Archive
Archives

2020

RFVNEdit

Hey Imetsia. Congrats on becoming an admin! I noticed that a substantial proportion of the pileup at RFVN is Italian terms, many of which were nominated by you. Now that you're able to delete pages, could you please go through Italian noms over a month old and close them as appropriate? Thanks! —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 21:12, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

@Metaknowledge: Hello. I used to add rfv tags to definitions that I could not find in any Italian dictionary, but which I couldn't definitively say were wrong. In that way, I thought of them more as "user beware" labels that cautioned against relying on dubious definitions. I see that all the rfv terms that were nominated by me (and subsequently added to the page by J3133) have not had any further discussion. No one has found attestation, but it doesn't seem that anyone has necessarily found the definitions to be incorrect or unattested. In that case, do we just assume the relevant definitions are unattestable and delete them? Imetsia (talk) 22:02, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
I see. Yeah, the tags actually trigger discussions that could lead to deletion. What you should do is try searching for these terms on Google Books to see if you can find enough quotes. If you don't find anything, you can say something to that effect and delete the page (and any inflected forms, of course); if you do find quotes, you should add them to page. And of course, if you need any help with Google Books or any other part of the process, feel free to ask me. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 00:02, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

forneriaEdit

You created forneria with the neologism label. Is it really a neologism? The word was part of the name of the Italian progressive rock band PFM 50 years ago, so it is not new. But it is not on Treccani. Perhaps it is from the Lombard dialect and newer to mainstream Italian? Vox Sciurorum (talk) 22:14, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

@Vox Sciurorum: I marked it as a neologism because the Zingarelli only added it as of 2020, and it was marked as a neologism by an Italian newspaper (see here). However, both the Zingarelli and the Devoto-Oli note that the word has been used since 1609! So maybe we should strip the entry of its neologism label. Imetsia (talk) 01:39, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
The same newspaper article has "fumifero o †fummifero" in its neologism section, while noting it was used by Dante. I removed the label from forneria. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 12:29, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

spedoEdit

Italian spedo (spit) was generated automatically based on a mention in the etymology of English spetum. Not in Treccani. Can you check the definition as a noun? Perhaps it is obsolete? Google books hits are all centuries old and some of them may be scan errors. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 15:20, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

  Done. It looks like an archaic alternative form of spiedo. Imetsia (talk) 19:34, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

elecncoEdit

Ciao,
è possibile creare un elenco di verbi senza participo presente al plurale in italiano?--Hdiddan (talk) 17:12, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

@Hdiddan: Sì. Basta creare la categoria "Category:Italian verbs without a plural present participle", il cui contenuto può essere semplicemente {{auto cat}}. Poi aggiungere {{Category:Italian verbs without a plural present participle}} in fondo a ogni tale pagina senza participo presente al plurale. Tenga presente che la "Category:Italian verbs..." dev'essere chiusa in parentesi quadra quando è aggiunta in fondo alle pagine. Non esitare a inviarmi un messaggio se ha ulteriori domande! Imetsia (talk) 17:32, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
Sì, ho capito, ma serve piuttosto a me per crearle, non mi serve aggiungere una categoria. Non è che si potrebbe fare tramite elenco generato offline?--Hdiddan (talk) 17:55, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
@Hdiddan: Se ho capito bene, lei vuole una tabella, lista, ecc. che è già stata creata (magari in un libro di lingua italiana, altro sito web, ecc.) con questi verbi senza participo presente al plurale - per poi redigere un elenco su Wiktionary con ogni tale verbo (e forse pure creare pagine per ogn'uno di questi verbi). Purtroppo, io non sono a conoscenza di un elenco del genere. Imetsia (talk) 18:21, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
no, intendo i verbi al participo qui su wikitionary di cui manca qui su wikitionary la voce al plurale, così posso crearle facilmente. Spero di essermi spiegato meglio.--Hdiddan (talk) 18:24, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
@Hdiddan: Ah, ok. Scusa per l'incomprensione. Non so se ci sia un modo semplice per creare questo elenco. Le raccomando di chiedere a @SemperBlotto, molto più abile di me a rispondere a queste richieste tecniche. Imetsia (talk) 18:38, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

SpeedyEdit

Now you're an admin, you might want to speedy delete a few of the SOP Italian entries. You've got good judgment with them, and it would speed up the process. Oxlade2000 (talk) 20:40, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Cleanup requestEdit

Hey there, you may have notice me moving "Diminutive of: X" from Italian headword lines into the etymology. I just have a few more that I wasn't sure how to handle -- mainly how to parse the base word from the suffix(es). The pages are piovigginare, lupacchiotto, festicciola, mostriciattolo, donnicciola, pesciolino, febbriciattola, soldarello, staterello, and forellino. If you could set these up with etymologies and remove the diminutive note from the headwords, I'd appreciate it. Ultimateria (talk) 05:51, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

  Done for the most part, @Ultimateria. I couldn't figure out the suffix in piovigginare, however. Italian dictionaries seem to just mark it as a "diminutive" of piovere without any more etymological guidance.
At the same time, though, I have been a supporter of the "Diminutive of: X" stuff in Italian headword lines. I would not have supported removing them, and perhaps there should have been some more discussion before doing so. Since it looks like many of these have already been removed, however, I won't make much of a fuss about it. Imetsia (talk) 16:59, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
Thank you. I didn't realize it would be controversial; besides {{tlb}}, I haven't seen editors adding info after the headword in the past few years. Many of these were made by SemperBlotto between 2010-2012, before we had robust and consistent formatting (as evidenced by the two-apostrophes-in-parentheses format). I tried to preserve the information by explicitly glossing the suffixes, but if your objection is the loss of lexical information, I think we can fix that by making more use of {{diminutive of}}. For example, basic diminutive definitions like at cupoletta could be replaced with {{diminutive of|it|cupola|gloss=dome}}. It also categorizes into Category:Italian diminutive nouns. What do you think of that approach? Ultimateria (talk) 17:58, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
@Ultimateria: I love the approach of using the {{diminutive of}} template. I personally don't like glossing the affixes at all, but it's personal preference. When it comes to adding stuff after the headword, we should also take a look at the Italian pronominal forms (e.g. avercela, vedersela, etc.). What do you think is a solution there? Imetsia (talk) 18:14, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
Cool, I'll start changing some of those. I think that information definitely belongs in the etymology, and once it's there I'm not too picky about how it's presented. Some Spanish entries like this use a definition-line template (see jugársela) to at least give the parts of speech, but I'm not sure that's necessary. We could just make them {{af}} compounds. Ultimateria (talk) 18:30, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
Does this edit look okay for cases of "diminutive of X but not just a small X"? Ultimateria (talk) 18:40, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
@Ultimateria: Your edit seems fine to me. It might be somewhat in tension with how we format Italian reflexive verbs. For some reason, we typically include one definition as simply {{reflexive of|it|term}}, but then restate the definition as a separate sense. I do, however, believe that the way you formatted it is the better way to do it. Imetsia (talk) 18:50, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
I think separating the specific meaning by semicolon works well for e.g. arruolarsi, but not for accingersi (the former being the reflexive extension of a transitive sense). Subsenses are another option, but I've seen a lot of complaints about that format. Ultimateria (talk) 01:21, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
And this for more specific definitions? Asking @Fenakhay to weigh in because he made the edit. I might have made 1.2 into a separate definition 2. Ultimateria (talk) 18:43, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
@Ultimateria: I agree with you. The second sense should be separated. I've edited the entry accordingly. — فين أخاي (تكلم معاي · ما ساهمت) 18:48, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

contratenoreEdit

Could you add Italian contratenore? It looks like quite a few languages may have borrowed their word for countertenor from Italian. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk) 20:29, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

@Lingo Bingo Dingo: Is it not controtenore instead, an entry which we already have? Imetsia (talk) 20:36, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
I suppose you will know that better than I. :P But there seem to be quite a few search results for contratenore on my end. Is it a common misspelling or a historic form? ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk) 20:43, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
@Lingo Bingo Dingo: Okay,   Done. I can't find it in Italian dictionaries, but this spelling does have a redirect page on Italian Wikipedia. So I suppose it's either dated or a common misspelling. Imetsia (talk) 21:00, 15 March 2021 (UTC)


throw a punchEdit

I can't seem to reply to your Tea Room post (it says March but sends me to the April page, which is blank); but wanted to point out throw is used with other nouns, e.g. "a new boy jumped into the dirt ring they'd drawn and began throwing blows"; "he threw a one-two combination that sent the Texan to the canvas". Maybe you could add my comments there if it works for you. Equinox 10:09, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Okay, that's helpful. I don't know why my Tea Room post is acting weird, but it doesn't seem to work for me either. Imetsia (talk) 14:00, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/195.195.244.141Edit

Could you check the contributions by this IP at Italian procace and feticismo? There have been a few issues in other languages. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk) 13:37, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

  Done. Reverted his edits at procace and gave a better ux at feticismo. Imetsia (talk) 15:18, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

The other side of the storyEdit

Hi, I am the person who a certain user recently got blocked for attacking.

We can begin with my first encounter with that user on Wiktionary (at the time my username was Excelsius). As you can see, I politely raised a question about Latin /ll/ and respectfully disagreed with him on some points. Suddenly he accused me of "milking him for knowledge and conviction points", said that I was ignorant not only of Latin but also basic phonology in general, and said that talking to me was a waste of his time: https://i.imgur.com/KGUR3gv.png

I can’t say that things have improved much since then. The following is just a few examples, including one in which he compares me to a dog: https://imgur.com/a/j84xSNA

The user was blocked for continuing his insults and weaponized "diagnoses" of me, even after two admins called him out for that behaviour. In his ban appeal, he continues to do exactly that, accusing me of "volatility and hatred that bursts forth every other message that cannot be explained in any way other than by a personality disorder", etc.

I have been nothing but polite to him for a while now, even after the comments he has made. The latest discussion is a representative example of me doing all I can to stay civil while he continues his personal attacks (calling me "volatile", an "enraged narcissist", "that", etc.)

I am sorry to post this on your page and I understand if you wish to simply delete it. The Nicodene (talk) 01:58, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Opinion requestEdit

Hello, thank you for replying on my talkpage and sorry for writing. I don't want you to read through any of the verbal wars. I just want to receive an admin's opinion regarding what I write here and reiterate when replying to Erutuon from 08:06, 22 July 2021 (UTC). I'm dismayed that I can't seem to get any input from any administrator regarding this. It's nothing to do with any technical details or any bickering, I just want to understand the principles this website operates under and that I believe to have been grossly and repeatedly violated at the pronunciation module. I will be grateful if you reply. Brutal Russian (talk) 09:19, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

@Brutal Russian: I would agree in full with what PUC said here. Beyond that, I don't think I can really help you, because I have no knowledge of modules, am unwilling to read the entire discussion(s) on this controversy, don't contribute in Latin, etc. But do let me know if you have some more specific questions about this that I can help with. Imetsia (talk) 16:24, 22 July 2021 (UTC)