Open main menu

Wiktionary β

User talk:SemperBlotto

NOTE: Conversations between third parties on my talk page are liable to deletion - talk amongst yourselves, not on my talk page.

ArchivesEdit

This is a Wiktionary user page.

If you find this page on any site other than Wiktionary, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated, and that the user this page belongs to may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wiktionary itself. The original page is located at http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/User_talk:SemperBlotto.


thermidorEdit

What do you mean? It's a direct quote from an English-language book. The word is italicized however. Rice makes it sound like it's a word used in international relations, regardless of the origin.zigzig20s (talk) 12:24, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

  • The italics are the clue - that shows that it is a foreign word being mentioned in an English-language sentence. SemperBlotto (talk) 12:27, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

How wasEdit

your 2017, Jeff? I had a great time - traveling to South America, getting a kinda promotion, joining a band and enjoying life in Catalonia. --Gente como tú (talk) 13:59, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

  • It had its ups and downs (that I can't mention here) - but I survived it. SemperBlotto (talk) 14:00, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

p.s. There is an email link on my homepage if you want the details. SemperBlotto (talk) 14:02, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. I probably won't be emailing you. BTW, there's a spelling mistake in the last sentence of this page --Gente como tú (talk) 14:07, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
OK. Fixed. SemperBlotto (talk) 14:12, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
And you spelled gullible wrong in the third paragraph, too. --Gente como tú (talk) 12:04, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
And a Merry Xmas to you too. SemperBlotto (talk) 16:06, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

AWB applicantEdit

Pkbwcgs has contacted me regarding xyr request for AWB CheckPage addition of more than 24 hours. I noticed you have edited that page somewhat recently so I am forwarding the ping. - Amgine/ t·e 18:45, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

dicky birdEdit

I think I can see why you reverted my edits on the two related pages - they did have errors (which I was in the process of fixing), but I think it would have been better to not delete the edit entirely but fix it - "dicky bird" (in several forms) is recorded as Cockney slang for "word" and I think the snippet from Simple Simon was worth mentioning as an example (although it was an alternative form - that might have been the main problem?). Maitchy (talk) 21:50, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

I think you have an admirerEdit

‎TemperBlotto (talkcontribs) --Per utramque cavernam (talk) 18:21, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

copper-bottomedEdit

Why did you revert my contribution, the Cambridge dictionary nuance on this is not to your liking? --BeckenhamBear (talk) 14:54, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

  • I thought that it was just repeating our existing definition. SemperBlotto (talk) 15:22, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
    • They can be both seen as different. “reliable, trustworthy”, is not the same as "safe and certain of success" is it? Also the former is open ended as to what it defines, whereas the latter "is" defined. --BeckenhamBear (talk) 17:55, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
    • This is very shoddy. You had reverted a perfectly good bolt-on referenced definition of mine, and then you reverted my deletion of a made-up word. All this without explanation, except a glib message putting the onus on me, to defend my edits, which I later did. I note also that when you realised I was correct in the latter case, there was no such word, you then deleted the non existing word, rather than rollbacking it. The nett effect was you increased your edit stat, did not accrue a delete, and wiped out my entire Wiki stat (now logged as deletes, all six in one swoop), making me look like a vandal. I asked for your justification, and got a somewhat glib answer. Then, when I gave you a full and correct justification for my change you ignored me. I also notice from your User page that you take pride in your own stats. It's not within the remit of an Administrator to deal out abrupt treatment to willing editors this way. What are you going to do about this? BeckenhamBear (talk) 16:37, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
      • @BeckenhamBear: Please don't take this the wrong way. We're dealing with many shoddy edits in a day, and sometimes good edits get mistakenly reverted as well. SemperBlotto reremoved himself the made-up word not because he wanted to increase his edit stats (or at least I don't think so), but because it was a good edit of yours that he mistakenly undid. Notice that your contributions still appear in the "history" tab; by no means are they wiped out from the system.
      • The "glib message" you're speaking of is automated; we have no way to change it.
      • As for the definition you added, I think it should possibly be readded, but not in the usage notes: it'd be better to make it a third sense. --Per utramque cavernam (talk) 17:06, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Woman as genderEdit

Why did you delete this section from the talkpage of the article woman? 31.154.8.98 23:25, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

  • Because it was incomprehensible. SemperBlotto (talk) 07:37, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
    • This definition relates the idea that gender and sex are different traits, so a woman by one definition is not necessarily a woman according the other definition. 31.154.8.98 19:27, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

cathode and anodeEdit

Hey SB. Are the definitions for cathode and anode OK? The pages have been on RFC for 200 years now, it'd be sweet to remove 'em. --Gente como tú (talk) 12:25, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

  • They look OK to me. Most dictionaries have shorter definitions, but I think ours are better, if a bit encyclopedic. I'm going to be bold and remove the RfC section. SemperBlotto (talk) 17:12, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

User Page DeletionEdit

The summary "and no further edits" seems to imply I was banned (soft banned if you will). Am I just infringing on that? Otherwise, how is your comment supposed to be understood? Rhyminreason (talk) 21:50, 16 January 2018 (UTC) I just noticed you might have intended to say, I had not done any edits except on my user page. Alright, well, the page wasn't up for long, so there was hardly any time for edits. The pointers to WT:CFI and WT:EL don't seem very helpful if you took issue with the talk page itself, so may I ask: How should I improve on it and how can the text be retrieved for that matter? I did (in the meantime) read Wiktionary:Usernames_and_user_pages#User_pages but didn't find any objection to my draft in it. Rhyminreason (talk) 22:02, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

  • First, become an actual editor - add or modify words. Then add a user page that contains babel templates - these tell us how much we can trust your edits. See the user pages of other users to see the format. SemperBlotto (talk) 11:21, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

assimilation (phonology)Edit

As a reader of wiktionary I found your 2006 definition of assimilation (sense:phonology) much more helpful than the current. It is not my place to make alterations to english entries, but... wouldn't it be nice if your definition came back... Thank you. sarri.greek (talk) 02:03, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

EWDC #4Edit

Hi! Here are your 10 random missing English words for this month.

Equinox 23:30, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

thermoclinicEdit

That's not what this word means. I thought that'd be it as well, but then I checked Google Books and it clearly is the equivalent of baroclinic (which I must confess I don't really understand) but for temperature. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 15:32, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

  • I have amended both definitions. I think (hope) they are accurate. SemperBlotto (talk) 17:08, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
    Looks better now. Thanks. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 17:14, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
  • -id (taxonomic -idae) is almost always for families. I've fixed a bunch, but please go over your recent taxonomic entries again — many of them have mistakes that can be checked just by googling the word first. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 22:23, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
    True of animals, but -idae is also used in the other main taxonomic system (plants, etc.) for subclasses. Fortunately there aren't a lot of those. Chuck Entz (talk) 00:50, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
    There are far fewer of those, hence the "almost always". —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 01:03, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
OK, but the simplest way to stop me adding bad entries is to add a good one first. See User:DTLHS for the ones I shall be looking at soonish. SemperBlotto (talk) 08:17, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
I don't really have the time, although I do try to get to some now and then. But I think that you're perfectly capable of making good entries — after all, you've created a great number of them over the years. If you just look a bit more carefully, maybe search the term in Google to see what database results pop up and then in Google Books to skim the first few results to see if the context matches, then you're bound to have almost no bad definitions. It doesn't take too long the manual way, and Equinox has got some way of making it quicker that he can share if you want it. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 03:13, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
Same issues with elopoid. Most of the time, you shouldn't expect the genus to be what they're referring to; these terms are usually for higher taxonomic ranks. Anyway, just searching this term on Google could have told you that they exist in modern fisheries (so not extinct) and that they include multiple genera, thus indicating that your definition was wrong. Really, looking things up isn't so hard, but if you really aren't willing to do it, you probably shouldn't create taxonomic entries. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 06:24, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
That definition is at odds with everything I've seen in Google Books- it probably doesn't even meet CFI. If an IP had created that, I might very well have deleted it. Heck, you've deleted better entries than that. Why risk damaging the credibility of the dictionary by editing blind? Chuck Entz (talk)

DraftEdit

Can you please restore the draft page of mine you just deleted? I was compiling them so that a user could look it over and you just erased 45 minutes of work. AncientEgypt23 (talk) 14:59, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

I have put it in your own userspace: User:AncientEgypt23/Pharaoh names. Equinox 15:02, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
@Equinox: Thanks. AncientEgypt23 (talk) 15:03, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
And I put it in your User page at the same time. What is it supposed to be? SemperBlotto (talk) 15:05, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Deletion so soonEdit

While I do concur about the opinion of wanting the page deleted, I disagree that the page should have been deleted so quickly. I was wondering what many others than just one editor were going to say about it. Also, now that the page has been deleted, the contents can no longer be viewed by non-admins, so a discussion is less easy because of that.

Isn't there a rule about only deleting the page after one month of discussion and clear consensus at that point, unless the entry is blatant vandalism or something along those lines? PseudoSkull (talk) 07:02, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Which page are we talking about? SemperBlotto (talk) 07:03, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
Wiktionary:Requested entries (other), sorry for not clarifying. PseudoSkull (talk) 07:04, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
Well there was nothing in it. I can bring it back if you like. SemperBlotto (talk) 07:05, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
Please do, and can you strike the "Deleted" too in the discussion so people know it's still quite open? It was only the obstruction of process that I was worried about; I know the page was relatively empty, but still gave a general idea of what the page was for nonetheless. PseudoSkull (talk) 07:11, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

EWDC #5Edit

Hi! Here are your 10 random missing English words for this month.

Equinox 00:23, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

CrystallogenEdit

Do you know of any sources predating 2012 (or, perhaps better, 2006 to account for the French entry) for this term? That would significantly alleviate my worries about this being a possible citogenesis incident. Double sharp (talk) 06:43, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

  • No hits at all on Google ngrams, but there are earlier hits on Google book search - some of which are nothing to do with chemistry. I'll investigate further. SemperBlotto (talk) 09:17, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
    • I've added three citations - one for each meaning as far as I can tell. SemperBlotto (talk) 09:31, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
      • OK on the first two; unfortunately the third one is from 2016, so it would have been from when the term was up on Wikipedia (in English Wikipedia as an alternative name, in French Wikipedia as the main name). I have had a look and I still can't seem to find any sources using the term in its third meaning before 2012 (except for this single patent from 2010, which, having the Commissariat a l'Energie Atomique et aux Energies Alternatives [sic] as its assignee, may well have been influenced by the French Wikipedia article). Double sharp (talk) 12:03, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
        • There are earlier hits on Google books, mostly popular science books about the periodic table. But they don't have full versions of the books to look at and I can't find the actual usage. SemperBlotto (talk) 12:22, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
          • Thank you so much for this reassuring information! Could you at least give me the titles of the books found? I can't find any uses myself of the "carbon group" meaning before 2013 searching for "crystallogen"; I am likely looking in the wrong places. Double sharp (talk) 14:38, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
            • Just do a Google book search. SemperBlotto (talk) 17:51, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
              • As you can see from the link immediately above, I did. Every single one of those uses before 2013 uses the term in one of the top two meanings instead. Given this, I am pretty much forced to conclude that there really isn't any support for the term but the citogenesis incident on Wikipedia, given that exactly the same thing happens when I do the search for the French form cristallogène prior to 2013. This of course doesn't mean the meaning should be removed; now that there are actual citations, it's become a real word that merits inclusion. But I wonder if this state of affairs could possibly be mentioned anywhere. Double sharp (talk) 02:35, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

big-onEdit

Is it really that bad? It was a real AFJ; sorry about the lack of citations. I've actually seen it in a book — can't remember the title, but it was about the accidental creation of a baby universe by colliding uranium nuclei together at RHIC. 137.99.169.71 08:17, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

  • Sorry. But our criteria for inclusion says that a word needs three independent citations. I don't think that the April fool word could get those. SemperBlotto (talk) 10:53, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

About albanian "Kushtrim"Edit

You reverted my edits and I would like to know why? I added:

  • 1. an example (including translation). Was that a mistake? Was a source needed?
  • 2. It's a fact that "Kushtrim" is a common albanian name. This should not have been removed, imo.
  • However, Kushtrim is name, which HAS the meaning "who's brave"; >> "Kush trim". But it can have the meaning "where we spread (it)" too, bc that's what "Ku shtrim" miterally means. It just depends on HOW you pronounce it and where you decide to "cut" the name/word.
    • KUSH TRIM or
    • KU SHTRIM
  • If you remove the -m, it could mean "KUSH TRI" = who's three or "KU SHTRI" = "where it lay(s)".
  • However, since it's written together, it goes back to the original meaning: >> command call.
  • In albanian personal names are treated like nouns, because they are nothing but nouns. Thus, there are always indefinite and definite forms of every personal name in albanian. It doesn't matter if names are albanian words or not, suffixes are always attached at the end. Same custom found (for example) in finnic.
  • This means: "Kushtrim" would be the indefinite form. "Kushtrim[i"] = definite > "[the] Kushtrim". The [i] is the masculine definite article. Imagine it as an english "the", but masculine. Like an italian "il", portuguese "o", french "le", german "der", etc. Imagine it as "[the] Kushtrim", "[il] Kushtrim" in italian, french "[le] Kushtrim", germ. "[der] Kushtrim" or "[o] Kushtrim" in portuguese. Now at the end: Kushtrim[the], Kushtrim[il], Kushtrim[der] and Kushtrim[o]. LAGTON (talk) 16:23, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
    • You edited the entry for kushtrim. The name should be at Kushtrim. SemperBlotto (talk) 21:04, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
      • Not only that, but giving it the definition "name (masculine)" is saying that it's an Albanian word for name (like emër or emën), not that it's an Albanian name. We also don't use an "Example" header, the Albanian quote should go first, followed by the English, the quote is longer than it needs to be (everything after"kushtrim" is unnecessary), English apparently doesn't use the phrase "command cry", so it shouldn't be linked to as a phrase, and I'm sure there are other problems. Chuck Entz (talk) 01:39, 10 March 2018 (UTC)
        • First of all: albanian is not only a language. Albanian represents an own branch. This means two main dialects (tosk+gegë) built one branch, also called "albanian". Tosk/Gegë have severeal subdialects. That's a fact. Also facts: Kushtrim is an albanian word and name. The 'name masculine' - part was wrong. I see. Also true, it's not the word for 'name'. It should be changed to 'masculine name' and an example header should exist, imo.
  • 2nd: Names are nouns. And they are treated like nouns, not only in albanian, but also in germanic languages, etc.
  • {My} [brother] is lazy. (ENGL.)
  • [Kushtrim] is lazy.
  • {Mein} [Bruder] ist faul. (GERM.)
  • [Kushtrim] ist faul.
  • [Vëlla] {im} është dembel. (ALB.)
  • [Kushtrim] është dembel.
  • >> WHO is lazy?
  • Brother/Kushtrim, Bruder/Kushtrim, Vëlla/Kushtrim
  • ■ Note the definite article in albanian, in "brother" and "Kushtrim". You cannot treat albanian like english, bc albanian Vellai is the brother, not just brother. Vëlla[i] [im] është dembel = [The] Brother [of mine] is lazy. >> Would be the correct translation.
  • [Imi] vëlla është dembel. = [My] brother is lazy.
  • why should 'command cry' be incorrect? There's also the alb. word ushtimë (noise). Now tell me german "SchlachtRUF" and "battle CRY" have "nothing" to do with noises. Or german "STIMME" (f. "voice") and "uSHTIMË" (f., "noise/echo") are "not" related...?!

LAGTON (talk) 04:29, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

On the matter of Gheg and Tosk: there's no absolute test for the difference between a language and a dialect, so it's hard to say what's a fact and what's an opinion. At the extremes, English is definitely a language, and American English is definitely a dialect, but it's a lot harder to say whether Scots is a language or a dialect. Since I don't speak and haven't studied either Gheg or Tosk, I'm not qualified to say whether they're languages or dialects, but I will note that this has been discussed here, and it was decided to keep them as dialects. You can discuss it at the Beer parlour if you want to request that we reconsider.
As for whether names are proper nouns or common nouns: I wouldn't know. If you look at Category:Albanian given names, though, you'll notice that they all start with a capital letter. We don't mix words that start with a capital letter with those that start with a lowercase letter, so Kushtrim isn't the same as kushtrim, just as hand and Hand are different. You can create an entry for Kushtrim by clicking on the red link, but I would advise looking at other entries in Category:Albanian given names first to see how to format it.
As for the definition: it needs an indefinite article, as in "a name" or "a masculine name". Better yet, use the {{given name}} template and it will take care of that.
As for the "Examples" header: we don't use a separate header. Quotes from sources like books are placed directly under the definition line, but with "#*" at the start of the line instead of "#", and example sentences that aren't quotes start with "#:". See our entry layout page for details. Chuck Entz (talk) 06:10, 10 March 2018 (UTC)
  • 》On the matter of Gheg and Tosk: there's no absolute test for the difference between a language and a dialect, so it's hard to say what's a fact and what's an opinion...《.

>> Wiki quotes: 》Albanian ... is a language of the Indo-European family, in which it occupies an independent branch. ... The two main dialects of Albanian are Gheg and Tosk.《 - You cannot compare american english with Tosk, Gegë. English is not an independent branch.

  • ■ Indo-European:

[Germanic] - Albanian - Armenian - etc.

    • [West Germanic]
      • [Anglo-Frisian]
        • [Anglic]
          • [English] No disrespect, I adore english. But note that for example your sisterlanguage icelandic built their definite articles like albanians, romanians, bulgarian, etc. We add them at the end. English speakers, germans, dutch, etc. put them in the front of the noun. In icelandic personal names have also declensions and suffixes.
  • However, "[Q]elb" Tosk, "[K]elb" Gegë (= "pus") / "[Q]esh" Tosk, "[K]esh", Gegë (= "laugh"). Kinda satem/centum, don't you think? You could (probably) compare tosk and gegë with swiss-german and high-german. Grammar: high-german is more advanced. That's why they teach high-german at school. Swiss-germ: [CH]ue, high-ger: [K]uh, [Ch]ind / [K]ind. However, in albania they learn the tosk dialect. Gegë preserved more than tosk dialect. Also, Gegë/Tosk grammar is not even identical.
  • 》...Since I don't speak and haven't studied either Gheg or Tosk...《... hold on ... but qualified enough to claim "kushtrim" is from "ushtrim"? Alllright then: "Bob" must be from "o.b." (tampon). And the B- used as a prefix; bc it sounds "better", right? LAGTON (talk) 18:56, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Revoking talk page access when blocking usersEdit

I found you tend to revoke talk page access preemptively when blocking a user. What's the purpose of doing this? This's not a common practice in other Wikimedia projects (see w:Wikipedia:Blocking_policy#Setting_block_options: "editing of the user's talk page should be disabled only in the case of continued abuse of the talk page".)--Zcreator alt (talk) 05:57, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

  • Yes, I find it saves further bother. I hadn't seen Wikipedia's policy. I'll refrain from now on.SemperBlotto (talk) 06:02, 10 March 2018 (UTC)
    • I think you should restore talk page accesses of all users you formerly blocked (probably need a bot).--Zcreator alt (talk) 06:05, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Chemical terms in taxonomic entriesEdit

Over the years have neglected to link taxonomic plant name entries to the chemical names that are derived from them. That is despite the fact that you have frequently shown the connection between chemicals and the plants in which they were originally discovered. Would you find it useful to you for me to place such names in a category if they would be redlinks. I would use {{vern}} with a named parameter, eg, "chem=1". I could also use {{attn|topic=chemistry}} if you find that adequate. DCDuring (talk) 19:45, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

  • Have an experiment. I'll see what I can do. SemperBlotto (talk) 21:04, 11 March 2018 (UTC)
    Everything is experimental. I'll try {{vern|topic=chemistry}}, because it is something that doesn't need modules. I'll let you know when it is going. BTW, at [[mahogany#Derived terms]] and WT:REE#M I'd added mahogany acid and mahogany soap. The are probably not "pure" chemistry. Does that kind of thing interest you as well? DCDuring (talk) 02:52, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
    Oh I'm interested in lots of things. Both added. SemperBlotto (talk) 05:52, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
    p.s. There are over 8,000 entries in Category:Entries missing English vernacular names of taxa - so it is rather daunting. SemperBlotto (talk) 05:55, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
  • I'll update User:DCDuring/VernacularNamesMissing which has shorter lists of the names enclosed in {{vern}} in order of decreasing frequency. DCDuring (talk) 11:45, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
    I have this evening added derived terms headings to translingual plant genus names and placed under them some phytochemical names. If you could take a look at these (my contributions from 22:10 to 23:10 my time) and let me know whether it is worth the trouble to add them, I'd appreciate it. If you don't get to it and need some Cirrus search that gives a high yield (doesn't waste your time), let me know. DCDuring (talk) 03:09, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
    Yes. I think it is worthwhile. However, I think the purists will say that "Derived terms" should be in the same language as the lemma. But I don't know how else to show them. SemperBlotto (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
    The source for the chemical names is Phytochemical Constituents of GRAS Herbs and Other Economic Plants, James A. Duke, 1992. It is a compilation from a very large number of sources, very heterogenous. In some cases, the lists include only elements other than gases and hydrocarbons; others consist almost entirely of complex organic molecules or mixtures.
I could switch to descendants. I have an analogous problem with English synonyms vs. translations. I wish we had the courage to do what MW3 did, making many technical terms "International Scientific Vocabulary". Or that we had a different L2 design for the various classes of Translingual terms. We already have a very different entry structure for CJKV characters, also called translingual. DCDuring (talk) 16:37, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

lisérgicoEdit

Hey. I think you screwed up the pt. --Otra cuenta105 (talk) 22:56, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

אִEdit

Why did you delete this Hebrew letter? If I can know thanks. Gioielli (talk) 11:02, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

  • You defined it using Norwegian templates - so it made no sense at all. See the contents of Category:Hebrew letters for how to format such letters. SemperBlotto (talk) 11:04, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Also, we don't create entries for Hebrew letters with vocalization, so please don't recreate it. --WikiTiki89 11:37, 22 March 2018 (UTC)


I understood, thanks. If I have doubts I will tell you! Gioielli (talk) 11:37, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

119.76.29.77 (talk)Edit

Hello. Could you block this IP please? Too many shoddy edits, he's unreliable. --Per utramque cavernam (talk) 10:31, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

  • I didn't think that they were too bad. Feel free to RfV or RfD any dodgy creations and then we'll see. SemperBlotto (talk) 10:34, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
    • Just looking at this small slice of their edits, you can't see the overall pattern of clueless and irresponsible editing. They add inflection and pronunciation templates, labels and categories in a dozen languages they don't know very well with no clue as to whether they work for that entry, not to mention definitions and even entries that appear to be extracted from a certain nether orifice of theirs... @Metaknowledge, Suzukaze-c, Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV and others have complained about them several times at WT:VIP. I created Abuse Filter 75 to make it easier to spot them, and I block them whenever I see them making bad edits (i.e., most of the time). IMO the effort required to check and fix their edits far outweighs any benefit from the trivial and usually-unnecessary material they add. I've left them alone on the Verlan edits because I had no way to know until now whether they knew what they were doing.
    • That said, they use a wide range of IPs, so I don't dare use range blocks for fear of shutting down access by most of Thailand. That also makes it hard to communicate with them, since they rarely use the same IP twice. Chuck Entz (talk) 19:20, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

LanguageEdit

Good evening, Can I also create the languages on wikitionary?

 Gioielli (talk) 17:00, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Good afternoon. What does that mean? SemperBlotto (talk) 17:01, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

bozoEdit

Re this

Aren't collapsed tables kosher when etymological hypotheses are many and occupy the bulk of the article?

If they are not, I will just add the Spanish material and that'll be it.

LanguageEdit

If it is possible to create a new language with new words and new alphabets on wikitionary? Gioielli (talk) 17:37, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

We're a descriptive dictionary: we only document terms in languages that are used or have been used to convey meaning between people, as documented in durably-archived sources- made-up stuff isn't allowed. See our Criteria for inclusion. If you have sources for entries in a real language that isn't represented here, first look at our List of languages to see if we already have a language code for it. If we don't, make a request at either Requests for moves, mergers and splits or the beer parlour for a language code to be created. Chuck Entz (talk) 18:29, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

ܣܘܝܣܪܐEdit

Is the Syriac letter not correct? Gioielli (talk) 12:17, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

d'eEdit

You suppressed the page? why? Bianchi-Bihan (talk) 15:37, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

I contibuted to d'he, d'hon, and others, can I try d'e ? Exists in french too : https://fr.wiktionary.org/wiki/d’e . Bianchi-Bihan (talk) 17:15, 24 March 2018 (UTC)
OK. Go for it. (I've made minor formatting corrections to those two) SemperBlotto (talk) 19:52, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

Erased in French recently. As were d'am, d'az, d'he, d'hol, d'hon, d'hor and d'ho. Best regards.--Prieladkozh (talk) 13:47, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

You should delete this page and related ones. There is no evidence that this word exists in Breton; the entries that are on br.wikt and scn.wikt have been created by Bianchi-Bihan and looking at the page history on the br.wikt shows that there is absolutely no consensus on the existence of this word. Pamputt (talk) 14:10, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

Why on earth did you delete my wikitionary user page and talk page?Edit

Why did you delete my wikitionary userpage and talk page? Any reason? Dajo767 (talk) 18:25, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

  • User pages are used by Wiktionary editors primarily to show what languages they know and what other specialist knowledge they have. You do not seem to be a Wiktionary editor, so don't need a user page. User talk pages are always started by another user talking to you. Feel free to become an editor here and only then construct a user page that contains babel entries and anything else useful. SemperBlotto (talk) 20:17, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global surveyEdit

WMF Surveys, 18:36, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/189.168.93.140Edit

Sorry to bother you, this needs looking at if you have a moment, please. Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 14:33, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

cozeulodoriesoEdit

I made the entry cozeulodorieso because I found it both interesting and surprising. The meaning I gave had been theorised by George Hempl, as is even stated in the Wikipedia article about 'Carmen Saliare'. It is the most widely accepted meaning of the word, and it may be strange because it is part of the oldest known text in Latin (8th century BC, during the reign of Numa Pompilius). You added to the page a request for verification saying it should be formatted and the meaning should be revised. I would like to help, so could you please tell me what would be okay to add? Mario Vivancos (talk) 17:07, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

  • You have already provided one quotation that uses the word. We just need two more independent citations. As for formatting - if it's a contraction, then you need to say what it is a contraction of. See Category:Italian contractions for how to format such things. SemperBlotto (talk) 17:43, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Unfortunately, I haven't been able to find any other citation of the word, and I fear there are none aside from the one I've given. However, I've been reading about attestation criteria and minority or dead languages – of which Latin could be part – only require one quotation to meet the criterium. 37.15.159.66 09:43, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

What are bombetti?Edit

What are bombetti? Singular probably bombetto but I don't know. Zizzi restaurant is using this name for some little breaded cheese snacks but maybe it means little bombs or summat. Equinox 14:51, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

  • Zizzi are crap at Italian. They probably mean bombette (singular bombetta) which are pork involtini stuffed with cheese &c (and yes, it's a diminutive of bomba). SemperBlotto (talk) 17:08, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
    • Bombetta can also mean "bowler hat" according to it.wikipedia. SemperBlotto (talk) 17:10, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

EWDC #6Edit

Hi! Here are your 10 random missing English words for this month.

Equinox 21:24, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

Er, you didn't copy "loast" from Urban Dictionary did you? Having trouble finding that one. Equinox 18:27, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
Feel free to correct or improve any of my definitions, ideally by adding quotations. SemperBlotto (talk) 04:56, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
That is dodging the question so I RFVed it. Since you're a fastard (PROTOLOGISM) and have been accused of taking other people's words (not actually a bad thing), here are ten more words, if you want them. (Maybe I'll create an API of some kind. Does anyone want a missing-words REST API? I could do it, I'm underutilised.) rullion maximite baywoods alkamine attuent pimas grannied cogways pangamies puggie Equinox 00:18, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

talk of the townEdit

I'm quite sure the reverted translations to Spanish were right (native speaker). See sources:

Tanisds (talk) 15:31, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

presentation in ChineseEdit

Hey: I totally understand why you would want to delete my addition to the page on 'presentation' concerning the Chinese usage. But this word is used amongst native Chinese speakers in amongst native Chinese vocabulary and grammar. When I heard it again yesterday while walking past a group of Chinese college students speaking in Mandarin, I decided the time had come to mention it on wiktionary. From my perspective, it's a loan word from English that hasn't been transformed into Chinese characters. It's an oddity, and I don't think it's Chinglish in the way that other things are pure Chinglish. Please let me know what you think I would need to do to add something about this to wiktionary or about this type of situation in general. Thanks! --Geographyinitiative (talk) 23:26, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Here's a real-life example: 如何做一个精彩的 presentation --Geographyinitiative (talk) 05:16, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
Here's another discussion about an English word borrowed into Chinese: Talk:Cookie --Geographyinitiative (talk) 05:35, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Reminder: Share your feedback in this Wikimedia surveyEdit

WMF Surveys, 01:34, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

damn itEdit

I think your rollback of my edit (diff) was in error. – voidxor 03:44, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia surveyEdit

WMF Surveys, 00:44, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

User-Page Deletion CommentsEdit

Don't forget that there's a deletion reason specifically for user pages. It's true that you have to scroll down to see it, but it specifically mentions WT:USER, rather than WT:CFI or WT:EL. Citing irrelevant pages makes it look like you're just trumping up some excuse, rather than enforcing policy. Chuck Entz (talk) 14:11, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Regarding editing behaviour of User:Carl FrancisEdit

@SemperBlotto This user (User:Carl Francis) has been always problematic in regards to my constructive editing on entries in his first language, Cebuano (see entries for the surname Ocaña and the nickname Pirot). I would see him revert my constructive editing as vandalism, or defacement, And he sometimes reports me on WT:VIP, such as one case after I created a non-existent surname (which I claim as my mistake) and he calls me an "attention-seeker" for some reason when I try to defend myself against his claims. I and that user are both experienced users, but the latter has been always overprotective on entries he creates for his native language. Is his activity already constituting edit warring if he insists on reverting constructive edits I make, and can you communicate with him directly through the user talk page?TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 12:55, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

  • I have no knowledge of Cebuano, so can't tell which of you is right. SemperBlotto (talk) 14:37, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
    • I don't know Cebuano either, but I agree that he's far too ready to call good-faith mistakes vandalism and doesn't understand proper wiki etiquette at all. Chuck Entz (talk) 18:45, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
@SemperBlotto, Chuck Entz I don't really speak Cebuano as a first language (I'm a Tagalog speaker). I just adding an etymology in a surname on his native language, but he reverts it as vandalism, for some reason I'm trying to find out. You are correct that he has that unethical behaviour of calling another editor's good-faith mistake "vandalism" and even a good faith addition or a simple fix "defacement", but we cannot jump to conclusions yet. You are free to contact him at his talk page to ask about those behaviours when seeing others edit his created entries.-TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 21:58, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

Hypnozoite Edits (Explanation)Edit

SemperBlotto reversed the Hypnozoite edits. The etymology had been changed to the two Greek words concerned, given in "Malaria: Origin of the Term Hypnozoite", near the end of the article (not open access): https://doi.org/10.1007/s10739-010-9239-3 A correction made was to get rid of "merozoite". A hypnozoite has nothing to do with a merozoite. A hypnozoite is effectively a dormant sporozoite, but there is a slightly better way, technically (long story re the reasons), of putting it (which had been done in the edit). The parasitological origin of the hypnozoite is explained in "Biological Concepts in Recurrent Plasmodium vivax Malaria" (not open access): https://doi.org/10.1017/S003118201800032X At the end of the Hypnozoite page, the anagram "hypotonize" was altered to "hypnotize". IdleMan (talk) 22:44, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

Undo of additions to Boston Slang seems in errorEdit

Do you not accept additions, or is there something I missed? 72.21.196.64 15:53, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

  • "Clihn [pause] Uhn" does not seem to be a word. Apart from that, this appendix is a dustbin that you can put any old rubbish in. SemperBlotto (talk) 15:56, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

decapentaplegicEdit

This one seems incorrect, cf. the Wikipedia article and -plegic. --Njardarlogar (talk) 20:50, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

Wiktionary:Template editorsEdit

Hey, I noticed you deleted this. Not sure what was there before, but why was it deleted? Shouldn't it be a soft redirect like many other groups at Special:ListGroupRights such as Wiktionary:Autoconfirmed users, Wiktionary:Transwiki importers etc etc.? — Mnemosientje (t · c) 14:05, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

  • It didn't seem to have any useful function. SemperBlotto (talk) 14:07, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
    Well, in that case should the other pages I listed not be deleted also? — Mnemosientje (t · c) 14:33, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
    Good catch. I'll get round to them some time. SemperBlotto (talk) 14:35, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
    Note that, besides the ones I linked here, there's a whole bunch of additional such pages linked over at Special:ListGroupRights. (Personally, I don't really see the harm in having them, even if they only serve to allow people looking for info on those user groups to discover the Special:ListGroupRights page.) — Mnemosientje (t · c) 14:42, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

Talk:AbdullahEdit

Hello, why did you delete my question? Thanks. Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 14:52, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

  • It wasn't needed - the suggested change had been made. SemperBlotto (talk) 14:53, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

25I-NBOMeEdit

Hey Jeff. I just added the above, but I'm out of my depth immediately. Should it go under a general NBOMe entry, and are you in a position to explain what it stands for or how it's pronounced? (I watched a few videos on YouTube, but everyone seems to say and explain it differently..). Ƿidsiþ 14:38, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

  • It's not something I'm familiar with (just smoked a bit of weed way back in the 60s). I'll investigate. SemperBlotto (talk) 15:36, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
    But never inhaled right? Thanks for the assist. Ƿidsiþ 07:43, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Trans definitionsEdit

Hello. You reversed all of the edits I just made to the wiktionary entries on trans and cis terminology. You then blocked my IP address for "adding nonsense/gibberish", but have now apparently unblocked me? I am a transgender academic and this is an area I have expert knowledge in. Every time I made changes I clearly explained why I had done so, and referenced guidelines such as the GLAAD media reference guide. Even if you did not understand or agree with my edits they clearly were not nonsense or gibberish and I hardly think they deserved a ban. "Trans" is an adjective not a prefix or a verb. If my explanations in the notes were insufficient I can show you many peer-reviewed scholarly citations for this. Some of my edits were in order to make the Wiktionary entries consistent with the Wikipedia entries, for example editing "trans woman" to read "a woman assigned male at birth" rather than "male-to-female". I fail to understand what is nonsensical about this. "Transmasculine" does not simply mean "trans man" as the entry now states. It means a trans person who was assigned female at birth and who is masculine. This can include trans men and AFAB masculine nonbinary people, but it does not include AFAB nonbinary people who are not masculine, and it does not include nonbinary people who were assigned male at birth. If the nuance is beyond you then I apologise but it certainly does not make my edits gibberish. This is the first time I have edited Wiktionary, and I don't have a user account yet. I edited the entries because they were unclear and inaccurate, and this is both my field of academic study and an area I have personal experience in. Whether this was your intention or not, immediately banning me for "nonsense" felt very cruel and I am quite upset about it. If this is what wiki editing culture is like then I want no part in it.

  • This is a dictionary. You need to have a basic knowledge of grammar. For instance, you complained that transmasculine was an adjective, not a verb, then added a definition that was for a noun ("a transgender person..."). SemperBlotto (talk) 05:24, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
  • I said that trans was an adjective not a verb. The entry for transmasculine previously stated that it meant to trans "to" something. Transmasculine is an adjective to describe a certain subset of transgender persons. Clearly the previous definition was inaccurate as it has now been edited. It is still inaccurate. Why did you unblock me unless you realised that you had acted in error?
    • I didn't unblock you. That was a decision made by another sysop (we don't always agree, but try not to get into fights about it). SemperBlotto (talk) 05:35, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
      • Right. Well I'm glad there's other people willing to correct your mistakes.

Typography in the page about the description of “concerning”Edit

I did not change the written in the “Verb” section because it seems special, but each other written in the lists begins with an uppercase letter and ends with a dot.

→ The revision I would like you rollback:

--77.141.95.102 15:40, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

Special:WhatLinksHere/obituarusEdit

Are these mistakes? —This unsigned comment was added by DTLHS (talkcontribs).

Yes, the correct lemma is obituarius, not **obituarus. --Per utramque cavernam 22:32, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
Fixed. SemperBlotto (talk) 05:34, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

Request for cleanup: トレントEdit

This article is bogus, and part of a campaign to invent a god called "Torento/Trent" enshrined in Sakurayama (a shrine, which does exist) in Morioka. The link to ja:WP is a dab page (perhaps that's automatic); the Japanese bits of the "definition" are meaningless. So this needs deletion, not cleanup - I put a note on the Tea House, but I'm not well acquainted with the Wikt way of doing things. Imaginatorium (talk) 08:58, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. Incidentally, the user(s) involved seems quite determined, and I will keep watching... Imaginatorium (talk) 09:14, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

Via EgnasiaEdit

Why were these edits reverted? I mean, I'm happy if they're changed, but I think the links to at least Gnaus and Egnatius should remain. -- TimNelson (talk) 10:51, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

  • I assume you mean Via Egnatia. I don't believe that those terms have anything to do with the road. My Latin is very rusty, but shouldn't Egnatia actually be Egnatii (genitive of Egnatius)? SemperBlotto (talk) 11:39, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

Wiktionary user groupsEdit

Hiya SemperBlotto! I noticed you're one of the more active admins around this place, and I figure you could answer a question I have. Which user groups actually serve a function on Wiktionary? I just couldn't help but notice the lack of documentation or an application process for anything except sysop.

For clarity, and to avoid assumption, I'm not looking to apply at this time. Discovering and learning the processes and standards are important for any productive community member and I'm still trying to figure the place out. Dross (talk) 06:37, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

  • Hmm. I think the list includes:- autoconfirmed users, autopatrollers, bots, bureaucrats, check users, flood flag, importers, IP block exemptions, oversighters, patrollers, rollbackers, stewards, administrators, template editors, and transwiki importers. But I'm not sure if all of those are used, or if there are others. SemperBlotto (talk) 10:46, 27 May 2018 (UTC)


obscultaEdit

You deleted my cross reference of Latin 'obsculta' to 'ausculta'. That was all the content it needed. Not sure if you know Latin, but this sort of word presents difficulties to students. The problem is, this is an irregular medieval spelling of a common enough word, but without the cross-ref a student will not necessarily know that. —This unsigned comment was added by 216.96.199.131 (talk).

  • Feel free to add a proper entry for obsculta. It will need a ==Latin== entry and then proper formatting for the rest, See our other Latin entries for how to format them. By the way, there is no entry for "obsculta" in Lewis and Short SemperBlotto (talk) 15:25, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

p.s. You can see from the Babel statement on my Userpage that I am "la-1".

Lewis and Short is great for classical Latin, but I don't think they cover medieval Latin at all. Chuck Entz (talk) 07:50, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

Bingo Bango BongoEdit

Please move bingo bango bongo back to Bingo Bango Bongo, as the citation I used clearly shows that the game's name is capitalized. EhSayer (talk) 04:59, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

  • No. That just typography. The article in Golf Monthly uses it uncapitalised when it is not at the start of a sentence. SemperBlotto (talk) 05:01, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
Should I re-create the capitalized page as an alternative form? EhSayer (talk) 05:03, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
Only if you really want to. SemperBlotto (talk) 05:05, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
Even the Wikipedia article on variations of golf capitalizes the name. EhSayer (talk) 05:08, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
That article seems to use capitalisation rather randomly - at the whim of individual contributors. SemperBlotto (talk) 05:12, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Reversion of KERNALEdit

Why was my edit to KERNAL reverted? I've never seen someone genuinely misspell "kernel" as "kernal" when talking about the Unix or Windows OS kernels, but that is the correct spelling of the Commodore KERNAL (there are two stories about how that came to be. Short version is, the CBM kernal is named KERNAL.) It would be nice if you quoted a rule or something about why that would be reverted, since that is a correct and useful definition of the term. TomXP411 (talk) 06:14, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

Nubian lionEdit

 
Jackie the MGM lion was said to be from Nubia

Nubia is a region that is split up between the modern countries of Egypt and Sudan, both of which are in Northeast Africa. Northeast Africa is a region that is intermediate between North Africa, where the Barbary lion came from, and East Africa, where the East African lion currently exists, so the Nubian lion should not merely be seen as a subpopulation of the Barbary lion of North Africa, considering that its scientific name (Panthera leo nubica or Panthera leo nubicus) was also applied to the East African lion, and where Jackie the MGM lion was from. Nobody, to my knowledge, would treat Jackie the Nubian lion as a Barbary lion. Leo1pard (talk) 17:04, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Reversion of "-mancer"Edit

Hello! You recently reverted my change to the suffix -mancer, to which I had added the definion "(fantasy) A practicioner of a specific type of magic, someone who can control a specific subject through magic". As this is a fairly common usage in popular fantasy, especially gaming, (eg. "pyromancer" - someone who controls fire in Dark Souls, World of Warcraft et al., "Hemomancer" for blood in Dungeons and Dragons) but also in literature (eg. Allomancers in the Mistborn trilogy) and given that "necromancer" is now much more commonly just someone who can raise and control the dead, I must wonder why it was removed.

rollback in errorEdit

Hi I think your rollback is in error because shrithe is not a real word. 195.2.244.193 08:54, 19 June 2018 (UTC)


Hi. Your rollback of my Mandarin Chinese translation on retweet might be an error, since '转推' is Twitter's official localization of the word 'retweet'. Please lookup this word on their zh-cn localization of Twitter Rules . Thank you. Tsumikiria (talk) 01:35, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

Genderismus and gender ideologyEdit

In German language, Genderismus means gender ideology. This usage in English is sometimes used by too conservertive peoples. w:Talk:Genderism --Sharouser (talk) 03:26, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

Your edits seem somewhat politically charged; I think that gender ideology was probably fine as an entry before your edits and I have reverted them again as a result. Pinging @-sche, who is better equipped (in terms of knowledge, patience, and German) to handle these entries than either Semper or I am. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 04:22, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
gender ideology is always used by politically charged people. I didn't mean to make politically charged article. I expect more accurated and neutral definition for this politically charged word will be finded during RfV process. --Sharouser (talk) 10:28, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

Your errorsEdit

It looks like you made at least two errors:

Could you please roll back to the good version?

If you think the good version is wrong please use the discussion page to expose your personal view on what's wrong. —This unsigned comment was added by 77.193.103.93 (talk).

  • Firstly, it is a noun. Your first definition "Not party to an agreement between two other countries" is not.
  • Secondly, in your other definition "a country other than the ones around the border", the quotation uses third-country - the hyphen seems to make it an adjective.
  • Thirdly, your etymology repeatedly used "presumably" - we try not to make presumptions here. SemperBlotto (talk) 18:24, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
I understand there are things which are not well documented.
In your version, of third_country,
  • 1/ The first definition is missing. To make this definition a noun it might be written Country not party to an agreement between two other countries;
  • 2/ I wonder why some people us third-country as adjective, while wiktionary says clearly that Third country is a noun. Anyway, your version makes readers believe this word is only used in the EU, while it looks like it is also used in both as American and Britsish English, far sooner the EU. I believe every other third countries quotations use nouns, and that only this US English is wrong.
  • 3/ Your etymology Presumably (...) formed as a neologism by European Union translators. used "presumably" - we try not to make presumptions here. The quotation dating from before the second world war makes in doubts your version.
Anyway, I see you have your arguments. That's why I would like to suggest you to share them on the article Discussion page to improve it.
Return to the user page of "SemperBlotto".