Mr. Guye
Joined 20 December 2013
Latest comment: 4 years ago by Mr. Guye in topic Phrasal verbs
Redirects edit
Please stop creating unwanted redirects to templates. This is not Wikipedia, and these redirects using capital letters are just a nuisance here. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 22:27, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Metaknowledge They are not a nuisance, and I and almost certainly many other people want them. They are helpful since one doesn't have to worry about creating redlinks when they wanted an established template. It's incredibly annoying when a capital version fails to exist.Mr. Guye (talk) 22:35, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- This is not Wikipedia. All pages are case-sensitive, and templates are lowercase by default. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 22:38, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Metaknowledge Yes, so that is why I am creating the uppercase redirects. Mr. Guye (talk) 22:40, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- Again, please do not do this. If you actually wish to become a Wiktionary contributor, it will be very easy for you to adapt to calling templates with a lowercase initial letter (or just copy existing usage). —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 22:42, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Metaknowledge: No. You have failed to explain why what I'm doing is allegedly so bad. You have not cited a single policy or guideline to back up your claims. I checked the deletion policy, and there is no justification for deletion of the redirects I'm creating. I'm not going to stop creating these redirects until I see a policy-based reason against it.Mr. Guye (talk) 22:47, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- Long story short, they have no reason to exist. Learning to actually type the templates in lowercase is not difficult and it's easy to catch, especially if one uses the preview like people should. SURJECTION ·talk·contr·log· 22:48, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- Lol, what gall. Per utramque cavernam 22:52, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) @Surjection, Metaknowledge: Never mind, I found Wiktionary:Redirections, which tells me that what you guys are saying have a grain of precedent behind it. Still though, "they have no reason to exist" is a very weak argument. Mr. Guye (talk) 23:01, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- We want to have only the infrastructure that we actually need. Our template usage is much stricter and more extensive than that of Wikipedia, and we need bots to be able to parse it easily. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 23:05, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Metaknowledge: "Our template usage is much stricter and more extensive than that of Wikipedia" How? Mr. Guye (talk) 23:10, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- I'm not sure what kind of an answer you're looking for. Look at an entry, and you'll see there is rather little prose unbroken by templates. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 00:29, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Metaknowledge So like Wikimedia Commons? Mr. Guye (talk) 00:54, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
- I don't know. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 02:06, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Metaknowledge So like Wikimedia Commons? Mr. Guye (talk) 00:54, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
- I'm not sure what kind of an answer you're looking for. Look at an entry, and you'll see there is rather little prose unbroken by templates. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 00:29, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Metaknowledge: "Our template usage is much stricter and more extensive than that of Wikipedia" How? Mr. Guye (talk) 23:10, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- We want to have only the infrastructure that we actually need. Our template usage is much stricter and more extensive than that of Wikipedia, and we need bots to be able to parse it easily. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 23:05, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) @Surjection, Metaknowledge: Never mind, I found Wiktionary:Redirections, which tells me that what you guys are saying have a grain of precedent behind it. Still though, "they have no reason to exist" is a very weak argument. Mr. Guye (talk) 23:01, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Metaknowledge: No. You have failed to explain why what I'm doing is allegedly so bad. You have not cited a single policy or guideline to back up your claims. I checked the deletion policy, and there is no justification for deletion of the redirects I'm creating. I'm not going to stop creating these redirects until I see a policy-based reason against it.Mr. Guye (talk) 22:47, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- Again, please do not do this. If you actually wish to become a Wiktionary contributor, it will be very easy for you to adapt to calling templates with a lowercase initial letter (or just copy existing usage). —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 22:42, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Metaknowledge Yes, so that is why I am creating the uppercase redirects. Mr. Guye (talk) 22:40, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- This is not Wikipedia. All pages are case-sensitive, and templates are lowercase by default. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 22:38, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
Chinese categories edit
Please stop adding Cantonese categories; they have been deprecated. Also, please stop to consider whether the term you are categorising in fact belongs in that category, instead of trying to add as many as possible. Unequal treaties are not a kind of war, or part of war. They emerged due to wars, but that doesn't mean the word for "unequal treaty" belongs in the category for war. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 03:00, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
Categories 2 edit
- Most of your categorising is unwanted, and I have had to revert many of your edits. You have been adding overly general categories, putting categories on alternative forms, and adding categories that are just bizarre, like this. I tried to explain this above, but you have continued in the same vein, so please stop adding categories altogether. If you continue to add them inappropriately, you will be blocked. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 03:54, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
- @Metaknowledge: I'm not going to "stop adding categories altogether", but since you say I'm categorizing wrong, can you please provide with or clearly state the rules on categorization. Can you please explain exactly what you mean by "unwanted", "overly general", etc.. Which guidelines specifically am I violating? — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs) 04:16, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
- Applying categories takes some level of judgement, and not everybody can make that judgement well. It's not really something that can be taught, but I tried to explain it above with unequal treaties. If that didn't make sense, I'm not sure I will be able to do better; you might ask @Chuck Entz, perhaps. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 04:36, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
- Well, you've continued to add categories that are inappropriate as described above, like Category:Culture for a word that means "bad". Accordingly, I will block you for one day. Additionally, please look at
{{sense}}to understand when that template should be used. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 05:52, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
- @Metaknowledge: I'm not going to "stop adding categories altogether", but since you say I'm categorizing wrong, can you please provide with or clearly state the rules on categorization. Can you please explain exactly what you mean by "unwanted", "overly general", etc.. Which guidelines specifically am I violating? — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs) 04:16, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
Phrasal verbs edit
"Wear the trousers" is not a PV. Equinox ◑ 08:38, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
- @Equinox Oops. I added it because it was already listed as a verb, and it was clearly a phrase. I didn't realize "phrasal verb" was a term of art. Sorry. — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs) 18:59, 12 December 2019 (UTC)