Karelklic

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wiktionary. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• Wiktionary Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to start a page
• Our layout policy (nicknamed "ELE")
• Criteria for inclusion (nicknamed "CFI")
• Wiktionary Sandbox (a safe place for testing syntax)
• What Wiktionary is not
• FAQ

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wiktionarian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk (discussion) and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~, which automatically produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to one of the discussion rooms or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! --EncycloPetey 23:33, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Welcome

Hi, glad to see you here at the English Wiktionary! Happy contributing. --Dan Polansky 09:48, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Dan. --Karelklic 10:51, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

stabil

Hello and welcome! As regards pevná linka I answered in the Tea room. As regards "stabil", well, I admit I didn't look for any printed evidence for this, neither did I try to google it, but I've heard it used pretty often both in Southern Bohemia (where I live for a decade and a half) and in Moravia (which I come from). Nevertheless if you're not convinced (it may be that only a handful of people use this term and I just happen to be among them) you may nominate the sense for verification, using the {{rfv-sense}} template. --Duncan MacCall 15:52, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

I have not heard of "stabil" either, which proves nothing, of course, but the burden of proof is with the creator I'm afraid. I guess there should better be an attestation for such a term, per WT:CFI and specifically WT:CFI#Attestation. If the term is suspect (which it is per doubts from two native speakers) and there is no chance of getting at least three citations for the term as required by WT:CFI, we can save ourselves the trouble of rfv-sense process, and get the term deleted straight. --Dan Polansky 21:36, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, I thought about asking your opinion, Dan, and you pre-empted me with what I didn't like to read... okay, it seems that you're right and the word just is too slang to appear in WT, for I couldn't find it printed anywhere as well. Go ahead then and delete it, I'm giving in. (Can't find it in my heart to delete it myself, though, knowing it does exist ;-)). --Duncan MacCall 00:25, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

The term "the word exists" has a rather unspecific meaning, which depends on the reference community in question. AFAIK a word exists if some community uses it; some words are used by a mother, a father, and their two children. Wiktionary has a set of rules that determine what entries are elligible for inclusion, and that' all to it. AFAIK Wiktionary does not allow personal attestation; there is no rule of the form "The User:Pepa attests that the word "frfluch" exists, and so does User:Jura, and User:Kamila, therefore, inclusion criteria is met."

I'd recommond you delete the word yourself. If you prefer, you may collect unattested slang terms on your user page, so that you and whoever comes accros your page can look them up. --Dan Polansky 11:46, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Just add rfv-sense, you don't know if someone else may have no trouble documenting it. At the very least someone who speaks Czech will go through the googling. (I did, but I don't speak or read the language; there are a lot of references to shoes, probably a trademark. There might be perfectly good citations I didn't/couldn't note.) At worst it just gets routinely deleted after a while. (and IHMO, the word makes sense; seems reasonable that it would exist) Robert Ullmann 11:59, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Rfv-sense added. --Dan Polansky 12:07, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

I quite realise none of these pages meets our CFI, so I'm not putting them to the page's citations page, but I want them here to record I'm not guilty of an attempt at protologism insertation ;-):

• Bodějť by jo - za těchto podmínek, když musíte nejprve zavolat ručkou domů na stabil manželce, aby to přepapouškovala do telefonu. [1] (18/11/04, 1204)
• Do práce: 469 657555, domů: 737 776 866 (mobil- stabil) [2]
• jen ženská mi volá, když něco potřebuje, a na to jí stačí stabil nebo skajp [3] (20/6/07, 0925)

There are probably several more, but you are right in that I haven't found anything in Google Books &c. BTW, the same goes for pikador in the South-Bohemian (or České Budějovice anyway) sense of hot dog. Shall we delete it as well, then, despite the fact that it's the way it's called in a 100,000-inhabitant town? --Duncan MacCall 17:57, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Template:cs-conj-kup-ovat and Template:cs-conj-ovat

Hi. Do we need both of these Czech verb conjugation templates? AFAIK, all -ovat verbs are conjugated identically. Also, I have checked carefully for mistakes, but please tell me if you find any mistakes. --Ro-manB 18:09, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

editor.js formatted text fix.

Hi, are you still working on this, in which case I'll leave you to it. (I assume you've got firebug, and have realised that if you have a syntax error, you'll get the site version). The main reason for not recursing into these formatted sections is that sometimes they are generated by templates, and so the text inside them will not appear in the wikitext. I think it will be necessary to recurse into the basic ones, like I and B, but not into SUP or anything complicated (see stick and Template:jump and Template:legal for these issues) If you want to talk in realer time, sign onto irc://irc.freenode.net#wiktionary and talk to cirwin (http://mibbit.com allows this). If you're not working on it, let me know and I'll fix it. Conrad.Irwin 20:55, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I'm working on it. Thank you for the hint about the stick and Template:legal. Karelklic 22:21, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Template gloss

Hi, for some time, I have been using the template {{gloss}} to mark up glosses after translations, instead of (''gloss''). May I recommend you to use the template too? For how to use the template, see {{gloss}}.

The template seems to have had at least a moderate support at Beer Parlour when I had brought it up some time ago; in any case some people opposed the use of italics for the purpose. There was no voiced opposition to the template. --Dan Polansky 17:00, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi Dan, I will use the {{gloss}} then. I agree we should use such a template. Thank you for pointing it out. --Karelklic 18:17, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

importExternalScript

Just a note, importExternalScript() from MediaWiki:Common.js is just a copy of importScriptURI() from wikibits.js. We're going to remove the former, so if you're still using it you might want to change over to the latter. Cheers. --Bequw → τ 20:44, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Wiktionary:Votes/2010-04/Voting_policy

Just letting you know of this surprisingly contentious vote. Input from more Wiktionarians such as yourself would be much appreciated. Thanks. The uſer hight Bogorm converſation 12:46, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Gender in term lists

For some time, I have been avoiding adding gender tags to items listed in synonyms, antonyms, derived terms, related terms, etc. I present this option for your consideration, but there is no clear consensus in Wiktionary on this point, but neither is there anything like a controversy. Rationale: A gender tag added to a term listed in DT seems superflous, as it is already listed on the main page of the entry, and it does not seem to be a particulary important piece of information; it does not seem more important than part of speech (noun, adjective, verb, ...), which is not listed. An example: "nástupce" without gender. Latin entries, to pick another gender-equipped language in Wiktionary, usually do not list a gender tag in DT and RT.

My procedure has been to avoid adding new gender tags, while I do not go about removing existing gender tags. If there would be consensus among Czech editors, which is me, you, and Mirek2 (talk • contribs), I would start removing the tags, after I would notify of this in Beer parlour. --Dan Polansky 07:55, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Oops, I have been adding gender tags when editing Czech words so far, as I somehow observed they are a norm in Czech entries :) However, I agree with you that they seem superfluous. If Mirek also agrees they can be removed, please extend Wiktionary:About Czech, so the policy is clear for the future and newcomers. I will also start removing the gender tags when I see them. --Karelklic 10:36, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

For a long time, I was adding these gender tags, and they indeed are the common practice for Czech entries right now. I started using them because I figured they were common practice. But as some languages do not use them (Latin), and I have raised this topic in Beer parlour some years ago without the proposal generating much opposition, I think it better to get rid of them for Czech. In fact, they are the common practice for Czech mostly because of my having continued what I had perceived as common practice when I started in Wiktionary. I could have raised this issue much earlier, but I was not clear on how to handle this politically, and I wanted to avoid a vote that would create a formal regulation for all languages. --Dan Polansky 11:38, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Update: Mirek2 is okay with us removing gender tags from terms that are bluelinked, but he finds the gender tags useful for redlinked terms[4]. I do not quite know what to do with this. In any case, I will avoid adding any new gender tags, just like I did before. I have left the About Czech document unedited so far. --Dan Polansky 21:19, 18 October 2010 (UTC)