User talk:Pumpie/archive

Learn more about this page

I'm having difficulty understanding the usefulness of some of your recent appendices for place names, surnames and first names. All of these can become tremendously long. How do you plan to coordinate what's in the linked articles to the fact that the word is on one of these lists. There is already a very long series of articles in Wikipedia on every imaginable little village in the United States. Surely you don't intend to put all of these in that appendix. Eclecticology

There is a solution. Other or some dictioanries ingluding that there on the worldwide web do intend to list every place names from the world. These place that I put are not Imaginable, I want some of the people and children from the outside world to know every single place names in the world someday. One example is "Pontypool" which is 105 kilometers northeast of Toronto. "Aspropyrgos" is a suborub of Athens, Greece.

Tell me where is that article of place names, please?

Most of the material relating to places belongs in Wikipedia rather than Wiktionary. In Wiktionary it is enough to say what will identify the name if one runs into it in the course of his reading. One of the "rules" that was adopted early on at Wikipedia is "Wikipedia is not paper." It is just as applicable at Wiktionary. It's really more a statement of fact than a rule. If there is anything to its being a rule it's in what that statement implies. Much of what we would need to help us find information in a printed fact book is meaningless in an electronic medium. After all, when you can search for something electronically, the function of lists change, Quite often these very long lists become nothing more than "to-do" lists. They are also useful in enumerating all the elements of a relatively finite set as in the list of Greek prefectures. Wikipedia already includes some 30,000 place names for the United States alone; simply listing them is not useful because the list is far too long. There is also a much bigger Pontypool in Wales.

I will also put Pompano Beach and Andorran willage and towns a little later, and actually, I am a boy genius. and this is really not paper. Also coming soon, Wiktionary Appendix:List of place names in North America, and tell me where you can find a lists of place names of the world and villages, towns and cities on Wikipedia please, I'm a beginner?

Eclecticology 06:03, 23 Sep 2003 (UTC)

I would love to see you express your vision of where these appendices are going. Eclecticology 18:34, 18 Sep 2003 (UTC)

your page on cane (italiano) is wrong (the french word is "chien") and redundant with cane. If a word is used in several languages, all these languages go on the same page... and about your addition on the french words index page, why have you written : "Lingue/Language" ? "Lingue" doesn't mean anything in english or even in french Koxinga 22:29, 18 Sep 2003 (UTC)

This page will go bilingual. I will someday know every language, Lingua is Italian and Latin word for "language".

Your optimism for knowing every language is more misplaced than the one for knowing every place name. Wiktionary is already polyglottal, and integrating information from a very broad selection of languages is a very big challenge. The people who participate often discuss how best to handle different issues as they arise, so when someone comes along and starts doing something in his own way without discussing it with the others it gets people a little concerned. There is already an apparent consensus put all appearances of a word in any language all on the same page. When you started suggesting that we put the Italian appearances on a separate page, it got people's attention.

Also, please don't use the fact that you are a kid as some kind of excuse or justification. We are all equals here; you will be judged on the work that you do, not on the fact that you're a kid. Eclecticology 06:03, 23 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Langue is the French word for language and I have corrected it.

My optimism for knowing every language is not misplaced. It is fundamental and educational for some people or students who want to learn their or other languages, especially people who want to learn lots of languages as well. More Wiktionarians will sign in and they will have links to every single language in the universe.

Eclecticology 06:03, 23 Sep 2003 (UTC)

You can't know every language. If you actually understand four or five languages, I think it's already very good... Ask me I you want help to learn french... ?
I think the list of place names should go on wikipedia instead
When you say :"This page will go bilingual", can you explain ? it is the english wiktionary and all pages have to be in english. Perhaps a french wiktionary will be created but in this wiktionary, you have to write only in english (excepted translations, of course). Eclecticology, do you agree ? Koxinga 20:59, 23 Sep 2003 (UTC)

I disagree. Its berret to speak and understand every language in the universe. And by the way, there may be links to other wiktionaries when you find an foreign word and it will be founded on a Wiktionary that isn't in the English language and second of all, I will understand every language in the universe

There are an estimated 5,000 different languages in the world. If each has a modest 10,000 words, that's 50,000,000. At 1 word per second it would take 19 sleepless months merely to say them all, without taking time to know what they mean. The great Argentinian writer, Jorge Luis Borges once boasted of knowing over 80 languages. When you are making claims about learning every language, iit is wise to subject those claims to a reality check.

6,800 languages and dialects is the exact, it doesn't take 19 to 21 months, that's about half a year, there are other Wiktionarians and better technology that will do the work, especially those writers who type 300 words per minute. Never mind Borges (pronounced bohr'hess), genius get to know every different languages in the universe and never gets sick of it.

There cannot be an exact number of languages spoken in the world. Where do you draw the line between a language and a dialect? I admire your intention of learning all the languages in the universe. I have to disappoint you though, it won't be possible. This is something you will gradually learn to understand as you go on learning more of them. Some languages are very near to each other Italian, Spanish, Portuguese or Dutch and German are very difficult to really master properly. You will always notice you make little mistakes because of 'contamination'. And then there are the differences, now that is a challenge. I would suggest you try to learn Turkish, Japanese, Chinese, Korean, Greek, Arab, Hebrew, Russian, Finnish and Hungarian to get a feel for the different ways people can express themselves. When you know those, you can take on Quechua and Basque. Don't start with the easy targets. If you really want to become a polyglot, you will have to take advantage of your youth. Your ability to assimilate new languages will start to diminish between 22 and 25. If you can afford to, you should try to travel as much as you can between 18 and 28 to practice and really get a feel for the languages you know theoretically by then. I grew up in a multilingual environment (Belgium). We speak Dutch with an important influence from both English and French. Germany is also very near and German is a language that is rather easy for us to learn. I ended up speaking 4 languages by the time I was 16, 5 (it) at 17, 6 (es) at 19, 7 (el) between 20 and 23, 8 (tr) between 26 and 28, 9 (eo) around 30. Today I cannot say I speak 9 languages though, even when I learned 9 of them (and some others I started, but I never attained any level of proficiency beyond saying hi, thank you and some very basic conversation. (eu, jp, pl, ro)), I can only say to be able to speak 6 fluently. For the other 3, I would need between 1 week and 1 month to be able to communicate on a rather basic level again. So there you have the reason why it is not really possible to actually communicate fluently in more than say 5 or 6 languages. Mere mortals with a day job and a family and social life, simply don't have the time to practice more than that amount. I see languages as a habit. If you stop using them, you start forgetting them. It will take less effort to refresh them than when you learned them for the first time, but it will take at least some effort. One thing that really helped to keep them up to date and deepen the knowledge of a language after you practiced it with people from the place where they speak them is reading books (originals preferably). :::Of course I'm just an average person with an IQ maybe a little above average (I don't know really) and with a terrible memory. I just learned all these languages because it was fun to me. I didn't often sit down to learn a lot of theory. I just tried to talk a lot with people around me and with people I met on my travels and improved my languages that way. If you are able to sit down and study and combine that with for example chatting with people from around the globe, you might be able to do twice or three times as good as I did. You should give up on the idea to learn every conceivable language on the globe though. It would be far better to concentrate on a few of the more interesting ones. It might also be better to concentrate on a basic vocabulary of the languages you are interested in, instead of place names or first names, as far as the Wiktionary is concerned. Those names will find their way into the Wiktionary and Wikipedia eventually, but they aren't a priority and entering them will quickly become a tedious job. Even more boring than trying to create a dictionary :-) Good luck!Polyglot 09:26, 24 Sep 2003 (UTC)

I disagree, and I really saw it on http://www.ethnologue.com, check out how many languages they have around the globe. I can think of many languages. People are going to like it. Anyways, people living in the second world is decreasing dramatically. Mostly outside China. Boy genius tend to learn all living ane extinct languages on the world. This boy genius live where people can learn as many languages as they can in. The exact number of languages in the universe is rare and unknown, just artificially.

There is no single alphabetical list of US place names in Wikipedia; it would be too long. If you want a particular community use the search function. Or... go to the state article, the list of counties in that state, and the particular county to find the places in that county. There are also many outside sources with long lists of places.

How about Australia, Japan, Latin America, Europe, Asia, Africa, the Americas, and Australia, alphabetically in a separate article. Where is that information?

I agree with Koxinga that this is the English Wiktionary. This means that here we try to give meaning to the words from any language for the benefit of English speakers. If someone chose to start a Wiktionary in the Gbeya language he would provide all the information to benefit speakers of that language.

There will be a link to that wiktionary at least, remove the language from wiktionary link to a new website called [language.wiktionary.org.] The only solution.

Finally, please sign your posts. As these discussions become longer that and various indentations become the way to know who is saying what. To sign simply put three tildes in a row; if you want to add the date as well, use four tildes.

Eclecticology 22:24, 23 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Is there any list of first names like Janice, Timothy, and more on Wikipedia? You know, I can't look every article in one day until my brain is smart.

There isn't; it would be too useless. Eclecticology 16:13, 24 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Useless, this isn't useless, There is an alphabetical list of names founded somewhere on Wikipedia.

Who want's to help me to edit some first names on Wiktionary and Wikipedia to outsmart some F-graded kabalarians, because they are teaching some inappropriate codes and rules of a meaning of a name, a real meaning of a name is like this, the meaning like Pomona=, Latin for apple, and so on that is not Kabalarian content?

Pumpie 00:35, 17 Oct. 2003 (UTC) (16 Oct in North America)

Hi Pumpie,

You don't need to be an administrator to set up a bot. Administrator privileges are rather to clean up the mess after somebody comes by to vandalize Wiktionary or for even more tedious organisational tasks. Polyglot 23:45, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)

phonetic alphabet

Oops, check definition afte ===Noun=== SemperBlotto 14:48, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Bobtail

Watch out, I've been reverting his vadalism too, but I think he's used to creating new users. Keep your eyes open. Rich Farmbrough 21:54, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

P.S. I've just seen your request for help on Wikipedia, but I'm not at present an Admin in Wiktionary, although I have just requested it. Rich Farmbrough 22:40, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Sorry for the lack of timely response. I was on a plane from John Wayne at the time. Running through and deleting stuff/reverting stuff now. The bad news is, this guy is a regular. The good news is that you haven't noticed before. Usually he is blocked & reverted within a few minutes...I think today's run of over an hour is a new record for him. --Connel MacKenzie 23:43, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Add topic