per utramque cavernam (talk) 21:42, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

@Per utramque cavernam: Ha, I still mess up spellings even today (like I just learned तय (tay) and तह (tah) aren't the same word!) And my Devanagari handwriting looks like computer font...

The matras aren't really modifier letters in my mind (after all, it's not a abjad like Arabic), but I guess someone trying to find something in Devanagari could miss (or mistype) them?

I think maybe having IAST translit redirects only for Sanskrit (because a lot of uni courses don't teach Devanagari from the get go, and most literature uses IAST) might not be a bad idea, but I think the Mediawiki software ought to redirect automatically. Mediawiki (at least with the extensions that Wikimedia uses) already has input methods in Devanagari, so I don't think autoredirection would be too difficult. But that can't be done from our end. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 22:54, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Hello. Sorry for not replying earlier, I'm forgetting every thread I'm in :p

To be clear, I won't particularly push for the creation of IAST redirections anymore, as there are very efficient tools outside of Wiktionary. I just think it could be added value to have it here. But it might be more overhead than it's worth so I don't know.

I've got another question: given the schwa-dropping in Hindi, misspellings must be quite frequent, no? What would prevent me from writing इनका as इन्का, or इसका as इस्का? Or even hypercorrect forms such as नमसते instead of नमस्ते (well, this is a ludicrous example but you get my point!)? --Per utramque cavernam (talk) 15:04, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

@Per utramque cavernam: Well, misspellings reflecting schwa-dropping tend to be pretty rare, for reasons I'm not entirely sure about. The first two examples you gave are clearly analyzable as इन (in) + का (kā) etc. which might be one of the reasons why. Beyond that, schwa-dropping isn't done in a lot of poetry, but I doubt that explains the whole thing. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 15:56, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

EWDC #5

Hi! Here are your 10 random missing English words for this month.

• apedoms, sponsings (something nautical?), scuchion, novia, trigly, tarands, sownd, whaizle, peripter, kamela

Equinox ◑ 00:23, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Bhojpuri

Linguistic Survey of India: 1 on page 48 says that ꣱ is used in Bhojpuri to indicate the long schwa (which he transcribes as â). What do you think? DerekWinters (talk) 20:04, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Also, page 50: "In Standard Bhojpuri, adjectives do not change for gender." But their verbs do conjugate for gender. DerekWinters (talk) 20:10, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

@DerekWinters: I think the modern style is just ऽ, without superscript. E.g. see the hits for कऽ on Bhojpuri Wikipedia. I've fixed MOD:bho-translit, since now we are sure it represents [əː].

As for gender in adjectives and verbs, Masica says:

"Although Awadhi (and Western Bhojpuri, e.g., of Banaras) often show gender agree­ment similar to that of (Western) Hindi, in the southern extensions of Eastern Hindi, namely Bagheli and Chhattisgarhi, this is greatly attenuated, in the latter almost to the point of disappearance - completely so from the verb. The influence of Standard Hindi as the official language of this region is now a factor confusing the situation, and it may often be a question of the revival or even of the introduction of gender agreement rather than of its preservation."

So it may vary from dialect to dialect. I think most varieties of Bhojpuri do inflect adjectives for gender, but not for verbs (so the opposite of what Grierson says) —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 20:17, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Interesting. There is a Standard Bhojpuri Grammar out there, but I can't access it currently. DerekWinters (talk) 21:15, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

chowtal

I guessed that this is from Bhojpuri but I'm not sure- can you verify the etymology? DTLHS (talk) 23:31, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

@DTLHS No, it's plain Hindi. I've added the word. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 23:40, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

User:AryamanA/common.css: do I need all of it?

No :) —suzukaze (t・c) 20:02, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Now it is all a gadget and you can remove zhDialMap stuff from your css/js. —Suzukaze-c◆◆ 04:14, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Hello

I am taking an indefinite wikibreak, and my parting words are: be careful with Gujarati lemmas. Double/triple-check, and if you're not certain, leave them out. And Nizil Shah is still here to help out. Also my list of resources is for all to use (check out my Braj stuff) so feel free (obviously) to suck them dry of info. Otherwise, I shall be back some day, but not any time soon. Have fun without me! Also can you protect my userpage for the time-being? You have my fullest ashirvad(s). DerekWinters (talk) 21:17, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

@DerekWinters: Sure, protected. Hope to see you again soon! Thanks for all the great resources, I will clean out all the out-of-copyright ones. I will continue my usual work and pay extra attention to Gujarati stuff, bahu abhar for the ashirvad... —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 21:24, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Sad to see you go, buddy. All the very best and thank you for everything. Hopefully we'll meet again. -- माधवपंडित (talk) 15:23, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

Hello. Good to know I didn't really leave after all. Can you unprotect my user page? DerekWinters (talk) 20:35, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

एगो and दुइ

Hi AryamanA. These two pages एगो and दुइ have Lua errors in them. I think it is because of your recent changes to Module:languages/data2. Can you please have a look? —Internoob 05:10, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Standard Assamese

Hi, I'm usure how should I differentiate Standard Assamese from the dialects. There are two types of Standard Assamese,
1) Based on Eastern Assamese,
2) Based on Central and Eastern Assamese.
In Eastern Standard Assamese if a word has two /a/ sounds side-by-side, the first /a/ turns into an /ɔ/ or /ɛ/, this shifting is more common in Eastern Standard Assamese than Central Standard Assamese.
For example:
Central Standard: কাটা (kata), থাকা (thaka)
Eastern Standard: কটা (kota), থকা (thoka).
So I'm thinking to use "Central Assam" for "Central Standard Assamese" and "Central Assamese" for "Central Assamese dialects". Same for Eastern.
Some features of Central Assamese dialects are:
In some dialects the "r" sound is absent and in many dialects the 3rd person suffix is /i/ instead of /ɛ/ and the 1st person suffix is /ɔŋ/ or /ʊŋ/ instead of /ʊ̃/. So Central Standard Assamese is clearly more closer to Eastern Standard Assamese. As a Central Standard Assamese (CSA) speaker, I have more idea about CSA and Central Assamese dialects than Eastern Assamese dialects. Msasag (talk) 16:51, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

@Msasag: I think "Central Standard", "Eastern Standard", "Central", and "Eastern" are good dialect names. "Central Assamese" vs. "Central Assam" sound very similar, and it could confuse people. Great work on Assamese by the way. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 17:04, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks! Yeah I think we should use "Central Standard" and "Eastern Standard". Msasag (talk) 17:21, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey

Hello! The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey. We want to know how well we are supporting your work on and off wiki, and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation. You have been randomly selected to take this survey as we would like to hear from your Wikimedia community. The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes.

Take the survey now!

You can find more information about this survey on the project page and see how your feedback helps the Wikimedia Foundation support editors like you. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement (in English). Please visit our frequently asked questions page to find more information about this survey. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email through the EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys to remove you from the list.

Thank you!

WMF Surveys, 18:36, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

स्फट्यातु (sphaṭyātu), स्फटयातु (sphaṭyātu)

स्फटयातु (sphaṭyātu), with 2250 Google hits, redirects to स्फट्यातु (sphaṭyātu), which has 331 Google hits. I have no other way of knowing which form is commoner, but someone capable of knowing should maybe take a look thereat

@बृहदांत्रदर्शन: Fixed. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 23:39, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

ٹڈا

looks like Gfarnab doesn't know the Arabic script conpletely

Is uncanny how Muphry's Law hits.

Anyway, thanks for revising that edit and all the others, and Happy Easter!

@淫荡: lol, remember that for doubled consonants Urdu uses the tashdid (also called shadda). Happy Easter to you too! —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 15:12, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

EWDC #6

Hi! Here are your 10 random missing English words for this month.

• coses, immunifacient, harmans, geognoses, dream feed, yellowfin sole, prosected, coggies, amphiploidies, cenosis/coenosis

Equinox ◑ 21:24, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

Reminder: Share your feedback in this Wikimedia survey

Every response for this survey can help the Wikimedia Foundation improve your experience on the Wikimedia projects. So far, we have heard from just 29% of Wikimedia contributors. The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes to be completed. Take the survey now.

If you have already taken the survey, we are sorry you've received this reminder. We have design the survey to make it impossible to identify which users have taken the survey, so we have to send reminders to everyone. If you wish to opt-out of the next reminder or any other survey, send an email through EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys. You can also send any questions you have to this user email. Learn more about this survey on the project page. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this Wikimedia Foundation privacy statement. Thanks!

WMF Surveys, 01:34, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

تشنہ

Hello, sorry but could you check my edit here? Thank you. Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 17:17, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia survey

Hello! This is a final reminder that the Wikimedia Foundation survey will close on 23 April, 2018 (07:00 UTC). The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes. Take the survey now.

If you already took the survey - thank you! We will not bother you again. We have designed the survey to make it impossible to identify which users have taken the survey, so we have to send reminders to everyone. To opt-out of future surveys, send an email through EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys. You can also send any questions you have to this user email. Learn more about this survey on the project page. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this Wikimedia Foundation privacy statement.

WMF Surveys, 00:44, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

crescent, please

Hi,

Do you mind filling in Hindi translations? I couldn't find sources I could trust and understand. TIA. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 08:48, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

که

Hello. Just in case you weren't aware, there is no consensus to change to lower case no matter how it might appear from some people's edits. Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 23:06, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

@Kaixinguo~enwiktionary: Oh, sorry, I thought that had been decided. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 23:23, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Ok, it has now been agreed on by everyone. I don't know if this applies to user examples or not, though. It would be weird to have full stops (periods) if there is no capital letter, wouldn't it? Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 09:48, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Is there a new editor in Persian and Urdu?

User:چلم_خرمایی? How is the Urdu edit? Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 23:02, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

@Kaixinguo~enwiktionary: Looks like it's just Gfarnab unfortunately. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 17:12, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

Yep. On the bright side, that led me to a bunch of sleeper accounts that are now blocked. I'm sure there are more, but it should waste more of their time finding a usable one. Anything to spoil their fun is a plus. Chuck Entz (talk) 20:21, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

North Jutland?

I added it. This okay? --Milkman20001 (talk) 01:16, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

@Milkman20001: It is now. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 01:19, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

Urdu

Hey! Do you think we could have Urdu lemmas come with the full vowel diacritics in the headspace (like for Arabic entries)? I've looked at some stuff but I can't find the proper method for diacritics for Urdu, but then with that we could get an automatic transliteration module as well. DerekWinters (talk) 02:49, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

@DerekWinters: Hi! I'm familiar enough with Urdu vowel diacritics so I started making MOD:ur-translit a while back. I think automatic transliteration is definitely feasible. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 15:02, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

Oh that looks perfect. We can start changing the headspaces to diacritic-marked Urdu. DerekWinters (talk) 15:38, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

Great suggestion @DerekWinters!, hope it will work :) — Bukhari (Talk!) 08:06, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

Need help

Hey! I have been referred to you by Hammad Saeed Bukhari. We are facing a problem with '''[[Special:Statistics|{{NUMBEROFARTICLES}}]]''' on urdu wiktionary. Though 20,000 pages have been created by bot on urdu wiktionary, none is counted in 'toatal number of pages', though it should be above 25,000.

Please help us!
شہاب (talk) 15:43, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

@شہاب: Hi! I would assume that the article count takes a while to be updated. It's also possible that since those articles are bot-created, they need to be updated by humans to be counted as articles. Sorry if I couldn't provide much help, I'm not too familiar with how the parser functions have been implemented in the MediaWiki software. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 01:33, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

Many thanks for your kind response. I will try to edit pages manually.

شہاب (talk) 08:40, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

@شہاب:

کوئی بات نہیں! اگر کچھ اور مسئلہ ہوں تو آپ زرور بتائے گا۔ —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 02:35, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

भैया

I provided a reference for the meanings of भैया from a dictionary, and yet you unnecessarily reverted it without providing any references of your own. --Foreverknowledge (talk) 21:36, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

@Foreverknowledge: I am a native speaker and your definition was inaccurate (at least the meaning "friend" is not specific enough). But since you insist, I added three references. Dasa Hindi dictionary says "बराबरवालों या छोटों के लिये संबोधन शब्द", "a word used for one's equals or subordinates". —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 21:40, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

I too am a native speaker, and when one says phrases such as अरे भैया, it's not brother in a literal sense, but in a vocative with the meaning "friend" as the dictionary stated. --Foreverknowledge (talk) 21:42, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

@Foreverknowledge: (You should indicate which language you know with a {{Babel}} on you user page; I was unsure if you were a native) But you can also use भैया when talking to a waiter at a restaurant for example, or when haggling with a shop-owner. In those cases, it doesn't mean "friend". —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 21:44, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

अज़दहा

Why did you remove the reference for अजदहा (with a j)? It is an alternative spelling and pronunciation as attested in Platts and McGregor, and which I've also personally heard myself. And you've erroneously linked a reference to McGregor for अज़दहा (with a z), when he spells it अजदहा (with a j) instead.--Foreverknowledge (talk) 21:56, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

@Foreverknowledge: The nuqta (for marking z) did not exist in Platt's time, it was invented later on by the Nagari Pracharini Sabha. He gives the Urdu spelling اژدها (azdahā) too btw. But I thought I saw z in McGregor, so my mistake. Personally, I've only heard the z pronunciation, and the spelling अज़दहा is more common on Google. For words with nuqta variants we only make the form with nuqta because the non-nuqta form (like )अजदहा automatically redirects to the nuqta form (अज़दहा) thanks to Mediawiki software. That's why I think linking to अजदहा is unnecessary. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 22:15, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

Point noted. Here is the link to McGregor, who spells it with j: http://dsalsrv02.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/philologic/getobject.pl?c.0:514.mcgregor

By the way, the nuqta wasn't invented by the Nagari Pracharini Sabha. It's been used for centuries. Gilchrist indicated in his Hindustani Dictionary of 1787 that nuqta is occasionally used in Nagari spellings for loanwords, Rupert Snell also indicated that it's occasionally used in Classical Braj Bhasha. Platts also used the nuqta for a few of the Persian/Arabic words that he has in Nagari script. It's never been commonly used though. --Foreverknowledge (talk) 22:29, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

@Foreverknowledge: Oh, I thought they invented it, because I remember reading an old essay from the 1800s criticizing its use by the Nagari Pracharini Sabha. Maybe they were only responsible for standardizing it then. Thanks for the knowledge. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 22:32, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

Sauraseni Prakrit

I have noticed that you are the one who added the entries for the Sauraseni Prakrit, I am wondering if you could tell me what source do you use for Sauraseni Prakrit? I am writing a paper on Romani language, and I need some references for Sauraseni. Thank you in advance. 109.245.191.198 01:19, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

@109.245.191.198 Hi! There is no definitive grammar or dictionary for Sauraseni Prakrit unfortunately. However, Woolner's Introduction to Prakrit has a short wordlist at the back for all the Dramatic Prakrits. Sauraseni specific words are marked with Ś, and if an entry has no dialect marks (only a definition) that means it was the same in all of those Prakrits. If you know what word you're looking for you can search through Pischel's Comparative Grammar Of The Prakrit Languages, it has a lot of word forms but rarely has definitions, and there is no index or word list at the back. The text is very dense as well. Hope this helps, good luck on your paper. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 23:29, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

@AryamanA Thank you for your reply, I have searched through the literature you recommended, however I still wasn't able to find all the specific words I was looking for :(. I just want to write how certain words were in Sauraseni, for example "head" ("šoro/šero" in Romani - Sanskrit: "śiras") - here on Wiktionary, it says that it was 𑀲𑀺𑀭 (sira) in Sauraseni - but where is the reference for that? I found almost every single word I was looking for in Wiktionary, however, I cannot state Wiktionary as my source in the paper. I was able to find all the words in Turner's comparative dictionary of the Indo-Aryan languages as well, which also states "Pk." - but not Sauraseni specifically. So, for example, for verbs, let's say the verb "kerel" (to do) - "karoti" in Sanskrit, Turner says: "Pk. karēi, karaï". I know that Sauraseni verbs ended with -di. Wiktionary states "karedi". So my question is, where can I find references for Sauraseni, more specifically Sauraseni verbs? Should I just use Turner and replace "-ï" with "-di", and add an asterisk before the word? Where did you get the Sauraseni verbs which you added on Wiktionary, from? Did you do something similar to this? 178.221.204.163 14:03, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

@178.221.204.163: Turner only gives Maharastri Prakrit forms unfortunately, but often the Sauraseni form is the same. In this case, the sound changes that operate in Sauraseni must produce sira too. Besides, Turner is the go-to reference for Indo-Aryan etymology, so I think you should be fine citing him. Even McGregor's Oxford Hindi-English Dictionary gives Maharastri Prakrit forms despite Sauraseni being Hindi's actual ancestor.

I got the entries I created while I was reading Woolner, and from research papers I read here and there (that's why I haven't made many Prakrit entries, the sources are quite scattered). In some cases I looked at original texts to find a particular form, but that is a very tedious process. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 02:21, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

@AryamanA Thank you very much again! It's been very helpful. In the end, I'll just use Turner, Woolner, Pischel, and Cowell, and search in them for all the stuff I need. As for infinitive verb forms, I'll do what I said, cause I think I know enough about its sound changes so I can reconstruct them, knowing how they were in other Prakrits. And if I've reconstructed a verb form, and not found it anywhere in this literature, I'll just add an asterisk before it. Anyways, thank you very much, again! :D 178.221.204.163 13:23, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

@178.221.204.163: No problem! —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 18:24, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

"error" at انگریزۍ

I really do think your rollbacks are in error. Actually, you might be reinstating an error. I don't think there's a way that "اَنٛگریٖزۍ" can be read as "angrēzi"; those are two different words. Mar1Qh 17:40, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

@Mar1Qh: Medial ye can be read as e in Nastaliq (in fact it's the only way to write medial e), which is the variety of the Perso-Arabic script that Kashmiri uses. Also, you're adding information without a source; I don't believe that *zy* is ever a cluster in Kashmiri Devanagari and would like to see proof of that Devanagari form. I will undo my rollbacks if you have the proof. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 17:51, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

It occured to me that you had created that entry and a few others -- Excuse me, but I really wasn't prepared for this.

I could contribute "unsourced content" here to other language sections with little response - at Wikipedia, as a registered user, it was my first or second edit that got undone.

I think I understood that you were, too, asking me for sources, but then there are a lot of articles here that have no references at all, so I wasn't sure what's enough and what's too much in an entry. I was going to lay all the sources that I know out on the "About Kashmiri" page, including the Devanagari orthography. Grierson is a good start for Devanagri. He uses ligatures with /y/ for palatalized consonants, if not in that particular word. But I did find a few instances of अंग्रीज़्य् elsewhere. I'm not aware of any other ways to write these "clusters" in Devanagari.

Kashmiri writing is difficult, but as I understand it, <یٖ>, with the diacritic (!) means /i:/ and without it, /e:/. Anyway, Grierson has angrīzi, and my main issue is with <ۍ> which is strictly a Pashto letter. -- Mar1Qh 19:50, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

p.s. I had restored my version before so now it's the current one. I will insert another source and leave it at that -- since I've learned we have a native Kashmiri speaker here who's working on inflection tables, I'm probably out with (modern) lexicon and grammar -- but there remain typographical and encoding problems to be resolved. --Mar1Qh 20:22, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

सिफ़र

Why did you remove the additional definitions? They are attested in dictionaries, with Chaturvedi even providing an example. It makes the entry more comprehensive and complete. --Foreverknowledge (talk) 02:36, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

@Foreverknowledge: All those words are redundant, they mean the same thing as "zero". It adds unnecessary clutter imo. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 14:52, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

I agree that zero, cipher and nought are all exactly the same thing. It wouldn't hurt, though, to add the rest to the existing definition line to show the semantic range better: zero is a number, but blank and nonentity aren't. Chuck Entz (talk) 02:54, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

@Chuck Entz: It seems my other Hindi-English dictionaries do have a noun sense "cipher" with masculine gender, even though my Hindi-Hindi dictionary just defined it as शून्य (śūnya, “zero”). I'll think about adding the defs back. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 02:57, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Cipher and nought are just old synonyms for zero in many of the same senses. Cipher can also mean a code, but that would be a bit of a stretch, given the overall range of the other words. Chuck Entz (talk) 03:02, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

átʰarwā

See the discussion page for átʰarwā. I think I pinged you incorrectly. --Foreverknowledge (talk) 17:45, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Pali

Please see the पाऴि discussion page. I must have pinged you incorrectly. Does ऴ even exist in the Pali language? --Foreverknowledge (talk) 00:39, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

Ashokan Prakrit Map

Hey! Is it possible to make Pakistan (and probably Bangladesh too) also white on the map. Personally it shouldn't just be modern India. Or better yet!, overlay either of

• 
• 

DerekWinters (talk) 03:21, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

@DerekWinters: I agree, the current map is probably not suitable since it has political boundaries. I'll try to change it. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 21:46, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

Your reversion of my edits

I don't know why you insist on publishing false etymologies of Persian words, you reverted my all edits but you don't reply my questions in their talk pages, for example here: Talk:خواستن, I asked about Middle Persian xwāst "quest", is it from Proto-Indo-European *sweh₂d "sweet"? Modern Persian درخواست means "request" or "resweet"?!! You even removed the meaning of "whether, which (of two)" from xwāh ([[5]]), just look at a dictionary to know what this word means: https://dictionary.abadis.ir/fatoen/%D8%AE%D9%88%D8%A7%D9%87/ do you want to deny it relates to French que, ...?

Portuguese: Iremos, quer chova, quer não > Persian: باید برویم، خواه باران بیاید خواه نیاید

@Mojshahmiri: They're horribly flawed etymologies. Any Persian specialist (and non-specialist) can show you that these etymologies are false. Do some proper, lengthy research on Persian before coming back. And don't waste Aryaman's (or anyone's) time with these. DerekWinters (talk) 05:23, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

I also say that these etymologies are false, I'm myself an Iranist, the supervisor of my thesis was Professor Jaleh_Amouzgar, the greatest Iranist in the world. Mojshahmiri (talk) 06:14, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

@Mojshahmiri: I mass reverted you because in almost all of your edits you were saying Persian words were derived from Proto-Germanic, which is preposterous. I did not pay any regard to the other non-etymological parts of your edits. You can add them back if you would like. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 12:55, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

If you had looked, you might have noticed other problems. At خواه, the "whether, which (of two)" definition was added under the verb header. The larger problem is poor English skills, which makes it hard to spot obvious problems like that, or the fact that the templates copied from other etymologies were categorizing the entry as if it were the language the templates were borrowed from: Category:Proto-Germanic terms derived from Proto-Indo-European. They also need to learn to use the "Show preview" button instead of using "Publish changes" before they're finished so they don't clutter the edit history with a dozen edits and still have everything in a shoddy, half-finished state. Chuck Entz (talk) 13:48, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

Why is it preposterous? Who has said Persian words couldn't be from proto-Germanic? Why proto-Germanic words could be from Old Persian, like *paþaz "path" from Old Persian pathi, certainly not from Scythian (One of principal sound changes from Proto-Iranian to Scythian is *p>f, cognate of Old Persian pathi in Ossetian, a direct descendant of Scythian language, is fændag), but there shouldn't be any Old Persian word from proto-Germanic? Jacob Grimm, the discoverer of Grimm's law (the First Germanic Sound Shift), says that "If only six or eight of my interpretations be correct, and the remainder more or less probable, there needs no further proof that ancient Getae were a Germanic people". You certainly know that Getae was one of the main parts of ancient Persian empire, where the famous Gherla inscription of Darius the Great was discovered. Mojshahmiri (talk) 04:07, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Whether there could be borrowing between Proto-Germanic and Old Persian is beside the point. The language code for Old Persian is peo, and the language code for Middle Persian is pal. You used the language code fa, which is New/Modern Persian. There are texts in several Germanic languages descended from Proto-Germanic that are older than New Persian, so Proto-Germanic was long gone and forgotten centuries before New Persian emerged. And you didn't say it was derived from Proto-Germanic, you said it was borrowed, which can only mean that speakers of New Persian got it directly from Proto-Germanic. Whatever your qualifications and expertise in your native language, in English your edits are full of errors because you don't really understand what you're writing. Chuck Entz (talk) 08:15, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

What you said is completely a different issue, I'm a new member and didn't know these things, I would certainly appreciate if you informed me of them in my talk page. I just changed خو#Noun, is it ok?

I also edited hood and خود#Etymology_2, the Indo-European sound changes clearly show that Proto-Germanic *hōdaz is from proto-IE *kadʰ-, not from Scythian but they were Scythians who borrowed this word. — This unsigned comment was added by Mojshahmiri (talk • contribs).

No, it is not okay. You wrote {{bor|xpr|gem-pro|*hōdaz}}, from {{etyl|ine-pro|en}} {{m|ine-pro|*kadʰ-||to cover}} where the correct formatting would be {{der|fa|gem-pro|*hōdaz}}, from {{der|fa|ine-pro|*kadʰ-|t=to cover}}, again categorizing entries wrong, again using {{bor}} where it does not belong, again using {{etyl}} that should never be used. Also you could have added the Behistun inscription in the original script if you pretend to be able to read it. This is even without talking about the factual accuracy of your edits. But probably it is likewise shoddy, for who does not have the understanding to use correct markup does not have the judgment to view the facts soundly. Fay Freak (talk) 11:15, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your hits, so it should be "Persian derived Proto-Germanic"? I also added the Old Persian text in the original script. Mojshahmiri (talk) 12:26, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

It’s that simple: If what you add is under “Persian”, the language code you write as the first parameter after {{der}}, {{inh}}, {{bor}}, {{calque}}, {{sl}} and such templates is fa, because you write it in the etymology section of a Persian entry. If you write the etymology section for a Latin entry, the code is la. If you create an Old Persian entry, what you might want to do, you write {{der|peo}} and so on. The function of the first positional parameter is to categorize. You just look into the documentations of the templates {{der}} (click!) to see what all parameters mean. Of course you also need to understand when to use which templates. {{der}} is the general template for foreign as well as native derivations, the fallback template (you know what that means?), {{bor}} is for direct loans from other languages. {{inh}} is used when a word has passed from an older stage of the same language without anything additional having happened. {{etyl}} is never used anymore. Fay Freak (talk) 13:24, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

In the end, the real issue is that Mojshahmiri has unsourced self-fabricated theories that are unwelcome here, and in the end, however he formats them makes no difference because they will be reverted anyhow. --Victar (talk) 15:45, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

@Mojshahmiri: I agree with Victar. My problem is not just that you use {{bor}} (which isn't even an issue compared to the other flaw in your etymologies), it's that that there seems to be no scholarly consensus that خو or خود, or any of the other entries you have added etymologies to, are borrowed from Germanic. I don't recall any historical circumstances in which every Old Iranian language would borrow a term from Proto-Germanic (which is what your etymologies say). It seems to me you are pushing your own pet theory. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 15:51, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

File:Map of Ancient Germanic tribes in Iran (2nd Millennium BC).jpg

> ruminating about historical circumstances
> searching maps about the lands Proto-Germans and Proto-Iranians were situated
> finding pic related

Pic related hurts so much. Are there some rules about crackpot maps on Commons? Fay Freak (talk) 17:26, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

LOL, @Fay Freak, that's just so beautifully crazy I almost want to make it my desktop pic. XD --Victar (talk) 17:43, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

@Fay Freak: Did not expect greentext on Wiktionary but this works perfectly lol. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 18:45, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

@AryamanA: Is there any research about Germanic words in the Iranian languages? Should we remove all etymologies in Wiktionary which don't have any source? Mojshahmiri (talk) 18:22, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

@Mojshahmiri: It is trivial to source a good etymology that has scholarly consensus. On Wiktionary we have a little leeway with original research provided an editor has shown their competence over a long period of time (which you haven't) and other editors find the theory reasonable (which no one does). —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 18:45, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

rupchanda

Could you do the ety for this tasty fishy please? Someone did a drive-by "it's Hindi" edit but they didn't provide the word or anything. Equinox ◑ 01:50, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Thanks! BTW only if you feel like it, a Wikt search for "india cooking" will find a bunch of food words probably added by me that you could improve. Restaurant menus always have me scrabbling for my notebook. Equinox ◑ 02:01, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

@Equinox: No problem! I've been meaning to do a bunch of Indian cooking words for a while, will do. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 02:42, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

What the hell is wrong with you

Thanks for the OwO article; oh but one thing. You fail to realize that’s not at all what OwO even means. Trinity2003 (talk) 23:26, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

@Trinity2003: OwO —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 00:57, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

shahab.bot for en.wiktionary

my user name is شہاب. I have successfully used my account shahab.bot for automated page uploads (PageFromFile) on urdu wiktionary about six months back.
Now I was trying to use it on English wiktionary but i get this error message about logging-in.
ERROR: Login failed (Failed).
Kindly authorize me as shahab.bot for English wiktionary, or guide me where to make such application.
Thanks
شہاب (talk) 13:17, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

@شہاب: Hello, please check WT:Bots for directions on how to gain the bot flag. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)}

Thanks! شہاب (talk) 20:21, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

dhuku/duku

Hi. Do you happen to know of any word in an Indo-Aryan language romanised as dhuku or duku, with a meaning corresponding or similar to "money"? It could be the root of Sranan Tongo duku (“dough, money”), Dutch doekoe, which some sources claim comes from Sarnami Hindustani. ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 11:07, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Why is it not just a semantic extension from "cloth"? —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 15:37, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

As far as I'm concerned that's an eminently possible explanation, and it is also my pet theory. But some prominent creolists claim that it is from Sarnami instead. ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 07:59, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

@Lingo Bingo Dingo: I'm not familar with any such word. I could only find Caribbean Hindustani paisa (“money”) which is from Bhojpuri पैसा (paisā). —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 13:26, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Okay, then a Sarnami origin seems implausible. Thanks for your effort. ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 13:57, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

What about दुकान (dukān)? Chuck Entz (talk) 14:56, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

EWDC discussion

Hello! I'm pondering doing EWDC again. See User talk:Equinox/EWDC. Equinox ◑ 04:00, 31 December 2018 (UTC)