User talk:Wikitiki89

Archive – 2008–20102012201320142015


What's going on here? If we have a citation page, shouldn't we link to it? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:40, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

We link to it in the tab at the top. Anyway, it looked out of place, maybe it's supposed to be indented under the definition line? Maybe I should have fixed it, but I personally don't think this template is ever necessary. --WikiTiki89 16:44, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
A lot of people, myself included, tend not to notice the Citations tab, or not to notice whether it's red or blue. I use this template all the time. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:56, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
I agree with Angr here; I would completely miss the Citations tab without a template like this drawing attention to it. Benwing2 (talk) 22:13, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
I didn't plan on starting an argument here about this, but since you're pressuring me... If you are specifically looking for citations, then you would presumably check whether the citations tab is blue. If you are not explicitly looking for citations, then the citations chosen to be in the entry itself should suffice. The citations tab is not meant to be in place of citations in the entry itself, but only to host additional citations, or citations that are not good examples of the term's usage and thus would not be useful on the page itself. In short, if we want readers to see a citation, we should include it in the entry itself. --WikiTiki89 23:36, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
It wasn't my intention to pressure you, just to express an opinion. Benwing2 (talk) 00:29, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
It is my nature to feel compelled to counterbalance arguments. --WikiTiki89 01:16, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

New Verb addedEdit

I added an entry for the Hebrew verb סגד(sagád), so feel free to expand it. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 15:19, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! I'm going to hold off on adding the conjugation until the module is finished. By the way, I see you've noticed the awesomeness of the templates I created for Judeo-Tat. --WikiTiki89 23:39, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Conjugation issuesEdit

I'd like to add more verbs at this point, but I still don't fully know how to use the conjugation template for the verbs that it does support. So this is a plea to finish the documentation, and most pressingly, to fix the tables at גיין(geyn) and טאָן(ton), which give incorrect mir/zey forms (they should be גייען(geyen) and טוען(tuen) respectively). —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 08:16, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

You really should ask these questions, because there was an easier way of doing this. Also, didn't know that that was the case, I had thought the tables were correct. But some quick googling shows you are right. --WikiTiki89 16:53, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
Well, that's what documentation is for. Anyway, I've been leaving technical requests to you here, at template talk pages, and elsewhere — is there a centralised location or thread that you'd prefer me to put them in? —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 20:06, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
Yes, I've been meaning to expand the documentation, but haven't gotten around to it. The most convenient place for technical requests would be the talkpage of the relevant module (Module talk:yi-verb for conjugations, Module talk:yi-headword for headword templates for all parts of speech). --WikiTiki89 20:21, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
Also, Module talk:yi-adjective for the future declension module, which I have some questions about: Do you know whether there is a rule as to why it's דעם נײַעם, but דעם בלויען? --WikiTiki89 20:44, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
I await the adjective module excitedly! In that case, bloy is the rule, and nay is the exception (and, to the best of my knowledge, the only exception there is). —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 20:48, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
Ok, thanks. I previously thought that nay was the rule. --WikiTiki89 20:52, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

@Metaknowledge: Can you look over User:Wikitiki89/yi-adj-test? I specifically have the following questions:

  • Layout:
    • Was it a good idea to merge the cells of identical forms?
    • Was it a good idea to re-order genders to m/n/f rather than m/f/n? I did this because neuter has similarities with masculine and with feminine and so it naturally belongs between them.
    • Is the neuter column to wide?
    • Do you like the layout of possessives in relation to regular adjectives?
  • Forms:
    • Do all n-final adjectives have -em endings?
    • Should it be לאַנגן and קראַנקן or לאַנגען and קראַנקען, or should this be decided on a case-by-case basis?
    • What are the postpositive/nominalized neuter forms of adjectives that end in -s, -ts, and -z? For now, I have just assumed that they are the same as the lemma/predicative/neuter indefinite.

--WikiTiki89 23:55, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

I don't care deeply about layout; they are clear, and that is enough for me. If I had to make a criticism, I would say that the horizontal bar separating the predicative from the sections below is superfluous and mildly distracting. The reördering of genders is fine, although nontraditional. I think that @Angr might have opinions on layout, though.
As for morphology: yes, always -en, and you are correct. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 00:19, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
@Metaknowledge: In that case, I have created the templates {{yi-decl}} and {{yi-decl-poss}} and they can be used now. Another question I had but forgot to ask, was how do you decline schwa-final adjectives? The table at ראָזעווע(rozeve), for example, is clearly wrong. --WikiTiki89 00:36, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
The rules for when the adjectives ends in a vowel depends on whether that vowel is stressed. If it is, follow bloy; if not, as in rozeve, I believe that the forms are rozevn, rozever, rozeve, and rozeves. However, I can't find an explicit mention of this, so if you want to wait a day or two just to be 100% sure, I can ask a native speaker. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 02:30, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
Also, sorry that I was evidently wrong regarding -tss and -zs. They look horribly wrong to me, but I guess that I was mistaken. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 02:40, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
I don't have any particular opinions on layout. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 06:22, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
@Metaknowledge: Also, נײַס and בלויס or נײַעס and בלויעס? --WikiTiki89 14:01, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
The former. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 00:43, 20 January 2016 (UTC)


I completely disagree with you, my edit is intended to create consistency across all of the similar definitions within the site. Please also note that reversion is intended for vandalism and obvious errors, you should not use it to undo someone else's work simply because you disagree with them; That is what talk pages are for. - TheDaveRoss 22:45, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Back at ya. Anyway, Massachusetts is called the "Commonwealth of Massachusetts", not the "State of Massachusetts", the context tag is wrong, because even outside of the US, Boston means can refer to "Boston, Massachusetts". There's nothing wrong with saying "capital and largest city" if it is both. The US is usually referred to as "the United States" rather than "the United States of America". A capital city is "of" something, not "for" something. There is nothing wrong with adding additional information that may not apply to other cities, like "informal capital of New England". And I still don't get why you removed the poem, even if it was not formatted correctly. --WikiTiki89 22:50, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
I agree with you about the "of" vs. "for", that was an oversight on the line I was pasting. I will go back and fix those. The rest of your comments seem to be critique for the sake of critique. Context tags are not merely do describe the geographic region in which a word means a particular thing, although that is one of their uses. When "baseball" is used it is not because a word only means something on the baseball field or when said by baseball players. I am sure you are aware that Massachusetts is a state, I understand that not all states in the United States have the formal name "State of...", however all fifty states are certainly referred to as "the state of...". There is nothing wrong with including extra information like "largest city", nor is there anything wrong with including population or founding date or local sports teams, but since that sort of information makes an entry more and more encyclopedic we are allowed to make editorial decisions. I made a similar decision about United States of America instead of the numerous other iterations, it is not wrong. The poem was uncited and not a great example of the usage of the word, if you have strong feelings about keeping it I have no qualms with that. It is my preference that the definitions for sets of things be in accord with one another, before yesterday the definitions of US state capitals were extremely varied. - TheDaveRoss 13:48, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
I appreciate your effort to standardise the definitions, but that’s misuse of context labels. Des Moines, Atlanta, et al. are not words limited to American English; these cities have the exact same name in English varieties spoken elsewhere. — Ungoliant (falai) 14:18, 23 January 2016 (UTC)


This has module errors when it's converted by bot to use {{m}} and {{l}}. I'm not sure why this entry uses the syntax 1=3, so I'm not sure how to change it. Chuck Entz (talk) 15:10, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

@Chuck Entz: It does not use "1=3". It is just an error caused by Right-To-Left writing system. And the module error is caused by the "1=" syntax. --kc_kennylau (talk) 15:22, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
I have no idea why the parameters were entered in such a strange way, but I have fixed it. --WikiTiki89 15:51, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Mobile editsEdit

Hello. I noticed your edits to ноль-ноль were tagged as mobile edits and included adding Cyrillic characters. I've tried editing Wiktionary from an iPhone 5S with Safari and found the interface nearly unusable. Worst thing was that the keyboard was obscuring the edit area so I couldn't see what I was typing, and positioning the cursor was almost impossible. Which phone are you using and did you have to do anything special? Benwing2 (talk) 22:15, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

iPhone 6S with Google Chrome (probably not much different from Safari). The interface is definitely buggy, but if you try hard enough it works. When the keyboard is hiding the cursor, I type a character and press backspace and it adjusts the view. When the selection isn't working I essentially just mash the screen until it works. Sometimes the landscape view is less buggy. For Cyrillic characters, I have the Russian keyboard (among others) enabled in the iPhone's settings. I use it in my everyday life as well, so it might not make as much sense for you to do that, since constaontly enabling and disabling keyboards can be very annoying. Also, it can't type stress marks. --WikiTiki89 00:10, 30 January 2016 (UTC)


Adding ancestry detail is nice, but causing 11 Hebrew entries to have module errors isn't. Please fix it, and, in the future, please check to make sure you're not sending ancestry chains off into the void. Thanks! Chuck Entz (talk) 05:24, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

@Chuck Entz: This is not exactly his/her problem. Fixed. --kc_kennylau (talk) 12:23, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Some suspect OCS translationsEdit

This French IP: (talkcontribswhoisdeleted contribsnukeedit filter logblockblock logactive blocksglobal blocks), (talkcontribswhoisdeleted contribsnukeedit filter logblockblock logactive blocksglobal blocks), etc., is knowledgeable in a wide range of difficult and obscure languages, but hates to be limited to attested forms in ancient languages (CodeCat has reverted dozens of attempts to add Gothic terms for things from modern times).

Judging from this edit, I think they're doing the same thing with OCS. I don't know as much about OCS as I do about Gothic, so I thought I would ask you to have a look. Thanks! Chuck Entz (talk) 01:44, 14 February 2016 (UTC)


¿Cómo se escribe noche en letras hebraicas? Saludos, --Romanophile (contributions) 01:34, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

As usual, in various ways. I believe it would normally be נוג׳י. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 02:47, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
As I've mentioned before, the actual diacritic on the letter ג varies, and I don't think we've decided on which one should be used for lemmas. --WikiTiki89 15:48, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

prove (Ladino adjective) --Romanophile (contributions) 02:09, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

פרובֿי, as always, I'm not sure about the diacritic on the ב or whether it is usually the same diacritic or a different diacritic from the one that appears on the ג above. --WikiTiki89 16:13, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

merkado --Romanophile (contributions) 13:54, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

It should be מירקאדו (possibly with a diacritic on the ד), but I can't find any evidence of it on Google Books. Although I do find it used in people's names. --WikiTiki89 17:02, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

eskrivir --Romanophile (contributions) 07:07, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

איסקריבֿיר. Same diacritic business on the ב. --WikiTiki89 14:45, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
For what it's worth, on the Ladino projects (Ladino Wikipedia, as well as very small amounts of content on a Wiktionary project in the Incubator), we're trying to standardize on the overbar (rafe) diacritic for these purposes. The majority of Judeo-Spanish-language content in these projects, as well as on multilingual Wikisource, is in Latin script. StevenJ81 (talk) 16:04, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

oy --Romanophile (contributions) 18:07, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

That's an easy one: אוי. --WikiTiki89 18:09, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

puerta --Romanophile (contributions) 10:33, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

פואירטה (plural: פואירטאס(puertas)). --WikiTiki89 15:22, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

deshar, kada --Romanophile (contributions) 15:35, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

דישאר and קאדֿה. --WikiTiki89 15:43, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

largo --Romanophile (contributions) 21:24, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

לארגו. Wouldn't it be easier if you just learned the orthography yourself? --WikiTiki89 21:26, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
Yes; I can read the Hebrew alphabet to an extent, but I’m worried about accidentally generating false forms. I feel safer consulting others. The golden rule of Wiktionary is that you never insert misinformation into entries. --Romanophile (contributions) 21:30, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
Ok. New rule: You must always present a guess with these requests. --WikiTiki89 21:36, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
That can be done.
sinyalar : סינייאלאר
posivle : פוסיבֿליא
imposivle : ימפוסיבֿליא
yerva : ייארבֿאח
serkano: סיארקאנו
--Romanophile (contributions) 21:44, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
סינייאלאר is correct (but I think it's senyalar). The rest are: פוסיבֿלי, אימפוסיבֿלי, יירבֿה, סירקאנו. --WikiTiki89 22:02, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

derecho: דיריג׳ו? --Romanophile (contributions) 22:32, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Yes. But apparently the דיריגֿו is the preferred diacritic. I would have preferred to standardize on the varika, but I guess it's more convenient to use a diacritic that can actually be entered on a standard keyboard. Use of the geresh for this is due to Modern Hebrew influence anyway. --WikiTiki89 22:53, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
We could include both forms! --Romanophile (contributions) 23:04, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
But then you have to be consistent and include both forms everywhere. --WikiTiki89 23:07, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
Yes, but that doesn’t bother me. The only problem that I see is time consumption. By the way, is all of this poking getting on your nerves? --Romanophile (contributions) 23:20, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
No, I like teaching. --WikiTiki89 23:28, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
Really? Were you ever hired as a teacher before? --Romanophile (contributions) 23:39, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
You mean other than to tutor my sister? No, I'm a software developer. --WikiTiki89 23:41, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

sivilizasion: סיבֿיליזאסיונ
imajinar: אמאגֿײנאר
medra: מידראה
periodiko: פיריודיקו
endevinar: אנדיבֿינאר --Romanophile (contributions) 23:56, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Theoretically, it should be סיבֿיליזאסייון, but I can only find סיבֿיליזאסיון in Google Books (in either case, note the use of the final form of a letter at the end of a word). אימאגֿינאר (the ligature ײ should not be used for anything). מידֿרה (word-final -a is written with ה; also, I'm starting to doubt whether the diacritic is ever actually used on the letter ד, but for now I will keep using it). פירייודֿיקו and פיריודֿיקו both seem to exist (so you got that one half right). אינדיבֿינאר (e/i are always represented by י and vowel-initial words must start with א). --WikiTiki89 00:14, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
mozotros & mozotras: מוזוטראס, מוזוטרוס
meoyo: מאוייו
propio: פרופיו
viajar: בֿיאגֿאר --Romanophile (contributions) 00:30, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
mozotros/mozotras: correct. meoyo: מיאוייו and sometimes מיאויו (you forgot the י for the e). propio: פרופייו seems more common. viajar: should be either בֿייאגֿאר or בֿיאגֿאר, but I cannot verify either spelling in Google Books. By the way, when I said the ligature ײ should not be used, I meant in terms of encoding, the diagraph יי is used, but should be encoded with two individual י. --WikiTiki89 00:40, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
Concerning diagraphs, I believe that Unicode itself discourages them. We could apply the ‘proscribed’ tag to װ & ױ ,ײ ,, but this would probably look strange.
es nada: איס נאדה --Romanophile (contributions) 02:06, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
Don't confuse real ligatures like , with digraphs encoded as ligatures, like װ/ױ/ײ. The latter should pretty much not be used anywhere on Wiktionary, the former can be used in quotations, and maybe in alt forms, but probably not in lemmas. איס נאדֿה is correct, but keep in mind what I said a couple posts ago about the diacritic on the letter ד. --WikiTiki89 13:49, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

por favor: פור פֿאבֿור
estreya: איסתראייה?
tornar: תורנאר
djoven: גֿובֿין --Romanophile (contributions) 17:48, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

פור פֿאבֿור is correct. איסטרילייה it seems (not sure if this always applies to -ll-). טורנאר (note that the letter ת is not used in native Latinate words, only ט is used). גֿובֿין is correct. --WikiTiki89 18:42, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

vuestro: בֿואיסטרו --Romanophile (contributions) 22:19, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

Correct. --WikiTiki89 23:48, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

serrar: סיראר --Romanophile (contributions) 00:53, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Yep. --WikiTiki89 18:26, 8 April 2016 (UTC)


In case of derived terms your comment was "derivations follow the transitive property. If Y is derived from X and Z is derived from Y, then Z is derived from X."
That seems to be your opinion, and not a fact. But even if that would be correct, compared with other entries only direct derivations (Y's) are listed here as "derived terms" (of X) while indirect derivations (Z's) are mentions at the term between them (that is at the proper Y).
As for the related terms, compared with other entries many words mentioned as related terms at "Kanadier" do not belong to there. Words with -kanadisch- rather belong to kanadisch and words with -kanda- rather belong to Kanada. E.g. "Neuengland" and "mittelenglisch" aren't mentioned in Engländer too. So, in case of "Kanadier" many of the words shouldn't belong to "related terms". - 22:19, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Basically, words should be listed wherever they are relevant and with an attempt to avoid too much duplication, although some duplication is not a problem. Neuengland and mittelenglisch are not really relevant to Engländer. However, kanadisch is very relevant to Kanadier. Maybe some of the words should be removed, but you removed too many relevant ones. --WikiTiki89 22:28, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
To avoid too much duplication it should be changed the way I did. Also IMHO I didn't remove any "relevant" word. So please tell me "relevant" words I removed. And for clarification - and to prevent misinterpretations of your words -, I did not remove "kanadisch" from "Kanadier". - 22:39, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
Looking more carefully, it's only the removal of the -in words that I have a problem with. --WikiTiki89 22:44, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
But that aren't directly derived terms, i.e. they're just Z's, and in case of other words Z's aren't mentioned too. E.g. "Regenbogenfarbe" is just mentioned in Regenbogen, but not in Regen and Bogen. - 23:04, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
I told you, it doesn't matter that they are Z's, what matters is that they are relevant. --WikiTiki89 15:29, 3 March 2016 (UTC)


¡Mira esta entrada! Genialísima, ⸘eh‽ --Romanophile (contributions) 09:56, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

Magnifique ! Où as-tu trouvé les formes ? Je croie qu'il y a quelques incohérences orthographiques. --WikiTiki89 18:06, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
Un hablante aquí me dio algunas conjugaciones, pero no puedo encontrar el tópico. Si yo supiera tu dirección, te enviaría las conjugaciones. Alternativamente te puedo enviar imágenes de ellas. --Romanophile (contributions) 19:06, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
Elles sont dans quel format? --WikiTiki89 19:36, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
Microsoft Excel 97-2003 Worksheet (.xls) --Romanophile (contributions) 19:50, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
Bien, je t'ai envoyé mon adresse e-mail. En ce qui concerne l'orthographe, si on emploie le lettre y pour le son /j/ entre une consonne et une voyelle, on doit le faire régulièrement. Si on présente les deux alternatifs (l'un avec y et l'autre avec i), on doit le faire régulièrement. Alors, on doit présenter même l'alternatif eskrivyendo. --WikiTiki89 21:05, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
Réinspecte ton courriel. --Romanophile (contributions) 21:09, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
¡Gracias! Ve también: [1]. --WikiTiki89 21:23, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
Es nada! Esa es informasion enteresante sovre courriel, ma pienso ke los frankofonos lo konosen i e-mail. Saludos, --Romanophile (contributions) 05:30, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Komo se dize cualesquier‽ --Romanophile (contributions) 05:28, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Theoretically, קואליסקיר(kualesker), but I can only find קואלקיר(kualker) in Google Books. --WikiTiki89 14:33, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

all sixes and sevensEdit

I was aware of the existence of at sixes and sevens, but I've heard someone saying "(someone is) all sixes and sevens" and the lack of "at" in that phrase made me consider that maybe we should have sixes and sevens too as a separate entry. (an adjective) --Daniel Carrero (talk) 01:06, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

You seem to be right, although it's much less common. --WikiTiki89 13:44, 2 April 2016 (UTC)


I just added a new one that seems to have failed — I'm not sure why the module should ever assume a vov that isn't word-initial to be v rather than u. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 18:35, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

The reason I made the module do that is to force people to use the dot in the vav in places where it's (supposedly) required by YIVO. I guess I was working under the potentially false assumption that after any vowel, the vav needs a dot. Was I wrong? --WikiTiki89 20:03, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
I believe that the dot is not needed here, but I guess we should check something published by YIVO to be extra sure. I may not have access to my books until tomorrow, so if you'd like to check how a word like laureat is spelt in Weinreich's dictionary, that would settle it. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 20:46, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
I confirmed that au is indeed אַו per YIVO. Can you please fix the module? —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 16:13, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
Where did you find that by the way? It would help if I knew the general rules so I don't leave anything else out. --WikiTiki89 16:54, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
I checked Weinreich's dictionary, as I suggested. Anyway, the general rule is just that it doesn't need a dot when preceded by another vowel, unless it's the sequence וווּ. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 05:05, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
So what you're saying is that ־וווּ־(-vu-) and ־וּוו־(-uv-) (and perhaps ־וּוּ־(-uu-) if that exists) are the only situations where a dot is required? --WikiTiki89 15:33, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
Exactly. (Although I'm almost 100% sure that וּוּ doesn't exist.) —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 19:39, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
I'm thinking maybe וואַקוּוּם(vakuum) if such a word and spelling is attested. --WikiTiki89 19:46, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
It actually seems to exist, although most I'm finding mostly וואַקוּום(vakuum) and וואַקווּם(vakuum), and only sometimes וואַקוּוּם(vakuum), so I'm going to update the module to support the former two. I wonder which spelling YIVO prefers. --WikiTiki89 19:49, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
Evidently וואַקוּום(vakuum). —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 20:40, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
Evident from ...? --WikiTiki89 20:44, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
Weinreich, yet again! —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 20:46, 13 April 2016 (UTC)



That seemed an obvious typo to me, I'm sorry. Peter Bowman (talk) 22:52, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

@Peter Bowman: I put 42 as a joke. I guess by coincidence it also starts with "4" which happened to be the correct number, making it look like a typo. --WikiTiki89 23:06, 12 April 2016 (UTC)


Привет! Ты откатил мою правку по статье средневековье. Тут история такая, я в русском викисловаре пытался выяснить как все-таки правильно писать его, со строчной или с прописной. И был найден источник в котором явным образом говориться что оно должно писаться с прописной. Я привел сслыку на это обсуждение в Talk:средневековье. Прямая ссылка вот. Прошу тебя изучть все это и я надеюсь, что это повзолит вернуть мои правки обратно... --Nataraj (talk) 06:29, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

Я это все уже прочитал. И не нашел нигде, что оно должно писаться с прописной. Смотрите например, что говорит «Русский орфографический словарь». --WikiTiki89 12:22, 14 April 2016 (UTC) Параграф 102? --Nataraj (talk) 20:18, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
Упс, когда я это первый раз читал, я пропустил последнюю часть. Похоже, что можно и так и так. Кто считает, что это название конкретного периода, пишет с заглавной буквы. А кто считает, что это просто общее описание, тот нет. --WikiTiki89 21:17, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
Ага... Уже хорошо. Значит я вижу тут две задачи. 1. Словарная статья про средневековье должна быть одна. С любым вариантом написания. Со второго варианта описания просто поставить редирект (автоматический или текст "см туда-то"). Потому что если это две статьи то в каждой надо подробно объяснить чем эти два написания отличаются. В оставшейся статье можно написать про альтернативный вариант написания. 2. Я готов дернуть знакомых редакторов и вызнать у них не только их профессиональное мнение на эту тему, но и ссылку на какой-либо авторитетный бумажный источник. Будет ли этого достаточно для того чтобы выбрать правильный вариант написания?
PS. Если ты будешь поминать меня при ответе через
, то я смогу отвечать сразу как придет письмо с оповещением, а не когда вспомню проверить не написал ли ты ответ... --Nataraj (talk) 07:19, 15 April 2016 (UTC)


Hello Mr. Wikitiki89! Can I edit at Wiktionary if I edit correctly? Fête Phung (talk) 21:03, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

I'm not going to revert edits if they are correct. --WikiTiki89 21:18, 14 April 2016 (UTC)


/ˈkɪndɚˌɡɑɹtən/ is correct too? Fête Phung (talk) 23:32, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

I've never heard it. --WikiTiki89 01:23, 15 April 2016 (UTC)


I was clearing the gap caused by WOTD. Maybe you don't see it on your browser, but I certainly can. Donnanz (talk) 21:34, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

You're right, I see now. But that's a problem with the templates, not with the entry. I will try to fix it. --WikiTiki89 15:15, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
Both WOTD and FWOTD templates have the same fault. Donnanz (talk) 16:30, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
Yeah it's strange issue. I think I recall it being discussed in the GP with the conclusion that it's actually a browser bug. I tried playing around with the HTML tags and found a lot of weird behavior. --WikiTiki89 17:21, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
If this problem has defeated everyone so far maybe my "workaround" isn't so bad after all? Donnanz (talk) 17:34, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
But once the browser issue is fixed (not by us, by the browsers' developers), then we would have to go around and change everything back. --WikiTiki89 19:12, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
But are the browser people, like Microsoft, actually aware of the problem? It may be a problem peculiar to Wiktionary with its unique set-up and not to other websites. Donnanz (talk) 22:11, 21 April 2016 (UTC)


Hello Wikitiki89, you're in error:

  • Isr. is an abbreviation, and when there are qualifiers then there can be one saying so.
  • the State of Israel is an official name, and when there are qualifiers then there can be one saying so.
  • Zion is a synonym of Israel, maybe see its entry Zion and the sense with "(metaphorical)".
  • Israelitish is derived from Israelite, and Israelite is derived from Latin. Both are not derived from English Israel but are related terms. Same holds for German and Norwegian terms.
  • The Latin alternative form Israël exists.
  • The Latin quote is correct and an improvement.
  • English, German and Latin don't have a "====Quotations====" section too, so Spanish doesn't need one. Also it makes more sense to put quotations directly under each meaning, so one can see to which meaning a quote belongs.
  • The category "Countries of Asia" is more precise than the category "Countries"
  • It makes more sense to place the category link for "Category:en:Israel" in the English section next to other English categories instead of placing it at the bottom of the Spanish section.

-Kirsea (talk) 15:46, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Look, if I revert one of your changes, you can't add it back as part of a bigger edit and then complain that I reverted the whole thing. "Zion" is a metaphor for Jerusalem and for the nation of Israel, not for the entire Land of Israel. And please stop re-ordering the list. --WikiTiki89 16:08, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
I can complain as you reverted my edits several times without leaving a comment in the edit summary or on my talk page. You could have reverted my edit and given a reason like "Zion is no synonym". I can also complain as my edits mostly were an improvement. So if Zion is no synonym, you could have simply removed it instead of removing everything else too.
IMHO nations means as much as country or state. Well, in its the entry it is defined as "A sovereign state.", but I still can't see the problem. Do you want to suggest that Zion is a synonym for the sense "The Jews, taken collectively" and not for "the State of Israel"? If so, you could have simply moved it. Compared with definitions in other dictionaries, Zion is a synonym for both. For example, has the definition "the Jewish people" and has "(Among Jews) Israel".
You reordered the list. In one way it's obviously sorted alphabetically. In the other way it seems to be unsorted. There might be some system how it's ordered like by the (assumed) commonness or modernness, but it's not obvious and thus appears to be unsorted.
-Kirsea (talk) 16:45, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
You say "I can also complain as my edits mostly were an improvement", but that's exactly the point, you shouldn't be adding back the reverted content hidden in a larger edit. "Nation" refers to the people. The nation of Israel is the Jewish people. I ordered the list based on relevance. --WikiTiki89 17:28, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
If you leave no comment, neither in the edit summary nor on the entry's talk page nor on my talk page, I can't see your problem, and it's very easy to leave a comment in the "Edit summary:" line. My further improvements should outweigh the inclusion of Zion. In numbers, my edit added "+693", while removing ", Zion" should just give -10.
That is, Zion should just be moved to be a synonym of "The Jews, taken collectively.", or not? But how about's definition "(Among Jews) Israel"? Doesn't that refer to the state Israel and mean that Zion also is a synonym for that? also has this definition of Zion: "Palestine as the Jewish homeland and symbol of Judaism.". It's different from just "Palestine" but would be a synonym of it, at least in the loose sense of the word synonym.
I can't see the relevance, which leads to this order: "the Land of Israel, Palestine, the Holy Land, the Land of Zion, Canaan". Palestine should be more common than the Land of Israel, so it should be more relevant. When somehow focusing on the aspect of Jewishness, then Holy Land and Land of Zion should be more relevant than Palestine. So IMHO the original alphabetical ordering makes more sense.
-Kirsea (talk) 18:01, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
I don't have to leave you a personalized comment. The default revert comment already says enough: "If you think this rollback is in error, please leave a message on my talk page." As for Zion, I don't think I agree with's definition. Also, relevance is not the same thing as commonness. I think I'm gonna remove "Land of Zion", it's not really a common phrase. --WikiTiki89 18:09, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
Your first revert comment today was "Undo revision 38031495 by Kirsea (talk)". There was no addition. IMHO that's not enough, but even if it would be enough, you could have still given a reason.
So, what now? Should one search for quotes in which Zion refers to the state Israel? Or is there a place to ask for other user's opinion?
Commonness and relevance is not the same, but anyway I can't see any basis for your ordering by (assumed) relevance. It appears to me that it could just be some kind of personal opinion.
You added "the Land of Zion", so it's up to you.
-Kirsea (talk) 18:41, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
The first step is to add the definition to Zion. Then you can nominate it for WT:Requests for verification. --WikiTiki89 18:55, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
Ok, thanks.
Any objections to this edit diff?
Is there some basis or indication for the relevance?
-Kirsea (talk) 19:00, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
I think that's fine. --WikiTiki89 19:03, 22 April 2016 (UTC)


Isn’t a ‘defective spelling’ a negative thing? When I first found these, I just assumed that they were misspellings. --Romanophile (contributions) 16:06, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

I know the word sounds that way, but that's not what it means in terms of Hebrew spelling. It just means that some letters are missing in relation to the "normal" spelling. --WikiTiki89 16:08, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
Deponent verbs are, technically, referred to as defective as well. For that matter, shouldn't the perfect aspect be better than the imperfect? Is the passive voice wimpier that the active voice? And I wonder what would Glen Beck would have to say about the "present progressive"? Chuck Entz (talk) 02:15, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
@Chuck Entz: you don’t have to mock me. It’s just a sense that I’m not accustomed to. --Romanophile (contributions) 02:23, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
I'm not mocking you. I'm just trying to have a little fun with the absurdities that stem from the way our grammatical terms have been borrowed untranslated from Latin into English. Chuck Entz (talk) 02:30, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
diff. --WikiTiki89 14:40, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
That kid deserves recognition. Definitely more creative than the ‘poop, lol’ nonsense that we usually get. --Romanophile (contributions) 18:05, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

school ageEdit

Hello Mr. Wikitiki89! In USA, kindergarten's students must have 4 years old at which month? Fête Phung (talk) 21:03, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Usually it's 5 years, not 4. It is different in every city and town, and even then they change the rules. Also, private schools have their own rules. When I was starting kindergarten, you had to be 5 years old by the end of the calendar year (so by the end of December), but a few years later when my brother was starting kindergarten, you had to be 5 years old before September (and since my brother was born in September, my parents sent him to a private school to circumvent the rule). --WikiTiki89 21:15, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
If students are often absent, they will have to repeat the grade on next year? Fête Phung (talk) 21:34, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
I think so, but it depends on a lot of things and I'm not an expert on this topic. --WikiTiki89 21:37, 29 April 2016 (UTC)


Do you accept direct requests? --Romanophile (contributions) 12:19, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Do you have a context? That looks like מִ־(from) +‎ סוֹלְלָה(battery, embankment, rampart) +‎ ־וֹת(plural suffix). --WikiTiki89 14:45, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
[2] --Romanophile (contributions) 15:15, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
So the lemma form of this verb would be סוֹלֵל, but I'm not sure it is attested. I did some research and as far as I can tell, it is only attested in the phrase נָשִׁים הַמְּסוֹלְלוֹת זוֹ בָּזוֹ(nashím ham'sol'lót zó bazó), literally meaning "women that X one another", where X is some transitive verb that is understood as alluding to lesbian sex. --WikiTiki89 18:30, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

EditTools alt textEdit

Thanks for adding Ugaritic and Old Persian Cuneiform to the EditTools. I've been meaning to add Avestan for a while, but I find I always need to look at AP:Avestan script to remember exactly what is what. Do we think it would be possible to add alt text with the phonetic transcription of each character in question? It seems like a pain to do, but would save time on cross referencing. What do you think? —JohnC5 15:35, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

I was actually thinking the exact same thing. I didn't end up doing it because I finally started getting used to the Ugaritic alphabet, but since there is more interest, I'll give it a try. --WikiTiki89 15:40, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
Thanks! I'd be prepared to help out if it works, and I think we should try to do it wherever possible, because it will help other people too. In some cases, the ambiguity of certain characters may make it too complicated (he're looking at you, Thai), but Armenian, for instance, would help me a lot. —JohnC5 15:47, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
Turned out to be pretty easy. I just did it for Armenian, Old Persian Cuneiform, and Ugaritic (but only for the main alphabets, I skipped the logograms and punctuation and things for now, but feel free to fill it in. For any alphabets that have a translit module (even if it's not enabled), I can repeat this process very quickly (using a combination of regex replacement in an external editor and {{subst:xlit}} magic). For others, I need to take the time to input the alt text, which I had to do only for Old Persian. --WikiTiki89 16:10, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
Thank you. I'll try to add the Avestan stuff later tonight. —JohnC5 16:39, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
Could you also do Gothic while you're at it? —CodeCat 01:09, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
@CodeCat: Did I do it correctly? —JohnC5 01:24, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
Yes, though the o should probably not have the macron. Also, the two you marked with "?" are apparently used for numbers, and have no letter value. —CodeCat 01:57, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
@CodeCat: Better? —JohnC5 02:04, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
Yes, thank you! —CodeCat 02:05, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

Etymology 1Edit

Why are you numbering isolated etymologies? --Romanophile (contributions) 19:38, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

By accident. Why else? --WikiTiki89 19:39, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
Because you may have planned on including more etymologies in the future…? --Romanophile (contributions) 19:41, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
That would require planning ahead... --WikiTiki89 19:46, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Yiddish stripping diacriticsEdit

I just added a Yiddish translation here and as you can see, it stripped the diacritics! I can't immediately find what the change was that caused this, but this is obviously quite a problem. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 18:54, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

There don't seem to be any relevant recent changes to User:Conrad.Irwin/editor.js. The only thing I can think of that could have caused this is if you had the langauge code set to "he" while typing the word and then changed to "yi" before saving it. Try re-adding it with the language code set to "yi" from the beginning. --WikiTiki89 19:31, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
I thought there was something afoot, but it looks like I was just being stupid, I guess. That's a relief. Thank you. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 19:32, 15 May 2016 (UTC)


Hello Mr. Wikitiki89! Ill-bred means impolite, because of a bad education. For example, if someone had a good education, but he is knowingly impolite anyway, it's ill-bred too? Fête Phung (talk) 14:30, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

No, ill-bred just means poorly raised. --WikiTiki89 04:34, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

yes or noEdit

  • You have no choice?

- No, I have no choice.

  • You have no choice?

- Yes, I have no choice.

Hello Mr. Wiktiki89, which one is correct? Fête Phung (talk) 15:14, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

I know you asked Wikitiki89, but I'd like to say that "Yes, I have no choice." is the correct one. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 15:16, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
Usually you would say the first one ("No, I have no choice"), but the second one is also possible ("Yes, I have no choice"). When you want to answer the other way, the two optios "Yes, I have a choice" and "No, I have a choice" are more or less equally common. This is what makes negative questions so confusing. But usually even if the person just says "yes" or "no", you can tell what they mean from their intonation. In the past, English had a four-word system including the words yea and nay, which you can read about on Wikipedia: Yes and no#The Early English four-form system. --WikiTiki89 15:38, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the revertEdit

Firefox crashed. The accidental deletion must have been connected to its effort to restore the session. DCDuring TALK 22:29, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

It's ok, it happens. --WikiTiki89 22:31, 24 May 2016 (UTC)


Hello Mr. Wikitiki89! The word learn has a lot of definition? For example, "I learn to do this", the word learn means accept the habit? Fête Phung (talk) 21:21, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

Right? Fête Phung (talk) 22:44, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't understand what you're asking. --WikiTiki89 14:59, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
Hello Mr. Wikitiki89! Can the word learn mean to accept the habit? 16:22, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
Can you give a more specific example? --WikiTiki89 14:40, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
For example, "I learn to do this". 20:58, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
I mean something more specific. I don't know what kind of thing you are thinking of for "do this". --WikiTiki89 23:17, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
For example, "He learns to change his habit". 23:48, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
Can you be even more specific? What kind of habit? Give me an actual full example of something you're trying to say. --WikiTiki89 00:08, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
For example, to learn to be polite, to learn to speak with an Quebec accent, etc, the word learn means what? 00:39, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
No, that's the regular ordinary definition of "learn" that we have as our first definition ("to acquire an ability"). --WikiTiki89 02:11, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
The word learn means to acquire a new thing? 20:38, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
What do you mean by "thing"? You cannot use "learn" to mean "to acquire a new house". --WikiTiki89 20:50, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
For example, to learn to speak with an Quebec accent, it means to start to speak with the Quebec accent? 01:53, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
No. --WikiTiki89 02:46, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
For example, to learn to change one's habit, it means to practice to change one's habit? 00:40, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Hebrew monthsEdit

FYI, I just added entries for all the Hebrew months in Hebrew and Yiddish. I'd appreciate if you checked my Hebrew entries and fixed them at your discretion; if nothing else, there are a bunch of Akkadian etyma that need to be added (currently as term requests). Thanks! —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 03:49, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Unfortunately I don't really know much about the Akkadian etyma (other than for חשוון). --WikiTiki89 15:39, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
I don't know whom to ping to help with Cat:Akkadian term requests. @JohnC5? —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 17:37, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
There is no rush. I'm sort of in the process of learning Akkadian and maybe I will be able to do the research to fill in the gaps later on. --WikiTiki89 17:45, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
@Metaknowledge: I only feel barely conformable adding the ones I have thus far. I could try if you'd like, and I'm flattered that you think I'm anything more than a fool bumbling about in the dark when it comes to Akkadian! i tend to brute force my way through whatever relevant literature I can find. —JohnC5 04:09, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Reform JudaismEdit

I don't know if you have the time, but I think the definition could use some improvement. There's probably more to it than being less strict and using less Hebrew. (I mean I don't know, but I think that's not how Reform Jews would define their movement.) Kolmiel (talk) 17:13, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

PS: I don't want to force this difficult job on you, but Orthodox Judaism doesn't seem perfect either (though better). -- I'm no expert at all, but isn't the main distinction a different understanding of the nature of the law, the relevance of profane sciences, and so on? Something like that should be mentioned, probably. -- I'd love to do it myself, but I really don't know enough. Kolmiel (talk) 17:23, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

I gave it a try. The main distinction between all forms of Judaism is generally in regard to the law. Theological differences are of lesser importance and probably don't correspond to any of the "streams". I guess theology is more of a personal thing, every individual has his or her own beliefs. But that also applies to the law to some extent, everyone has his or her own interpretations and level of observance. So I guess these "streams" are mainly applicable to communities of people; so they sort of refer to the standard interpretation and level of observance used by a community in its rituals, liturgy, etc. And since theology has less relevance to the communal aspects, it has less relevance to the division between "streams". It's a complicated topic really. --WikiTiki89 17:54, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
Hey. Perfect, as far as I can judge. Thanks a lot!! Kolmiel (talk) 18:43, 1 June 2016 (UTC)


All other labels with the plain_categories field specify the language. There is no other language that can be labelled as Haketia. It should be Haketia Ladino. DTLHS (talk) 19:14, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

@DTLHS: The category name was chosen in a discussion. Therefore, you shouldn't change it without discussing it first, preferably in the same discussion. --WikiTiki89 19:24, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

he: qamatsEdit

I have a question. What condition if the qamats mark would become a or o? I may add the condition for it. --Octahedron80 (talk) 20:44, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

You can't tell for certain without knowing the grammar. There are even ambiguous cases like חָכְמָה(khokhmá, wisdom) and חָכְמָה(khakh'má, she became wise) or בָּאֳנִיָּה(bo'oniyá, in a ship) and בָּאֳנִיָּה(ba'oniyá, in the ship). There are some heuristics that can help you guess, but they're pretty complicated. --WikiTiki89 21:05, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
I should also mention that Unicode has a codepoint (U+05C7 HEBREW POINT QAMATS QATAN) meant to distinguish the case that is "o", but it is very rarely actually used. --WikiTiki89 21:08, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
Since "a" is much more common, the transliteration module should use "a" as the default and "o" would require a manual transliteration. If the module can transliterate about 80% or more of fully vocalised Hebrew words accurately, it's worth working on it and use it the way Arabic or Yiddish modules are used. Is 80% about right? Is it still worth if it's less? --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 20:43, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
It's not worth it at all. We also add stress to our romanisations, and a module would do a crappy job trying to predict that. We can never handle Hebrew the way we handle Arabic, let alone Yiddish. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 20:46, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
(e/c) It still would have to handle stress. We could add metegs as stress marks in the Hebrew text, but they don't display very well in most fonts and we would have to actually go and add them in everywhere. Also, the shva nach/shva na distinction would need to have a similar default and manual override, which would eliminate another very significant percentage of words. With the qamatz, we could theoretically start using the Unicode HEBREW POINT QAMATS QATAN, but there is no equivalent (yet?) for the shva nach/shva na distinction. --WikiTiki89 20:49, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
(e/c, reply to Meta) Just wanted to post about the stress before I saw your post. Hebrew and Sanskrit don't use native means to mark stresses and I don't see them in some dictionaries. I think they probably belong to pronunciation sections. Besides, all words having stress on syllables other than the final can have a manual stress.--Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 20:53, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Can you assess the percentage of words, which could use the automatic transliterations, let's say - no stress meaning it's the final syllable and if the stress is not marked, other variations. Note that users add translations without transliterations or stresses sometimes. I have a French-Hebrew-French dictionary. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 21:01, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
I went through the first 500 words of Wiktionary:Frequency lists/Hebrew, and about 35-40% of them will need manual overrides. But also the farther down the list I go, the more likely the words are to need manual overrides, so the actual percentage will be higher. --WikiTiki89 21:57, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for checking! Can I also ask what you used in the estimate when deciding that a term needs a manual override? E.g. stress marks, kamats, shva? I am also aware that not all terms can have full vocalisations - did you include those? --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 01:06, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
Yeah I took all three of those into account, using the rules that qamatz qatan and shva nach always need manual overrides and that stress needs a manual override if it is non-final, except if that is due to a patach gnuva (which is easy to detect). The reason for the imprecision in my result is that I had to use my discretion to skip redundant words and double-count ambiguous words in the list. Also, I'm not sure what you mean by terms that can't have full vocalizations, could you give an example of that? --WikiTiki89 14:52, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply. I meant defective spellings, which don't get nikud, AFAIK, e.g. "אובייקטיבי \ אוֹבְּיֶקְטִיבִי". BTW, the WT:AHE doesn't describe this. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 20:28, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
Oh. Well that's not a problem, the transliteration module would be working with the vocalized forms. I was considering the canonical vocalized form for each term in the list. --WikiTiki89 20:31, 6 October 2016 (UTC)


Hello Mr. Wikitiki89! "Always" doesn't mean all the life? For example, "he is always nice", it's doesn't mean he is nice for all the life? 14:32, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Not necessarily. I think it's similar to toujours. --WikiTiki89 18:09, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
The definition of "Always" and "toujours" is exactly the same. 20:44, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

you're welcomeEdit

Hello Mr. Wikitiki89! To say welcome instead of you're welcome is correct or incorrect? 22:43, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Incorrect. They mean different things. "Welcome" by itself means "Bienvenue". --WikiTiki89 00:04, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
Some Québécois say bienvenue instead of de rien. 18:08, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
But in English you can't. --WikiTiki89 18:12, 18 July 2016 (UTC)


The Starostin transcription scheme for Khakas has been made. Could you please update the Khakas module?

I still have some problem with the Fuyu dialect but the Xyzyl dialect is well now. -- 21:22, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

learn from one's mistakesEdit

Hello Mr. Wikitiki89! For example, learn from one's mistakes, the word learn means to acquire knowledge or habit? 18:32, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

The word learn means what here? 16:58, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
It can sort of mean both here. --WikiTiki89 17:14, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

"He has learned the rules, but he doesn't learn to follow the rules", in this sentence, the verb learn has 2 definitions? 18:43, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Yes (but it is correct to say "but he hasn't learned to follow the rules"). --WikiTiki89 18:45, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
"He hasn't learned to follow the rules", the verb learn means to accept the habit? 19:06, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
Yes. --WikiTiki89 19:12, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
"to learn to speak Arabic", the verb learn means to acquire the knowledge or to accept the habit? 19:21, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
Either, depending on the context. But usually to acquire knowledge. --WikiTiki89 19:22, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
When the verb learn means to accept the habit, it's means that it's the first time you do it? 19:55, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
No. --WikiTiki89 19:56, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
When it's not the first time, you say "you have learned"? 20:15, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
I have no idea what you're trying to ask. --WikiTiki89 20:25, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
When someone says learn to follow rules, it's means that it's the first time that he follows the rules? 20:33, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
I think so. 00:36, 19 July 2016 (UTC)


Hello Mr. Wikitiki89! The verb must means to be mandatory and to be inevitable? 18:04, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Hello Mr. Wikitiki89! For example, "everybody eventually must be old", the word must means inevitable. 13:40, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

See our entry for must. --WikiTiki89 14:22, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
To do with certainty and to happen inevitably are almost the same thing. 19:07, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
So then why do you have to ask me about it? --WikiTiki89 19:08, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
Because I was not sure if the verb must can mean to happen inevitably. 20:45, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

from now onEdit

Hello Mr Wikitiki89! From now on means to start to change now, but maybe it's not for all the rest of the life? 21:10, 1 August 2016 (UTC)


Hello Mr. Wikitiki89! 1,15$ is pronounced one fifteen or one and fifteen? 15:38, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

"1,15$" is not a thing that exists. If you mean "$1.15", then that can be pronounced any of the following ways:
  • one dollar and fifteen cents
  • a dollar and fifteen cents
  • a dollar fifteen
  • one fifteen
Outside of currency, the number "1.15" by itself can only be pronounced "one point one five". --WikiTiki89 15:42, 5 August 2016 (UTC)


HELP ! My Votes Din`t CONTRIBUTED !!!

I could use help with a short Russian passageEdit

See Wiktionary:Information_desk/2016/August#Translation_of_Russian_sentence and the link to original Russian document. If you can't help please let me know.

Ultimate objective is getting some info into a WP article on an electrical transmission line. DCDuring TALK 02:35, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Polish–Lithuanian CommonwealthEdit

This is the only English entry spelled with an en-dash. Should it be moved? DTLHS (talk) 01:14, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Yes, it should; cf. Talk:Hertzsprung–Russell diagram. But a redirect is fine. - -sche (discuss) 01:51, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
Yeah I guess. Perhaps we should do the same for other languages that use en-dashes for these kinds of words. --WikiTiki89 02:00, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
In Russian en-dashes and em-dashes may have different uses and a term may have both types. At least officially.--Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 02:52, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
I English too, yet we choose to go with the less correct hyphen in this case despite that. --WikiTiki89 03:04, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
Please see this discussion you took part in. Spelling with an en-dash "Бозе-Эйнштейна" would mean it's a surname with a hyphen, not two different people.--Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 03:55, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
Like I said, the situation is officially pretty much the same in English. This is not the commonwealth of "Polish Lithuania", but the commonwealth of Poland and Lithuania, and so the proper typography is with an en-dash. Yet we choose to simplify the typography in the entry titles and use a hyphen instead. This is similar to our use of straight apostrophes (') instead of curly apostrophes (), not only in Englisg, but in most languages that use apostrophes, including Ukrainian (м'ясо instead of м’ясо), but for some reason not Macedonian (inconsistently too, see ‘рж vs. ’рт). --WikiTiki89 11:56, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
Yeah, the argument that a hyphen means one name is made in English too (on en.WP), but in practice many people just use hyphens and the dash is, as Wikitiki mentions, a frill like curly apostrophes (or narrow spaces before em dashes, which I see aren't being used above, lol). I suppose it could be argued that there's a difference, that dashes (debatably) signify semantic information whereas curly apostrophes signify none, but if we had entries at dash spellings, we'd face all the tricky cases WP has had debates over (sex-gender distinction, if we had an entry for it like error/mistake distinction, but also placenames where e.g. two towns merged, or a town was named for two people vs someone with a hyphenated surname), and the near-impossibility of measuring relative commonness. Hence I think hyphens are preferable, though I recognize that there is a plausible argument for en dashes. I won't upset the applecart of конденсат Бозе — Эйнштейна as long as we have redirects pointing to it from the hyphenated form.
Off-topic, I'm intrigued that Bose's name is rendered with 'з'; the Bengali letter seems to be a plain 's' i.e. 'с' and the pronunciation ru.WP gives is with /ʃ/ i.e. 'ш'.
For Macedonian I suspect the inconsistent apostrophes are errors. New contributors, or those from some other wikis, or those who are copying and pasting entry titles from other texts, sometimes add English entries with curly apostrophes. I'll open an RFC. - -sche (discuss) 17:10, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
Re: offtopic: There's no /ʃ/ in the Russian pronunciation of "Бозэ". --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 20:59, 25 August 2016 (UTC)


I don't know what you've done at Module:palindromes, but it's causing module errors everywhere. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:25, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

User:Justinrleung fixed it before I could. It was a silly mistake on my part not to preview (although the poor programming practices of the module's author(s) are also partly to blame). --WikiTiki89 14:33, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
Which practices are those? *Harumph* —JohnC5 15:00, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
Declaring a variable within a visually delimited block of code and then using it outside that block. --WikiTiki89 15:02, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
Oh, that was Code. Carry on. :PJohnC5 15:04, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
This would be the diff I blame (if that comment had been placed two lines lower, there wouldn't have been a problem). --WikiTiki89 15:10, 29 August 2016 (UTC)


Special thanks to you for reverting that vandal from my talk page! I don't think I've ever had a vandal on my user space before. I see that this SOP-obsessed user seems pretty consistent. Good luck to you guys with handling it. (If it goes far enough, could it be a good idea to add the word "SOP" to the username blacklist? Just a suggestion/question) Philmonte101 (talk) 00:55, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

IMO, we shouldn't add "SOP" to the username blacklist, if this would be a measure against a single person. He would be able to choose a different name easily enough. If we added "SOP" to the username blacklist, it would block people named Sophie. (and Sophocles) If the block was case-sensitive, Sophie would be allowed, and the SOP vandal could try using "Sop" in the name, too. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 01:01, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Morse module/templateEdit

What does it do? I have tried two things (in the sandbox) to no avail. SemperBlotto (talk) 10:52, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

It generates the headword line images for Morse code characters (see .--., for example). --WikiTiki89 10:53, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

POS header for MorseEdit

Currently, both Morse entries ---.. ---.. and ...---... have this:

  • POS header = "interjection"
  • template = "prosign"
  • category = "prosign"

I wonder if there's a way to make the POS header, template and category use the same classification.

For example, the POS header could be ===Prosign===. It sounds better than Interjection, in my opinion. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 16:38, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

I oppose adding even more POS header types. From a linguistic point of view, it's an interjection. It's only a prosign within the Morse encoding, but we're not describing Morse encoding, we're describing language. —CodeCat 16:41, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
"Prosign" is not a part of speech. Neither is "Abbreviation". --WikiTiki89 16:48, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
Fair enough. What, then, about my initial objection? We could do the other way around:
--Daniel Carrero (talk) 16:52, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
We still want to categorize them as prosigns and abbreviations. We can also categorize them by part of speech. --WikiTiki89 16:54, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
Sounds good.
{{morse code for|88|lang=mul}} returns "Visual rendering of Morse code for 88."
Suppose we added a new parameter:
{{morse code for|88|lang=mul|prosign=hugs and kisses}} returns "Visual rendering of Morse code for 88 (prosign for hugs and kisses)."
This would link the entry to the actual gloss and categorize it as a prosign. Category:Translingual prosigns in Morse code could be a subcategory of Category:Translingual abbreviations, so the entry itself would not need to be in Category:Translingual abbreviations.
P.S.: If all Morse code sequences are Translingual, then "lang=mul" is redundant and can be removed from all entries. Actually, Japanese Morse code for hiragana/katakana was mentioned in the BP discussion about Morse code. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 16:58, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
88 is not a prosign, it's an abbreviation. Prosigns are long single "characters" with no pauses, while abbreviations are separated by pauses as normal letters would be within a word. Other than that, I agree with what you intend to display. |lang=mul can be removed anyway, because it is treated as the default (but |lang=ja can still be used for Japanese). --WikiTiki89 17:28, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
I edited both ---.. ---.. and ...---...; now they are categorized as interjections using the headword line, and either prosign or abbreviation using the definition line. Incidentally, after I was done with them, both sere sent to RFD. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 04:08, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Russian spelling categoriesEdit

These are the new categories after you added the standardChars field: Category:Russian terms spelled with —, Category:Russian terms spelled with №, Category:Russian terms spelled with ², Category:Russian terms spelled with B. Could you verify that the entries are correct and that you want a category for these characters? DTLHS (talk) 01:55, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

@DTLHS: The em-dash category is probably unnecessary (and I just updated standardChars to reflect that). The others are fine, although for the last one, it would be better if we could have some sort of generic category like Category:Russian terms spelled with Latin characters, but that is not currently possible to do with standardChars. --WikiTiki89 11:59, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Some more: Category:Russian terms spelled with U‏‎, Category:Russian terms spelled with T, Category:Russian terms spelled with S‏‎, Category:Russian terms spelled with D‏‎, Category:Russian terms spelled with C‏‎, Category:Russian terms spelled with Α‏‎, Category:Russian terms spelled with І‏‎, Category:Russian terms spelled with X‏‎, Category:Russian terms spelled with Ё‏‎ DTLHS (talk) 16:32, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

The Ё and І categories are only showing up due to some strange caching glitch (these characters should have been excluded by standardChars); null edits and purges don't seem to help for some reason and it's really pissing me off. --WikiTiki89 18:23, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
I did a null edit on Module:ru-headword, and they went away. It's hard to say if that's what did it, though. Chuck Entz (talk) 18:51, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
I tried that before and it didn't work. I think what did it was my latest edit to Module:languages/data2. I think there is a bug in the Scribunto regular expression implementation, particularly with regard to the bracket operator, that causes it to non-deterministically produce correct results only some of the time if the character list between the brackets happens to be ordered in some particular way. --WikiTiki89 18:54, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Morse code -- written format for concatenated groupsEdit

The section w:Prosigns for Morse code#Concatenated group delineation describes how to write concatenated Morse code groups in Latin script. Apparently, ...---... should not exactly be written as "SOS". It should be: <SOS>. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 05:46, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

But why do we need to? We already say it's a prosign and give the correct Morse code representation, and the entry for SOS contains all the relevant lexical information. --WikiTiki89 11:52, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
Fine with me, then. I was just wondering if "SOS" without fancy typography was wrong for some reason. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 21:13, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
It's wrong as an actual written representation of Morse code, but it's not wrong as a definition (in my opinion, at least). --WikiTiki89 21:21, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

game overEdit

Hello Mr. Wikitiki89! The word over in game over means stopped? 13:04, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

It means "finished". --WikiTiki89 13:23, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
Even if you haven't finished the level, but you failed, it's written game over too, the word over means finished and stopped? 13:59, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
You didn't finish the level, but you finished the game because you lost. If you just stop playing, the game is not over because you can continue later. --WikiTiki89 14:54, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
For example, if you do something incompletely and you stop forever, can you say you've finished? 15:35, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
It depends on the situation. But when you lose in a game, it is impossible to continue, that is why the game is over and not just stopped. --WikiTiki89 15:55, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
Hello Mr. Wikitiki89! In French, "c'est fini, il fait plus ça", the word fini means to stop forever? 10:35, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
But in English, can you say "it's over, he doesn't do this any more"? 23:19, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
Hello Mr. Wikitiki89! Please answer me. 21:54, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Your French is probably better than mine, but I think you're right that "c'est fini, il fait plus ça" is the same as "it's over, he doesn't do this any more". --WikiTiki89 22:01, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
The word over means "completed", but it means "to stop forever" too? 00:46, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
Basically correct. But it's important to keep in mind the context of exactly what is "stopping forever". In a football (soccer) match, for example, a half can be "over". That means that the half has stopped forever. But the game may still have a second half. StevenJ81 (talk) 15:43, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Next definitions voteEdit

After Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2016-08/Definitions — introduction ends, (I'm assuming it will pass) I intend to create a 2nd vote to edit the next piece of WT:EL#Definitions. This is just a minor edit and it does not change regulations so, if nobody objects, I'd like to just create the vote together with a BP thread informing that the vote exists, and give it the usual 7 days for discussion, which may be extended if needed.

This is the opposite of your rule of thumb in the BP. Most votes require discussion, I think this one probably doesn't. What do you think?

Old text:

The vote “2006-12/form-of style” is relevant to this section, without specifying text to be amended in this document, so please see it for details.
The vote “2010-08/Italicizing use-with-mention” is relevant to this section, without specifying text to be amended in this document, so please see it for details.

New text:

Non-lemma definitions (plurals, conjugations, superlatives, etc.) are generated by templates, linking back to the main entry. The link is bold when written in Latin script or another script that allows boldface; the rest of the definition is italic.

--Daniel Carrero (talk) 06:05, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

@Daniel Carrero: With so much going on here lately, I never noticed this. I would have given you feedback sooner, sorry. --WikiTiki89 22:55, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
It's all right. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 22:57, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Aramaic on WiktionaryEdit

Since you're the only active person I know to be really into Semitic languages, I have a question I hoped you could help with: how to deal with the different periods/dialects of Aramaic on Wiktionary? And are there any policies at all regarding the language? With there being no Wiktionary:About Aramaic and precious few discussions in the BP, I'm not sure where to even begin here. Like, what would the lemma for cat be? שונרא/שנר/שנרא?

PS, should you know any good resources (online or in print) about Aramaic (especially the forms used ~500BC-500AD), that'd be awesome too. — Kleio (t · c) 14:59, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

The best resource I can recommend on Aramaic is CAL (the Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon project). It's not completely comprehensive quite yet, but very nearly so. Before I even started editing here, someone had already added a whole bunch of Syriac as in Hebrew script as Aramaic (still using Syriac orthographic conventions that were never used with the Hebrew script). Also, entries for all verb classes had been added at the page for the root, listing the definitions without distinguishing which verb class they belong to. Nouns and adjectives were all added at the emphatic forms; for East Syriac that makes sense for nouns, but not for adjectives, but for Aramaic in general I don't think that makes much sense for nouns either. So I have been trying to clean things up, by moving entries to their proper Hebrew-script orthography, by splitting verb entries to their correct pages, and by moving adjectives to their absolutive forms (but there's still a long way to go). Still we are left with other orthographic issues like the one you mention of matres lectionis. This is a difficult issue to solve, so I can't propose a solution. Currently, most entries are still added the way they were spelled in Syriac, which means short u was always marked with ו, while short i was never marked with י, which is by no means the case in any Hebrew-script orthography. I can't really say that we have a solution to this problem. To complicate things even further, Classical Syriac is treated as a separate language and has plenty of entries in the Syriac script, making it kind of silly to duplicate the Syriac orthographic conventions for Aramaic in the Hebrew script. I recommend browsing through CAL to see how they handle it. They handle it fairly well, but in a way that is incompatible with our general practices at Wiktionary. (Also, when you are searching for words in CAL, be aware that they lie and say you can search for any form of the word, but really you can only search for the absolutive form; I recommend just leaving off the ending entirely when searching.) --WikiTiki89 15:17, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
@KIeio: I noticed your page User:KIeio/Aramaic and that you are planning on working on Chad Gadya. I recommend that you pick something else, because Chad Gadya is not the best example of Aramaic literature; it's filled with grammatical errors and Hebraisms. --WikiTiki89 17:31, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
Hmm, guess you're right, but as long as I verify the lemmata through CAL I should be fine tho? Either way, thanks for the detailed answer. I think I'll visit the Semitic studies section of my uni library to do some proper reading, and only after that will I start adding words to Wiktionary. My current knowledge is mainly based on Hebrew cognates, bits of Talmud here and there and a few random words/expressions that leaked into Modern Hebrew, so some real introductory reading is probably a good idea. — Kleio (t · c) 11:25, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
This article is a very good introduction to the dialectology. It's useful to be aware of the various dialects even if you only focus on one of them. My first introduction to Aramaic was A Short Grammar of Biblical Aramaic by Alger F. Johns. I think Biblical Aramaic and Classical Syriac are the easiest to start with because there is vocalized reading material (here is an online vocalized version of the Peshitta). --WikiTiki89 17:36, 14 September 2016 (UTC)


I know you were trying to keep things neat, but by removing my comment on Equinox's talk page, I think you made it harder for him to respond. He still hasn't responded on my Talk page, and I will be surprised if he does so, as my question was and probably is very low in his priorities. Just an observation. YMMV Bcent1234 (talk) 20:25, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

@Bcent1234: If Equinox left a measage on your talkpage, he should know to check there for a response. If you're worried he won't notice, you can {{ping}} him, like I just pinged you. It's always best to respond in one place. --WikiTiki89 21:56, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Yiddish plansEdit

I have a rough idea in my mind of how the expansion and improvement of Yiddish content here should go, and most of the steps require technical work that I can't do myself. It would be be best if an editor familiar with Yiddish carried them out, but that leaves you as the only person to do it. If you're not interested, I can try working with non-Yiddish editors, but I'm still hopeful that you'll be able to carry it out. In my mind, the first things to do are unstressed i (Wiktionary talk:About Yiddish#Transliterating the plural suffix ־ים) and templates for verbs with two constituent parts. Then we'll need an inflection bot (for noun plurals, inflected forms of adjectives, and inflected forms of verbs). That should cover most of the infrastructural issues still outstanding, leaving me to create a hell of a lot of entries. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 02:18, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I know I'm a deadbeat. I'll try to get around to the verb thing soon (although I still need help figuring out the default word order for reflexive verbs and phrasal verbs like מבֿטל זײַן). The -im's I'll get to too. For the inflection bot, we might be better off asking for help, since there are people who have already solved all the non-Yiddish-specific problems that would need to be solved for it. --WikiTiki89 10:27, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

inflection botsEdit

You mention an inflection bot for Yiddish. In my experience, these are quite hard to write properly. My Russian inflection script is currently 2,886 (!) lines of Python, with 75 FIXME's at the top (almost all of which have already been fixed). Granted, it does a lot of things, but there are a whole lot of cases if you want to do this correctly, particular if you want to properly handling existing entries (so that e.g. it won't mess up if people have manually created inflections, if you run it twice, if the page already exists and has a lemma on it, etc.). Simplification could come e.g. from not using separate etymologies for lemmas vs. inflections or for inflections from different lemmas, as is done in Russian, and even more could come from simply ignoring existing pages, although that would omit some of the most important inflectional forms. (I can't imagine that other inflection bots that have been written are as complex, so I bet they took some of these shortcuts.) Benwing2 (talk) 04:51, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

@Benwing2: The first shortcut is fine by me, the second not. But Yiddish inflection is far, far simpler than Russian inflection. Are you interested in helping with this project? —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 06:11, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
Yes, although I don't have all that much time currently; but I'll help as much as I can. Benwing2 (talk) 06:28, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
@Benwing2: But you already wrote one. I'm sure most of your Russian inflection script is reusable for Yiddish. For how to handle etymology sections, I would suggest that for Yiddish a good method would be to create a new etymology section if and only if there are already two or more etymology sections on the existing page. --WikiTiki89 15:32, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
For reference, my earlier Arabic inflection script is 2300 lines. I created my Russian script by cutting and pasting about 700 lines from the Arabic script, rewriting it, and gradually fixing problems until I got the current nearly 2900 lines. You would be surprised at how much of this is specific to Russian. As for creating a new etymology section, I don't understand why creating a new section if and only if there are already two sections would make sense. Benwing2 (talk) 00:13, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
@Benwing2: Can you give some examples of what kinds of things were Russian-specific? As for etymologies, my reasoning is this: If there are already two or more etymology sections, then putting the inflected form into one of them would imply that it has the same etymology (and would also require picking one), while if there is only one etymology section, then the chances are much higher that either the inflected form is actually related to it or there is already mixed content from multiple etymologies that would need to be split manually anyway. --WikiTiki89 00:22, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
Sorry, I'll respond to this soon, been busy lately. Benwing2 (talk) 17:41, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
No rush, we still have a lot to do before we're ready for an inflection bot. --WikiTiki89 17:53, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
Well, a few things could be botted already (inflected forms of adjectives, for example). —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 21:28, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
In order to do this, it would help if you could provide a template similar to {{ru-generate-adj-forms}}, something like {{yi-generate-adj-forms}}; the idea is that you pass the exact same arguments as you do to {{yi-decl}}, but it generates a string something like pred=גות|e=גותע|s=גותס|er=גותער|n=גותנ. If there is manual transliteration required, it should generate something like pred=גות//got|e=גותע//gote|s=גותס//gots|er=גותער//goter|n=גותנ//gotn (in this case, I'm imagining that גות is irregularly transliterated got). If there are multiple possible forms for a given inflection, separate them by commas. The purpose of this is so that my bot can call the template and parse the result to get the forms to generate. Benwing2 (talk) 23:23, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
BTW you might consider renaming {{yi-decl}} to {{yi-decl-adj}} since it looks like Yiddish noun declension exists at least some of the time. Benwing2 (talk) 23:26, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
Yiddish noun declension, when it exists, is limited to a single oblique form with an ־ן(-n) suffix, and so does not need a whole table template. We can handle it in the headword line (in fact, I though we already did, but apparently not; currently we just leave a usage note like at האַרץ(harts)). --WikiTiki89 23:41, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
I still think {{yi-decl}} should be called {{yi-decl-adj}} for clarity. Benwing2 (talk) 04:59, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
I've been marking non-lemma etymologies with the {{nonlemma}} template. If a bot can recognise such a section, then it will know where to place the inflections. —CodeCat 17:47, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
That's only if such a section already exists. --WikiTiki89 17:53, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
Of course, but a separate bot run may be able to add it to entries. —CodeCat 17:54, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
Russian-specific inflection issues

Above you asked about some Russian-specific issues I handled. Here is a partial list. Note that some of these may apply to other languages but weren't generally an issue in Arabic.

  1. Lots of things involving manual translations. E.g.
    1. If a given inflection has multiple forms with the same Cyrillic but different translit (this happens with words where Cyrillic е is pronounced either palatal or non-palatal), I combine the translits into a single tr= param, e.g. {{ru-noun form|те́рмину|tr=términu, tɛ́rminu|m-in}}.
    2. I check if the manual translit can be auto-generated and remove it if so.
    3. I remove accents from monosyllabic translits.
  2. Lots of work to handle stress variants i.e. cases where a single inflection has multiple possible forms, which are the same except for stress, and as a result will end up on the same non-lemma page.
    1. If there's a single lemma which has stress variants in a given inflection, they are combined, e.g. {{head|ru|verb form|head=прибы́ли|head2=при́были}}.
    2. But if a given lemma has stress variants in it, e.g. мышле́ние(myšlénije)/мы́шление(mýšlenije), which has its declension declared as {{ru-noun-table|мышле́ние|or|мы́шление}}, I have a bunch of code to split each of the inflection sets, matching the appropriate-stressed inflection to the appropriate lemma, so that e.g. мышлению(myšleniju) gets two entries, one for мышле́нию(myšléniju) dative singular of мышле́ние(myšlénije), and one for мы́шлению(mýšleniju) dative singular of мы́шление(mýšlenije). The splitting algorithm tries to remove the (Russian-specific) ending from the inflections and compare the stems to match up the stress variants, but it needs to be supplemented by a manual list of cases that can't be handled automatically (e.g. cases like бондаря́(bondarjá) form of бонда́рь(bondárʹ), and multiword nouns like комплексное число(kompleksnoje čislo)), and it gets especially messy when you have lemmas that have both stress variants and manual translit, e.g. йоркширский терьер(jorkširskij terʹjer)).
    3. Additional complications with verbs that have stress variants, e.g. спалить(spalitʹ) with 2p pres ind спали́те(spalíte)/спа́лите(spálite) but 2p pres imperative only спали́те(spalíte), caused by the fact that the lemma page has two separate {{ru-conj}} calls, so when the second one is processed, the non-lemma form from the first one is already generated, so it has to be modified.
  3. Apropos the previous entry, there is a lot of complication in general to make sure that non-lemma pages with already-generated inflections are properly handled. If the page was bot-generated it's often easier, but some such pages were written by hand, and might have missing accents, missing manual translit, etc.
  4. Cases like кеды(kedy), нарты(narty), омеги(omegi) that are forms from two different lemmas.
  5. Lots of work to insert the gender/number/animacy into the {{ru-noun form}} call and properly handle updating the gender in an existing entry (e.g. when a given form can be either gen sg or nom pl of the same lemma, or when someone manually created a non-lemma form and gave it a partial gender). Additional complications (I think) due to nouns that can be either animate or inanimate. Also, the gender from the declension call might not be accurate (e.g. masculine nouns ending in -а or -я), so we have to parse the headword declaration to find the gender.
  6. For plurale tantum nouns, forms like genitive plurals should say just "genitive" not "genitive plural".
  7. Remove в, во, на, в/на from beginning of locatives.
  8. Don't create entries for words beginning with hyphens (e.g. verb forms of the suffix -бавить).
  9. etc. etc. Lots of other issues (as I said above, I have 75 FIXME's listed).
Benwing2 (talk) 17:45, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

merging history of Module talk:ru-pron and Module talk:ru-pron/testcasesEdit

Can you merge Module talk:ru-pron/testcases into Module talk:ru-pron, keeping the history, and then redirect Module talk:ru-pron/testcases to Module talk:ru-pron? In this case, almost everything in Module talk:ru-pron/testcases is earlier than Module talk:ru-pron, so the combined history should remain sane. Thanks! Benwing2 (talk) 04:58, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

@Benwing2: Both pages were created in May 2014 and held discussions simultaneously for a while before Module talk:ru-pron/testcases stopped being used. So the history would actually not be very sane. Do you still want me to do this? --WikiTiki89 17:22, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
You could just paste the content from Module talk:ru-pron/testcases onto Module talk:ru-pron, leaving the content all in one place but the history sane, as long as you left Module talk:ru-pron/testcases as a redirect (bluelink) so people could see it for the edit history / for licensing. But actually, since both talk pages are rather long and all the stuff on Module talk:ru-pron/testcases is old, why not just move that page to Module talk:ru-pron/Archive 1 or similar? - -sche (discuss) 15:47, 25 September 2016 (UTC)


Hello Mr. Wikitiki89, the future tense of "must" is "will must"? 11:56, 1 October 2016 (UTC) Please answer me. 21:33, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

There isn't a future tense of must. You have to use a synonym such as have to for anything other than the present tense. Chuck Entz (talk) 22:15, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
I would have suggested "need to". --WikiTiki89 18:16, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
...and either of those in future tense ("...will have to...", "... will need to ..."), or past tense ("... had to ...", "... needed to ..."). Those forms also work in present tense. StevenJ81 (talk) 15:40, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

ointment - משחהEdit


Just want to check if מִשְׁחָה(mishkha) has a correct transliteration. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 00:35, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

@Atitarev: It's correct, but missing the stress mark: mishkhá. --WikiTiki89 01:28, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
OK, thanks. Both stress marks and noun genders are missing in my dictionary. The verb lemmas also differ from Wiktionary conventions. The transliteration also uses different standards and rules. I hope it's okey to add translations without stress marks and genders. I only do occasionally. Somebody might fix later. Is the gender predictable? I couldn't find much online.
BTW, the translation adder has a bug, you can't add {{t-needed}} specifically for Hebrew. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 01:47, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
Erm, you do know about Morfix, right? You can at least get gender from there. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 01:49, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
Do you mean labels they put after words, like 'שֵם נ? If I knew the meaning of abbreviations they use, I could probably take your advice ;) --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 02:01, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
שם means noun. שם ז' means masculine noun, שם נ' means feminine noun, שם זו"נ means masculine or feminine noun, and שם without a gender means the noun is masculine but has a feminine form. פ' means verb and is followed by the name of the binyan. Gender is about just as predictable as it is in Arabic. --WikiTiki89 02:39, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
Thanks again! --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 04:22, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

Working with you on HebrewEdit

You mind if I do that off and on for Hebrew entry writing/ transliteration? You clearly do quite a bit for the section, and it's probably better if we communicate about out work. Of course, I can't do much besides that in every language besides English, so I mostly intend on doing empty but present/ noticeable "gamma" pages with limited info or adding on obvious info. I've already transliterated a bit based on fully niqquded readings i've seen. For English, i also try to work on ancestor versions of it (including Proto-Germanic) and document Anglo-Norman and Romani whenever I can.

I also managed to snag a file from some Christian Hebrew website documenting all of the Tanakh's hapax legomenna. I can mail to you via dropbox.

--Zontas (talk) 01:41, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

grade repetitionEdit

Hello Mr. Wikitiki89! In USA, how many years do students can repeat at primary school? 13:29, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

As may times as you want, I think. It probably varies by state and district, but in Massachusetts you can no longer attend public school after you turn 21. --WikiTiki89 15:38, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
It's allowed or forbidden to be at primary school at 14 years old? 16:36, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
I don't know. --WikiTiki89 17:06, 10 October 2016 (UTC)


I've heard that "similes" can also use than. PseudoSkull (talk) 16:06, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Maybe, but still I wouldn't sum of its parts a metaphor or simile or anything. It's a quite literal expression. --WikiTiki89 16:07, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
Also, sum of its parts's meaning seems to not be idiomatic by itself, but is only idiomatic by extension, i.e. "than the sum of its parts". PseudoSkull (talk) 16:09, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

ux with NavajoEdit

Hi, I don't know if you're the appropriate person to ask to, but would you know why the ux template doesn't italicize the example sentence in Navajo, when it does in other languages?

I don't know‎ ― English example.

Je ne sais pas.‎ ― French example.

Doo shił bééhózin.‎ ― Navajo example.

Thank you! Julien Daux (talk) 01:46, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

It's because the script as defined in Module:languages/data2 is "nv-Latn" (if it were Latn it would be italicized- the logic is at line 54 of Module:usex). DTLHS (talk) 01:58, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
I think it should be fixed now- uses tag_text. DTLHS (talk) 02:08, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
Great it works now. Do you know why Navajo has nv-Latn script instead of just Latn? Also, why are only acute (á) and ogonek (ą) accounted for and not acute with ogonek (ą́) for sorting purposes? Thx! Julien Daux (talk) 00:56, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
There used to be problems with normal Latin fonts not having a few of the diacritic/letter combinations in Navajo, but I doubt there's been anything like that for quite a while now. Chuck Entz (talk) 02:45, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

She's started again.Edit UtherPendrogn (talk) 14:23, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

I advise Wikitiki to look closely at the actual edits performed and the results they had on the page. —CodeCat 14:26, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
@CodeCat: Don't worry, I always do. --WikiTiki89 14:28, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
@UtherPendrogn: I don't get what the issue is. {{cel-gau-proper noun}} doesn't exist, so why are you trying to use it? --WikiTiki89 14:28, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
I was trying to revert her edit that made the page english. Revert vandalism first, correct form when I'm not under attack. UtherPendrogn (talk) 14:29, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
What the hell are you talking about? You were the one using the English template and CodeCat was fixing it. --WikiTiki89 14:31, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
Nonsense, look at my edits. UtherPendrogn (talk)2
I did, perhaps it's you who needs to look more carefully. --WikiTiki89 14:37, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
You need a new pair of eyes. UtherPendrogn (talk) 14:42, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
Tell me, in the following two edits, who's doing what: CodeCat's edit and your edit? --WikiTiki89 14:46, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
Look at the other edits. UtherPendrogn (talk) 14:58, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
Why don't you show me one edit where CodeCat did something wrong, or even where you did something right. --WikiTiki89 15:00, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
*makes more popcorn* —JohnC5 15:02, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
What a constructive post, JohnC5. And what would be the point? The lottery's rigged, might as well not play. UtherPendrogn (talk) 15:49, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
It's not rigged, you're simply losing at a game you created yourself. --WikiTiki89 15:50, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
@UtherPendrogn: When you delete "head|" from {{head|cel-gau|proper noun}} you break the markup and make the phrase "Template:cel-gau-proper noun" appear in the page. CodeCat gets a point for understanding markup language or whatever we use here for source code of content pages. But what the dispute is actually about is, should we describe the lemma and the proper noun as English, or Gaulish, and the given name - especially in its capacity as male - as Proto-Celtic, or Gaulish? That's a lot of technicality for a discussion with this much drama.
@everyone: Calm down, everyone - it's nothing personal, it's just linguistic reconstruction. 13:33, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

question about maqeph in YiddishEdit

Should a Yiddish construction using a maqeph (that doesn't use a construct state but seems SOP anyway) be treated as SOP? Asking because of the etymology at kinnesinne. Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk) 12:10, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

In general, the maqaf is basically just a hyphen and does not affect whether something is SOP. In practice, things spelled with maqaf are often fixed idiomatic expressions. In this case, that doesn't seem to be the case, I can't find any instances really of קנאה־שׂנאה in Yiddish in Google Books, nor of קנאה ושׂנאה in Yiddish and not very many in Hebrew either. --WikiTiki89 18:48, 19 October 2016 (UTC)


Don't know if you noticed the module is still generating לָתֶנֶת for the to-infinitive. And in a case like that do you just override? —Enosh (talk) 21:38, 21 October 2016 (UTC)


Hello Mr. Wikitiki89! For example, to stop the primary education without completely finish the primary education, it's "graduate" or not? 09:20, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Yes or no? 09:13, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

No. --WikiTiki89 12:37, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Greek entriesEdit

Hi. I remember reading somewhere (I don't know where exactly; I think it was a discussion about what should qualify as Modern Greek/Ancient Greek) that you were in favour of stripping Greek words of their accent (and all their diacritic signs?) in the entry's name. I'm curious as to why you would want to do that; this seems like a strange suggestion to me. --Fsojic (talk) 09:30, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

We consider Modern Greek to have come into existence around the year 1500. However the accent system we use for Modern Greek is only a few decades old. Before that, Modern Greek was written with polytonic accents. And I wouldn't be surprised if there are plenty of attested Modern Greek texts that use no accents at all. Also in Modern Greek, an extra accent is added to the end of a proparoxytone when followed by certain unstressed particles. In Ancient Greek, there were times when all polytonic accents were written and there were times when no accents were written. It would make it much easier to have all the information in one place if entry names didn't have accents in them. We do this for Latin, we do this for Old English, we do this for Hebrew and Arabic, why not do it for Greek? --WikiTiki89 12:55, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Even if your rationale is actually convincing, I'm afraid we would instantly be labeled as "amateurish", because this would go against the usual lexicographic conventions for Greek (even though, like all conventions, they might not always be linguistically justified). When I see something such as παιδευω, I automatically think: "this person has no knowledge of Greek". Of course we could write παιδεύω... Another related question: would you keep two separate language headers for Modern Greek and Ancient Greek? --Fsojic (talk) 16:16, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Well yes, I was only talking about the entry names and not the entry text or links, those should always have accents (or at least whenever possible). As for whether Modern and Ancient Greek should be kept separate, they are in fact very different, but the question is more about where the line is drawn. From what I know (and I'm not an expert on Greek) I think we draw the line a little too late at 1500, because late Byzantine Greek is basically Modern Greek. But also note that it might also work to merge them, like we do for Hebrew, although I think Modern and Biblical Hebrew are less different than Modern and Ancient Greek. --WikiTiki89 16:41, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Of course, but don't you think that even having the "culprit" spelling only on the top of the page itself and nowhere else could be considered "too much" by meticulous people? (I actually don't know how I would react myself, so I'm genuinely asking) --Fsojic (talk) 22:13, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

باسم الأب والابن والروح القدسEdit

You deleted the form with a long ā in al-ʾāb. This form was actually legitimate and should be put back on. Both forms are correct because for some reason (I don't know why either) this long ā is often spelt and pronounced when the word refers to the Christian God the Father. Take this for an example: [3]. I think it's fine to have the form you created as the lemma, but there should be an alternative-form entry. Kolmiel (talk) 23:11, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

PS: It's also mentioned in Wehr's dictionary. So it's definitely not a mere misspelling. Again, I don't know how this came to be. Maybe Syriac influence? What's their word for "father"? Hebrew would work, but seems unlikely. Kolmiel (talk) 23:16, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
In Syriac, and all other Aramaic dialects I know about, it has a short vowel (that same verse in Syriac: ܙܸܠܘ ܗܵܟ݂ܹܝܠ ܬ݁ܲܠܡܸܕ݂ܘ ܟܼ݁ܠܗܘܿܢ ܥܲܡ݈ܡܹܐ ܘܲܐܥܡܸܕ݂ܘ ܐܸܢܘܿܢ ܒ݁ܫܸܡ ܐܲܒ݂ܵܐ ܘܲܒ݂ܪܵܐ ܘܪܘܿܚܵܐ ܕ݁ܩܘܿܕ݂ܫܵܐ(zelū hāḵīl talmeḏū kulləhōn ʿamᵊmē waʿmeḏū ʾennōn bəšem ʾaḇā waḇrā wərōḥā dəquḏšā)). The word ʾāḇ refers to the Babylonian month of Ab or the Roman/Christian month of August. So it would be interesting to find out where this comes from. --WikiTiki89 15:53, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
@Kolmiel: PS: I also noticed that in that otherwise fully vocalized text of the Bible, الآب is not vocalized at all (other than the madda), which includes both the missing sukuun that should be on the laam and also the missing case ending vowel. Could this be a clue? --WikiTiki89 18:12, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
I noticed that as well. However, I don't know if it means anything. Grammatically speaking, the -i has to be there if it's supposed to be correct "classicalesque" Arabic, which it is supposed to. And even if they did want it left out, there would have to be a sukun rather than no mark at all. So I don't think it is a clue. I might be mistaken, though. Kolmiel (talk) 19:04, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
@Kolmiel: I didn't mean that it implies there aren't vowels there. Here are a few observations that come to mind, which may or may not be relevant: Dagger alifs are always left out in these online versions, which I'm guess is because the people who digitized the text didn't know how to encode them. Words that would start with an alif wasla but are prefixed with the definite article have the connecting vowel left out (as seen here in وَالابْنِ). In the polytonic Greek versions of the Bible I've seen online, most names borrowed from Hebrew are left unaccented, presumably because the position of the accent is undefined or unstandardized or something. In the Qur'an, maddas are used to emphasize any long vowel and do not imply a hamza (ʾā is written as ءَا, with or without a madda). I'm just brainstorming here. There has to be a reason for the missing vowel marks. --WikiTiki89 19:25, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
Okay, I misunderstood. I thought you meant that al-ʾāb was originally something like a pausal form, which is actually what I had considered possible. (Although, of course, Arabic pausal forms don't normally exhibit vowel changes.) Also, I had only noticed the missing inflection and I'd skipped your mentioning the missing sukun on the lam. The latter is very probably due to digitalization. I suppose the computer treats the -ligature as one letter and therefore is unable to insert the sukun. (You see the same in al-ʾumam and, I'd guess, in all ligatures in the text.) Madda for any long ā is pretty common in printed versions of old texts, even other than the Quran. But yeah... Kolmiel (talk) 19:53, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
Yeah I just noticed الأُمَمِ, that explains the missing sukuun. That makes a little less odd, but still odd. --WikiTiki89 20:10, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Declined word pagesEdit

Hi, re the question I asked at the information desk, could you tell me how to create those declined and conjugated word forms automatically? Thanks, Icebob99 (talk) 21:04, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

I responded at the Information Desk. Please don't start the same discussion in multiple places, it can get hard to follow. If you think I forgot to answer, just ping me again there, but in general one day is not enough time to assume I forgot. --WikiTiki89 21:13, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

OCS derivatives of *h₁ed-Edit

Hello! Looking at some OCS lemmata, I noticed that you recently moved most of the words derived from PIE *h₁ed- to use ѣ in their root rather than . The vowel reconstructed here for Proto-Slavic was indeed ě, and in Glagolitic, of course, ѣ and were represented by the same letter (ⱑ), but in normalized OCS the convention is generally to use word-initially, after vowels, and after soft л҄, н҄, р҄; conventionally, ѣ is only used in other contexts. Since I can’t find much information on Wiktionary’s choice of OCS normalization, I’m not sure of the rationale here; are we intentionally breaking from the traditional norms? Should this also be carried this out for other OCS entries that had Proto-Slavic ě, e.g. ꙗдра(jadra), ꙗдъ(jadŭ), ꙗрость(jarostĭ), etc., or should we generally keep according to conventional normalization, or is there a reason to single out this particular family of words? —Vorziblix (talk) 07:08, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

You're probably right. I thought that maybe OCS actually differentiated ja from (j)ě in these positions but that this fact is lost with there being on one character for it in Glagolitic, and that it would be worth distinguishing them in our normalization. But I guess was wrong. Should I move them all back? --WikiTiki89 21:06, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
Initial in Cyrillic OCS for the most part represented (j)ě; initial (j)a was predominantly written as а in most words (thus азъ(azŭ), агода(agoda), аице(aice), etc.), although there are a few exceptions (ꙗко(jako), ꙗма(jama), etc.). So there was actually some differentiation, although as vs. а rather than ѣ vs. . (Since Glagolitic has both and , it was possible to differentiate them in this way even in Glagolitic.) ѣ is occasionally used instead of word-initially (never in the Codex Suprasliensis, but decently often in the Book of Sava), but as a general rule is written there, and that’s also how all the standard reference works lemmatize them (e.g. Template:R:cu:SS says »ѣ и ’а: … в начале слова и внутри слова в положении после гласного употребляется форма с «). I’d suggest moving them back, but in either case we should be consistent. —Vorziblix (talk) 23:21, 22 November 2016 (UTC)


Hi, this word זָהוּב appears in the etymology of zoof and variants. Some dictionaries record the meaning "gold coin" for it, but it seems like it means "golden" (figuratively or as a colour) more often. Are you familiar with the form? Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk) 10:27, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

Conduct dispute on Information DeskEdit

Wikitiki89, please stop suppressing conduct disputes on the Information Desk. The story is a long one, and if I told it to you here without you first saying you want to be told it, you'd probably block me again, claiming I'd added nonsense/gibberish. I'm open to debating this right here. 12:44, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, I have no idea what you're talking about. When was I suppressing "suppressing conduct disputes on the Information Desk"? --WikiTiki89 16:08, 28 November 2016 (UTC) 10:53, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
The title of this thread contains your answer: the Information desk is where you ask for information. Conduct disputes are subject to removal there as completely off-topic, and yours was so over the top as to look like what a vandal would spam everywhere just to annoy people. The Beer parlour is where you would go to discuss the conduct of admins- not the information desk, and not every talk page where anyone has ever said anything negative about my conduct. Chuck Entz (talk) 15:01, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
So if you call someone a "caricature" for trying to defuse an alleged "losing battle", then where should they go to complain? 13:20, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
Just ignore that comment. 13:23, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Displaying diacritics in EdittoolsEdit


What should be done in MediaWiki:Edittools to show Thai diacritics better, e.g. like the Cyrillic accent marks? they are currently all lumped together. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 05:36, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

@Atitarev:   Done. Can you replace the occurrences of the capitalized word "TITLE" with the names of the corresponding diacritics? --WikiTiki89 20:58, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
Awesome, thanks heaps! Will do, when I get a chance. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 21:16, 30 November 2016 (UTC)


ifonlyOTHRPPL'd"convrt"2,it'd'elpthisDIC(morequalityeditsbymoreppl--nowi'v2CANCERSbutsamebother-smh;ta'gentho!:) 17:54, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

To respond to this, {{lb}} is only for the actual definitions, {{q}} should be used almost everywhere else. --WikiTiki89 19:29, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

ididntno,ta!(sonoENeded? 20:10, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Arabic terms without diacritics are not found by google search webpageEdit


First off, I am posting here because I do not know where this type of issue belongs, and you are the only user that has replied to me in former posts.

As a mere example, the search on google of


redirected from

finds no match.

The term appears in with diacritics as دَاوَى, U+064E being the diacritic added twice. Once you search the term with diacritics, a result is matched, namely

On that page right above, and unlike google homepage search, the Find option of chrome, Ctrl*F, does find and highlight the term either you use diacritics دَاوَى or not داوى.

I'd like google to behave as the Find option of chrome so that it matches arabic terms regardless of using diacritics or not.

Otherwise, I'd like to know how to use to find a term in any page regarless of its position along the page, even if it is not an entry term.

Hope to hear news soon.

Thank you in advance Backinstadiums (talk) 17:10, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

I'm not Google. If there is a problem with Google, tell Google about it. On Wiktionary, we have been trying to get the developers to make the search feature ignore diacritics, but they so far have not cooperated. --WikiTiki89 20:51, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
@Wikitiki89: Thank you for replying. I do not mean even dictionary entries, but terms appearing anywhere along the webpage. I thought google would be an alternative, but apparently google poses the same issue. It should be easy for the search feature to allow disabling and enabling searches taking into account or ignoring diacritics. Unfortunately I am a newbie, so I do not even know where I could request for the developers to add such a feature. Maybe on we can find an alternative. Hope to hear from you. Backinstadiums (talk) 15:56, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
Yes, such a search feature would include any term that appears on the page. We've already requested that the developers do this (here is the phabricator ticket). It actually seems like it is on its way to being dealt with. --WikiTiki89 16:07, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
@Wikitiki89: O.k., thank you so much. There're some issues apart from this one, which is the most important though, which I'd like to help to solve. For example, I see that many terms show the same root yet neither it's possible to search such a root, nor is every term using such a root under the same root. I do not much about editing, but I thought that could be automatize by using templates properly. Also, many terms do appear yet their pages are completely empty. I have been reading about lemmatization lately, so I think it could be achieved. Backinstadiums (talk) 16:34, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
@Wikitiki89: I've just checked chinese pinyin, and it seems latin script does allow looking up terms without diacritics. Backinstadiums (talk) 17:20, 15 December 2016 (UTC)


Hello Mr. Wikitiki89! Someone pronounce the word will as [wʊɫ]? 03:12, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Old Church SlavonicEdit

I don't know anything about this, but clearly we need a discussion rather than this vote that came out of the blue. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 08:29, 17 December 2016 (UTC)


Do you approve of this? --2A02:2788:A4:F44:AD3C:5A4:7A45:7FB7 22:04, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Yes. --WikiTiki89 17:49, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

A proposal on splitting Monguor into Mangghuer and MongghulEdit

Hey, a proposal I've made at Wiktionary:Requests_for_moves,_mergers_and_splits#Splitting_Monguor_into_Mangghuer_and_Mongghul seems to be stuck for a long time now, could you perhaps take a look at it, share your thoughts and vote? Crom daba (talk) 00:33, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

//NOTE: This message was crossposted to multiple talk pages. Crom daba (talk) 00:33, 21 December 2016 (UTC)


User:Ajraddatz ⋅ actions ⋅ user ⋅ popups 2016-12-24 (last) 07:48:24 User talk:Romanophile → That IP: more (last) 07:46:48 User talk:Romanophile → That IP: new section (last) 07:44:20 m bus shelter Reverted edits by If you think this rollback is in error, please leave a message on my talk page. (last) 07:44:20 m abri Rever hu=VANDAL+DISrespecflhere??@chuckentz213.49.62.10 15:47, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Latin alphabet and EnglishEdit

I remember your saying somewhere that the Latin alphabet doesn't suit English very well/at all. I was curious as to what type of system you would devise, or, if you had to keep the Latin alphabet, what changes you would make. --Barytonesis (talk) 20:15, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

When and where did I say this? I may very well have said it, but I need to know what the context was in order to remember what I was thinking at the time. --WikiTiki89 20:33, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
I tried to find it but I couldn't. This was a while ago... --Barytonesis (talk) 22:40, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "Wikitiki89".