User talk:Metaknowledge

  1. 2012
  2. 2013
  3. 2014
  4. 2015
  5. 2016

[grammatical exceptions like kijana] (talk) 22:16, 3 December 2016 (UTC)Edit

Interesting to see the fast reaction to my first edit in Wiktionary! Though I fully understand that a more well thought out format would be good, I still think it was better there than gone. To me it seems a bit strange to just assume "that people coming here already know" things, especially about exceptions. My edit was about the swahili kijana which belongs to the ki-vi- class which usually has also ki and vi as the fitting subject prefix. But this is one (of few!) members of that class that DON't do that because it is about people. I would think that a best case resolution would be to have some marking (to put on words that are exceptions) and a link to a page explaining the animate subjects exceptions. What do you think about that? Jeffforssell (talk) 07:20, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

It would certainly be possible to write up a short template to be used as a usage note. However, the work involved in adding that template to all relevant entries would be quite intensive, and not particularly valuable. We would also have to distinguish animals from other animates, as in at least some dialects of Swahili, animals in the n class do not take animate concords when used in the plural. In short, we all know that a list of words in Swahili is not sufficient for someone to be able to speak the language unless they study the grammar elsewhere. Wiktionary's role is to be a dictionary, not a grammar, and we should lean towards storing this kind of information in Wiktionary appendices or on Wikipedia instead of distributing it in entries. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 22:47, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
Swahili usually has the m wa class for people. There are exceptions (for plural) like kijana. I think it would be great if I could be reminded of the practice around this particular case, and similar ones if other people fill in. Adding to ALL relevant entries would be intensive and that hasn't been my suggestion. Making a dictionary at all is intensive :-) . Making these comments is more intensive than just letting the original edit remain and now we are back to ZERO = "I know about m wa and how it is used. I know how ki vi is (usually) used. But this word is about a person so it is most probably an exception in the ki vi class. Where do I go to check words that could be exceptions?" I don't see an easy way to do that (check kijana) inside wikipedia. (I get the "8th Vice President of Kenya")
For me one of the wonderful things about the net is hyperlinking capability. It can be so easy to connect things, like wordlists and grammar. When there are breaks in usual patterns that would seem to be a good idea. Languages are holistic things and grammar always has specific words in it and word lists, dictionaries, have grammatical elements. I assume that we all are wanting to create resources for the Swahili language as a whole and the more we can tie things together for users the better. So I wonder, where "in Wiktionary appendices or on Wikipedia" this information is best already written up, so that I could link to it. Jeffforssell (talk) 07:20, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
Personally, I see the matter of kijana as being a regular rule, though it does form an exception to other rules. Irregular rules constitute a parameter associated with specific lexical items and therefore must have their own usage note. Regular rules are best documented on Wiktionary in appendices that are linked to by each relevant entry. You are correct that languages are holistic things; dictionaries are not, and we have to struggle with the disconnect between the two.
Now for practical matters. When I made the headword-line template for Swahili nouns, {{sw-noun}}, I had it link the name of each class to Appendix:Swahili nouns. That appendix is pretty good as a backbone, and better than the documentation for nouns in any other Bantu language here, but it could use work. I think that this kind of information could conceivably be incorporated into an expanded and improved version of that appendix.
Finally, one important thing about Wiktionary that may not be immediately obvious: we have extremely strict formatting rules (most of which is described at WT:EL). This is necessary because there is such a large amount of linguistic information and it is so difficult to manage it all, so it all has to be standardised as best we can. That is why we have to decide on a way to handle cases like this, and not add prose to some part of the entry where a robot or a script won't expect it or know how to handle it. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 07:53, 6 December 2016 (UTC)


Thanks for reviewing my changes to this entry! Can you please share the specifics of your concerns with some of my edits [1]? I believe they served to enhance accuracy (previous version claimed a degree of regionality to the word not backed up by a brief survey of its' use in literature), and completeness of the entry. Thanks for taking the time to help me learn.


I only saw your final edit, which was adding a term to 'Related terms' which does not belong there. Most of your additions had various formatting errors as well; please see WT:ELE or look at how existing entries are formatted. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 04:59, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback! —User:Brycemilton


Why would you want to revert the link to the English WP although the link to the Finnish WP is useless to users of this, the English version of Wiktionary? --Espoo (talk) 11:54, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

That's how things work around here — if the section is X language, it links to X language Wiktionary. Meänkieli#English is the place to link to the English Wikipedia. (And though it seems odd and counterintuitive, I find it rather helpful as a language-learner.) —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 16:44, 25 September 2016 (UTC)


FYI, {{t-}} is actually long-deprecated; it's been a redirect to {{t}} for almost three years now, aside from a four-month period when it was simply deleted. —RuakhTALK 06:17, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

@Ruakh: Thanks. I'm not sure what I did to merit this notification, but I hope it means you'll be around more. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 06:50, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
Oh, sorry, I should have linked to the edit I saw: adjectivization?diff=40568798.
As for being around more . . . maybe? Not sure. :-P
RuakhTALK 05:27, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
@Ruakh: Ah, I just wasn't thinking in that edit. And, er, please come back... you're a remarkably sane person and a good editor, and we have more than enough work to go around. :) —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 05:33, 28 September 2016 (UTC)


Dear volunteers,

For the entry “transability”, I added a reference and link under Quotations. Since the definition provided for transability is clearly inspired by one sentence in my work (the one for which I added a quotation and reference), I would really appreciate if the quotation was not removed. I tried to add it a few times but for a reason that I don't understand, it was removed. Thank you very much. All the best, ABscholar1979

It is not clear why what you are trying to add even belongs in the entry. We are only concerned with the word, and your "quotation" does not even contain that word. There is no reason for us to fix your formatting for something that doesn't even need to be there. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 00:39, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Acela RepublicanEdit

This is completely ridiculous. We know the word exists, we know it's used a fair amount, and we're still trying to delete it. This is a good idea HOW exactly? This improves learning the language HOW exactly? It's not. DC and Equinox are being overly bureaucratic about this, and I am mad at DC in particular for his insistence on bureaucracy while he does nothing to try and add citations. All he does is say I must do it. Purplebackpack89 05:47, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

If you really wanted to be able to add this word and improve Wiktionary, you'd work with experienced editors to craft a vote that would expand and clarify durability. Instead, you ignore the rules, insult other editors, and act insufferably immaturely.
Also, I would prefer it you wouldn't bring your drama with others to my talk page. I don't intend to respond to you further here unless the situation changes. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 05:52, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
You don't seem to understand why I think this is ridiculous... Purplebackpack89 06:09, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Booties is fashion slang for bootsEdit

I added booties into boots because I have seen it a few times and recently it was also on Aliexpress where they advertised boots, take a look at this: Just think about it, someone says "I want those those booties" in informal affectionate way.

water and wahter, wahtuhEdit

Sorry for edit-warring you right back on water, but I have to wonder whether you're actually in favour of retaining links to those forms (I could give every word an eye-dialect respelling; the targets of those links don't even have citations), or whether you've just mistaken me for some kind of vandal based on the form of my username... 4pq1injbok (talk) 03:28, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

I know you're not a vandal, you just don't know what you're doing. The entries don't have to have citations on them to be citeable; just glance at Google Books and you'll see they pass. Now, I reckon they should be marked as eye dialect (and I appreciate that you did that on their pages), but there's no call to remove them (especially after someone's reverted you). —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 03:37, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
I know what I'm doing. I'm trying to fight cruft, and those lines are crufty, though your latest is an improvement. Eye dialect is a fully productive process! If we carry this through to its logical conclusion, shouldn't we write a bot that changes -er to -uh in every English headword, searches Google Books, and slaps up a link if it finds something? That wahtuh should have a page of its own isn't cruft, since it might be searched for, and it's useful that it can be found; but I see no use in the link going this way. Anyway, I'm not going to argue further about this here, that's all from me. 4pq1injbok (talk) 03:50, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
Well, plurals are productive as well, but we have entries for them and link to them from the lemma. If someone could write a bot that could do that, it would be an acceptable contribution to Wiktionary. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 04:19, 14 October 2016 (UTC)


I've never seen that tilde thing on an English word before (except Spanish loans). I am truly curious about the ety/origin. Equinox 19:29, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

In the middle ages, the tilde just indicated a following letter n (or occasionally m or even other letters) written above the letter to save space. It was used in pretty much all Latin-script languages. --WikiTiki89 19:35, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Module:fa-translit not workingEdit

Hey @Metaknowledge, fa-translit is not working. Why is that? Using {{xlit}}, I will use an example of it not working:

>>> <<<

There! — AWESOME meeos * (「欺负」我) 23:41, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

It never worked and never will work. Persian text cannot be transliterated automatically because the vowels usually cannot be deduced. --WikiTiki89 23:59, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
  • You don't need to ping someone on their talk page; it accomplishes nothing. Also, I have no association with that module and have not contributed to the Persian entries here. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 00:35, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

"fix indent" editEdit

Hi. Re: diff. Correct me if I'm wrong but I'm not sure if it does any good. It looks like a reply to an unsigned post of another person. I intentionally used "::" to align to my previous paragraph. Am I missing something? --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 01:44, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

I hope it's better now. In numbered lists, every consecutive line must start with # otherwise the numbering restarts. --WikiTiki89 01:51, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Your editEdit

is in error at a macro level, even if the formatting could be improved. Wiktionary:List of languages is a list of the language codes used at Wiktionary, not a list of languages in some overarching Wikipedia or ISO principle. If we have some separate lists of codes like NL. and other "etymology only" "languages" they should be linked prominently until they can be fully merged. Keeping them at separate namespaces is a needless timesuck and inconvenience. — LlywelynII 04:46, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

It's not a terrible idea to add it, but you could at least try to do it right. Ask someone who can if you can't. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 04:52, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
Voilà! —JohnC5 05:07, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
I didn't know of that page. Thanks, John. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 07:24, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
Neither did I, but I had a suspicion that such a thing should exist. —JohnC5 14:46, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

About votesEdit

Are you, personally, annoyed at the fact that I've been creating some votes? I remember you saying sometimes: "People are annoyed", but I don't know who these people are (except, perhaps, 1 person which I mentioned in the BP). I think you said that phrase like 5 times if I'm not mistaken. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 10:37, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

I also find the large number of votes annoying. Pretty sure I said so before. Equinox 15:01, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
  • I find it only slightly annoying. However, quite a lot of other people are clearly annoyed (this is not particularly difficult to see), and that in turn has a large effect on how people feel about participating in votes in general. I have some votes that I want to create, but I keep putting them off in large part because I feel like we are saturated. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 19:22, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
    Ok, I apologize, then. I can slow down on the votes. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 19:27, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

We should be less saturated now; I wonder if you would be more comfortable creating votes now if you want, Metaknowledge. (Don't put your votes off because of me!) There are 3 votes now; only 1 of those was created by me. I'll probably want to create another soon, which would make 4 votes. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 22:30, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

Indeed, now is a welcome ebb, and you can certainly create a vote. I'm a bit busy, unfortunately, but I may try to get a vote going myself. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 02:21, 21 November 2016 (UTC)


Hi Meta. Thanks for responding to my RFP. Unfortunately, the Modern Israeli Hebrew pronunciation, /tʁuˈot/, suggests the English *truot not teruot or whatever. Would it be possible for you and/or other Hebrew-knowledgable editors to add transcriptions for any trisyllabic pronunciations of this word that exist or have existed, please (like the Biblical and Ashkenazi versions you mention, I imagine, for example)? Also, re listing non-lemma descendants under non-lemmata, the practice is atypical (most descendants are lemmata listed under other lemmata) but justified in the case where a non-lemma in one language was clearly borrowed from another language's non-lemma alongside that recipient language borrowing the related lemma from the source language; other examples include ethe and ethea, from the Ancient Greek ἤθη(ḗthē) and ἤθεα(ḗthea), respectively, which are plural forms of ethos, itself from the Ancient Greek ἦθος(êthos). — I.S.M.E.T.A. 00:11, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Re pronunciations: You have to understand that the English spellings comes from the Hebrew spellings, not the pronunciations. Choices of whether to treat tav as <t>, <s>, or <th> are of course influenced by pronunciations from various times and places, but many people (including me) will use a spelling in running English text at odds with their pronunciation.
Re non-lemma descendants: It's not a big deal, but it's a ridiculous duplication of information if you think about languages like Yiddish that pluralise nouns differently based on their sources. We need to avoid duplication so that errors in the dictionary do not persist, and that's why this should only be done in exceptional cases. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 01:26, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
@I'm so meta even this acronym: I agree with what Metaknowledge said, but I humored you and added more pronunciations, some of which are closer to the English spelling. --WikiTiki89 12:52, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
That "careful Ashkenazi" one sounds really weird to me. I think I've only heard the first Ashkenazi transcription. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 18:19, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
It's definitely used, such as when reading the Torah, for example. At other times, the same pronunciation but with penultimate stress (/t(ə)ˈʁu.ɔɪ̯s/) is also common. --WikiTiki89 18:38, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
In my shul, as is probably true in much of the world, the Israeli pronunciation (or something similar to it) is somehow considered superior and used for leyning, etc (but the Ashkenazic pronunciation is still sometimes used in the context of prayer). —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 18:43, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
Yes, that's pretty common nowadays, but in many of the shuls I go to (I hop around a lot), the Ashkenazi pronunciation is still used by at least some of the leyners. But even aside from that, before the 20th century or so, the Ashkenazi pronunciation was ubiquitous in Ashkenazi congregations. Just because it has lost prestige doesn't mean it disappeared from history. --WikiTiki89 18:57, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
Believe me, I'm not happy that it's even lost prestige. But who am I to complain, I can't even speak Hebrew. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 19:05, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── @Wikitiki89: Thanks for adding all those pronunciations! I recognise that the content I look for in Hebrew here is usually to elucidate etymology, which may not be the content that is of most intrinsic importance to actually learning the language (especially since, etymologically, it's usually Biblical Hebrew that's relevant), but I appreciate being humoured. :-)  — I.S.M.E.T.A. 11:56, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Not meant for vandalismEdit

Hi, Meta. I didn't mean to vandalize something. It was a rollback error. I was trying to be more accurate for the given names that was translated from another language. BrianChiem1996 (talk) 23:30, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

@BrianChiem1996: I know you're not a vandal. You are still proliferating errors by adding translations in languages that you clearly do not know, with faulty transliterations. Please stop adding these, and stick to editing what you do know. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 23:33, 12 November 2016 (UTC)


I would like to rename this page to include the noun prefix, *ma-. But since this name includes tones, I have to figure out what the tone of the prefix would be. Do you know? —CodeCat 21:17, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

The prefix is low tone. But we should keep them as roots, especially because some roots have changed noun class in the descendants. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 21:26, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
@CodeCat: I see you've already moved one (where low tone is unmarked, incidentally) to the full form. We need to create standards before moving entries. Also, you should probably do some reading about Proto-Bantu first. If you send me an email, I can give you some papers and books. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 21:31, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
I've done quite a bit of reading already, w:Proto-Bantu is mine, mostly. —CodeCat 21:32, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
I'll set up a basic WT:ABNT. —CodeCat 21:34, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Zulu and Swahili -fa "die"Edit

I looked up "die" in BLR, but the main result that came up was "kú". This seems rather different from the Zulu and Swahili forms. Is there really a sound change that turned ku into fa into both of these languages? —CodeCat 14:02, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Just regular sound change. /ku/ goes to /fu/ in many noninitial positions, and then the verb */-fua/ joined the monosyllabic set and became /-fa/. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 18:37, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
I see. I noticed that BLR drops the final vowel of verbs, how should we deal with this? Having -kú- with hyphens on both ends looks a bit silly. How are the verbs of various Bantu languages lemmatised? —CodeCat 18:41, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
Generally, Bantu verbs are lemmatised with the stem (≠root, because it includes the final vowel). In PB, the final vowel is a toneless -a. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 18:47, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
Is a toneless -a different from a low-tone -à? In Zulu they're equivalent, but not sure about Proto-Bantu. —CodeCat 19:21, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
Well, the PB contrast is, on a phonemic level, solely between H and L. However, verbal extensions seem to have been "toneless" in the sense that they simply matched the tone of whatever was next to them, and the FV *-a may have carried that to some degree, although it probably experienced downdrift and those resembled a low tone phonetically. You can think of these as underlyingly L, which may be conditioned to H by their environment. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 21:49, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
So, should we name our entry *-kúa or *-kúà? —CodeCat 14:56, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
The former is the standard notation. Of course, we still might be better off just using the root, *-kú-. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 23:51, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
I'd rather use the form that more closely agrees with the descendant lemmas. We use the infinitive of Proto-Germanic and Proto-Slavic for that reason, and the 1st singular present in Proto-Italic and Proto-Hellenic. —CodeCat 23:57, 17 November 2016 (UTC)


When you removed otb from Module:languages/data3/o, you overlooked the fact that bo lists xct as its ancestor, and xct lists otb as its ancestor. I removed the reference to otb from Module:languages/data3/x, but that's just a stopgap to get rid of the 70+ module errors until this is sorted out. You obviously can't merge the grandparent and the grandchild, but leave the parent separate, so this may require some rethinking. Chuck Entz (talk) 14:47, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Oy vey. Thank you for catching that. We can solve this by making otb etymology-only, right? Might not be a bad idea anyway. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 21:15, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Proto-Bantu class 1a/2aEdit

I believe that class 1a nouns have no prefix whatsoever in Proto-Bantu, is this correct? What about class 2a? —CodeCat 18:42, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

You are correct about 1a. I don't think that PB had 2a. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 23:51, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Tone marks in descendantsEdit

I noticed that tone marks are used for Chichewa headwords. Should we also include them in the descendants on Proto-Bantu pages, for easier comparison? —CodeCat 23:02, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

If we start marking tone in all the descendants, we're just getting ourselves into more trouble, in my opinion. Some languages, like Lingala, seem to be lemmatised here with tone marking in the pagetitle, so we should keep those for linking purposes. For most languages, we don't even have consistent standards about how tones should be marked. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 23:05, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

umzali and -zalaEdit

Meeussen mentions this derivational pair, but the suffix is a close *-i which would lead to -zi in Zulu, not -li. Do you think the l was restored here by analogy? Also, while *-bíadì is in BLR, it says there are no zone S descendants. —CodeCat 22:09, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Well, since BLR says it isn't in Zone S, this must've been formed from the verb post-PB. The suffix -i has remained slightly productive in many groups, so it wouldn't be too surprising. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 22:36, 21 November 2016 (UTC)


Does Swedish espan also derive from Munsee? Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk) 09:55, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

Geographically, it seems likely. That said, I'm not knowledgeable about Munsee and its close relatives, so asking -sche might be better if you have doubts. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 20:14, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
All right, thanks for the answer. Also, is it me or does the sound example at kinnesinne sound like it stresses the first syllable. Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk) 11:16, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
Definitely as a secondary stress, at least. I am probably biased by seeing the IPA before playing the audiofile, though. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 17:22, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
Oops, so I misphrased my question. What I intended to ask was whether it sounds to you like the primary stress is on the first syllable (which is a pronunciation I've never heard and haven't seen in any print dictionaries). Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk) 13:29, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
I don't think it sounds like that, but I lack a particularly well-tuned ear, so to speak. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 00:42, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Your behaviorEdit

Hello Wiktionary Admin Metaknowledge, your reverted (my edit) without any comment and as minor, which obtain on Wikipedia either for vandalism or for rude behavior. @Uploader is a more common synonym to "Hochlader" (which you now added without any ref). Bing, Google and also Babylon had only Uploader as translation. Anyway it is a very specific terminus for a common dictionary. On the other hand you seems not familiar with German language. Thanks for attention --Perhelion (talk) 00:38, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

This isn't Wikipedia. Your formatting was a mess, and I simply made an effort to correct it; it was actually faster to revert it. I'll add Uploader as a translation. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 00:41, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
Ok yes indeed, and yes there was now 2 lines instead of one line (hidden behind a click menu). I was aware that here other rules could apply, but not the basic ones. In this way, new users could are more likely to feel pushed (which are most likely come first from Wikipedia). Thanks for your additional edit. Perhelion (talk) 00:51, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

this revertEdit

While the edit summary may have been profane, what's inaccurate about that? He's (unfortunately) going to be president in a few weeks. Purplebackpack89 00:57, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

He's not the president yet. What if he drops dead? —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 01:53, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
Much as I'd like that, it is exceedingly unlikely. Purplebackpack89 02:01, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
We're not a crystal ball. Point is, we don't say it until it's true. The current wording is true now and will continue to be true even after his probable inauguration. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 02:03, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
At this point, the only thing more crystal-bally than saying he's going to be president is saying he's not going to be President. Purplebackpack89 02:26, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
The likelihood is irrelevant. Even if it's 100% certain that he will be President, he is not President yet. --WikiTiki89 04:53, 27 November 2016 (UTC)


No responsibilities! No promises! <channels inner Nac Mac Feegle> No lawyers! maybe, if I must. - Amgine/ t·e 02:39, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

I haven't read any Pratchett. But done. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 03:13, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
w:Nac Mac Feegles, sometimes called pictsies as they small, blue-ish, but not at all fairy-like. - Amgine/ t·e 04:44, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Illion numbersEdit

You can see the larger number to Wiktionary.

Millillion - 10^3003

Dumillillion - 10^6003

Myrillion - 10^30003

Micrillion - 10^3000003

Nanillion - 10^3000000003

Picillion - 10^3000000000003

Femtillion - 10^3000000000000003

Attillion - 10^30000000000000000003

Zeptillion - 10^3000000000000000000003

Yoctillion - 10^3000000000000000000000003

Xonillion - 10^3000000000000000000000000003


Cyrus noto3at bulaga (talk) 07:45, 5 December 2016 (UTC) ッ

Return to the user page of "Metaknowledge".