User talk:Ffffrr

welcome
Please don't change redlinks to plain text in lists of synonym, derived terms, etc. Those are generally for the purpose of linking to entries- whether they exist yet or not. In a wiki such as this, redlinks are the main way that new entries get created. There are a few exceptions where a term is sum-of-parts, but mostly, if it's worthy of being in the list, it's worthy of being an entry and therefore worthy of a redlink. That's not to say that there aren't parts of the entry where there can be too many redlinks: linking to every word in a sentence is usually overkill. In ordinary text it's better to only link terms that someone might want to look up, such as names for things, and terms the average reader might not know. Chuck Entz (talk) 14:00, 31 August 2021 (UTC)


 * User_talk:2A01:CB09:B044:ADB1:48A4:A228:634:3257: Dude, you need to stop "making blue links". —Fish bowl (talk) 20:19, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

I created a page for the synonym after that. Ffffrr (talk) 20:21, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

I don’t think I did anything wrong, and I try to fix any mistake I’m told I’ve made. Ffffrr (talk) 20:22, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

Etymology cleanup is removing tracking categories
E.g. https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=-phagic&diff=0&oldid=54532317 took out the Ancient Greek redlink categories. You may want to manually add them back. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:33, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

I don’t know how that happened, that’s odd, I will pay more attention to that I guess. Ffffrr (talk) 23:45, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

rfving categories
Don't. RFV is for verifying whether an entry meets the usage requirements of WT:CFI. Categories aren't entries and they aren't covered by CFI. Use und to nominate categories, appendixes, etc., and post a topic at Requests for deletion/Others. Chuck Entz (talk) 16:43, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

Ok thanks I was not sure which one I was supposed to use. Ffffrr (talk) 20:36, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

Revert
I reverted this edit of yours because is better than  - it shows the plurals. Also, you can auto-add some forms by going to MyPreferences and installing OrangeLinks. Cheers Br00pVain (talk) 09:50, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

Ok, although the pronunciation got removed in the process, I added it back though so no problems. Ffffrr (talk) 17:17, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

Korean Pronunciation Sections and the ko-IPA template
Hi @Ffffrr, thank you for your contributions to Wiktionary and for doing some cleanup with Korean entries. For now, please please please, do not add to Korean entries without at the very least making sure that: So again, please avoid adding for now as it may easily lead to confusion and a lack of clarity for users. Thank you. AG202 (talk) 09:10, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
 * 1) It actually works:
 * 2) * are just two letters, so the pronunciation template does not work unless you actually send the full word in.
 * 3) * is just a single letter and already has a robust pronunciation section and didn't even need the template to begin with.
 * 4) It's meant for the entry:
 * 5) * is a dialectal entry so having the pronunciation template for the standard Seoul dialect doesn't make sense here.
 * 6) * is an NK entry, so the Seoul standard doesn't make sense here either.
 * 7) * is an Early Modern Korean entry, so the Modern Korean standard template doesn't work here.
 * 8) * is also an Early Modern Korean, but additionally, here it straight up breaks the module because it's not made for usage with.
 * 9) You're checking on Korean dictionaries for the pronunciations of the words:
 * 10) * has a long vowel at the start as mentioned at the Korean-English Learners' Dictionary entry for it so you should've sent in  which would've given:


 * I see, I will only edit the entries in which it makes sense then. Ffffrr (talk) 14:08, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
 * @Ffffrr Thank you. For now, please stop adding to entries entirely fpr now. We appreciate the effort with clearing the number of entries without an IPA pronunciation, but the template has kept being added to entries that don't need them. Some recent examples since your last message:
 * is supposed to have a long vowel at the start if you looked in a dictionary as suggested.
 * is supposed to be tensed in the second syllable as it is in that it comes from.
 * is broken, and is also supposed to be tensed.
 * So please for now, stop adding to entries. Thank you. AG202 (talk) 22:52, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

etyl
Please don't replace etyl with der in case where a more specific template (such as bor or inh) is appropriate. We'd be left with a bunch of unspecific der templates and no category to track them so we can never clean them up. See also Beer_parlour/2021/September. &mdash; Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 09:14, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Whoops, that was an error on that one, though I don’t indiscriminately replace etyl with der like that user did, in entries for example where the Romanian term was inherited from Latin I marked it as such with inh, so no worries. Ffffrr (talk) 10:25, 13 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Ah, I see. Thanks a lot for fixing! Cheers. &mdash; Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 10:28, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Please don't do this. I just came across . &mdash; Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 17:39, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Should it have been a borrowing? Ffffrr (talk) 20:07, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, either bor or lbor should have been used instead of der, depending on what is correct. &mdash; Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 20:19, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Ok, I’ll fix it Ffffrr (talk) 20:20, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you! &mdash; Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 20:21, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

Category:en:New England
We already have Category:New England English.

Btw, are those terms even attested? I can find a lot of mentions, not a lot of use. And the first article I pulled up defines "quister" as an adjective, not a noun. 98.170.164.88 07:01, 29 July 2022 (UTC)


 * I only edited the categories, and am not from that area so I cannot confirm its use. Ffffrr (talk) 07:03, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Okay, but even if we assume these words are well-attested (which seems at least questionable), I don't see how you got quister being a noun with the meaning "attractive female". In the list of words you see everywhere, mush is translated as "guy" and quister mush is translated as a "good, stand-up guy". That sounds like an adjective. 98.170.164.88 07:11, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
 * That sense should be added into it then, as well as some quotations as examples of its use. Ffffrr (talk) 07:12, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I didn't realize you weren't the one who created them. Sorry. 98.170.164.88 07:13, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Apologies
I just realized that I called out the wrong person for messing up benvegnua. I clicked on the username from Recent changes and not page history, so I must have hit the wrong line. I can imagine you were confused. Sorry about that! Ultimateria (talk) 21:08, 11 August 2022 (UTC)


 * I see, I saw you fixed the errors that were on that page so I sent a thanks for it. Ffffrr (talk) 00:22, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Old Polish ꟁ
Hi. Since Old Polish didn't distinguish ⟨ą⟩ from ⟨ę⟩, now that ꟁ has Unicode support, should the lemmas be moved to that spelling? kwami (talk) 09:09, 11 May 2023 (UTC)


 * I'd say maintaining the modern distinction would be preferable and more intuitive though either option would be acceptable. Ffffrr (talk) 19:37, 11 May 2023 (UTC)