User talk:Diddy-sama6

Please stop adding automated pronunciation templates to entries in every language you can think of. You clearly don't speak some, probably most, of them. &mdash; surjection &lang;??&rang; 20:12, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
 * I repeat Surjection’s warning. You should only use the templates if you can confirm the generated pronunciations are correct. — Ungoliant (falai) 10:32, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
 * OK, sorry. I will use it only if I can confirm it. I do this so can the natives speakers confirm themselves and complete the job if there is/are any error·s or not. 😅 — (Diddy-sama6 (talk) 15:02, 29 September 2021 (UTC))
 * Hey, you're doing it again with these last names. Where did you get those pronunciations? Vininn126 (talk) 17:37, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I also don't think your latest edits are right (see ). No pronunciation data is vastly superior to potentially wrong pronunciation data. Also, please don't replace etyl with der. Use a more specific template like inh, bor, ubor, lbor, ... instead. because this seems to be a consistent problem. --Fytcha (talk) 20:22, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
 * A “consistent problem”? Do you know that I’m—in the Wiktionnaire (French Wiktionary)—an “utilisateur de confiance” (a user of trust)? I didn’t do anything wrong here; I just wanted to help and I wanted anything to be perfect. I wish to have the same title—if it exists here—as in the Wiktionnaire because I want you to trust me; I know what I do, and no, I’m a vandal. I do (almost) the same the thing in the French Wiktionary and I don’t even get block—well, I copy the pronunciation of a certain word a pond transfer it to the article. —Diddy-sama6 (talk) 02:50, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I appreciate your spirit of trying to help but the claim that you didn't do anything wrong here is plain untrue: You've made repeated incorrect pronunciation edits, the last of which I've highlighted just above which you haven't even addressed in your response. I would advise you to only edit languages that you're familiar with for the time being. Why don't you have a look over at Category:Requests_concerning_French?
 * As to your question regarding the "title": Refer to Special:ListGroupRights; trusted contributors usually get autopatroller rights after some weeks. Fytcha (talk) 03:20, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
 * OK, I’m gonna check this out. —Diddy-sama6 (talk) 22:40, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

Doing it again?
I have a bad feeling about some of your edits. where you've added an automatic pronunciation template for Portuguese was rolled back by a native Portuguese speaker. Also your Slovak edits:


 * : The speech sample in the dictionary sounds to my ear as though was right and your change to  was wrong, though I'll let the people who actually know the language decide.  as the original supplier of the IPA.
 * : Same spiel, same original supplier, though no pronunciation on the dictionary so I can't say anything about correctness.
 * : Same as above, added.


 * Maybe you can also help ascertain the correctness? Fytcha (talk) 14:16, 25 November 2021 (UTC)


 * Oh and there's also your edit to where you've also changed the velarization in a narrow transcription, though that was before your block. Fytcha (talk) 14:18, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Montreal is a unadapted foreign word and rare are the cases where pt-IPA correctly depicts those pronunciations correctly and unambiguously. The pronunciation is usually similar to the the one of the language of origin (in this case, both English and French are common pronunciations). I've also often heard it being pronounced as "Monte Real" or "Monreal". I wouldn't say pt-IPA actually captures any of these pronunciations. The Brazilian one might be correct, but I'm suspicious without any sources. Personally I would advise against the usage of pt-IPA in unadapted borrowings except in some very specific cases where it does work. - Sarilho1 (talk) 15:29, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

I also know and “see” someone correct the pronunciation in Latin (for example, the [ɾ] became [r]). So I think there is maybe someone who can correct the sound [l] into [ɫ] in Slovak and so on (in the IPA code), and in many languages. If I could correct the code and know how to do it, I would do it with pleasure and someone could tell me, “This sound is supposed to sound like this instead to be more [language] accurate” (with the IPA letters), and so on, and since I can read IPA quite easily, I know how it sounds like. For example too, the letter “й” in Russian, it’s coded like [ɪ̯] in the Russian Wiktionary while here it’s [j]. —Diddy-sama6 (talk) 21:08, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Respellings
Why did you remove those respellings? We have those in there for a reason. Vininn126 (talk) 08:02, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Баффинова Земля

 * My ping was incorrect but my message was "You also need to ask yourself, why the respelling had only one "ф" and what impact your edit will have". Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 23:35, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

Portuguese pronunciations
Hi. I'd recommend you stick to editing only French rather than editing Portuguese and other languages you don't really know. Benwing2 (talk) 05:29, 3 November 2022 (UTC)


 * I'm going to repeat this and warn you. Please don't edit languages you don't know anything about, it may end badly for you and even worse for the editors that will have to clean up after the mess you make. Thadh (talk) 19:20, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

OK, but what mess are you talking about? I don’t mess anything here. All I do is to make sure that anything be perfect. I’m a perfectionist. Making sure that all the “articles” I edit may be good looking for all people who might read or search a certain word. If the IPA, I go check in the Wiktionary on the langage if it’s accurate or not. —Diddy-sama6 (talk) 20:13, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I have blocked you for a week. Based on both my familiarity with you and the numerous comments from others (which you have generally not responded to), you are clearly a longtime problematic editor and refuse to recognize or correct your mistakes. When your block expires, please refrain from editing *ALL* languages other than French, otherwise the block will be lengthened. Pinging for visibility. Benwing2 (talk) 03:16, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
 * To add to this, your Japanese edits have generally been poor too, and I expect that you read WT:About Japanese and go back and fix them after your block expires. &mdash; Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 07:51, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I was afraid of that. I don't trust this user to clean up their mistakes (since there's no evidence of them doing it in the past), should we just revert all their changes? It might be safer that way. Benwing2 (talk) 08:08, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I'd say let's wait and see what they decide to do. I have some hope that they will clean it up but if they don't, mass-reverting their Japanese edits would be an idea. &mdash; Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 09:49, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
 * re: "what mess are you talking about": Other wiktionaries are not a good source for pronunciation. We now have to go through all your edits and make sure it makes sense. Leave the editing of those languages to their editing communities or try to find an adequate source. The fact that you also expanded an Ingrian IPA template in for no reason suggests that you not only don't check (Ingrian doesn't have a Wiktionary) but also don't know how the IPA templates work. Thadh (talk) 11:09, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Block
I've blocked you for one week for and for the fact that you've received several warnings before. I'm also getting tired of having my watchlist polluted by pointless edits like. PUC – 09:41, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

épée de Damoclès
This term is not exclusively used in historical contexts; once more, shows you don't know what you're doing. I've reverted you, and blocked you for one more week. Next time it will be two weeks. PUC – 18:41, 30 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Salut,
 * OK, mais explique-moi pourquoi il est « Ancient Greece » dans la catégorie alors qu’il n’y a pas de contexte historique comme tu viens de m’écrire? Quand j’ai lu ton message, il a fallu que j’aille voir sur le Wiktionnaire français (dont je suis utilisateur de confiance btw) pour vérifier et — surprise! — il n’est marqué rien. Donc je pense que marquer ce contexte historique porte à confusion.
 * Bonne journée/soirée.
 * —Diddy-sama6 (talk) 20:17, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
 * "This term is not exclusively used in historical contexts" means it is also used in historical contexts. PUC – 12:57, 31 May 2024 (UTC)