User talk:Cdhaptomos

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wiktionary. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
 * Wiktionary Tutorial
 * How to edit a page
 * How to start a page
 * Our layout policy (nicknamed “ELE”)
 * Criteria for inclusion (nicknamed “CFI”)
 * Wiktionary Sandbox (a safe place for testing syntax)
 * What Wiktionary is not
 * FAQ

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wiktionarian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk (discussion) and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~, which automatically produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to one of the discussion rooms or ask me on my Talk page.

Did you know that Wiktionary can be adapted to fit your style? Go have a look at your personal preference page (nicknamed “PREFS”)! In particular, you can choose the option to show hidden categories, which will be of great help if you are looking for work to do.

Again, welcome! †  ﴾(u):Raifʻhār (t):Doremítzwr﴿ 17:58, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

coldė and herė
Hi there, I see you are an established editor, and I therefore would like your opinion on my first entry from scratch: coldė. Have I done it right? Cdhaptomos 12:06, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Also, please take a look at herė. Cdhaptomos 12:24, 17 May 2009 (UTC)


 * They’re not at all bad for first tries. From the top to the bottom:
 * is normally reserved for near-homographs (which usually means those words whose differences are limited to capitalisation, diacritics, punctuation, &c. — that sort of thing); so, for example, coldė: should display “See also colde”, but not “See also cold”. Also, I noticed this; see how I corrected it — multiple pages are linked to by using multiple parameters, till you end up with something like me:, where displays “See also ME, mé, më, mě, and mé-”.
 * Alternative spellings sections are unnecessary in entries whose definitions are limited to, , , or the like, especially when the only alternative spelling given in the section is also the one given in the definition line(s). Furthermore, when there are many alternative spellings, it becomes a problem of entry synchronisation; for example, could you imagine having copies of the Alternative spellings section of in the entries of each of its variant spellings? (FYI, this sort of thing has been considered with a technique known as section transclusion; however, AFAIK that is not a very common practice.)
 * Inflexion lines: For English (as well as many other languages), there are tailored inflexion templates for most (all?) of the POS; for adjectives, use, and for pronouns, use — guides to using them can be found in the documentation on the templates’ talk pages. POS templates autocategorise the entries in which they are transcluded into appropriate and useful categories (for example,  autocategorises into Category:English adjectives, whereas  also autocategorises into Category:English adjectives that lack comparative forms), as well as, usually, generating generic information applicable to most terms of that given class. If you can’t find a specific POS template for the language in which you’re editing, you can always fall back on the universally-applicable.
 * X spelling of … — Nota that we also have and  (as I mentioned above); for old spellings which are rarely or never used any more, they may be more appropriate. undefined: roughly means pre–20th-century, whereas undefined: usually means the term or spelling had fallen out of use at least two or three centuries ago (although the latter is far vaguer a term than the former, and can just mean a form that would be incomprehensible even to educated language users of today).
 * Citations: Please take a look at WT:QUOTE, which is more or less the standard for citations on Wiktionary. (I don’t agree with it 100%, but my deviations therefrom are very minor.) One thing that’s vitally important is that quotations come with the year from which they herald; please add them to the quotations you’ve added to the entries for and . Which brings me on to my final point…
 * The English language, like many other major languages having undergone significant changes over time, is split into chronological variants; it is subdivided into time periods, viz. Old English (circa 450–1066), Middle English (1066–1470), Early Modern English (1470–1650), and Modern English (1650–present). These subdivisions are, to a significant degree, fairly arbitrary, and in borderline cases supporting quotations may be attributed to a chronological variant to which, strictly speaking, it does not belong; but alas!, taxonomy necessitates that we have clear demarcations. Old English and Middle English terms are sorted verbatim under language headers of those names, whereas Early Modern English and Modern English are both sorted under the English language header. Judging from your quotations, your two contributions seem to be more appropriately categorised as Middle English rather then English (Geoffrey Chaucer having lived circa 1343–1400 and the Mediævum having spanned AD 476–1453).
 * I hope that my feedback is helpful. If you have any further questions, or you would like clarification and/or elaboration of what I have written, please don’t hesitate to ask. †  ﴾(u):Raifʻhār (t):Doremítzwr﴿ 14:40, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Latin entries
About Latin covers this, we don't normally put macrons in page titles, so don't be upset in an admin reverts all your edits, sorry. Mglovesfun (talk) 16:24, 27 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks, I wasn't aware of this. Cdhaptomos 16:27, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

hyperæmia
Ligated spellings with of terms in English derived from 🇨🇬 aren’t archaic; they are lemmatised by the Oxford English Dictionary [2nd Ed.; 1989], for example. Please use thus instead. Thanks. †  ﴾(u):Raifʻhār (t):Doremítzwr﴿ 16:53, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/Llusiduonbach
Hi. This user is adding quite a few Welsh translations. I wondered if you might be able to check their translations to make sure they are correct, and you also might want to show the user around some? Regards, L&#9786;g&#9786;maniac ☃ 23:01, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
-- The New  Mikemoral  ♪♫WT:APR 23:42, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

re: rugby union
Sorry about that, I deleted the wrong page. It has been restored. - 21:06, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

PAGENAME
Generally, should be used with subst: on pages (as opposed to in templates). Also, don't plurals need genders too? I could quite easily knock up a substitutable template to do this. Mglovesfun (talk) 23:18, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Cheers for the tip. Welsh plurals do take gender, yes; I have been thinking about making a few templates recently, but I've never gotten around to doing so. Cdhaptomos   talk – contribs  23:23, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Template:cy-mut-o et al
I have nominated Template:cy-mut-o for deletion along with the other mutation templates you've created for words starting with letters that do not mutate. Your comments would be welcome at Requests for deletion/Others. Thryduulf (talk) 00:13, 2 June 2010 (UTC)