Talk:gksrmf

RFD discussion: November–December 2021
Not dictionary material.--Tibidibi (talk) 01:07, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete per Tibidibi. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 07:19, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Send to RfV . Abstain. Fytcha (talk) 13:51, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
 * No. It should be deleted even if it can be verified. It’s a non-word. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 22:35, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
 * How is it a non-word? What even is a non-word? It clearly conveys meaning to Korean speakers. --Fytcha (talk) 14:51, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Please see [[non-word]]. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 10:44, 28 November 2021 (UTC)
 * This is like "The key on my keyboar oesn't work", or "i don't believe in using uppercase, joe". The only meaning it has is due to extra-linguistic context. Chuck Entz (talk) 22:57, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Also note that the example sentence includes other words with the same substitution of Latin letters for the hangul that the same keys would produce with the normal input method. Do we really want to have a whole series of "keyboard-problem form" entries for common terms in non-Latin scripts? What about "schon" for or "uber" for - as German entries? Chuck Entz (talk) 23:09, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
 * We do currently have but I do agree with you that  as an alternative spelling of  would be absurd. I also see that opening the floodgates to all deterministic QWERTY "spellings" of Korean terms does not really provide any value to our dictionary, though I have to say that I could see myself wondering what  means if I were to learn Korean and browsed some message boards AND if it is the case that it is vastly more frequent than other QWERTY "spellings" (for me it hinges only on this last point but I'm not sure whether it is true so I'll abstain for now). Note also that we have  which is just as much merely a manifestation of certain input methods, so I don't think the point with extra-linguistic context is how we currently deal with these entries (we could change that though). --Fytcha (talk) 14:51, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
 * is defined as asdfghjkl. If you look at the definition for asdfghjkl, you'll see that it's an expression of incoherence, not the result of it. There is no technical reason for it, it's just used to say something about the emotional state of the writer. It's the difference between SHOUTING IN ALL CAPS!!! and writing in uppercase because you have the caps lock on. Which also brings up the point that we don't have an entry for CAPS LOCK, even though it would be the most likely term to occur when someone is writing in uppercase due to a technical problem. You'll also notice that we don't have a "typo" sense at teh, even though it's a very common typo- I catch myself doing it all the time. Chuck Entz (talk) 19:08, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep.
 * Chuck Entz's analogies are not quite correct because they are either a "hardware" issue ("d" or capital letters not typed) or "by design" ("ö" not in QWERTY).
 * A Korean input method is "software" that allows people to type hangul, and hangul/QWERTY mode toggling is done on a software level.
 * For whatever reason, a Korean input method sometimes fails to enable the hangul mode. When this happens, it just stays in the QWERTY mode. This behavior is not "by design," but a software failure.
 * When a Korean speaker encounters this problem, they do write a post online for help saying that they cannot type hangul by hitting the keys in QWERTY that would produce the intended hangul text. And in such cases, they almost always write the word "gksrmf", which corresponds to 한글 in hangul.
 * Check the following links to see how common it is.
 * gksrmf
 * gksrmfdl (corresponds to 한글이, which is 한글 + -이 (particle))
 * Therefore, "gksrmf" is worth an entry. --2607:FB90:5AB3:4EEB:A976:B1C:BE8E:4268 00:56, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Whether it's hardware or software, it's still what I called "extralinguistic context". Chuck Entz (talk) 01:36, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't think it is extralinguistic context. When Korean speakers see Korean text written in QWERTY keystrokes, they do know what it is and are able to understand the meaning (although it could take a little bit longer than ordinary Korean text written in hangul, it is pretty simple and straightforward).
 * In addition, some Korean speakers intentionally use the QWERTY keystroke form of a word in order to evade censorship in an online game or on an internet forum. For example, some Korean speakers intentionally write "Tlqkf" for 씨발 (fuck) because the word in hangul can get censored.
 * In other words, Korean text written in QWERTY keystrokes is widely understood and used by Korean speakers.
 * My opinion is that if the QWERTY keystroke form of a Korean word is commonly used (like "gksrmf"), it should be regarded as a Korean word and deserves an entry on Wiktionary. There is no reason to reject such a form. --2607:FB90:5AB3:4EEB:A976:B1C:BE8E:4268 04:56, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Even if this mojibake is familiar to many, it is sill mojibake. People wouldn't write it if they hadn't this entirely technical problem. And where does it end? In your links, dksehldy is also attested, so should this also get an entry? It actually makes more sense to have an entry for tlqkf, provided it has a prevalence similar to f**k in English. –Austronesier (talk) 10:53, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Mojibake is a character encoding issue. This has nothing to do with character encodings.
 * "People wouldn't write it if they hadn't this entirely technical problem." I don't disagree with this, but they are real usages anyway (in those two links, one can go all the way back to 2003; and I'm pretty sure it has been used even earlier than that).
 * I'm not saying that the QWERTY keystroke form of "every" Korean word should be created, but the ones that are commonly used. If "dksehldy" is common enough, then it should get an entry.
 * I'm saying that "gksrmf" deserves an entry because that is the most commonly used word when hangul is not getting typed ("gksrmf" corresponds to 한글 which literally means "hangul" (the Korean writing system), so it cannot be uncommon). --2607:FB90:5AB3:4EEB:A976:B1C:BE8E:4268 16:49, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
 * A similar (closed failed) case is at [[Talk:lytdybr]], which is keyboard strokes on QWERTY keyboard for the Russian word . --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 11:24, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete not dictionary material and would likely fail RFV as everything I see that would fall under CFI would be a mention and not a use. AG202 (talk) 12:46, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Disagree. There are real usages. Please check the links above. --2607:FB90:5AB3:4EEB:A976:B1C:BE8E:4268 15:34, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I have checked the links, and they don't fall under WT:CFI, which is why I mentioned it. I'd also recommend that you make an account so that people can ping you directly. AG202 (talk) 22:25, 27 November 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete. Technical insufficencies or expectation of censorship are criteria that speak against lexicalization. But spellings aimed at should be included. Under the like rationale had to be deleted and typos are deleted as distinguished from spellings that are misspellings according to a common standard but believed to be true anyhow. Fay Freak (talk) 22:11, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete. Ultimateria (talk) 19:02, 28 November 2021 (UTC)


 * Dlt. —Suzukaze-c (talk) 02:05, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
 * THE EXAMPLE SENTENCE GKSRMFDL DKS CUWUDY MAKES IT PAINFULLY CLEAR THAT THIS IS AN ENTIRE EXTRALINGUISTIC STYLE OF TYPING
 * IF YOU HAD EVIDENCE OF GKSRM IN AN OTHERWISE HANGUL TEXT IT WOULD BE MORE CONVINCING
 * —Suzukaze-c (talk) 03:18, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete —Svārtava [t•c•u•r] 16:07, 31 December 2021 (UTC)


 * RFD-deleted —Svārtava [t•c•u•r] 16:07, 31 December 2021 (UTC)