User talk:AugPi/2011

Include2.py
Are you aware that you created Include2.py here? I don’t know exactly what it is, but it is not dictionary material. Surely you meant to put it somewhere else? —Stephen (Talk) 14:32, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I moved it to User:AugPi/Include2.py‎. Obviously, you can move it again. Mglovesfun (talk) 14:37, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Ugh, sorry, I meant to put it where Mglovesfun did. Lapsus mentis. &mdash;AugPi 21:03, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Hey
Hey, could you take a look at motorboten, please? Thanks 81.68.255.36 02:24, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay. &mdash;AugPi 06:02, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

lol? Why did you remove the verb? "Terwijl zijn donkere kijkers begonnen te schitteren en zijn wenkbrauwen snel vibreerden vertelde hij het ons: motorboten doe je door je hoofd tussen de ontblootte borsten van een vrouw te plaatsen en dan een hevig startende buitenboordmotor te imiteren."

perhaps not widely used, but everyone knows what you're talking about. I wanted to ask you what that act is called in english. 81.68.255.36 19:38, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I removed it because http://nl.wiktionary.org/wiki/motorboten makes no mention of it...
 * I found these two sites answering your latter question:
 * http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20101216193346AAn7eR2
 * http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=motorboat
 * &mdash;AugPi 03:43, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

So it's motorboat? Funny, because that page doesn't list the verb. The same goes for the Dutch wikt. I think the Dutch wikt is very bad. It has so few entries and meanings. All in all, it's a very boring wiktionary and that will keep it at this low level. I will add motorboat back in as a verb. 81.68.255.36 09:20, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Esperanto inflections
Hi! I noticed you were creating some Esperanto entries, wanted to say thanks. A suggestion: could you consider using the accelerated entry creator to make inflected forms of adjectives and nouns you create? It only takes a moment, and really makes each entry more complete IMO. Cheers, Tempodivalse [talk]  17:12, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay. I used to do it, but for some reason I stopped, so... I'll start using WT:ACCEL again. &mdash;AugPi 06:11, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

desayunar
Only English gets translations... Nadando 20:06, 21 March 2011 (UTC)


 * You're right: I made this edit instead: http://es.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=desayunar&diff=587763&oldid=576561. &mdash;AugPi 20:14, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

amar
Can you help? I think the adjective definition has been vandalised, it should read 'bitter', from Latin. TY, Mglovesfun (talk) 11:31, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Indeed. I traced the article's history backwards at a rate of 1 click per month, to find this: http://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=amar&diff=957652&oldid=881654  &mdash;AugPi 16:33, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Requests for deletion
Could you have a look, please? &#x200b;—msh210℠ (talk) 16:56, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

thanks
Thanks for showing me the format used. I will add again with correct format --Lujk3 09:52, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

request
¶ I find it objectionable that you blocked somebody for 72 hours over adding rhymes. Could I please see an explanation why exactly such additions are disallowed? --Pilcrow 18:13, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Many of the user's additions were wrong. &mdash;AugPi 18:15, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay, I unblocked the user (see the block log for reason). Rhymes should only be added if they are not mere form-of entries. &mdash;AugPi 18:18, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Besides that, there were other errors such as: adding "cosine" to Rhymes:English:-aɪn ("cosine" is paroxytone whereas that rhymes page is just for oxytones.) &mdash;AugPi 18:33, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
 * ¶ I am thankful, but I would like to see a policy page on why rhymes are not permitted there, if I may please; I consider it to be misleading that rhymes are not allowed on inflexions. --Pilcrow 18:41, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
 * If you look at the code for, say, Rhymes:English:-aɪnz (here: http://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Rhymes:English:-aɪnz&action=edit) you will see, under the headlines "One syllable" and "Two syllables", some wiki-coded comments:
 * Do not add plurals or third-person singular forms of verbs to this page unless they having meanings different from the respective singular or infinitive.
 * Note: words in this section must be stressed on the FINAL syllable.
 * Do not add plurals or third-person singular forms of verbs to this page unless they having meanings different from the respective singular or infinitive.
 * Those wiki-coded notes were there even at the inception of the page, which was almost six years ago: June 27, 2005. &mdash;AugPi 18:59, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
 * ¶ Interesting, thanks. Although I am incertain why that was officially decided. --Pilcrow 19:08, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I found a discussion about this topic on the Beer Parlour: http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Wiktionary:Beer_parlour_archive/2010/June#non-lemmata_rhymes, so it doesn't look like there is an actual policy page on this issue. &mdash;AugPi 19:12, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
 * You can search through Help pages and Beer Parlour archives, like so http://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Search&search=rhymes&fulltext=Search&ns4=1&ns12=1&redirs=0... &mdash;AugPi 19:19, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Latin question
What is the significance of the little symbol under the /u/ on 's pronunciation section? Also, unrelatedly, do all the words ending in vowel + m need their pronunciation sections updating to correspond with ? Latin_spelling_and_pronunciation also states that a vowel plus either ‹M› or ‹N› before a fricative should be nasalized too. Caladon 11:06, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
 * The little symbol under the /u/ means that the semivowel /u/ is being used as the consonant /w/, forming part of the diphthong /au̯/. Without it, /au/ would be two separate monophthongs, and thus, two separate syllables.  The said symbol is equivalent to Esperanto's use of the breve over its 'u', e.g., in the word Eŭropo, /eu̯ˈro.po/, which you can interpret, informally, as meaning /ewˈro.po/.  Likewise, /ˈlau̯.daːs/ can be interpreted to mean the same thing as /ˈlaw.daːs/.
 * Concerning the second question, you might want to ask Kwamikagami who is responsible for this edit: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Latin_spelling_and_pronunciation&diff=next&oldid=364507220, which removed the comment "This occurred quite late in the life of Latin, closer to the stage of Vulgar Latin than the classical period." posted by the anonymous IP editor who originally introduced mention of nasalized vowels with the muted syllable-final nasal consonants. &mdash;AugPi 13:50, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

The pronunciation of monstrum should be within square brackets, as it indicates particular pronunciation rather than broad phonemes (which is what we normally use). At least, that's how it's been done elsewhere here. It could also be tagged for a later period of Latin, though I'm not sure what we'd call it, since the label "Vulgar Latin" is a bit broad for it. --EncycloPetey 15:28, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

tenacious
This word comes from, not from , and so should be listed as a Descendant on the page of the former only. --EncycloPetey 15:26, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay... so a rule of thumb would be... if English adjective E descends directly from Latin adjective A which derives from Latin verb V, then E should be listed as A 's descendant, not V 's... I should keep that in mind... &mdash;AugPi 20:58, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh, and, you have been away for a while: welcome back. &mdash;AugPi 21:12, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Dutch pronominal adverbs header
Wouldn't "Contraction" be a better term for this header, where we try to have a high degree of cross-lingual intelligibility? If the pronominal header makes sense as a category, that is a separable matter. DCDuring TALK 10:37, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
 * They are not really contractions though, because there is a grammatical difference as well. The adverbial form of 'met het' is 'ermee', which is quite different and can't really be considered a contraction. —CodeCat 12:04, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
 * There shouldn't be a "Pronominal adverb" header: the header should just be "Adverb". As far as the category is concerned, I agree with CodeCat that labeling it as "contraction" wouldn't do it justice: e.g., the English word therewith is categorized under Category:English pronominal adverbs.  &mdash;AugPi 13:34, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

User:Rockpilot/German verbs needing conjugation
That page is awesome! Thanks so much for making it - there's plenty of work for our German editors to do! If you need a favour anytime, just ask me. --Rockpilot 18:52, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay; de rien. &mdash;AugPi 18:55, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Did I understand wrong? I thought that your request in WT:BP was for a list of German verbs missing conjugation templates, not a list of German verbs which already have templates but which are missing conjugated forms... I had assumed (rather automatically) that the latter list can be obtained by modifying the de-conj templates in order to produce a new category such as Category:German verbs needing form-of entries. &mdash;AugPi 20:11, 21 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I don't quite understand your second comment. You did hear me saying that the page was awesome, right? --Rockpilot 20:18, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes; and I see now, you are doing both things rather simultaneously: senden had been added as a request to User:KassadBot even though it did not have a conjugation template; that is different from how the Dutch editors had been working with User:MewBot (add the conjugation template first, then add the page as a request to User:MewBot). &mdash;AugPi 20:22, 21 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Would you be able to do a User:Rockpilot/Portuguese verbs needing conjugation too? I'm guessing the same thing, changing de to pt, right? And a User:Rockpilot/French verbs needing conjugation? --Rockpilot 20:18, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I'll see about it. (I'll probably do the French first (since you already appear to have a Portuguese list.)) &mdash;AugPi 13:32, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks again. As for the Portuguese one, it needs an update as I think conjugations have been add to all the ones on the page, and the list is about 18months old anyway. --Rockpilot 19:39, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Welcome. Looking through the list, I couldn't but notice that most of the verbs are phrasal, which would mean that their conjugation sections should probably look like that for laisser tomber (and the ones that aren't phrasal tend to be mostly archaic forms...)  Anyway, there it is; I'll see about the Portuguese... &mdash;AugPi 19:53, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

constipar & constiparse
Hi there. Could you check the latest edits to these pages please. SemperBlotto 11:34, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, I have, and the edits (by the anon) are basically correct (they are concordant with the entry in the online Real Academia Española dictionary, which is authoritative). &mdash;AugPi 13:26, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

GedawyBot
Hello, I opened a voting to have bot flag. I hope you particibate. Thanks.--M.Gedawy 19:11, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Lojban
The issue of whether Lojban is actually used as a language has been raised on the Beer Parlour. Mglovesfun (talk) 13:25, 10 December 2011 (UTC)