User talk:Equinox

Phrase vs InitialismEdit

I noted you revert HMU from Initialism back to Phrase. Question, should every Initialism header be changed to Phrase? I see Initialism very often and can help transition away from it. Amin wordie (talk) 18:44, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

The problem is that "initialism" is etymological information (how the word was created), whereas headers are supposed to tell us the part of speech. For this reason the "abbreviation" and "initialism" headers should not be used for new entries. This was discussed some time ago and I think there might even be a bot that gets rid of them. They aren't all phrases though: for example, the part of speech for FBI can be proper noun or noun (depending on the various meanings there). It needs to show the part of speech, i.e. how it can be used within a sentence (adjective, noun, etc.) the same as with the normal non-initialism words. Equinox 18:47, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
But "Phrase" isn't a real part of speech either. This should be an interjection, since that's what we tend to call lexicalized imperative verbs. --WikiTiki89 18:51, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
Been thinking about this. You have a point, but that also seems to condemn "Proverb". Perhaps "proverbialness" would be better indicated by a category than by a PoS header, but consensus seems to say otherwise. Equinox 01:13, 5 May 2016 (UTC)


Try MediaWiki:Gadget-aWa.js. If we have the scripts that automate it, no point in doing it by hand. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 06:32, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

I tried it on a single RFV and it timed out. Equinox 11:32, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

these kingdomsEdit

Could you please post a boldface keep, delete or abstain at WT:RFD#these kingdoms? It would help close the discussion. Thanks. --Dan Polansky (talk) 06:57, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Recent changes to الله أكبرEdit

Hi Equinox!

Do you mind removing the edit summary for الله أكبر? Changes made by are unacceptable. --Robbie SWE (talk) 19:30, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done. I think you meant hide the edit, there was no edit summary. --WikiTiki89 19:34, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
Aaah...that's what I meant. Thank you nonetheless for your help @Wikitiki89. --Robbie SWE (talk) 19:36, 26 April 2016 (UTC)


This might sound strange but could you restore just the module? Thanks. (I wanted just the documentation page gone but I did a poor job of conveying that) —suzukaze (tc) 20:12, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

In the future, use <noinclude> tags. --WikiTiki89 20:17, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
Got it. (Sorry.) —suzukaze (tc) 20:20, 27 April 2016 (UTC)


Hi Equinox,

Okay, fair enough, but in this case, I think we'd need to remove 'grrl' as well, the page looks to have been set up for words without pronounced vowels, otherwise it would contain words like 'crypt' and 'cwm'.

Hmm. To prevent confusion making this category go back and forth, the category page probably needs a message at the top explaining what it is for. Equinox 16:31, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
I noticed that Category:English words without vowels belongs to Category:English terms by their sequences of characters, so it must be referring to letters and not phonemes; therefore I have added an explanatory message and a few other words. Equinox 12:54, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "Equinox".