Open main menu




Hello, welcome to Wiktionary, and thank you for your contributions so far.

If you are unfamiliar with wiki editing, take a look at Help:How to edit a page. It is a concise list of technical guidelines to the wiki format we use here: how to, for example, make text boldfaced or create hyperlinks. Feel free to practice in the sandbox. If you would like a slower introduction we have a short tutorial.

These links may help you familiarize yourself with Wiktionary:

  • Entry layout (EL) is a detailed policy documenting how Wiktionary pages should be formatted. All entries should conform to this standard. The easiest way to start off is to copy the contents of an existing page for a similar word, and then adapt it to fit the entry you are creating.
  • Our Criteria for inclusion (CFI) define exactly which words can be added to Wiktionary, though it may be a bit technical and longwinded. The most important part is that Wiktionary only accepts words that have been in somewhat widespread use over the course of at least a year, and citations that demonstrate usage can be asked for when there is doubt.
  • If you already have some experience with editing our sister project Wikipedia, then you may find our guide for Wikipedia users useful.
  • The FAQ aims to answer most of your remaining questions, and there are several help pages that you can browse for more information.
  • A glossary of our technical jargon, and some hints for dealing with the more common communication issues.
  • If you have anything to ask about or suggest, we have several discussion rooms. Feel free to ask any other editors in person if you have any problems or question, by posting a message on their talk page.

You are encouraged to add a BabelBox to your userpage. This shows which languages you know, so other editors know which languages you'll be working on, and what they can ask you for help with.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wiktionarian! If you have any questions, bring them to the Wiktionary:Information desk, or ask me on my talk page. If you do so, please sign your posts with four tildes: ~~~~ which automatically produces your username and the current date and time.

Again, welcome! PseudoSkull (talk) 00:07, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Alternative spelling entries for O.E. wordsEdit

Please refrain from simply copying entries and recreating them with a wynn instead of the regular w (as you did at ƿoruld, among many others); we keep the brunt of the information about words on the entry for one "standard"/main spelling (the standard spelling differs per language: typically for OE we use the West Saxon spelling).

This means etymology, alternative forms, etc. etc. only go on one main entry; the other alternative spellings get a more barebones entry redirecting to that main entry. For an example, see my edits to worold (main entry) and the alternative spelling entries you created. On the entries for alternative spellings just use the {{alternative form of}} template, as I did at woruld. I've been cleaning up after you just now, but in the future please keep this in mind. — Mnemosientje (t · c) 02:00, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Alright, I'll keep it in mind. Birdofadozentides (talk) 02:17, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

I'm sorry for bothering, could you please delete blæƿ page? It had to be blaƿ, not blæƿ, I just made a mistake, I'm so sorry about that. I created the blaƿ page before I realized how moving pages works and I can't delete the wrong page myself. --Birdofadozentides (talk) 21:18, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

Hey, you can use the speedy-deletion template ({{d|Entry created in error, please delete}} (you can change the rationale I added here to whatever you like or even leave it out) to bring pages you created in error to the attention of an admin who will delete it for you. I'm not an admin so I can't delete it, but if you add the template to blæƿ it should be taken care of within a day or two. — Mnemosientje (t · c) 19:42, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
OK, thank you, I'll try to add it, hope I'll do everyting right. Sorry I bothered you, I thought you were an admin. Birdofadozentides (talk) 17:05, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
No worries, I don't mind. Anyhow, seems like you managed just fine. — Mnemosientje (t · c) 17:23, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
I guess so. Thanks again. Birdofadozentides (talk) 17:26, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

Ic ƿundrige, hƿy ƿentst þu ealle þas bocstafas to ƿynnum?Edit

Ƿast þu hu fela manna þone stæf ne oncnaƿaþ, oþþe hu feaƿa geƿunode sind hine to rædenne? Hundwine (talk) 03:44, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

Hello, unfortunately I'm not able to keep the conversation in Old English. I create pages with Ƿynn because it's a right thing. Ƿynn was the letter of Old English alphabet, I know this sound was also written as u or uu, but Ƿynn was the main one. It's Ƿynn, not w that is supposed to be in Old English texts.

But there is that tendention, this unfair tendention that rules the world. Creating these pages is the least I can do. You say many people do not know about Ƿynn and they would not understand. I don't see a ptoblem with that, on the contary, people could learn about Ƿynn. I always provide a link to word's main page, how can it be a problem?

May I please ask you something? Would you mind if I get rid of w in your question and put Ƿynn instead? Please, I really want to. Birdofadozentides (talk) 19:22, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, but I fixed this. Hope you don't mind. Birdofadozentides (talk) 02:09, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

Alternative spelling entries for O.E. words, againEdit

As it seems to want repeating -- please stick to the established entry formatting - definitions following the pound symbol, not a line below, and label markers such as "poetic" only on the main entry, that is not the wynn-spelled one (unless the information is specific to the alternative form in question). See this edit of mine to one of your recent wynn alt-entries: Special:Diff/50137641/50139381

Also, be careful when editing entries not to forget headers, as with the Etymology 1 header here: Special:Diff/49991766/50139577

And please do not do this: Special:Diff/47952096/49526204 -- there's a standardized spelling for a reason, using alt forms on the main entry in examples is just confusing. — Mnemosientje (t · c) 15:37, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

I've taken some time to clear the entire backlog of entries you edited or created that required reverting or fixing, but please keep these points in mind in the future. — Mnemosientje (t · c) 16:23, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

I understand, the Etymology thing should be created differenty, and "poetic" is not supposed to be added, but why the alternative pages do not have the meaning of the word? What harm could it do if people would know the word's meaning without clicking on the main page link? Without the definition pages look empty.
About quotations, I also don't like doing it on the main pages. With all my heart I wish I could add these quotations to pages I create and then everything would be fine. I know you would never let me, but why not so? Alternative pages are going to have less information than the main page anyway, not all words have quotations. It could look great.
I'm sorry I added you more work
Birdofadozentides (talk) 21:09, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
Because the more alt-form entries you have with a lot of information on them besides the main entry, the more difficult it becomes to amend or expand an existing entry: instead of just editing the main entry, you now would have to check whether there aren't alt-form entries with outdated information floating around somewhere. This is why we unify information in one place with alt-form entries pointing to that one main entry: it means you only have to change or expand in one place. It's a more easy, elegant and consistent solution than having all these competing spellings with their own expanded entries. Again, therefore, the only information that should be added to the alt-form entry is information that is unique to that entry (e.g. dialect labels for dialectal spellings). The rest should all go to the main entry.
Regarding quotations using wynn - it's a matter of consistency. Today, very rarely do you read published O.E. text editions (disregarding the original manuscripts, which few except scholars and the occasional amateur get to read) where wynn is used (while the eth and thorn for example are commonly used), the letter just isn't familiar and isn't conventionally used when reproducing OE text. Therefore, it makes sense for Wiktionary to also use W instead of wynn for quotations. I understand you have a love for this particular letter, but that shouldn't stand in the way of consistency in wiki editing. — Mnemosientje (t · c) 10:50, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
"Today, very rarely do you read published O.E. text editions where ƿynn is used (while the ð and þorn for example are commonly used), the letter just isn't familiar and isn't conventionally used when reproducing OE text". I know and this is one of the most unfair things in this world for me. If there were more Old English texts with Ƿynn, both electronic and puplished, they could make a difference, and people would be familiar with Ƿynn. But with all that tendency of using w instead of Ƿynn, how can it be possible
And it's such a pity that alternative pages are without definition, adding it would be more easy (people would know word's meaning withoug following the link), elegant (pages do look better with definition) and... well, I can't really say "consistent", but definition is not etymology, perhaps it's even more important than pronunciation, though pronunciation is added and definition is not. But it's not my rules, I will be creating pages without definition.
Thanks for undertanding. Birdofadozentides (talk) 22:19, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Minor pointEdit

Also please note to keep the pound symbol before the {{alternative form of}} template (see here for example), and to keep the amount of spaces lower (see here for example). Sorry to be bothering you about such things so often, but every mistake you make means more work for others who have to clean up after you. It may be useful to review the WT:Entry layout guidelines. — Mnemosientje (t · c) 14:30, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I didn't know the position of this template means so much, I'll be more carefull. Again, I'm sorry. Birdofadozentides (talk) 18:48, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Old English /wr/ and /wl/Edit

I've noticed that in pages like awlencan you've interpreted Old English /wr/ and /wl/ as being phonemically [rˠ] and [ɫ] (at least after /ɑː/). I would be interested to know why you chose to write them that way.

IIRC, The theory that Old English /wr/ and /wl/ are phonemically velarised [rˠ] and [ɫ] isn't universally accepted. In my opinion, it doesn't stand up to the evidence, at least for /wr/, as the evidence shows it persisting into Early Modern English orthoepic texts that write write as <ureit>, presumably indicating a pronunciation of /ˈwɾeɪt/. --Hazarasp (talk) 12:04, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but it must be a mistake, I didn't change anything in pronunciation section, I just added "Alternative forms". And I'm afraid I know really a few about phonetics to answer your questions. Birdofadozentides (talk) 22:14, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

alternative formsEdit

Hi ! Thanks for adding the alternative forms with Wynn. Please be careful to also include macrons, and dotted letters (ċ, ġ, etc) so that the Alt forms match the headers. Thanks ! :) Leasnam (talk) 19:51, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I'll try to, but I don't quite understand. I always cope the information from the main page and get rid of w. As I understand it, if the title has macrons or dotted letters, it should also be used throughout the whole page, right? Birdofadozentides (talk) 18:39, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
For instance, at swēor, in the {{ang-noun}} template, the head argument = swēor to show that the diphthong is long, not short, which would be sweor. You've added an alternative form as sƿeor when it should properly be sƿēor. Leasnam (talk) 01:14, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
There are two Etymology sections on the page, with both long and short diphthongs and two different meanings. --Birdofadozentides (talk) 01:21, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
Correct. The change made here [[1]], whioch I believe was meant for Etymology 1, was lacking the macron. I've since added it and moved it to its proper place beneath Etym_1 Leasnam (talk) 01:25, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
Just please make sure that when you are adding Alternative forms with wynn, that you are adding the needed macrons (indicating vowel length) suitable for each entry and etymology section. Thanks ! Leasnam (talk) 01:26, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
Hey, I just undid your edit...the only thing that it needs is to look like this: sƿīġe; not sƿige. Thanks ! Leasnam (talk) 01:29, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
This cuts down on a lot of work someone else will have to do behind you to add the macrons and dots... Leasnam (talk) 01:29, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
Page titles do not have mascrons or dots, why adding alternative forms with them are so important? Macrons will still be on the alternative page, just not in title or alternative form section. I'm sorry for asking, but I acually don't understand. --Birdofadozentides (talk) 01:44, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
Because that is the conventional/consensus way we display the word, not only in the header lines but also in links. Plus it's simply good practice to do so. You want Wiktionary information to be of the highest quality, do you not ? Leasnam (talk) 14:32, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
Macrons and dotted letters are made to help people to know how the word is pronounced without looking at transcription. It's a good thing though in original manuscripts macrons were not used or used very seldom, as far as I know.

I believe page titles don't have macrons here for some technical reasons, right? Otherwise if macrons mean so much it's strange that titles don't have them. I'll keep in mind adding it all to alternative forms. Birdofadozentides (talk) 18:41, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

I just realized that alternative forms are actually always added with macrons. Sorry for not noticing it before. I'll be carefull Birdofadozentides (talk) 20:20, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
You're correct, macrons weren't used in Old English. They are added in later times to do exactly what is stated above, to assist in pronunciation, and also to distinguish between words which might be homographs, but aren't homophones. And you're correct, since they aren't used in the original orthography of OE, we don't want to add them in the page title...that would be an error. Leasnam (talk) 01:01, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

A: Macrons were not used Old English orthography, so there will be no macrons in titles, it'd be an error.

B: The letter W were not used in Old English orthography, Ƿynn was the main letter for the sound and sometimes it was written as u or uu. Pff, who cares! It's too complicated. Let's make all Old English resourses with w, let's wreck the orthography!

L - Logic
Kind of... hypocritical, I'd say

Birdofadozentides (talk) 03:06, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

I actually don't have anything aganist macrons, unlike w, they're harmless. The fact that titles are without macrons and the whole page (sometimes) is written with them made me confused, that's why I couldn't understand at fist what the problem is. I thought: if titles can be like that, why alternative forms can't? Now I got it and I'm sorry I added you (or someone else) work. Birdofadozentides (talk) 03:21, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

I noticed that in the alternative entries with wynn, you have included a pronunciation as well as the template {{alternative form of}}. But as far as I can tell, these words aren't pronounced any differently from the main word, only spelled differently. So the template {{alternative spelling of}} is more appropriate, and the pronunciation should be removed ("alternative spelling" entries should never have a pronunciation section, as a rule). The heading on the main entry should still say "Alternative forms" though, it was decided years ago that we would not use "Alternative spellings" as a header anymore, only as a definition in alternative entries. —Rua (mew) 22:19, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but why is it such a problem? Both of the templates used, I see nothing so wrong with using "alternative forms" one. If that is so impotrant, I wouldn't mind use "aternative spelling", but it means the pronunciation is going to be taken away from adding, forever! I can add no etymology, no descendants, no quotations, no definition, espesially definition! And now no pronunsation, the alt pages will be even more empty. Please, please don't do that. All was discussed, arranged and at least somehow fine, just why? Birdofadozentides (talk) 22:40, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

But that's kind of the point. Only the things that are different from the main form should be given. That way, we avoid redundancy and make things easier to maintain. What if someone changes one of those things in one of the entries, but not in any of the others? Then they no longer match, which is confusing. We once had complete entries at both color and colour, but they proved so hard to keep consistent that we made one an alternative form of the other and stripped all but the differences. The wisdom we have gained from editing Wiktionary for over a decade is that duplication of information should be kept to a minimum, to avoid things going out of sync. Even if you don't like it, can you at least understand where we're coming from? It doesn't come from thin air. —Rua (mew) 22:48, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

I understand it's about making things easy, but please try understand too, pronounsation makes pages look more valuable, it's not great creating pages with only "word type" section, withiout definition, with "alternative form of". And with pronounsation it doesn't seem so sad. If adding pronounsation and these templates are real problems, why nobody talked about it before, there were a lot of dicussions, no one even mentioned it. And now out of the blue it becomes the problem number 1. Can it not stay as it is, the main word in these templates is "alternative", and "alternative form" is just used more often. Birdofadozentides (talk) 23:14, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Return to the user page of "Birdofadozentides".