User talk:62.73.69.121

Sumerian Entries
Hi! I see you've been adding a lot of Sumerian entries. Thank you for your hard work on them!

Unfortunately I've also noted that you're not always following the current formatting rules and templates. I don't really have time at the moment to revise all your edits, so could you please familiarize yourself with the structure, layout and templates used in Sumerian entries, and make sure you follow them when editing? You find everything you need to know HERE (About Sumerian). Thank you! — Sartma 【𒁾𒁉 ● 𒊭 𒌑𒊑𒀉𒁲】 09:34, 31 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Hello! Thanks, but I find it hard to change my way of editing unless you specify which current formatting rules I have deviated from. It's not as if I've been deviating from all or most of them - I have been trying to observe the current standards by copying and imitating what I see in other Sumerian entries. Skimming through the page you linked to, I don't see any rule that I have deviated from, although, of course, it's quite possible that I have overlooked something. The only thing I can think of is that I may have occasionally filled out the normalisation parameter even where it coincides with the transliteration, but I believe that I haven't been doing that recently either. In any case, I don't really think that this or whatever other formatting rules I have broken is so crucially important as to make my entries more harmful than useful for the user and to make it worth bothering to revise all of them. This is volunteer work, something I've been doing on the side as a by-product of other activities with Sumerian - I am not paid to be the perfect Wiktionary editor. If you think Wiktionary is better off with fewer Sumerian entries than with Sumerian entries that contain deviations from the formatting rules, you are free to delete my entries and to inform me so I don't bother to add any more in the future. 62.73.69.121 13:05, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
 * @62.73.69.121 Just keep referring back to the WT:ASUX page, that's all I'm saying. Nothing I wrote granted your snappy, offended reply, and nowhere I said you should stop adding Sumerian entries, either. What's wrong with you? — Sartma 【𒁾𒁉 ● 𒊭 𒌑𒊑𒀉𒁲】 21:27, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I was very clear. First, you told me I'd broken some rules, but you didn't tell me which ones, and I don't see which ones I have broken either, so I can't avoid breaking them in the future either. Just telling me to read the page would work only if I were blatantly breaking, like, every fourth and fifth basic rule, so that it would be easy to notice on the page. Second, you essentially said that I'd made a mess and that you didn't have the time to clean up my mess after me, so I should try not to make any more of this mess in the future, which did entail that you saw my edits as creating problems for you and for the project in general - pressing problems that it is quite important to fix. Well, as I said, I don't have time to fix these supposedly pressing problems either. This is work done for free, and on a wiki on top of it all, so requiring people to also do the work of learning a huge amount of rules, templates, layout etc., beyond what can be observed by example, as a precondition for the 'privilege' of doing that work strikes me as unreasonable. I'm sure there are ways to improve my contributions, but I don't think that should be my obligation - other people can and will improve them, that's the nature of a wiki.--62.73.69.121 23:06, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
 * @62.73.69.121 I apologise for not giving examples here, I thought you would have seen my edits to your contributions. You gave wrong reference links, you copy-paste headword templates without changing the POS (e.g. leaving "noun" in verb entries, and vice versa, you don't use the template for alternative spellings, etc.
 * I still can't see what I did that would deserve your wrath, especially since the first thing I did was recognising your hard work and thanking your for it. It's true that it's in the nature of a wiki that other people will improve it with time, but that's not a justification for sloppy work. I spent a lot of time working on the layout, structure, templates of Sumerian entries, and hearing you saying you don't care because you're not bothered learning them and someone else will clean up, when I know that someone else is going to be me, only strikes me as disrespectful. Anyway, by any means, please do continue with your sloppy work. Someone will clean after you, at some point, if they notice it, maybe... — Sartma 【𒁾𒁉 ● 𒊭 𒌑𒊑𒀉𒁲】 08:20, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Of course I don't monitor every single page after I have edited it, otherwise I'd have to be frustrated all the time, at least on Wikipedia, by reverts made for POV reasons or just because I'm an IP. It should have been obvious to you that the reason I "left 'noun' in verb entries and vice versa" and left wrong reference links was not ignorance of your conventions but simple lapses of attention. It is not because I'm not trying to maintain the same format, it's because I sometimes fail to concentrate enough to do so, and it should be clear to you that the overwhelming majority of people do fail to maintain perfect concentration and do make technical mistakes like that. Again, it's absurd that when I'm doing this for free, occasionally, as a by-product of other things I'm doing, you should think it appropriate to nag me for not being perfectly concentrated while doing it and not producing a perfectly polished product. You aren't supposed to look a gift horse in the mouth - I am perfectly entitled to work as "sloppily" as I want to. It's up to you or anyone else to fix it in any way if they feel that is important, and your making demands that I should strikes me as disrespectful to my work.
 * As for the, I didn't use them because I wanted to point out not just that such spellings exist, but that they are actually the more common spellings and ideally should be made into the main entry about the lexeme in question (while the entry I was editing should only note that spelling as alternative), yet I didn't want to register in order to be able to make the new entry. Again, your assumption that I just hadn't noticed your precious formatting rules was false; but note that the proliferation of highly technical devices, templates etc. that are difficult to understand and use is in itself contrary to the spirit of a wiki. It may make things convenient for a few very dedicated people, but it is a barrier that repels everyone else; and indeed I'm getting the impression that you are used to very few people contributing at all - even though that inevitably limits the amount of work actually done - and you are appalled by the inevitable side-effects when more people do contribute. In general, when many random people edit entries, you should expect that they won't all manage to maintain the exact same style and format, and that is not a tragedy. The main goal is to have the information available to the readers, whereas keeping its appearance nice, pretty and uniform is just a bonus that will not always be achieved. --62.73.69.121 17:31, 21 June 2024 (UTC)