User talk:Fish bowl/archive

宏碁
Hi,

Just wondering, why you have tagged 宏碁 with RFV? --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 22:47, 22 December 2014 (UTC)


 * I supposed that it fell under Criteria_for_inclusion —umbreon 126 00:23, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

阿伯
Thanks for the usage example. Note that Cantonese Jyutping, like Mandarin Pinyin is semi-automated. You only need to provide it with {Jyutping} when you want to override the automatic transliteration. I've also added red-linked words: 成日, 喺度, 食煙. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 02:31, 21 January 2015 (UTC)


 * I overrided the automatic transliteration because it output "hai2 dok6" for "喺度" (And thank you for cleaning up my red links!) —umbreon 126 02:34, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Oops. It's better this way, note 度{dou6}:


 * --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 02:55, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
 * --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 02:55, 21 January 2015 (UTC)


 * I was unaware that it also worked for Cantonese, I'm sorry (^^;;) (Template:zh-usex/documentation says "For MSC,"; perhaps this should be updated/changed?) —umbreon 126 02:58, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
 * No worries, updated the doc. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 03:04, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

vi-hantu
Hi,

is used for longer words as well, proper nouns are an exception. You need |pos=n, etc. The doc needs updating to reflect this. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 05:27, 11 March 2015 (UTC)


 * I see （´∀｀；） Updated documentation would be good. —umbreon 126 05:41, 11 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Your edit was right because it's a proper noun (exception) :) --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 05:55, 11 March 2015 (UTC)


 * ah. oops —umbreon 126 05:57, 11 March 2015 (UTC)


 * I find this a bit inconsistent. You can use to generate Hán tự entries but it only generates "Noun" header, doesn't add PoS - only works for common nouns. We can ask Wyang when he gets back to address this. I can't do it. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 06:03, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Explanation for edit version at 歎
I'm curious as to why you reverted my edit at 歎. Any reasonable explanation will do. Bumm13 (talk) 04:56, 28 March 2015 (UTC)


 * See the edit history (summary?) —umbreon 126 05:00, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Okay, I apologize for being so brusque with my previous comment; I found that variant glyph at Glyphwiki and it is correct. Thanks for your correction! Bumm13 (talk) 05:03, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
 * It's fine :) —umbreon 126 05:05, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

TA!
4 http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Wiktionary:Random_page :]


 * No problem :) —umbreon 126 06:35, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

therusd2b.abutn@ ea.rndampp'shownewr.pag,wasv.andyw/myhandz..202.175.26.139 07:00, 25 April 2015 (UTC)


 * My apologies, but I'm having a hard time deciphering this message （；´д｀） Could you please make it a bit clearer? (the most I got was "there used to be a button at" (?); the rest is less legible...)--—umbreon 126 07:29, 25 April 2015 (UTC)


 * -@ eachrnd.page[sou'dHOPfromrnd2rndp.i/1lect w/outgoinbakea.time:)


 * "there used to be a button at each random page ? from random page to random page ... without going back each time :)"
 * A "Random entry" link is on the left of each page under but unfortunately it's not restricted to one language (I don't really like this either; conjugated forms of Italian verbs just don't catch my interest...)
 * I'm not aware of any other buttons :(
 * Perhaps you could add one of the Random_page links to an easily accessible browser bookmark? —umbreon 126 06:31, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

kanucheko/dadROLBAKpl?
http://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=calcaneum&action=history wasboutmakinC.HEELofit~c-neus,sai[nitypmy.andzpainfl4such,man-evnmorsoi/ensuinconfusin,juscosoftrig-fingrmoronz:((202.175.26.151 03:27, 26 April 2015 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure I understand what the issue is (I'm afraid that I can't really understand this sentence either) :( (by the way, it's a good idea not to insult other users, no matter what the situation) —umbreon 126 08:18, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

曲奇餅
Hello. Why is there a trend for unified Chinese? Is there a discussion board for it? DerekWinters (talk) 07:14, 3 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Votes/pl-2014-04/Unified_Chinese —umbreon 126 07:15, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

huofendshueh?
nididntstartit ou are currently unable to edit pages on Wiktionary.

You can still read pages, but you cannot edit, move, or create them.

Editing from 202.175.26.136 has been disabled by Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV for the following reason(s): Repeat offender: the disabld8rs lunatic.

This block has been set to expire: 01:24, 23 September 2015.

Even if blocked, you will usually still be able to edit your use


 * "lawsuit" "disgusting scum"← It's generally a good idea to not leave nasty messages like this :/ —umbreon 126 10:32, 4 May 2015 (UTC)lunatik=k,ic

下單 and 落單
Just letting you know that you added the Cantonese reading in hanzi but didn't add the pronunciation at either entry. ---&#62; Tooironic (talk) 11:37, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

ta!
https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=%E9%95%B7%E5%B9%B4&action=history entrycreator dunworkwel4zh>contctYAIRAND?36.231.97.150 08:54, 14 June 2015 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure it's worth pestering Yair rand about it; Template:zh-new does a good job of things. —suzukaze (t・c) 08:57, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

pl.vluk at
mypostsATchuk entz'p


 * I'm not sure I have the authority to comment on SemperBlotto's edits (although some of them do seem a bit zealous) :/ —suzukaze (t・c) 03:37, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

wel1.u=entitled2OWNOPINION;)2.it=aKOMUNITIEFEThere,noSBprivvatbakyard3.ta4rply!:)36.231.97.150 06:17, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

I=LEARNINquotfrmt
pl.bearw/me..1.163.104.51 02:47, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Don't worry about it. —suzukaze (t・c) 17:33, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

吳語拉丁字
Hello, User:Suzukaze-c.

You have recently mail me about the romanisation I use, and saying that Wiktionary uses its own romanisation. I want to say you that Wu is non-official language, and due to this, threatened. Because of such situation, I think it's important to use an unified romanisation, easy and representative of Wu Phonology and particularities, so I've created a romanisation called 吳語拉丁字. All details are explained inside (if you understand french...). You can look also here

為吳語个保存搭標準化!

Lingstudisto (talk) 18:26, 19 June 2015 (UTC)


 * "WT Romanization" is the standard created by Shanghainese-speaking Wiktionary editors and the standard that they have decided to use despite at least three other methods already existing. Perhaps you could talk to User:Wyang, he is more knowledgeable about Wu than I am. —suzukaze (t・c) 04:30, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

rcBYLECT
WHER2FINDpl?


 * Is RC Recent Changes? I don't think there are language-specific versions. —suzukaze (t・c) 15:16, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I lied —suzukaze (t・c) 00:09, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Use of 𧾷 (U+27FB7) character in articles
Hi Suzukaze-c, Instead of using "𧾷" (U+27FB7), go ahead and just use the non-unified ⻊ (U+2ECA) as it already redirects to the unified 足 character article. U+27FB7 is an Extension B character and those are almost always non-standard/variant characters. Cheers! Bumm13 (talk) 22:56, 2 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Makes sense. Good thing I didn't get around to replacing them all. —suzukaze (t・c) 19:05, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Chinese chemical element articles and 䥑
I noticed that you've been changing the Category:zh:Chemical elements template links in Chinese chemical element articles to Template:zh-cat|Chemical elements. Is there any way to add the Mandarin pinyin reading to Template:zh-cat|Chemical elements as were being done previously in the Category:zh:Chemical elements templates? Adding those readings puts the Chinese characters in Category:zh:Chemical elements under Latin letters instead of various Chinese character header categories. I'm not even sure if this behavior is desired or not, so I thought I'd ask for your input. Thanks! Bumm13 (talk) 08:26, 4 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Special:ExpandTemplates gives an idea of what does (sort by radical like a dictionary, which is probably most appropriate for a "Chinese" (!= Mandarin) dictionary):


 * Title: 字
 * Input text:
 * Result:
 * Although I see it doesn't work right with 䥑 yet (which is probably a bad thing):


 * Result: —suzukaze (t・c) 08:32, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

"Compounds" section - conversion to traditional character words error
Be careful when converting simplified character compound words to their traditional forms. I found an error you made in converting 钠灯; it should be 鈉燈 instead of "鈉灯". Thanks Bumm13 (talk) 09:30, 4 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Indeed it is. Japanese is messing with my perception of "Traditional" >_< —suzukaze (t・c) 09:31, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

數
I'm not that familiar with Cantonese, but especially not with Hakka and Min Nan. Do you mind taking a look? I wasn't sure how to split it into three, since I don't know the Cantonese, Hakka, and Min Nan pronunciations. I assumed the Hakka and Min Nan were the same. Also, should the Middle and Old Chinese sections be expandable for all three? Thanks. —  Wiki  Winters ☯ 韦安智   20:43, 11 July 2015 (UTC)


 * I wasn't aware that 數 could be used as a noun... ._. Try someone else, I'm sorry... (I'm also not sure about the Middle and Old Chinese) —suzukaze (t・c) 00:17, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

94.5.99.102‎
I suppose it doesn't hurt to try, but this idiot has a history going back five years of generally bad edits and ignoring dozens of attempts to get him to shape up or stop.

He has an obsession with deities and all things supernatural, with occasional side excursions into things like flowering shrubs. He also has abysmally poor judgment about sources: he's admitted to using Bing Translate and anime fansites, though I suspect most is extracted from a certain nether orifice. He's easy to spot: no one else edits Japanese entries from UK Sky/Easynet IPs, and his interests and editing style are dead giveaways as well.

He's not as bad as he used to be: since we started blocking him on sight, his volume has gone way down, and I think he's slowly improving on his own. At one time it was so bad we were burning out good editors just from the constant flood of crap that had to be fixed. Chuck Entz (talk) 06:50, 13 July 2015 (UTC)


 * D: —suzukaze (t・c) 20:54, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

The citation of ふいんき
Hello. Thank you for your contribution, but I think we had better avoid using copyrighted materials published in Japan even as a quotation because it is often disputed whether we can apply the fair use doctrine to such materials or not (see article 'Fair use' in jawp).

I know you have no intent to deliberately infringe copyright and just tried to show a lively example of a term. Personally I would like to let it be. Just imagine, however, if authors accuse us of violating their own right and even sue the whole Wikiproject as a nest of illegality. Then, responsibility will be a serious matter. I'm anxious about such kinds of elements unless the author gives permission. What do you think about it? Regards, Eryk Kij (talk) 22:42, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I thought that it would be okay because it is a transcription of a very short spoken line (not even picture or audio like a Niconico Douga MAD could feature) —suzukaze (t・c) 23:12, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your answer. I understand your standpoint. I still consider raising it at Information desk to ask for other's opinions. May I do that?　--Eryk Kij (talk) 08:44, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Go ahead. —suzukaze (t・c) 08:48, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your cooperation and I apologize to you for this trouble. --エリック・キィ (talk) 04:03, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

ta
nikantrili'elpw/itmuch[format,nolidz,sai

POS at 茲
You have an empty "Adposition" section here. Do you mean this is something that acts like a preposition, but is equally likely to be used as postposition? Or do you mean that you're have no idea whether it's a preposition or a postposition, so you're saying it could be either?

The reason I ask is that we currently don't recognize "adposition" as a valid part of speech. That's not to say we couldn't adopt it, but it would take more justification than its occurence in a single section that's completely devoid of any useable content. Unless you have something specific in mind that you can support with a usage example or a note or something, it would be better to just remove that section and add it back some other time when there's more to work with. Chuck Entz (talk) 01:48, 17 August 2015 (UTC)


 * The reference I used tranlated to adposition and I don't have the skills to translate the definition. That's all I know. —suzukaze (t・c) 04:31, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

buthubenfitfr.dis????
do not have permission to edit this page, for the following reason: You are currently unable to edit pages on Wiktionary.

You can still read pages, but you cannot edit, move, or create them.

Editing from 202.86.135.18 has been disabled by SemperBlotto for the following reason(s): Vandalism: repeat offense (multiple)

This block has been set to expire: 13:22, 19 October 2015. wel,OVIESLY,resindDADAMAGroughtbyusualsuspkt.

c.owP=now~oldWT:((
ta4urprogres!:))+ineded2getridofmyeg[wp'bot'censorship,puke[nher2,sai "While I would dearly love to have my way with her in a wild and uninhibited fashion, Jolin needs to realise SHE IS CHINESE AND THUS NOT FUCKING AFRICAN-AMERICAN. God DAMN that woman is confused. And watching her with Luo Zhixiang in that new video trying to dance like some hip-hop slut is just embarrassing. Stupid cunt that girl is. Bet she fucks like a tiger though."<=diskindofSEXIST/RACISTçmntOKhere???????wmf=~dapits:((((60.246.183.249 09:36, 25 August 2015 (UTC) butwait,woduzdaAVRIDGWPNUTHED[holdfest]Please refrain from making nonconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Talk:Jolin Tsai with this edit. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. ~Oshwah~ (talk) (contribs) 10:55, 24 August 2015 (UTC) [wasment4userTHUMPERWARD,abrviatedvrsn
 * I'm not sure what you want me to do here :/ —suzukaze (t・c) 09:44, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Overlapping kanji readings and kana?
Although I don't speak Japanese, I spend a good bit of my time working with Special:WantedCategories, so I've created a substantial number of the kanji-readings categories. I've noticed lately that a number of the categories resulting from your use of don't match the readings for the kanji themselves in a very specific way: a kanji with a reading that ends in a particular syllable is missing that syllable in the ja-kanji-tab for an entry with the kanji followed by the hiragana for that syllable. Let me give you an example:

For, you provided. Looking at the entry for, the kun readings are and.

Now, either there's a missing kun reading for of, or the correct reading for the  in  is , and there's overlap between the kanji and kana. As I understand it, sometimes the kana are there to show that a particular ending is present, even if it's phonetically merged with the morpheme represented by kanji, or to show that the kanji has one of the readings that end with the sound represented by the kana.

As I said, I don't speak Japanese, so you should check a more reliable source to verify that I'm correct, and even if I am, it will only apply in some cases. It's just that I've run into this pattern more than a couple of times, and because I don't know the language, I'm not going to create categories in cases where things don't add up completely- so it's adding to the backlog of redlinked categories. Chuck Entz (talk) 22:43, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
 * 口走る has  →Category:Japanese terms spelled with 走 read as はし, although 走 only lists "hashiru" as a kun reading. It should be okay. —suzukaze (t・c) 00:48, 31 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Butting in...
 * : Japanese has something called okurigana (which you allude to), which amounts to the kana added onto the end to indicate inflection.  needs reworking, as the actual phonetic part of the kun'yomi that correlates just to the kanji character is only omo.  However, omo on its own is not a word meaning  or  (it matches  “main” or  “face” or  “weight, heaviness” instead), so Japanese needs to add the -i on the end to clarify which kun'yomi word  indicates.
 * In idiomatic older writing especially, the okurigana are more commonly subsumed into the kanji and left to the reader to reconstruct (perhaps vaguely similar to how vowels are often omitted in writing for Semitic languages). In modern Japanese, there is more of an educational effort to ensure consistent and unambiguous spellings, and more explicit use of okurigana.
 * The upshot of all this is that, in most cases, the oddities you're discovering are because many (most?) of our single-kanji entries are old content from before various of our JA entry conventions were established. More basic dictionaries will often give the kun'yomi for a kanji as the entire word, without indicating which parts are okurigana.  We're slowly going through and trying to clarify this, such as at 青 or 雪.
 * HTH! ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 21:58, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

一個
The entry doesn't make it clear what the exact pinyin is. In the example sentence, a variant is used. In the pronunciation box, "yīgè" is used. This should be clarified. Wiki Winters ☯ 韦安智  22:48, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I overrode the pinyin in because the pronunciation box and the previous revision of the page said ge4. —suzukaze (t・c) 23:07, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

得了

 * The discussion has been moved to Talk:得了 . -- SzMithrandir (talk) 22:32, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

需 and the Old Chinese gloss
Hi Suzukaze,

The link you gave only shows java.lang.NullPointerException for me, in both Chrome and Firefox. From your comment, I assume that this might be the modern Taiwanese definition. That's fine. What I'm concerned about is that at least some of the Old Chinese sources I've looked at give a sense of need and require for this character, which isn't currently given in the table there in the 需 entry.

I'm a little annoyed that the content provided by is so hard to edit or even access, but that's probably a separate matter. :)

‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 21:45, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
 * The right link is (the website relies too heavily on JavaScript; I forgot that copy-and-pasting the link straight from the address bar doesn't work). It's not a Taiwanese dictionary but one run by the Taiwanese Ministry of Education that specializes in characters. The definition from the above website quotes sources like the Shuowen Jiezi saying "需，䇓也. "
 * It looks like the data for Old/Middle Chinese is quoted from elsewhere so it might not even be a good idea to correct it (?) —suzukaze (t・c) 00:35, 1 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the working link. I note that the definitions listed there also include 有所欲求. 如：「需求」、「需要」. 清．  But as you note, it's a bit of a puzzle where to make any changes.  ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 04:45, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Some things I want to talk about
Dear Suzukaze-c,

as you can maybe guess by the headline of this entry, there is some things that I would want to talk with you about. First off, I love what you did to the "Han etyl" template. It looks and works better than ever. Second off, I really like the new "Han simplified forms" template. I have some questions about it though. Would it be possible and/or useful if it had four sections instead of three, and by that I mean that it would have a kyujitai section in addition to the three other sections. In some cases this could actually be useful. Take for example the character 絲. In traditional, it is written as 糹+糸, while it is 糸+糸 in kyujitai. Is this something that you think you could and should add? And also, do you think that it is possible to make it so that pages which uses the template only gets added to the category "Han characters simplified differently in China and Japan" if the characters actually are simplified differently? I "might" have used your temple on this page: 數. This character is simplified the same way in Japan and China, but because I used the template, it got placed in the category.

There is one last thing that I wish to discuss with you; character variants. I want you to look at this page: 國 A time ago, I added a list of variants to several pages, including that page. It seems as such that you have moved some of variants from the translingual section to the Chinese section. May I ask you why you have done so? Can I, before you answer, leave you with one final thought? If you look up any of those variants, whether or not they are in the Chinese or translingual section, of you look up any of those (or at least most of them) on the Japanese version of Wiktionary, they will have an entry. And in every one of these entries, it says that it is a variant of c. And it does not say that is a Chinese variant, but there is simply a text in the 漢字 section saying that it is a variant. If you still think that certain variants should be in the Chinese section, you might as well also move 𡆻, 𡇎, 𡇏, 𡇕, 𡈑, 𢦾, 𢧌, 𤦒, 𤦂, and 𡆸 there.

Sorry of this post seemed impolite or rude, I am not very skilled in the art of communicating with others. VulpesVulpes42 (talk) 19:14, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
 * bothered me so much, it looked so awkward ( ´∀｀)；
 * I would consider 絲 an example of a very minor glyph variation (the 糸 radical always looks different in contemporary PRC/Taiwan fonts versus the more conservative Japan/Korea forms, where one has three dots and the other has 小. in addition, the Unicode charts record 5 or 6 shapes for 述, which should differ in China, Hong Kong/Taiwan, Japan, Korea, and Vietnam fonts)
 * was used primarily for illustrating the difference between shinjitai and jiantizi, so it seems a bit redundant to add it to pages where the shinjitai and jiantizi forms are the same. (TBH what I find puzzling is, if it was meant for this purpose, why was it named ja-forms if PRC simplified forms are included, and why does the obsolete but original kyujitai forms come last????)
 * As for the variants, I think that it would be better if they added to only the languages they are a variant in; for example 㒱 is exclusive to Korea, so calling it a "Translingual" "Alternative form" would be a bit odd (even with context labels). If the Japanese have used 𤦂 (GlyphWiki data suggests that they haven't), then it can go under Japanese Alternative forms.
 * And I think that your communication skills are much better than mine. —suzukaze (t・c) 01:26, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

uvbenADMINb4
?


 * "you've been an admin before?"
 * Elsewhere, but not here. —suzukaze (t・c) 17:22, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello again!
Hello Suzukaze-c, do you remember when I added 曫 as a synonym to 黃昏? When you undid my edit I said:

Obscure it may be, but still a synonym. If you really can't stand it being there, then you may re-revert my edit.

I have to be honest with you, in reality it was me who couldn't stand it not being there XD

You see, one of my favorite websites (which I oftenly use) define 曫 as 黃昏, making it a synonym by the first definition of the word.

But that was not what I wanted to talk about. I came here to ask you a question: How in the world do you upload a file to wikimedia commons that has a character from the Supplementary Ideographic Plane in it? Whenever I try to upload a file that has such a character in its name I get the following message:

The title you are about to create contains undesirable characters. Undesirable characters include unusual space characters, BiDi overrides, control characters, byte order marks, soft-hyphens, surrogates, Private Use Area and Specials, including the replacement character U+FFFD and characters outside the Basic Multilingual Plane. In case you do not know which character triggered this message, have a look at [//commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:User_scripts/Invisible_charaters&withJS=MediaWiki:Invisible_characters_unveiled.js#val/Badtitle/dummy_title_for_API_calls_set_in_api.php Commons:User scripts/Invisible charaters].

But the thing is, there are files which have characters outside the Basic Multilingual Plane in their names, take for example the seven last files on this page. Can you help me? Thanks in advance. Sorry for messy message, I would have made it better-looking if I had the patience. VulpesVulpes42 (talk) 13:39, 23 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Suggestion one: Ignore the notice
 * Suggestion two: Don't put the problematic character in the file name. —suzukaze (t・c) 19:38, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello again (again)!
Thank you for replying to me. But the methods you mentioned won't work. You can't ignore the notice, and I must have those problematic characters in the file name. You know how the SVG files depicting seal script characters always have the same name? X-seal.svg with X being the character this file is showing in seal script form. That X could be a character from CJK Unified ideographs extended A, or from CJK Unified ideographs, in which case there wouldn't be a problem as those blocks are in the Basic Multilingual Plane, or that X could be a character from CJK Unified ideographs extended B, CJK Unified ideographs extended C, CJK Unified ideographs extended D, or CJK Unified ideographs extended E, in which case I'd be unable to upload the file as those blocks are in the Supplemental Ideographic Plane. I even tried to upload a new version of a file that had a problemtic character in its name, and I couldn't do that! When I tried to do that, I got this message:

The title you are about to create contains undesirable characters. Undesirable characters include unusual space characters, BiDi overrides, control characters, byte order marks, soft-hyphens, surrogates, Private Use Area and Specials, including the replacement character U+FFFD and characters outside the Basic Multilingual Plane.

In case you do not know which character triggered this message, have a look at Commons:User scripts/Invisible charaters.

Even though this isn't about a file that I want to upload, this is about an already existing file that I want to update. VulpesVulpes42 (talk) 07:06, 24 October 2015 (UTC)


 * I'm not familiar with the inner workings of Commons. Maybe you could contact the users who have successfully uploaded files with non-BMP characters in the file names and ask them for help. —suzukaze (t・c) 07:08, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

リア充爆発しろ
Hi Suzukaze. Can you tell me why failed RFD? — I.S.M.E.T.A. 22:43, 30 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Other editors considered it SoP (which TBH I find puzzling; the phrase tells people to explode [as in "kaboom"]). —suzukaze (t・c) 23:40, 30 October 2015 (UTC)


 * I see. So it is deemed to be the sum of its parts; but what are its parts? — I.S.M.E.T.A. 23:55, 30 October 2015 (UTC)


 * リア充 (someone with a fulfilling life in the real world) + 爆発する (to explode) + しろ (imperative form of する) —suzukaze (t・c) 01:43, 31 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I've moved/copied your citations of the phrase to Citations:リア充 and Citations:爆発. There was no point deleting a couple of perfectly good citations. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 15:28, 31 October 2015 (UTC)


 * The full phrase リア充爆発しろ also appears to be the name of a popular phone app (see some of the top hits at ), which might account for its recent increase in use online. That said,  is also used in other contexts.  C.f. .  ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 07:47, 2 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Google Trends graph for,  ,  , and  . The lines(?) for   and   closely match each other. It seems that the spike in April 2015 was because this app got deleted.   is also the weakest graph line(←?)　—suzukaze (t・c) 08:21, 2 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Just FYI, I only really asked about this because the original citations page had been tagged for speedy deletion. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 14:13, 2 November 2015 (UTC)


 * @I.S.M.E.T.A.: Aha, I hadn't seen that. Good of you to step in -- as you note above, it would be a shame to have those citations vanish into the ether, as they are equally applicable to the constituent terms.
 * @ suzukaze-c: Very interesting. I have no experience with Google Trends; I'll have to give that a try.  Thank you.  ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 19:21, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Hakka Dictionary
I saw that you've used 客英大辭典 as a source for PFS, such as in 懶人多屎尿. I just wanted to tell you that this dictionary does not use the variety of Hakka that we currently support with, that is, Siyen Hakka. The romanization used in 客英大辭典 is slightly different from the PFS used for Siyen. BTW, this might be a reason why there is a POJ option for Hakka. — Justinrleung (t...)⁄c=› 02:17, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
 * I see. Thanks for fixing it >.< —suzukaze (t・c) 08:03, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Atitarev's removal of Chinese section from 豊
Atitarev removed the "Chinese" section from the 豊 page on 11 July, but the character is in the Shuowen Jiezi, so I consider this removal as questionable. Eyesnore (talk) 04:08, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

A common courtesy...
I would really appreciate it if you would wait a few minutes before starting to edit CJKV articles that I've made very recent edits to. I'm often in the process of unifying the separate Chinese sections when you decide to make the very same edit to a particular article. This causes an otherwise undetectable edit conflict to occur and makes editing very difficult for me. Thanks for your consideration. Bumm13 (talk) 06:35, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
 * My apologies, I wasn't aware. (Have you considered using Special:ExpandTemplates to generate the code? It's really efficient, and often the pronunciations are already there, although additional Mandarin pronunciations need to be added manually.) —suzukaze (t・c) 06:37, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Korean word article edit reversions
Umm, would you care to explain why you just reverted my recent edits to those select Korean word articles? Your edit summaries gave no indication why you made the reverts in question. Bumm13 (talk) 14:38, 31 December 2015 (UTC)


 * I explained it in the first two reversions; the edits were incorrect. The PUA mapping that you used is MingLiU_HKSCS, which uses PUA to map HKSCS Cantonese characters to PUA instead of CJK Ext B. The PUA mapping that should be referred to is the one noted on List of hangul jamo, this "Hanyang Private Use" thing. After a quick Google search I found the proper fonts, which show characters that match the Yale romanization. —suzukaze (t・c) 14:42, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
 * http://imgur.com/MQMu1C1
 * Supposedly there is a way to display Old Hangul using standard Unicode, but it doesn't seem to be a question a quick Google search solves. —suzukaze (t・c) 14:46, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Better example —suzukaze (t・c) 14:51, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Okay, I obviously was totally confused about the situation with those word spellings. Bumm13 (talk) 06:02, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Vietnamese Nouns in Han Script
I wish either or  could link to a category like Category:Korean nouns in Han script, which is Category:Vietnamese nouns in Han script. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 04:40, 10 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Seems like a good idea. I imagine that it wouldn't be too difficult for . However, the way seems really weird to me, and  is locked. —suzukaze (t・c) 04:45, 10 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Then you could examine for ideas. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 04:53, 10 January 2016 (UTC)


 * I know how to do it, but is locked from editing. I'll try editing  to see what I can do. —suzukaze (t・c) 04:58, 10 January 2016 (UTC)


 * ✅ Category:Vietnamese nouns in Han script /  Category:Vietnamese proper nouns in Han script /  Category:Vietnamese adjectives in Han script
 * ❌ —suzukaze (t・c) 05:17, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
 * ❌ —suzukaze (t・c) 05:17, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Module:ja-kanjitab table layout
Heya Suzukaze --

I recently noticed that was no longer floating to the left of the floating   containing WP links and images, as at, and was instead pushed down below these elements. I to the table layout, and  is back to floating to the left of the.

I think it might be the  you added previously, but I'm out of time today for editing on Wiktionary. If you have the bandwidth, could you have a look and change Module:ja-kanjitab as appropriate?

TIA, ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 18:10, 18 January 2016 (UTC)


 * I think it was my replacement of  with  . Is it okay if I change the code back, save for the   part that I'll change back to  ? The old appearance is slightly lacking in design sense IMO. —suzukaze (t・c) 20:15, 18 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Please give it a whirl! I liked the font / color / line changes, it was just the layout change that worried me: too many items lined up vertically on the right margin can cause the entry's extras to push down into the following language's area, which just looks messy.  ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 22:39, 18 January 2016 (UTC)


 * It should be good now （ゝω・）ｂ —suzukaze (t・c) 22:45, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Looks great, thank you! ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 22:57, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

tweet
The strong conjugations are pretty odd too. Hillcrest98 (talk) 01:53, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for your editing!
That's exactly what I intended to do but failed. I simply use Ctrl+H and it didn't work out.202.195.129.247 06:39, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
 * （ゝω・）ｂ —suzukaze (t・c) 06:53, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

ow2mov pp?
81.11.220.20 21:11, 28 January 2016 (UTC)


 * "how to move pages?"
 * If you mouse over the "More ▼" thing at the top of the pages a "Move" option will appear. —suzukaze (t・c) 22:53, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

ys-hm,no c>no4IPs?ta4elp:)81.11.220.179 11:27, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

inkompetens=rampanthere:((
ur | prev) 21:36, 3 February 2016‎ Leasnam (talk | contribs)‎ . . (413 bytes) (-31)‎ . . (→‎Noun: a plant can also act as host) (undo) (cur | prev) 21:36, 3 February 2016‎ 81.11.231.7 (talk)‎ . . (444 bytes) (+58)‎ . . (undo) (cur | prev) 21:35, 3 February 2016‎ Leasnam (talk | contribs)‎ . . (386 bytes) (-3)‎ . . (→‎Noun) (undo)
 * MEKANIKALatachment=NOTrealyhost(dadfedz>misledin!
 * feard2generaliz3.igotridof myeg,ta!81.11.219.30 10:04, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Possible bug in Template:zh-pron
Hi suzukaze-c,

I just edited the 蝗 article to added "mc=y" and "oc=y" parameters to Template:zh-pron in that article. It returned this error: "Lua error in Module:ltc-pron at line 485: attempt to concatenate field '?' (a nil value)". I'm letting you know since you were the last person who edited the template. Nothing about my edit was unusual in any way. Cheers! Bumm13 (talk) 23:50, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
 * The error appears with the December 2014 version of the module too, so it doesn't seem to be caused by my edits.—suzukaze (t・c) 00:55, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

frame/<wotmeanin pl?
User group rights

The following is a list of user groups defined on this wiki, with their associated access rights.

Legend:

Granted right Revoked right

Group	Rights (all)

Create discussion pages (createtalk)<FE81.11.219.30 10:01, 7 February 2016 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure what you mean by "frame" :( —suzukaze (t・c) 10:02, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

daCONTINUUSLINE4ROUNDITãpic'sframe81.11.218.210 12:47, 10 February 2016 (UTC)


 * So, I'm assuming that you want an explanation of the above text [that I'm guessing was inside a frame]? (It's not immediately clear how "frame" was relevant, since no frame was copy-and-pasted)
 * I see a legend, and I see an attribute that presumably would have one of the legend's symbols attached to it, but I don't see any symbols. Too much formatting was lost, so it is impossible to explain. —suzukaze (t・c) 13:11, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

praps gotlost i/myBLAKBAKGROUND(scren,ta4tryintho!:)81.11.218.210 22:32, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Template:Sinoxenic-word
What did not work and on which page? --kc_kennylau (talk) 10:05, 7 February 2016 (UTC)


 * —suzukaze (t・c) 10:08, 7 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Wow. Wonderful tool, never known before. So what went wrong is that the "||" makes an empty string parsed as the first parameter. --kc_kennylau (talk) 10:11, 7 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Yep; PAGENAME isn't being passed on for some reason. (Although, IMO seems a bit unnecessary since all  does is pass on all of its parameters...) —suzukaze (t・c) 10:13, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

canu'v aluk?
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Talk:trequartista#trequartistas.2Ben-sectn_neded81.11.218.210 12:45, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
 * SemperBlotto's been contributing for ages, unlike me; I don't think I have enough experience to say whether trequartista it should have an English section or not. However, I do think that the border between code-switching and borrowing can be rather thin (although, I'm not a linguist; don't listen to me). —suzukaze (t・c) 13:15, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

agre(thin,ta:)(1'dsayEN_PLURAL=inkompetns,ordad it=TREATINit~ENGL,yep[niFOUNDAWORD(smeanin,mymainconcern;)81.11.218.210 22:23, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

烏竜茶
Could you check this edit? I thought 竜 is the standard Japanese character. I don't know enough Japanese to know if this is right. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 01:51, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * From my observations, it seems like some reason people like to use 龍 (and 櫻) for stylistic reasons. Like in 青龍_(将棋).—suzukaze (t・c) 02:07, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I see. Should we use 烏龍茶 or 烏竜茶 in the descendants section in the Chinese section? — justin(r)leung { (t...) 02:51, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * IMO it should be 烏龍茶, because 1. it's the name the Japanese Wikipedia uses: 烏龍茶, and 2. 烏竜茶 seems to be much less common than 烏龍茶. —suzukaze (t・c) 03:25, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

花費
Can you check the Cantonese readings here? The verb and noun in Mandarin are different, but have no idea about Canto. Thanks. ---&#62; Tooironic (talk) 07:26, 26 February 2016 (UTC)


 * It looks good to me. —suzukaze (t・c) 08:03, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

and, and ,  and
I have added the template to these pages. By the way, the "Cantonese" and "Mandarin" sections for these pages (apart from 斋) are yet to be unified. Eyesnore (talk) 23:12, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Requests for deletion
Why did you blank the page? --Robbie SWE (talk) 10:34, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I think Opera Mini was fucking up; I was trying to fix a typo in the top header >< —suzukaze (t・c) 10:36, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Ah, ok. What a relief :-) --Robbie SWE (talk) 10:39, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

歌 vs 唄
http://www.last.fm/group/un-romaji/forum/35342/_/470623 http://www.guidetojapanese.org/forum/viewtopic.php?id=6155 --kc_kennylau (talk) 14:52, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Just thinking out loud :) I didn't even try to look up the actual difference yet :p —suzukaze (t・c) 17:49, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

Extended shinjitai and Asahi characters
Extended shinjitai characters are no longer categorized in Category:CJKV characters simplified differently in Japan and China. They are not official forms. Eyesnore (talk) 23:52, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

boy/girl
Hello, it's written boy here: http://www.fravahr.org/spip.php?article517 À la 雞 (talk) 01:13, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
 * The site is displaying errors for me. —suzukaze (t・c) 02:48, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
 * It was also showing errors for me yesterday, but it's working now. It does say boy. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 02:08, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm just following the file talk page and file description. —suzukaze (t・c) 04:39, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Bopomofo
Do you think the Bopomofo pages should use the Chinese section instead of Mandarin? Mandarin is not the only Chinese language that uses Bopomofo. Most notably are the used for Hokkien and Hakka. Also, each symbol has a name, so /p/ for ㄅ might not be correct. ㄅ is pronounced as bē or bō. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 06:19, 27 March 2016 (UTC)


 * I think that there should be separate Mandarin and Min Nan sections, similar to how POJ entries have Min Nan headers and Pinyin entries have Mandarin headers. According to Wikipedia, ㄏ and ㄜ differ in phonetic value, and there are extra letters that would mess up the "1st letter of" scheme. Unless we use and dump the numbering, in which case I'd be fine with a "Chinese" header. —suzukaze (t・c) 06:22, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
 * About pronunciation, z has separate Letter name and Phoneme sections; should something like that be done? Also do the the vowels have names? —suzukaze (t・c) 06:25, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
 * The vowels are pronounced as they are. About the numbering, I don't know if the Min Nan has a specific order. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 06:28, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
 * (Also, some letters are Mandarin-only, and some are Min Nan-only; it seems wrong to use  for ㄖ.) —suzukaze (t・c) 06:34, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
 * OK, we should have separate sections then. About the pronunciation sections, I think we should have letter name and phoneme sections. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 06:46, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

shàitàiyáng
I have long put variant forms on separate lines to distinguish them from main forms. For the sake of consistency, would you mind if I undid your edit? ---&#62; Tooironic (talk) 09:22, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Hmm, but it's all the same word though; putting them on separate lines makes it seem like there's 曬太陽, whose simplified form is 晒太阳, and another new term 晒太陽... I don't really care though. —suzukaze (t・c) 09:24, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Also, about 葡萄 - I do not support collapsible tables for derived terms on Chinese pages, and have undone many of them in the past, since they do not allow for alphabetical sorting. Can I also undo your edit here? ---&#62; Tooironic (talk) 09:29, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
 * The list is super long though; is okay? It's still in alphabetical pinyin order. —suzukaze (t・c) 09:30, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Genius! I will edit this way in the future for long lists. Many thanks. ---&#62; Tooironic (talk) 09:33, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Triad of /
template not present yet on these pages. Possibly an extended shinjitai? Eyesnore (talk) 18:13, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

辡
Why did revert my edit Johnny Shiz (talk) 23:13, 16 April 2016 (UTC) Johnny Shiz (talk) 23:13, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
 * My sources do not indicate such thing. —suzukaze (t・c) 23:19, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

托
Hi. I see you reverted 托. Please check 託 too. It said 托 is simp of 託. Should be add as another etymology? --Octahedron80 (talk) 07:49, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I think so. —suzukaze (t・c) 07:50, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

ZH 石綿
I'm curious about your recent. The ZH WP article itself lists as an alternate rather than misspelling (「石棉，又稱石綿，...」), and MDBG has an entry for this spelling. Perhaps this is a regional or dialectal spelling? ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 19:00, 25 April 2016 (UTC)


 * I assumed Wyang knew what he was doing. Perhaps I should've checked first :/ —suzukaze (t・c) 21:51, 25 April 2016 (UTC)


 * No worries. :)     I assumed I was missing out on a regionalism, and it looks like that might have been the case --  I see that the  spelling now has .  ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 23:08, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Character compounds
Hi! Thanks for your work on characters! Just a heads-up: Chinese Wiktionary has compound lists for individual characters, e.g. zh:附录:漢語詞彙索引/女. You can remove "更多..." and "逆序" and replace all new lines with a "|" to generate lists for en.wikt. May be useful. Wyang (talk) 11:48, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Pseudo-Japanese BS
I see you've been busy with our resident Sky/Easynet-UK IP mental case. After 5 years of adding this kind of crap and consistently getting reverted, you'd think they would get something halfway resembling a clue, but they're completely impervious. I remember them asking Eirikr once how their bogus entry could be wrong if Bing Translate said it was right...

I block them for a couple of weeks every time I see them. They change their IP frequently, so it doesn't last, but it slows them down so we can keep up. They used to practically live here and churn out huge volumes of bad edits, but they only stop by occasionally these days, so I must be doing something right.

Thanks for all your tireless work on patrolling the recent edits and cleaning up the CJKV entries- you're definitely worth your weight in gold, as far as I'm concerned. Chuck Entz (talk) 03:04, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

display of measure words
Is there a way we can get simplified forms and pinyin to display for this new measure word component you guys are using? (e.g. at 明月) ---&#62; Tooironic (talk) 13:13, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, but User:Wyang probably has reasons for writing code that explicity doesn't display it... (likely partly because the template describes varying measure word usage across lects, so pinyin would be inappropriate) —suzukaze (t・c) 18:25, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Module:zh
人 is running out of memory, and it looks like it may have something to do with your edit to this module (you would know better than I would). Thanks! Chuck Entz (talk) 04:07, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

留級
Hello! Please check the 留級 article in Wiktionnaire. Fête Phung (talk) 12:40, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

I'm sad, someone had deleted the 留級 article in Wiktionnaire! Fête Phung (talk) 13:04, 23 May 2016 (UTC)


 * 對唔住，我唔識法文. —suzukaze (t・c) 21:51, 23 May 2016 (UTC)


 * : I've helped you asked the deleter. --kc_kennylau (talk) 02:10, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
 * He got into an edit war with Wyang and Wyang blocked him as a sock of a globally-blocked user- which he indeed is. If his current IP (see below) keeps making revertable edits, it may very well meet a similar fate.
 * As for the deleted entry at Wiktionnaire: they aren't as tolerant as we are of banned users coming back to continue making edits, so that was the reason given in the deletion comments of the first 2 deletions. His English-language edits displayed an appalling lack of understanding about what it means to repeat a grade, so I wouldn't be surprised if there were content-related reasons this was deleted, as well, though you would know better than I would. Chuck Entz (talk) 02:50, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

new sense at 溫馨
A "happy" memory? Is that what you were getting at with those example sentences? ---&#62; Tooironic (talk) 01:46, 4 June 2016 (UTC)


 * If I knew/was sure I wouldn't use ... There are multiple "of a..." and none of them seem to match the citations. —suzukaze (t・c) 02:25, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

Something you might want to see
I've gone through all the talk pages in Category:Chinese terms needing attention, and added sort keys (starting with the last character in the category) to the ones where the tag was added by a certain inquisitive person whose IP geolocates to Kent (earlier Lorain), Ohio. The results are here. I don't know how long it will last, because it shouldn't be that hard to figure out what I did, but I thought I might as well do something while I was checking the pages. Chuck Entz (talk) 05:28, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Hm :o Are you doing it manually? Seems like a lot of work D: —suzukaze (t・c) 21:30, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

明知故犯
唔該你睇吓明知故犯. 206.180.250.57 00:54, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

小朋友
I don't recommend we add glosses for see also terms. It's going to mean a heck of lot of work for us to remain consistent across all entries. Please reconsider. ---&#62; Tooironic (talk) 19:06, 15 June 2016 (UTC)


 * It is true that remaining consistent is important. However, from a usability standpoint, glosses are helpful. For example, compare こうしょう and 女 to tú. —suzukaze (t・c) 19:44, 15 June 2016 (UTC)


 * As you know, the amount of work required to maintain a high level of accuracy, usability and consistency across all Chinese entries on Wiktionary is huge. I'm only thinking about how we can avoid overwork, wherever possible. In the future, we may be able to find a way to have glosses appear automatically, without the need to input them manually. ---&#62; Tooironic (talk) 05:27, 16 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Alas Wiktionary is not a database... —suzukaze (t・c) 05:49, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
 * こうしょう is a disambiguation page but it's an overkill still, if you ask me. Homophones for multisyllabic words in Japanese is even a bigger problem than in Chinese. The entry's definitions are too short, not always accurate and get out of date, as soon as lemmas are changed. No need to do glosses on each synonym, related term, etc., IMO. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 06:39, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
 * How could a user possibly disambiguate the items in the list without glosses? I agree that data consistency can be an issue -- but in most cases, the glosses are short renderings of a term's central meaning(s), and as such, they are unlikely to vary that much from the information in the targeted entry.  For my part, I view the こうしょう as close to ideal for this kind of disambig page, given the constraints of the MediaWiki software.  ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 16:05, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Presumably, by clicking on them. ---&#62; Tooironic (talk) 16:47, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Every single one? —suzukaze (t・c) 23:35, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Module error at 実
When you converted everything in the "Compounds" section to use ja-r, the module choked on one of them:
 * 実は

I have it commented out for now, but you'll probably want t go back and fix it. Thanks! Chuck Entz (talk) 07:36, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for pointing it out; fixed. —suzukaze (t・c) 07:37, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

On my reverted 時 edit
Hello, Suzukaze-c. I am writing in reference to my edit to the page 時 which you reverted about a month ago. After doing extensive research, I found that 「花占い」(はなうらない, hanauranai) does mean "flower fortune-telling" or "flower divination." That has led me to the logical conclusion that the example sentence given,「こんな時は花占いだ！」would in fact mean that events such as these were the fortune derived from flower divination. I see now that the example sentence has been removed (I'm assuming by another user), but I was simply wondering why you found my translation insufficient. (No malice whatsoever; merely looking for clarification here.) Here's the history comparison page for reference.

Thank you very much, Blue Caper  (talk) 21:28, 17 June 2016 (UTC)


 * https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=時&diff=next&oldid=38585994 —suzukaze (t・c) 21:30, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Music Memory?

 * Discussion moved to User talk:Lo Ximiendo.

Sort args in etymologies
I just noticed from calls to. This causes the entry to be indexed under the kanji spelling in the category page at Category:Japanese_terms_derived_from_Chinese. The WT:AJA page also notes that category sorting should be by hiragana, as described at About_Japanese.

I thought I'd ask before reverting, since I'm unclear on why you removed the sort args. Was there something specific you had in mind? ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 23:27, 20 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Ahh, previously it said "Lua error in Module:parameters at line 110: The parameter "sort" is not used by this template." because the template was, so I fixed the template and removed . I'll fix it. —suzukaze (t・c) 23:29, 20 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Crikey, I hadn't even noticed my derpitude of using when I meant to use .  &lt;facepalm/&gt;  Thanks for fixing it!  ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 23:42, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Kanji entries that lack Chinese entries
Is there any way to make a list of the kanji entries on Wiktionary that are lacking Chinese entries? This would be useful to have. ---&#62; Tooironic (talk) 16:02, 30 June 2016 (UTC)


 * A handful of CJK A characters are missing, as well as a large part of Appendix:Unicode. Most of them are fairly obscure or obsolete. —suzukaze (t・c) 20:57, 30 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Or do you mean Japanese kanji entries without Chinese? There's this. —suzukaze (t・c) 23:41, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
 * The latter, yes, thanks! ---&#62; Tooironic (talk) 04:12, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

hiragana to kanji pages
Hi. If I were to create hiragana entries to point to the kanji form, do I need to replicate every POS the kanji entry has? For example, "流暢" is a "Noun" and an "Adjectival noun". Does this mean I have to also do two parts of speech in りゅうちょう?

By the way, a similar entry きゅうでん, when it comes to linking to 休電, looks like this: Noun きゅうでん ‎(romaji kyūden) 1. 宮殿: palace 2. 給電: electricity supplying 3. 休電 : electricity cut-off 4. 球電: ball lightning Verb きゅうでんする ‎(romaji kyūden suru) 1. 休電 : for electricity to be temporarily cut off Should the entry at the bottom be "休電する" or something?

Thanks. -- Dine2016 (talk) 08:41, 1 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Regarding ryuuchou: yes.
 * Regarding kyuuden: no, as the verb is found on 休電 and not 休電する. —suzukaze (t・c) 08:46, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

照
Do you have an example of the Cantonese sense you added? I can't think of it being used as that sense. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 13:39, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
 * I was thinking of ("繼續"; "to keep on; (in the same old way, as ever) to persist (adv? persistently; accordingly; in accordance with)"). —suzukaze (t・c) 23:43, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

ta!
cat=n,m=,'uncreated,(bloCHIN=wot?81.11.206.69 11:50, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
 * If i understand correctly, you are asking about the purpose of cat= and m=? An explanation can be found at T:zh-pron.—suzukaze (t・c) 01:10, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

反逆
Would you mind checking the Japanese entry here? Is 叛逆 really an alternative form? It can't be in Chinese. ---&#62; Tooironic (talk) 12:50, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
 * It's probably a situation like 作飯 and 做飯 that have close meanings and sound identical in Mandarin (but non in Cantonese: zokfaan vs. zoufaan). —suzukaze (t・c) 15:55, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your thanks!
I must confess that I got a little giddy over the notification. I think it's the first time that I got thanked here. Just before I read the notification, I coincidentally had been admiring your user name after seeing it in the history of a page. Thanks again for a happy moment! Geekdiva (talk) 08:36, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Japanese renyoukei
Hi. I wonder whether 出来 needs a Japanese part, saying that it's the stem of 出来る? Thanks. Dine2016 (talk) 12:14, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Forms of Japanese verbs are rather neglected here unlike other languages. IMO yes, but as the format is essentially undecided, maybe not yet. (, any insight?)—suzukaze (t・c) 14:45, 21 July 2016 (UTC)


 * It probably needs a Japanese section with the readings of でき, しゅつらい and しゅったい. Links to 出来る and 出来す can be put into +/- etymology. Wyang (talk) 22:58, 21 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Ditto Wyang's and Suzukaze's comments. Japanese in general doesn't have the best coverage here; we're working to fix that, but it takes time.  Verb forms are less of a priority than simply getting the core lemmata in place, but we are gradually (very gradually) filling in.   is one such page that is in need of a Japanese entry.  As Suzukaze notes, some of our formatting and infrastructure is still TBD when it comes to verb forms, and Old and Classical Japanese for that matter -- 出来 is also a valid spelling for the Classical (maybe even OJP?) verb deku, ancestor to modern dekiru.
 * Anyway, TL:DR version: we're slowly getting around to entries like this. :)    ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 07:59, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
 * PS: @Suzukaze, sorry for the lag -- I never saw the ping.

JA misspellings
Thanks for the heads-up at. Could we get a proper header template for that? Using the generic just looks so wrong... ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 00:37, 29 July 2016 (UTC)


 * I suppose it could be added to Module:ja-headword somehow... —suzukaze (t・c) 20:26, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

シーバス
英語ではseabassは、siːbæsと発音します. 日本語の発音だと/ʃiːbæs/となります. 日本でシーバスを意味する言葉は、スズキ、セイゴ、ヨーロッパスズキです. 主に釣り用語や市場などで使われます. wiktionary は、辞書なので、意味を書かないと意味がないです. --109.148.252.191 08:44, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

ɕiːba̠sɯᵝ この発音記号は微妙です. 言えなくもないですが、少し変です. 日本語の発音だと/ʃiːbæs/となります. あとシーバスのEnglishの項目を消そうとするのは、なんで？--109.148.252.191 08:53, 1 August 2016 (UTC)


 * /ɕiːba̠sɯᵝ/はでの日本語の発音の表現です. 奇妙に見えますが正しいはずです. シーバスは 英語話者 が使用しない英語から日本語への借用語. （＝seabassは英語の言葉でシーバスは日本語の言葉）—suzukaze (t・c) 09:03, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

u=v.fas2+ta4elp!:)
81.11.219.175 02:48, 8 August 2016 (UTC)


 * :) —suzukaze (t・c) 04:32, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

sigh-owdousavesuch?
==Chinese== Editing 面摊 (section)

information 	Warning: Your contribution does not contain a valid language and part-of-speech header. Please see Wiktionary:Entry layout explained for details regarding formatting entries. Guidelines regarding formatting entries of specific languages may be found in Category:Wiktionary language considerations. Click the "Show preview" button to see if there are any anomalies.

Unconstructive edits will be quickly reverted, and egregious or repeated unconstructive editing will result in your account or IP address being blocked. If you believe this action to be constructive, you may submit it again to confirm it. If this message is erroneous, please report it at WT:Grease pit.

This action has been automatically identified as harmful, and therefore disallowed.

If you believe your action was constructive, please inform an administrator of what you were trying to do. A brief description of the abuse rule which your action matched is: strips L3

You are not logged in. If you save your edits to this page, your IP address will be recorded in the page's history. For that and other reasons, you should create an account.

Please do not save test edits. If you want to experiment, please use the sandbox. Inserting nonsense, knowingly adding false information and gratuitously removing content are considered vandalism, and editors who engage in such behavior may be blocked without a warning. Bold Italic Link Embedded file Reference Advanced Special characters Help Heading Format Bulleted list Numbered list No wiki formatting New line Big Small Superscript Subscript Insert Picture gallery Redirect Table Search and replace

Chinese
Edit summary:

By clicking the “Save Page” button, you are agreeing to the Terms of Use and the Privacy Policy, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 License and the GFDL. You agree that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license. Cancel 81.11.219.175 15:43, 11 August 2016 (UTC)


 * The edit filter doesn't see Chinese simplified entries as a valid entry since it does't have an L3 (, , etc) so it won't let you save. It's been brought up a few times but the problem hasn't been resolved yet since the filter doesn't apply to autopatrolled users. IMO the easiest way to deal with this is to let other established users create the simplified form. —suzukaze (t・c) 20:03, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

thanks
Thanks for fixing a lot of my old entries. Sorry they're such a mess! ---&#62; Tooironic (talk) 04:57, 14 August 2016 (UTC)


 * They were probably up-to-standard at the time so it's not your fault :) —suzukaze (t・c) 04:59, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

ging
ta4elp/gudtransl!:)62.235.175.70 04:30, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
 * only,ow2finditw.oBPMinput?

jingqiu<thoutickekd(butiprimarilyneDIC4dad,circlclozd,uh-ta4urefets!(pr=rillibitmuchtypin4me..(bitiredritenowfysicaly,inTWidWAYmortime4editin(nchines),itryd2tem..(urcoligz81.11.218.228 18:38, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

ja.wikt
I doubt something. At ja.wiktionary, don't users like to make hiragana entries? I found many redirect like this --Octahedron80 (talk) 05:22, 27 August 2016 (UTC)


 * I don't know about their policies regarding hiragana. It doesn't seem to be included in their editing guidelines. Please ask at ja:Wiktionary:Sabo ('∀') —suzukaze (t・c) 05:26, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Incomplete sentence?
This is not a complete sentence: It is one of four myeloproliferative disorders, characterised by increased production of a particular line of blood cellS butAPARTFR the lymphocytic lineage. but the lymphocytic lineage what? Jim1138 (talk) 08:11, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
 * but=excludin(canuENGL?Preposition

but

(obsolete outside Scotland) Outside of.

Away but the hoose and tell me whae's there.

Without, apart from, except.

Everyone but Father left early. I like everything but that.<en.wt

furthr:Acute myeloid leukemia (AML), also known as acute myelogenous leukemia or acute nonlymphocytic leukemia (ANLL), is a cancer of the myeloid line of blood cells,helbreaxluz,gudintentns-hel:/62.235.179.141 17:54, 2 September 2016 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure I understand your message this time, other than it has to do with dyserythropoiesis and using erythropoiesis in the definition :( —suzukaze (t・c) 02:58, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

dunwury-1thingitryd2saywasigotD/W.CANCER(PMF81.11.206.159 19:30, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
 * 2actualy:(http://www.nature.com/bcj/journal/v1/n5/full/bcj201118a.html81.11.206.32 13:30, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

breakfast cereal
Could you check the Cantonese translation here? 麥片 only refers to oatmeal or rolled oats, at least that's the case in Mandarin. ---&#62; Tooironic (talk) 09:55, 4 September 2016 (UTC)


 * To be honest I don't think I've even heard of cereal being referred to in Cantonese (I'm just a 竹升)... Pinging as a much more competent Cantonese speaker. —suzukaze (t・c)

Question on templates
Hi, thank you for fixing the forced addition of a space in one of my templates. I'm new to this and I have a question : everytime I change my templates, I do not see the changes in the pages that transclude them, unless I edit / resave these pages to force a reparse. This would be completely unmanageable to do when the number of pages grow... Do you know how to his work? Does wiktionary update in batch every night and not real-time? Thx! Julien Daux (talk) 17:29, 12 September 2016 (UTC) Julien Daux (talk) 17:29, 12 September 2016 (UTC)


 * The pages do not update right away but they usually update in a decently short amount of time (speaking from experience tinkering with Chinese templates that are used on thousands of pages). But if you are feeling impatient for some reason you can add buttons to the top of pages to quickly "purge" a page (make the software reparse the page). —suzukaze (t・c) 17:34, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you, I have this button now.. But it doesn't work recursively, so I think I'm better off waiting for the automated batch ...  Julien Daux (talk) 17:57, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, no.
(cur | prev) 05:55, 19 September 2016‎ Suzukaze-c (talk | contribs)‎. . (621 bytes) (-16)‎. . updated since my last visit (undo | thank) (Tags: no-documentation, removal-of-deletion-or-rfv-template) (cur | prev) 05:48, 19 September 2016‎ Suzukaze-c (talk | contribs)‎. . (637 bytes) (+16)‎. . (undo | thank) (Tag: no-documentation) (cur | prev) 05:43, 19 September 2016‎ UtherPendrogn (talk | contribs)‎. . (621 bytes) (+621)‎. . (Created page with "{| class="wikitable" style="width: 800px" ! colspan="6" | Chess pieces {{#ifeq:{{{chess pieces}}}|-|| · {{{ch...") (Tag: no-documentation) It's quite clear it WASN'T updated since your last visit, since there was only one edit before you RFD'd it. Why are you lying? UtherPendrogn (talk) 05:57, 19 September 2016 (UTC)


 * {{ping|UtherPendrogn}}  is used to denote edits that have taken place since the last time you looked at a page. In this case, you looked at the page history before looking at the newest version at  . —suzukaze (t・c) 05:58, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Reason for reversion at 氙?
Why exactly did you revert my edit at 氙? "Formatting is lacking" is not a valid reason. Bumm13 (talk) 15:56, 22 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Because you seem to not give a shit about the messages on your talk page, so I used a different method to get your attention. —suzukaze (t・c) 18:15, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Japanese combining forms
Feel free to correct me or suggest doing something else, I know only a little bit of Japanese. Small characters like ァ are defined as "combining forms" because apparently they can't be used by themselves to form syllables/morae, as opposed to normal characters like ア which are defined as "syllables". The small characters are using, which for some reason was categorizing entries in Category:Japanese syllables and leaving Category:Japanese combining forms and its children empty. I see you marked the combining form category (and its children) for imminent deletion, because it was empty. If it's okay for you, I removed your deletion request and fixed the template, so the right categories will get populated once the system catches up. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 13:03, 23 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Got it. —suzukaze (t・c) 17:19, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

mentalanguish,f.e.
noentryz??213.49.92.118 20:54, 2 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Hmm, I don't think English entries are really my specialty, especially with something as technical as "mental anguish"... —suzukaze (t・c) 05:54, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Curious about Korean reading "evolutions"
Hi suzukaze,

I noticed your two reversions regarding Korean "reading evolutions" and ">" sign usage. I was genuinely curious as to why we are using the ">" signs in the first place. Are the readings on the left some sort of earlier readings? I'm just not quite sure what is being conveyed within the context of (older) Korean hanja readings and some clarification would be helpful. Cheers! Bumm13 (talk) 06:30, 11 October 2016 (UTC)


 * User talk:Atitarev. —suzukaze (t・c) 06:32, 11 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Okay, yes, I just now finished reading your post on Atitarev's talk page... this makes all those edits I made a pointless waste of time, it seems. I wish this had been clearer but for now, the status quo usage is the only option. Bumm13 (talk) 06:44, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

Zen Buddhism
Is the Japanese translation correct? In Chinese this is known as 禪宗. ---&#62; Tooironic (talk) 06:39, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Nope. —suzukaze (t・c) 06:58, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

䲁 Mandarin reading
I noticed that when you unified the formatting at 䲁, the Mandarin reading changed from wèi to wēi. I just wanted to check to see if this is what you intended since the sources I've checked show it as "wèi". Cheers! Bumm13 (talk) 11:22, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Possible bug in Module:nan-pron
Hi suzukaze, When I try to say the following set of readings (chian/chó̍/chu) in the "mn=" (Min Nan) entry of Template:zh-pron, it returns the following module error:

Lua error in Module:nan-pron at line 667: attempt to concatenate field '?' (a nil value)

Hopefully it's not a major issue. Thanks! Bumm13 (talk) 22:21, 22 October 2016 (UTC)


 * The 8th tone character is present after "chó", which already has the 2nd tone on ó. I think the module can't cope with the weird input. —suzukaze (t・c) 22:58, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

Band (K-ON！輕音少女 quotations)
Which season are they from? Also, could you check the pronunciation of leader in the second quote? — justin(r)leung { (t...) 13:22, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
 * ✔—suzukaze (t・c) 02:38, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

咱們ＶＳ我們
Hi, in Mandarin Chinese, the terms 咱們 and 我們 both mean 'we', but 咱們 includes myself. Can 我們 also include myself? – AWESOME meeos ！ ＊ （「欺负」我） 01:13, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
 * "We" always includes myself, in any language. includes the speaking partner (the person you're talking to) and  doesn't. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 01:25, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Can 咱們 be replaced with 我們? 我們 seems more common. – AWESOME meeos ！ ＊ （「欺负」我） 01:36, 8 November 2016 (UTC)


 * (: Don't ask me these questions man, I'm just an ABC who thinks language is cool. My Mandarin is downright terrible. —suzukaze (t・c) 01:59, 8 November 2016 (UTC))

Data for Middle Chinese
Hi, where do you get the data for the Middle Chinese pronunciations; for example, how do you know that 貓 was pronunced like, with initial 4, final 92 and level tone? And what about the other reconstructions? Are they based on other dialects of Middle Chinese? Sorry for the abruptness – AWESOME meeos ！ ＊ （「欺负」我） 23:52, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure. Wyang is the one who set up the system. —suzukaze (t・c) 00:30, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
 * The data seems to be from here. The Middle Chinese reconstructions are based on an ancient rime dictionary called . All the reconstructions are slightly different depending on how each linguist reconstructed it. Reading the Wikipedia article on should give you more insight. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 00:32, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Module errors due to Module:ja etc.
I hope you can fix it ASAP. --kc_kennylau (talk) 14:18, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

Category:Zhuang Sawndip forms
Please deal with this category which I believe you have populated. Thank you. --kc_kennylau (talk) 16:14, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure what template should be used to create it (if there even is one) (；´∀｀) —suzukaze (t・c) 21:45, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Incomplete Dubeolsik support
In Grease pit/2016/September, you suggested using for all existing Hangul Syllables entries, because the old template had a very unsightly bug that you described in the GP discussion. This task is ✅, I added in all these entries.

But, the Dubeolsik support seems incomplete. (currently, affected entries have a "?" in the Dubeolsik; before, adding the template in these entries would cause a module error) Do you know what is the Dubeolsik for all the "composite" final jamos, like the ㄳ in the end of 갃? I'd like to fill in all these question marks in the code:

['ㄳ'] = '?'; ['ㄶ'] = 's-g'; ['ㄽ'] = 'f-t'; ['ㄵ'] = 's-w'; ['ㄺ'] = '?'; ['ㄻ'] = '?'; ['ㄻ'] = '?'; ['ㄼ'] = '?'; ['ㄾ'] = '?'; ['ㄿ'] = '?'; ['ㅀ'] = '?'; ['ㅄ'] = '?'; ['ㅆ'] = '?';

(Should I just use this table: http://www.sayjack.com/type/korean/ It does not seem to be compatible with this online Korean keyboard: https://www.branah.com/korean )

--Daniel Carrero (talk) 21:49, 20 November 2016 (UTC)


 * TBH I'm not really familiar with Korean input methods :/ But it should be straightforward ... (?)
 * Also, ㄻ is listed twice in the code above. —suzukaze (t・c) 22:23, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

The nonidentical complex codas are entered as a sequence of two consonants, and the tense consonant codas are entered as uppercase equivalents of the plain consonants. So: ['ㄳ'] = 'r-t'; ['ㄶ'] = 's-g'; ['ㄽ'] = 'f-t'; ['ㄵ'] = 's-w'; ['ㄺ'] = 'f-r'; ['ㄻ'] = 'f-a'; ['ㄼ'] = 'f-q'; ['ㄾ'] = 'f-x'; ['ㄿ'] = 'f-v'; ['ㅀ'] = 'f-g'; ['ㅄ'] = 'q-t'; ['ㅆ'] = 'T';

Wyang (talk) 22:34, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you. ✅. All Korean syllable entries, like 갃, should have a character box with automatic composition and Dubeolsik now. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 22:42, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

Silly translation
Hi suzukaze, I know this might be a funny translation to translate into Cantonese, but how do you translate "three cats in one week", considering the context of a cat giving three cats as children. I know. – AWESOME meeos ！ ＊ （「欺负」我） 07:23, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
 * maybe but my grammar is terrible, please check with others —suzukaze (t・c) 13:04, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

泱 Min Nan readings
Hi Suzukaze, I was just curious about the Min Nan readings at 泱 (iaⁿ/iang), which you added to the article. The Taiwanese Ministry of Education dictionary gives just an iong reading while another Min Nan dictionary gives "iong" and "iòng". I just thought I'd bring it up since I'm not an authority on which Min Nan readings are actually correct. Bumm13 (talk) 23:45, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
 * It came from the data here that Wyang imported into Wiktionary for use by Template:zh-new. TBH I don't know how accurate it is. User:Justinrleung probably knows more about it. —suzukaze (t・c) 07:28, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
 * TBH, it's not a very common character. Here's what I found so far:
 * nothing in 閩南方言大詞典 or 普通話閩南方言常用詞典
 * 甘字典 (probably the other dictionary you're talking about): iong ("(of clouds) agitated; (of water) deep and wide; tall and big") and iòng ("(of clouds) agitated; (of water) deep; tall and big")
 * 台語線頂字典: iong, iàng, iang and iaⁿ
 * 當代泉州音字彙: iong (e.g. 泱灢 "(of water) murky"). — justin(r)leung { (t...) 21:32, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
 * 台日大辭典: iaⁿ ("ripple"), oaiⁿ (e.g. 清泱泱 "(of water) very clear"; 飾泱泱 "very beautiful")
 * I'd say it is  almost for sure.   could possibly follow. I am unsure about the other readings, but they seem to be valid, albeit for different meanings. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 21:32, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

ああ！四川語は現れた！
Hi suzukaze, the title should tell you something. Why did you add this? – AWESOME meeos ！ ＊ （「欺负」我） 08:39, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
 * User talk:Prisencolin—suzukaze (t・c) 08:54, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:za-sawndip form of
It took a lot of trial and (mostly) error, but I think I got this to work. With my meager knowledge of lua, I haven't figured out the details, but it looks like at least one of the modules involved insists on getting its positional parameters from the entry rather than the template, so it interprets the {"t"/"s"/""} values as the term to link to. I probably should have let you figure it out, since you know more about this, but I'm pretty stubborn at times. I edited all the entries to work with this version, but it wouldn't surprise me if I missed one or two of the ones with "t" or "s" as the first parameter. If you can figure out how to get it to not link to the first parameter, feel free to rework or replace my version. Chuck Entz (talk) 04:45, 24 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you for noticing a problem and fixing it >_< —suzukaze (t・c) 05:01, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

自在
When you're free could you check the non-Mandarin readings for this entry? Thanks. ---&#62; Tooironic (talk) 02:27, 28 December 2016 (UTC)


 * I think and  could do a much better and more knowledgeable job at that. —suzukaze (t・c) 04:47, 28 December 2016 (UTC)


 * OK, I'll ask them, thanks anyway. ---&#62; Tooironic (talk) 04:57, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

Otaku
The entry currently has the most information, but I see that you've  changed the link at  to point to  instead.

I don't care much which spelling is used as the lemma, but whatever the case, that lemma entry should have the full details.

If you prefer, would you be so kind as to move the relevant content from , and then edit the relevant etym section at to point the reader to ? Alternatively, would you change the links back to point to instead, and edit the  entry to point the reader to ? Either is fine by me. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 17:56, 9 January 2017 (UTC)


 * I was actually considering doing it but I guess it slipped my mind... —suzukaze (t・c) 22:27, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Translingual Braille
Feel free to discuss this, but actually I think a Braille entry like ⠁ should have separate Japanese, Korean, Thai, Greek sections... This would be consistent with Latin script entries like a. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 07:06, 13 January 2017 (UTC)


 * I'm doing it because the Braille entries currently have literally everything under Translingual except for Japanese and it stands out weirdly. If you want to revert my edits go ahead. —suzukaze (t・c) 07:07, 13 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Ok, thanks. Yes, then I'm going to revert your edits, if you don't mind. I agree with your reasoning: Japanese really is currently standing out weirdly. I've been meaning to create separate sections for the other languages in Braille entries but it's going to take some work... I've been procrastinating that project and doing other things instead. FWIW, if I remember correctly, around 2009 I created separate sections for all Latin script letters I found that were using "Translingual" to list a bunch of specific languages, like in this diff. Another thing: the Japanese section was properly categorized, but these "Thai Braille", "Greek Braille", etc. in the Translingual section don't have any categories at the moment. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 07:24, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Why?

 * A succeeding edit made it do weird things. In theory, it's back and even stronger than before now.
 * I think that (が無駄になる) is a more natural way of saying "disappeared into thin air". "Thin air" is an English idiom, and usage of 'は' in this case feels inexplicably weird. —suzukaze (t・c) 10:03, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
 * —suzukaze (t・c) 10:03, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the edits in the module. But what does muda ni natta literally mean and can Japanese people still understand kūki ni kieta as muda ni natta? – AWESOME meeos ！ *  (chōmtī hao /t͡ɕoːm˩˧.tiː˩˧ haw˦˥/) 10:07, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
 * ??? ga muda ni natta &mdash; "??? became a waste [of effort]".
 * Not sure.
 * (You don't need to ping me when writing on my own talk page. People already get notifications that they have a talk page message.)
 * —suzukaze (t・c) 10:13, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Irregular Korean pronunciation
Hi Suzukaze-c, I was talking about random things to my Korean friend, and we eventually hit a Korean word called. The thing was, I thought that this word was pronunced like haedodi, but he told me it was actually. I thought Hangul was a completely phonetic orthography for Korean! What do you think of this? – AWESOME meeos ！ *  (chōmtī hao /t͡ɕoːm˩˧.tiː˩˧ haw˦˥/) 05:28, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
 * PS I have also asked Wyang about this as well – AWESOME meeos ！  *  (chōmtī hao /t͡ɕoːm˩˧.tiː˩˧ haw˦˥/) 05:28, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Language change happens. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ —suzukaze (t・c) 05:35, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

人
Module error here due to insufficient memory — can you fix it? —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 02:09, 11 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Fixed. Wyang (talk) 02:19, 11 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Can't we add in the entry? It was removed a month ago. I tried to readd it now, but didn't do it because it would cause module errors again. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 02:23, 11 February 2017 (UTC)


 * No idea. My best opinion is that if adding it produces errors, don't add it. My weaker opinion is that it is not entirely necessary in the first place: the Translingual#References section already tells us the hexadecimal codepoint and has a link to the Unihan database. The extra information provided by the infobox is trivial ("CJK UNIFIED IDEOGRAPH-4EBA", wow!) —suzukaze (t・c) 06:24, 14 February 2017 (UTC)


 * I agree with this: "if adding it produces errors, don't add it". That said, I hope it can be readded without errors eventually, for consistency with all other character pages that use it if nothing else. Today I suggested opening up to Wikidata and moving our character information there (in this discussion: Beer parlour/2017/February). I wonder if using Wikidata would make entries like 人 lighter, because I believe we would only access the data items and properties needed in each case, as opposed to loading many modules with information about everything (and the kitchen sink).
 * If we add the charbox to 人 someday, then this will happen automatically: a link to Appendix:Unicode/CJK Unified Ideographs is going to appear, the entry will be categorized in Category:CJK Unified Ideographs block, it will show previous/next characters and it will display an additional image. I kinda like to know the codepoint name too ("CJK UNIFIED IDEOGRAPH-4EBA"), although it's easily derived from the "CJK UNIFIED IDEOGRAPH-(hexadecimal)" formula, so this one is less informative than usual anyway. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 06:47, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Japanese names in Chinese question
Hi Suzukazec, I've wondered how would Chinese speakers know how to pronounce the original Japanese names? For example, the surname is  in Mandarin. Totally different! — AWESOME meeos ！ *  (chōmtī hao /t͡ɕoːm˩˧.tiː˩˧ haw˦˥/) 05:50, 21 February 2017 (UTC)


 * They don't pronounce it the Japanese way, they pronounce it the Chinese way.
 * If a name has kana in it, they assign a theoretical kanji spelling to it and then still read it the Chinese way.
 * Sometimes you have the funny case where surnames include ' (Japanese-made kanji), in which case ' is invoked (which again allows it to be read the Chinese way). —suzukaze (t・c) 05:54, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Example: Ānbèi Jìnsān (Abe Shinzō) —suzukaze (t・c) 05:59, 21 February 2017 (UTC)


 * But they may not know the original pronunciation, in Japanese. With English, it's taken directly from Japanese with a few pronunciation modifications. But with Chinese—it's changed completely! Just saying... — AWESOME meeos ！ *  (chōmtī hao /t͡ɕoːm˩˧.tiː˩˧ haw˦˥/) 06:00, 21 February 2017 (UTC)


 * They don't need to know the original pronunciation. —suzukaze (t・c) 06:04, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Q re: gyoza
I took the "Shandong" mention from the EN term's etym, [[gyoza]]. Does that entry need editing too? Would Wyang be of any help in ferreting out the likely source dialect? ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 07:57, 23 February 2017 (UTC)


 * I only think it's too specific since there are other historical cases of k ~ j, such as in Peking (Beijing) and Chekiang (Zhejiang). Other than that my opinions on the topic are are not that strong. —suzukaze (t・c) 08:00, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

WT:AJA
Since you asked, here's the answer. Our main page for telling people how to format a Japanese entry is terribly outdated and is directly inspiring this kind of problem. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 05:41, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
 * While we're at it, a lot of these pages are pretty badly out of date. WT:AZH could use some attention too. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 05:46, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
 * How do people get there? —suzukaze (t・c) 06:28, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Probably from CAT:Japanese language, I'd guess. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 06:48, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

Rom in WP links
As a usability consideration, I've added rom in cases where the WP link term doesn't match the headword. In such cases, users do not have any information on the entry page regarding the reading of the WP link term, unless we provide it right there in the WP link.

Since ja:w:紅鶴 now exists (as a redirect), we may as well just use with no params -- possibly less confusing. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 23:49, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello
Thanks for the kind message. :D I do have a bit of knowledge of Japanese, but my onyomi and kun'yomi knowledge is mostly rudimentary at best, but I am slowly learning the ropes of all this. Thank you again, and I look forward to contributing to more in the future. Johnnysama (talk) 05:51, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Nationalities
Just so you know, nationalities are adjectives like "French" or "Swedish". Nouns for people are demonyms. —CodeCat 01:37, 17 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Ah, thank you. It seemed off to me but when I looked at Category:en:Nationalities there were entries like Siraya and Acholi and I thought my own understanding of something was wrong. —suzukaze (t・c) 01:40, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Not really, the English category has a bunch of miscategorised entries. —CodeCat 01:41, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Orz
Hi! Do you mind taking a look? I deleted it, but restored it again because of the Japanese section at orz. --Robbie SWE (talk) 18:21, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅(?)—suzukaze (t・c) 04:07, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

溫馨
You might want to take a look at this entry. ---&#62; Tooironic (talk) 04:53, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure how to word the definition since the other ones are so specific. —suzukaze (t・c) 04:57, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Appendix:Japanese verbs
Hi Suzukaze! I'm a bit unsure if this change is legit. Mind taking a look? --Robbie SWE (talk) 17:21, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Looks good to me.—suzukaze (t・c) 17:45, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Category: Hong Kong English
Hi Suzukaze! I see that you have deleted a lot of entries from this category. I'm not sure that these changes are very helpful. Very few words are absolutely only exclusive to one variety of English, especially in this day and age of information technology where boundaries are more porous that they may have been in the past. However, that does not mean that certain terms (e.g. chow fun or char siu) are not part of Hong Kong English. In fact, I would argue that most of the terms you have deleted from the list are more common/frequent there than in other varieties of English (with the exception, perhaps, of Chinese English). Char siu, for example, is a famous item of cuisine in HK, the local HKers identify this word as part of HK English, and other sources/dictionaries that treat HK English include "char siu" as part of HK English (e.g. Bolton 2003, Cummings and Wolf 2011). In addition, the evidence I have suggests that a lot of these terms originated in HK English. The general understanding/practice in the lexicography of regional varieties of English (see for example the dictionaries of Ramson 1988, Orsman 1997, Winer 2009, Silva 1996) is to include terms that originated in that variety, or that are more common there than in other varieties. Now, when someone goes to the category of HK English they do not get a link to "char siu" ... not very helpful. Can we revert your deletions? - Sonofcawdrey (talk) 04:32, 14 May 2017 (UTC)


 * I believe your understanding of the category is fundamentally wrong. It's for "Hong Kong-isms", "English words specific to the Hong Kong region", not "words more common in the Hong Kong region". A lot of the words you added (dragon boat, hong, bubble tea, Wing Chun, har gow, hoisin sauce, Mongkok) are definitely words that will not be found exclusively in Hong Kong. Dragon boats, hongs, bubble tea, and Wing Chun don't even originate in Hong Kong, and the last two may be found across the US with decent frequency. and  are a part of Cantonese cuisine and may be found in the cookbooks of people who are probably not from Hong Kong and are probably not for Hong Kongers. Mongkok is literally the only name the place has. Perhaps you are looking for Category:en:Hong Kong? (although, I believe most of the words I mentioned don't belong there, either, not being intrinsically linked to Hong Kong) —suzukaze (t・c) 04:49, 14 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Hi Suzukaze, I understand why you took them out. But, if we don't include such terms, then I think that the real problem is that the category is fundamentally misnamed. If it is a category of Hongkongisms, then it should be Category: Hongkongisms, not Hong Kong English - these aren't the same thing. - Sonofcawdrey (talk) 07:44, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * IMO there is no problem&mdash;Category:British English = Britishisms, Category:Taiwanese Chinese = Chinese terms exclusive to Taiwan, etc. "Hongkongisms" is merely an informal wording. —suzukaze (t・c) 07:51, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I added "The following are terms, or specific meanings of terms, only used in Hong Kong" to the "Hong Kong English" page to clarify matters. - Sonofcawdrey (talk) 14:02, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

拗 Mandarin readings
I was just curious about 拗 supposedly having the Mandarin readings "āo, āo, niū, yū" when other sources say they are "ǎo, ào, niù (not 100% sure about yù)". Bumm13 (talk) 08:29, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Shoot, it must have been one of those cases where the code I used to generate the entry accidentally ignored tone marks... I must figure out a way to track them down. —suzukaze (t・c) 19:57, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

ja-readings template
I just wanted to say thanks for what you did to the ja-readings template. Awesome job! thanks!! 馬太阿房 (talk) 07:42, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
 * You're welcome! User:Krun was the impetus though. —suzukaze (t・c) 21:18, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm curious to know where you got the list of jōyō kanji which designates certain jōyō readings as uncommon (the one the ja-readings template draws data from). Knowing that a reading is uncommon is useful information, so I'm glad that information is included, but I was wondering how trustworthy that information is. For example, I could be wrong, but I thought 久遠 read as くおん is more common than 久遠 read as きゅうえん but the く reading has the "Jōyō, uncommon" label. 馬太阿房 (talk) 17:12, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
 * It was extracted from the Japanese Wikipedia page. If you know of any better sources I could look at it.—suzukaze (t・c) 17:25, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Okay, I think I figured out what it means, and it is useful information. I don't think it means that it is less common, but rather that is used in just a few or maybe just one or two words (words which may themselves be considered common and also more commonly read with that reading).馬太阿房 (talk) 17:32, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

体
Please check what I did to the Japanese section under 体. Feel free to revert or change my editing as you see fit, but I thought it looked very confusing the way it was and decided to do something about it. I'm thinking maybe User:Krun had already asked you to do something about this too because I noticed that he was the one who had made the changes utilizing the ja-kanji template which doesn't work properly in cases like this. Can you maybe do something with this template and template documentation to make it more usable for cases like this? 馬太阿房 (talk) 22:28, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Hmm, I don't think anyone has discussed ja-kanji nor this particular problem (shinjitai co-opting of older characters) before. I'll think about it. —suzukaze (t・c) 00:55, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Favour
Hiya. You can see what I'm doing; converting to. But can you do a big favour for me? Please list all of the pages that use the former template. Thank you! 220.244.238.202 07:15, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:ja-pron Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:ja-accent-common—suzukaze (t・c) 07:40, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
 * ありがとうございます. 220.244.238.202 08:14, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

嗹 / 𪡏
The character is not being simplified correctly in the compounds section on its page. I presume that its simplified form, having been fairly recently added to Unicode, is missing from a simplification table in some module we have. Do you know how to fix this? There will also be several more new simplified characters missing from there, so it would probably be best to scour the most recent version of the Unihan database to get all the connections we’re missing. Edit: I noticed e.g. that the simplified form was added to the page late (2013), manually, by User:Bumm13, so I guess we’ve never had a good coverage of these later-encoded simplified forms. – Krun (talk) 00:57, 24 June 2017 (UTC)


 * The data is at Module:zh/data/st (trad→simp) and Module:zh/data/ts (trad→simp). I've considered regenerating the data from other sources online (that are better than the Unihan database), but haven't gotten around to it... —suzukaze (t・c) 01:04, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

生
Why isn't the reading なま showing the Jōyō kanji lable in the readings section? I can't figure out what the problem is. Can you fix this? 馬太阿房 (talk) 20:12, 27 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Well, I see that the issue is resolved now. I don't know if you did anything, I did anything, or if it resolved itself.馬太阿房 (talk) 20:37, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

Transclusion limits
In this you used a rather ingenious kludge to get the desired display. Unfortunately, that caused the entry to hit the template include size, and a number of templates toward the bottom of the page displayed as links to the templates themselves without any of the parameters. An IP (sort of) fixed this by selectively undoing the edit on those templates that weren't displaying, but the display is now inconsistent and less-than-optimum. I'm not sure the best way to fix this, but you may think of something I haven't (the easiest way would be to split the page, I guess). Thanks! Chuck Entz (talk) 01:40, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Damn, I hadn't noticed. I can only think of splitting the page. —suzukaze (t・c) 05:50, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

Hanzi sortkeys
I was looking at the sortkey data modules when you were experimenting with a sortkey function in Module:sandbox. Your data module is pretty huge. I wonder, had you considered splitting it by Unicode codepoint or something? Then a function could get the codepoint for a character and look up its sortkey in the correct module. And then, at least on most pages (i.e., those that have characters from fewer submodules), the function would use less memory.

Isomorphyc divided up modules used for reference templates in a similar way, though I really don't understand how it works (see Category:Reference module sharded data tables). — Eru·tuon 06:23, 29 July 2017 (UTC)


 * I have considered it. I know Module:zh does it at  but I don't understand the code. —suzukaze (t・c) 06:32, 29 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Hi Sorry I'm still away much longer than I thought.  I am trying to make regular time for Wiktionary again.  If you would like to pursue the sharding idea for data modules I can put my sharding code in GitHub or share it with some notes on my user page.  It is in Python and it is simple conceptually; and I can help with explanations or cleaning up my Python style if necessary.  Isomorphyc (talk) 18:30, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I would add that I do not really recommend sharding if you can avoid it. It is not very friendly to other editors, and is too low-tech to maintain itself cleanly, while the robot client nexus with Lua is overpowered for data storage, brittle, and not very open.  I wasn't able to find your data-intensive sort key module, but my binary hash index key is probably not appropriate; if you must shard, a user transparent key, such as stroke count, radical or initial Pinyin letter would probably be better.  Isomorphyc (talk) 19:12, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
 * The module of sortkeys is at Module:User:Suzukaze-c/zh/data/skeys. It has single characters indexed to a radical (?) and a number. I was thinking of just putting it in a bunch of separate modules organized by Unicode codepoint. I'm new to programming and I'm not totally sure how it would work, but I might be able to figure it out. — Eru·tuon 19:21, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I created a function to print out the content for the separate modules: Special:Permalink/47139321. — Eru·tuon 19:23, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
 * If you like I could share the code I used to process http://unicode.org/Public/10.0.0/ucd/Unihan.zip into Module:User:Suzukaze-c/zh/data/skeys. —suzukaze (t・c) 23:24, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Naw (if you're talking to me). I can just compile the submodules from your master module. See the current version of Module:sandbox/documentation. (I've exceeded the template include size, so it won't display in Module:sandbox. XD)
 * Only question is how big the submodules should be.
 * Right now, the module puts each range of 5000 codepoints (for instance, codepoints 13312 to 18311) in a single module, and it yields 36 submodules. (That indicates there are gaps, because there are 87870 codepoints total, and 87870/36 ≈ 2440. So the number of characters in each module probably varies.)
 * This system might be maintainable: we could keep the submodule-compiling function and your master sortkey module, and recompile the submodules if there are any changes. And because it's based on codepoints, the organization should be stable. However, I wonder if the submodules should be smaller. More work, but less likely to cause memory problems. I don't know how to figure out the actual amount of memory used by the module, though. — Eru·tuon 00:44, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Bleh. There aren't actually that many modules. There's a big skip in the actual module numbers, corresponding to a skip in codepoints. There are still only 18 modules, approximately 87870 / 5000. — Eru·tuon 01:03, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
 * (I imagine that theoretically we could exclude a good number of the characters as being unused, but the modules might be used for unanticipated purposes in the future... —suzukaze (t・c) 02:10, 30 July 2017 (UTC))
 * My experience was that 5k-50k is a good module size. One can be on the small side of the range if a single page might have a large number of different module transclusions; otherwise on the larger side.  It is necessary to optimise for the worst case scenarios, usually involving short, high traffic, multi-language pages, depending on use case.  I regularly made the mistake of not checking `Category:Pages_with_module_errors' often enough after changes for memory errors.  Good luck.  I did look over your data and I agree this is a very good candidate for sharding, and code point value is a good key.  Isomorphyc (talk) 05:23, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm starting to create the modules. I think they're on the lower end of the range that you give. That should be safer. — Eru·tuon 06:19, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Okay, I've got less than half of Module:User:Suzukaze-c/zh/data/skeys added to subpages of Module:zh-sortkey/data. You can see the results on Module:zh-sortkey. (I should probably zero-pad the pagenames....) — Eru·tuon 07:26, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

I moved the pages to zero-padded versions. So there are like 80 modules left to go. If you'd be willing to help, I'd greatly appreciate it. Just go to Module:User:Erutuon/zh/documentation and copy the module code into the appropriately numbered subpages of Module:zh-sortkey/data/. — Eru·tuon 18:07, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you for doing this; you beat me to it. Isomorphyc (talk) 21:48, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Heh, I was planning to do it by hand and ask others to help, but then I thought, This is stupid, a bot should do it, so I asked DTLHS. But I hadn't considered that you might do it with OrphicBot. — Eru·tuon 22:00, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi. I saw your work on the new format of and it looked much nicer. Just asking if it was possible to add the correspondence between the reading section and the kanji definitions for 多音字 like ? --Dine2016 (talk) 01:21, 19 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Like 樂? (which is an experiment) —suzukaze (t・c) 04:12, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
 * The Korean hanja section looks great. I'd like to wait until we have enough Japanese 漢和 coverage, though. --Dine2016 (talk) 06:03, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

By the way, what would be the criterion for inclusion of kun-readings? I've just got a copy of the three-volume 広漢和辞典, but it seemed to list too many kun-readings, some of which are only used for reading kanbun. --Dine2016 (talk) 03:01, 8 September 2017 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure... —suzukaze (t・c) 03:12, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

部
Please check your last edit there. It looks like there are at least a couple of bogus/empty items in the list (at least those seem to be hyphens, not kana- but what do I know). The reason I noticed is that it led to the automatic creation of Category:Japanese kanji with kun reading -, which auto cat doesn't know what to do with. Chuck Entz (talk) 02:58, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Darn. Thanks for noticing.—suzukaze (t・c) 03:01, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

Cáo Cāo
Objecting your proposed quick deletion, I changed it to discussion. Personal names should generally be excluded, but limited exception should be considered with specific reasons. I was just trying to delink 曹操.Jusjih (talk) 00:05, 2 September 2017 (UTC)


 * So far, the pinyin forms of deleted entries have also been deleted. Why should we keep a non-lemma form of a deleted entry? —suzukaze (t・c) 00:06, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I have a new thought at Requests for deletion.--Jusjih (talk) 03:03, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

zoosexuality
Probably, but luckily Metaknowledge just protected it. - Amgine/t &middot; e 23:31, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

月, and on'yomi of the pattern CVchi
I was curious about.

Generally speaking, I remember reading somewhere that at least some of the on'yomi ending in ち are essentially reconstructed and only found in kanji dictionaries, based on Middle Chinese readings that ended in. Meanwhile, つ ending for such readings would basically be allophone, as the alternative Japanese nativization of a final.

More specific to the entry, this would point to the がつ reading as the expected goon pair for がち. What is the basis for removing がつ from goon?

Also, is there any attestable evidence for the ごち reading in the historic record? I've had a poke in my resources and can't find anything.

Curious, ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 17:49, 20 September 2017 (UTC)


 * I don't know about the other readings but gatsu is already listed as kan'youon. —suzukaze (t・c) 22:36, 20 September 2017 (UTC)


 * If there's a case to be made for がつ being goon, it would seem to make more sense to remove the kan'yōon...? ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 01:26, 24 September 2017 (UTC)


 * I suppose so. has   though. It's either one or the other... —suzukaze (t・c) 01:28, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Rollbacker
I'm surprised you are not a rollbacker yet, considering you are patrolling and reverting many (if not most) of the recent changes to CJKV entries. Would you like to become one? It is a one-click revert function, and will make patrolling much easier. Wyang (talk) 12:40, 23 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Also, would you like to become an admin, Suzukaze? I think the community would greatly benefit from your patrol and reverting of vandalism, entry maintenance and technical skills. Wyang (talk) 12:59, 23 September 2017 (UTC)


 * rollbacker: Maybe. I must think about it more. I'm not sure I'm responsible enough.
 * admin: Never, for various personal reasons. —suzukaze (t・c) 13:51, 23 September 2017 (UTC)


 * No worries! Just let me know when you make up your mind with the rollbacking tool. I'm not sure what the correct procedure is with this, but I will find out. I think you will be the perfect candidate for it, with your invaluable patrolling edits. Wyang (talk) 14:11, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I've seen it done on the Whitelst page, just like autopatroller. @Suzukaze-c: As for responsibility: if you're responsible enough to regularly undo edits, you're responsible enough to do the same thing using the rollback tool. There are only two drawbacks: the rollback tool has a generic edit comment that you can't change, and it marks the edit as patrolled, so it disappears from Recent Changes for those who have patrolled edits filtered. The first gets you the occasional "why didn't you say what was wrong?" gripes, but you seem to good enough at dealing with that kind of thing. The second means that you need to let admins know when someone should be blocked or inappropriate content (mostly personally-identifiable details and spam/promotional content, but also some copyvios) hidden.
 * As for adminship: it's a responsibility, it changes how people deal with you, and it takes a certain temperament. It's not for everyone. We're all volunteers here, so I'm just grateful for anything anyone is willing to contribute- and you contribute a lot!!! . Chuck Entz (talk) 16:09, 23 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Also, I'm trying to cut down on obsessively looking at Recent Changes all the time. It can't be good for me. —suzukaze (t・c) 02:33, 7 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Haha, you are not the only one obsessively doing that. Wyang (talk) 05:53, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

Q re:
I was editing recently to add readings, and found myself wondering what to do about, canonically spelled. I added it to the readings list, but it's showing up as, which is incorrect. Adding the reading as い-ま-い-ましい didn't work (I didn't really expect it to, but I gave it a try), and I couldn't figure out how to override the template.

Which leads to my questions:


 * Is there an override for readings like this?
 * Or should readings like this be omitted from the list, as the kanji appears more than once?

TIA, ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 17:39, 16 October 2017 (UTC)


 * I wasn't aware of such words existing. Imaimashii doesn't seem to be listed in my (admittedly feeble) sources for readings; are you certain it should be included in the first place? —suzukaze (t・c) 04:49, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I guess that's the question. If a given kanji has a kun'yomi that includes that kanji plus kana, but the kanji appears more than once in the spelling, do we list that as a kun'yomi?  I suppose it could be analyzed as a derivative instead.  Your thoughts?  ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 18:24, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
 * No idea, but I lean towards exclude for now until there is further information. —suzukaze (t・c) 03:36, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I'll remove the reading from the kanji section at  for now.  :)  ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 15:50, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Signature
Hi there! I wonder if you could lend a little help here. I'm trying to find out what this File:Culto do chá p25.png writing says. I'm almost positive it's an author signature, saying either Yoshiki or Goto Seikodo. Thanks! NMaia (talk) 15:09, 17 October 2017 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure what it says either. Try asking someone else, I'm sorry. —suzukaze (t・c) 04:47, 18 October 2017 (UTC)


 * It reads 芳明畫 (drawn by 芳明 Yoshiaki), whoever that is. Maybe . Wyang (talk) 22:10, 23 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Wyang's guess is probably right. See also  on the EN WP, and search the page for "Yoshiaki" -- apparently he was part of this school of .  ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 22:20, 23 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Many thanks for your help! :) NMaia (talk) 23:30, 23 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Pure curiosity here, but this work cites a Gotô Seikôdô as illustrator. Does that name ring any bells? NMaia (talk) 02:49, 30 October 2017 (UTC)


 * @NMaia -- Googling for that name throws up a handful of results suggesting that Gotō Seikōdō did the engraving.  That said, while "Gōtō" is a common surname, "Seikōdō" sounds like a company rather than a personal name.  I can find online reference to  (read as Gotō Seikōdō) as a company based in Kyōto, close to Kōbe, but I'm not sure if this is the correct kanji spelling for the work you're looking at.  ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 03:26, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Template:ja-kana-mannyogana-etym
This looks pretty cool.

One concern -- the "nn" spelling. That is unusual, and unexpected as a romanization spelling. Would you object to moving this to  with one  ? ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 15:49, 23 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Not really. I think I was thinking in waapuro romaji at the time. —suzukaze (t・c) 19:29, 23 October 2017 (UTC)


 * (why not ? —suzukaze (t・c) 19:37, 23 October 2017 (UTC))
 * I'm open to including the apostrophe. I had come by the thought somewhere that apostrophes weren't allowed in template names?  If that's not an issue, sure.  ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 19:45, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
 * It seems like it's OK. en.wp has a template named . —suzukaze (t・c) 19:51, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I think whatever works in entry names also works in template names. — Eru·tuon 21:42, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Links in usage examples
"Unusual"? There's a problem with the linking within the usage example, so my preference is to link the romanized parameter so the terms within the ll template go directly to the respective language heading. For comparison: before your revision, your revision after that

Tried using on the usage itself, but there are "escaped" links or something. --POKéTalker (talk) 03:46, 1 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Ah, I see. I hadn't noticed that the #Japanese anchor was missing, my bad. I do think it is unusual to have links in the romanization instead of in the original text; I don't think I've seen it before in our entries. I believe this shouldn't be hard to fix, although I haven't had the time to fix things lately. Instead, I shall call on . —suzukaze (t・c) 03:57, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I ran the ruby through the lua function in Module:links if it contains double brackets; that sends the links to the Japanese header. Till now, the ruby was just being language-tagged and nothing more.

文語形
Hi. Any ideas about including 文語 forms for Japanese terms? Seen a lot of them in Japanese dictionaries. Perhaps the headword template of Japanese verbs and adjectives can give the classical conjugation, and the shuushikei if it is different from the modern form in hhira, and the conjugation/declension tables could be extended to include the six bases of the classical form? --Dine2016 (talk) 05:49, 8 November 2017 (UTC)


 * I think that would be fantastic. Honestly I really think our current conjugation tables aren't helpful (I certainly don't use them) and need some sort of overhaul in general. I am hesitant about working on stuff like this though; I didn't learn Japanese conventionally, and I suspect many of my views regarding grammar are really weird. Japanese grammar from the Japanese point-of-view is also not something I'm that familiar with (I think that's why I don't like the current conjugation tables). —suzukaze (t・c) 06:35, 8 November 2017 (UTC)


 * I think it would make more sense to figure out how to represent Classical Japanese, which is what 文語形 essentially is. The  parameter is intended to express the historical kana spelling of the headword; using that to show the kana spelling of something other than the headword would be very confusing. And to clarify, the historical kana is the pre-reform spelling of the same form of the same word. Modern  is spelled  in the modern spelling, and  in the pre-reform spelling, although both were pronounced as niou in recent history. Meanwhile, modern  has the same kana spelling in both modern and pre-reform orthography, and a Classical Japanese form of, identical to the modern intransitive verb -- the transitive and intransitive were differentiated by conjugation patterns. Adding the Classical to the   of modern  would be highly confusing.
 * I'm completely supportive of building in Classical Japanese content. It's just not compatible with our modern Japanese infrastructure, and it's different enough that we should probably treat it separately. We have lang code  for Old Japanese, which I'd also like to see built out at some point, but so far as I know, Classical Japanese has no ISO language code. Can we create our own code for Classical Japanese and go from there? ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 06:42, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
 * PS: I'm in agreement that our conjugation tables could use reworking. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 06:52, 8 November 2017 (UTC)


 * (Sorry for the misunderstanding in my post above. I was aware that modern form, modern form in historical spelling, and classical form are three things, and I meant to include the third, e.g. たずねる―たづねる―たづぬ, if it is different from the second, not put the third in the place of the second. I should have checked the grammar before posting it.) --Dine2016 (talk) 13:01, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

If you want a head start, and, classical verb forms of , have been created a long time ago. Do they have to be under the Old/Classical Japanese header? --POKéTalker (talk) 21:00, 9 November 2017 (UTC)


 * My 2p is on "yes" -- momitsu is listed as 四段活用, which is not modern, and momizu is described as 上二段, also not modern, as an innovation on momitsu that arose some time in the early Heian, maybe later (「平安初期以後上二段化し...」). Shogakukan's 国語大辞典 lists two spellings for momizu, and neither is listed on Weblio, suggesting that the verb is obsolete: 紅葉ず, and 黄葉ず.  OJP is sometimes delineated as everything before the Heian, which would suggest that momizu would be Classical and not Old.  Then again, w:Old Japanese says the transition was some time during the Heian, suggesting that momizu could be classed as Old Japanese.
 * That said, we only have limited infrastructure for OJP, and we don't have any infrastructure at all for Classical -- until such time as we have somewhere more specific to put momitsu and momizu, I have no strong objection if they stay under a  header for the time being.
 * My bigger concern, as relates to this whole idea of building out our Classical Japanese content, is how to delineate between Classical Japanese, and Old Japanese? If we can narrow down a term's etymological details to show that the term only arose in the Muromachi, for example, then that's clearly not OJP.  But if a term is attested in OJP, and also in later stages of the language, do we include it in all three (Old, Classical, modern)?  ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 22:18, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

精液
Why was my edit to this word reversed? Johnnysama (talk) 15:57, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
 * My guess (since I'm not Suzukaze) is that he objected to your removal of the count/noncount distinction.  in Japanese is not countable, so it has no counter.  The   text that you removed specifies that this term is not countable and has no counter.  This is useful and correct information, and your removal of this information made the entry less useful and less correct.
 * HTH, ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 20:34, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Eiríkrさんのおっしゃる通りです. —suzukaze (t・c) 04:34, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

莫
Hi Suzukaze - I see you reverted my added pron. for 莫. To tell you the truth, it was my first time at making an edit to a Chinese page, so perhaps I did not do the right thing. However, I do believe this character is pronounced mài in Hokkien in Singapore (and is apparently an old-fashioned pronunciation in Taiwan as well). Is there some way that info can be added? - Sonofcawdrey (talk) 05:15, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Read my edit summary. —suzukaze (t・c) 05:29, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Ah all is clear. Sorry to have caused you an unnecessary tidy-up.- Sonofcawdrey (talk) 07:35, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Template:bor
I noticed.

My understanding was that both  and   were slated for removal. I think  was already removed, and   is deprecated. C.f. [[Wiktionary:Beer_parlour]]. Is there a reason to use  that I've missed?

Curious, ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 21:18, 3 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Oh, huh. Man, this is confusing. —suzukaze (t・c) 21:22, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

JA い-adjective く forms
Would something like be acceptable to you? く forms are really more adverbs than adjectives, much like EN forms. What do you think? ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 22:24, 18 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Sure. (I was thinking about it too.) —suzukaze (t・c) 22:31, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

I think it needs to still be categorized as an adjective form somehow. It is an adverb, but it is ultimately derived from an adjective, similar to things like eating→eating. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 04:28, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Um, I can't agree.
 * is an adverb, and it is definitively not an adjective. Same with .  Both are ultimately derived from adjectives, but they themselves are not treated as adjectives and should not be categorized as adjectives.
 * The example is a non-sequitur:  is neither an adverb, nor derived from an adjective.  This is a manifestation of a separate grammatical construct altogether, and  is both the present participle (i.e. verb form) and gerund (i.e. noun).  By contrast,  (the one from ) is just an adverb: it is not an adjective, verb form, noun, etc. but only an adverb.
 * I would be supportive of adding an  section or additional verbiage to further clarify that this is derived from the adjective .  Would that work for you?  ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 16:53, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
 * There is definitely value in keeping the adverb category; I am not saying that "Japanese adverbs" should be removed. But ～く is used in the construction of other forms like ～くない and ～くて, so I see value in including an adjective section as well.
 * I suppose an etymology section could be added but I think that inflection of is sufficient. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 18:37, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Re: construction of other forms, granted. However, these can be analysed either as integral forms (how they're often presented to Japanese-as-a-foreign-language learners), or as adverbial ～く + additional endings.
 * I'm still unclear on what an "adjective" heading would be for. Again, this く form does not function as an adjective.  If we're viewing terms analytically and decomposing to smaller units,   + く is still adverbial, with ～ない and ～て attaching to that.  If we're looking at bigger pieces more synthetically as integral forms, then   + くて or   + くない would be the entries with their own headers, and   + く would be yet another entry, with the latter clearly -- and only -- an adverb.  It might well be translated as an adjective when going into other languages (such as when using the く form at the end of a clause as a kind of conjunction, but without the て), but that is a function of the grammar of the target language, and not a reflection of how the form functions in Japanese.
 * Also, all three of the links to Weblio describe the く form as the 連用形. This form (形) can only attach (連) to another inflecting word (用語), and the closest analog to this form of an adjective, for purposes of describing the grammar in English, is the "adverb".
 * I guess ultimately I'm confused how these would be adjectives, and I'm worried that other readers would be similarly confused. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 19:18, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
 * I thought about く + ない and く + て but I'm not really aware of scholarly analysis of grammar, and I found it hard to interpret く + て as adverb + ??.
 * I'm not saying that it is an adjective either; just that it is an inflected form of an adjective, and should be categorized as such. It's funny how you oppose an "Adjective" header because it might confuse readers as to how it is used, while I was thinking about adding "Adjective" in case readers would wonder how 赤い→赤く works. (yeah, I didn't mention this before...)
 * Maybe I'm worrying too hard about this, and maybe I'm out of my depth. You mentioned "ADJ STEM", and I realized that I would probably be more accepting of having only an adverb section (akaku) if we had entries for aka (and thus aka).
 * At this point in time I don't really care that much about it, and you know more about it than me, so I shall leave it alone.
 * (mostly-unrelated question: are things like わからない and 赤くない regarded as adjectives or verbs?) —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 02:23, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

「 」
I see you removed "Encloses a character sequence that is supposed to represent a single character" from 「 」. Do you think that sense does not actually exist, or maybe that it is not citable? I realize it's usually hard to find quotes on Google Books for punctuation marks. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 06:21, 26 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Not sure it's citable. Probably just an offhand way of noting that character A and character B are supposed to be grouped together. —suzukaze (t・c) 06:25, 26 December 2017 (UTC)


 * I remember seeing them used like this, but it's mostly online, so it's not that easy to cite. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 07:50, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Category:Han characters needing common meanings
Can this category be cleared?--2001:DA8:201:3512:55FD:63A0:5A07:6206 07:21, 26 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Not sure. I think our hanzi entries are weird, and when I think about the topic it gets complicated. —suzukaze (t・c) 07:28, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Common meanings are going to be phased out. I think this template no longer have purposes as definition should be added to appropriate language sections.--Zcreator (talk) 12:01, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Bumping it again. It is no longer preferred to add any definitions to translingual section and current contents in translingual section is being migrated. So I don't think this serves any use (rfdef template in Chinese section is enough). Also, it is three months since the proposal for deletion of this category.--Zcreator (talk) 17:39, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
 * It is certainly no longer preferred, but I worry about the quality and formatting of the pre-existing definitions, like 㣐. —suzukaze (t・c) 18:02, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
 * If it is no longer preferred, we don't need to add or request it anymore; cleaning pre-existing definitions is another thing. What I request is remove from pages in the category, which displays the text "This term needs a translation to English." in the translingual section.--Zcreator (talk) 12:15, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Ahh, sorry, I forgot what the original proposal was. Yes, I think we can probably get rid of most of them. But what do we do about characters that don't have any other language sections besides Translingual? —suzukaze (t・c) 18:05, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
 * If the character have some meaning, they should almost always be added to appropriate language sections (which may be created if needed). Having defn in translingual instead encourage people to add definitions to translingual section.--Zcreator (talk) 18:18, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
 * That's true. But then we need to think of another way to keep track of those characters. —suzukaze (t・c) 18:20, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
 * They are now tracked in Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:tracking/zh-han/translingual-only_character.--Zcreator (talk) 18:40, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Nice. —suzukaze (t・c) 18:52, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Is it ready to be cleared?--Zcreator (talk) 20:41, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I suppose so. —suzukaze (t・c) 20:48, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

せう
There'd been some discussion a while back about having entries for historical spellings. I think せう was created as part of an earlier effort towards that same end; looking at the history, I revamped it in May 2016, likely after our more-recent discussions.

If we are to have entries for historical spellings, then the entry should be cleaned up somewhat to more clearly redirect users to the modern spelling しょう.

If we are not to have entries for historical spellings, we should probably have a broader discussion on that to gain consensus, and then delink  and   spellings in headlines. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 20:10, 27 December 2017 (UTC)


 * I marked it for deletion as part of the WT:RFDO discussion for ja-kanji reading, and because it had no actual definitions. (I think people should go to Wikipedia for such detailed information on the evolution from seu > shou). I think that if it is to be kept, it should be as an entry that concisely points to shou, with some header other than Usage notes. —suzukaze (t・c) 01:27, 28 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Helpful resource → KSound link. Please refer to the link, the list of historical readings derived from Middle Chinese. From there, it is possible to list the kanji with that historical spelling/pronunciation. What do you think? How about an appendix extending the KSound? --POKéTalker (talk) 02:13, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

𡿺
Hey! Please let me know what you think of the page I made about 𡿺! Thanks for your tireless work.--Geographyinitiative (talk) 13:38, 1 January 2018 (UTC)


 * It seems like Justin has already looked at it, so I don't really have any comment other than I like your work too. —suzukaze (t・c) 03:45, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

丁丁‎
Why the reversion? It is the Chinese Wikipedia, and not just any Wikipedia, and that dot before the word on the other template looks weird to me. PseudoSkull (talk) 21:22, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
 * The dot is a bullet.
 * zh-wp is different from the normal wikipedia template, but I think it is necessary. See 中國 for an example. —suzukaze (t・c) 23:21, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Ok, that makes sense. PseudoSkull (talk) 07:07, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

𭒹
I was wondering where you got the Chinese pronunciation of 𭒹 from? Johnkn63 (talk) 04:52, 11 February 2018 (UTC)


 * It comes from the Zhonghua Zihai. —suzukaze (t・c) 06:05, 11 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Thank you very much for a quick and clear answer. I asked because only pronunciation given.Johnkn63 (talk) 09:33, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Grammar for 鬱 adjective
My references all list this as a と・たる adjective, not a な adjective. C.f. the Daijirin entry at Weblio and the Daijisen entry at Kotobank. Examples of 鬱な気分 found via Google mostly seem to be cases of 憂鬱な気分. Can you confirm usage of 鬱な where it's not part of a larger compound? ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 05:39, 19 February 2018 (UTC)


 * I wonder if it's a colloquial thing. These Google News results seem to have 鬱な気分. —suzukaze (t・c) 05:47, 19 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Thank you! I suspect this is a literary term that is now making (or has recently made?) the transition back into common vernacular use, with a grammatical change as part of that process.
 * I feel like we should note that this is also a と・たる adjective... but I don't think we have the templates for that, as classical stuff and rare grammar patterns keep getting back-burnered. :)  ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 07:06, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Reddit
Hello. You said in an edit summary at moon rune, "reddit is not a source of quotes". I am curious about why. I actually don't know much about Reddit, but I had imagined that it is something like 'alt' spaces were in usenet – a basically open forum where people share messages. Is Reddit not durably archived? or does it have in-group language norms that make it problematic for examples? Just curious. Cnilep (talk) 00:37, 15 March 2018 (UTC)


 * I don't think Reddit is durably archived. (Honestly, I think the "durably archived" criteria is out of touch with the current state of the internet...) —suzukaze (t・c) 00:51, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Reddit comments can be (and are frequently) deleted by their creators, by moderators, or by site administration. Sometimes entire communities are banned or locked off from public view. In those cases, it becomes impossible to verify that someone said something on Reddit unless recorded on another website. Now, we can (and possibly should) broaden the "durably archived" criterion, but including Reddit directly is not the way to go about it. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 02:27, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

'full=' in ja-verb-suru
Hello. The documentation at Template:ja-verb-suru/documentation says, “full= full form with the suru included ¶ This parameter is required.” It appears, though, that the template works well without that parameter. Should the documentation be changed? Cnilep (talk) 01:43, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
 * "full" doesn't exist in Module:ja-headword, the code that powers Template:ja-verb-suru. I think it is outdated documentation. —suzukaze (t・c) 02:55, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

中華人民共和國
Hi.

Do you have another source for Min Bei? --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 03:23, 17 April 2018 (UTC)


 * I personally don't, but it seems to me like nêng belongs to 人, not 人. I don't think we are in any hurry to add Min Bei pronunciation to words that we don't have information for, even if it a word like 中國. I'm not really a fan of blindly concatenating readings. —Suzukaze-c◆◆ 03:27, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
 * I got the transliteration from Min Bei incubator, apparently an enthusiast of Min Bei. The Min Bei (Jian'ou) pronunciation of 人 (nêng) is /neiŋ³³/, I don't see any discrepancy here. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 03:32, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Nêng is a reading of 人, which is corroborated by 漢字古今音資料庫 and this excerpt of Matthew in the New Testament, but it strikes me as too similar to 人.
 * Of course, it is possible that I am wrong too, and that nêng really is part of 人. —Suzukaze-c◆◆ 03:37, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
 * I can only see one Min Bei reading - "nêng" and /neiŋ³³/ is the only reading listed there under the "Dialectal data" in the expanded mode. I've added "nêng" to etymology 1. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 03:42, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Nêng is actually etymology 1. Compare other characters with the same rime (Min Bei / Min Nan): 親 (chéng / chhin), 認 (nēng / jīn). Min Bei is inland Min, not coastal Min, so it's lexically quite different from Min Nan, Min Dong, or Puxian Min. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 07:37, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Alright, thanks for clearing that up. The initial threw me off a lot. I guess I was indeed wrong :o —Suzukaze-c◆◆ 07:43, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Min Bei initials are kinda weird, but this is just a mild case. There are weirder ones, like 狗 (ě), 食 (iè) or 老 (sē). My bigger concern for 中華人民共和國 and 中國 is the fact that dô̤ng is a vernacular reading, which I can only find in 中央 at this point. I've left a message at 's page on Wikipedia, so hopefully we can get an answer on this. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 19:40, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
 * (I wonder if we can invite more editors from China by infiltrating their QQ/Wechat/whatever groups...?) —Suzukaze-c◆◆ 21:10, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
 * (I wonder if we can invite more editors from China by infiltrating their QQ/Wechat/whatever groups...?) —Suzukaze-c◆◆ 21:10, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

Katakana in ja-usex
Hello. Regarding [//en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=%E3%81%BA%E3%81%A1%E3%82%83%E3%82%93%E3%81%93&type=revision&diff=49340894&oldid=49337438 this edit], notice that without the duplicate kana the bolded word doesn't appear in bold face. At least, it doesn't in my browser. Also, タイヤ should be in katakana. It seems like the bold face works if there is カナ|かな in the template, but not if there is only one kana entry. I'm not sure if this is a technical snafu. Cnilep (talk) 03:43, 18 April 2018 (UTC)


 * I didn't notice that たいや was in hiragana orz
 * The font thing should be fixed! —Suzukaze-c◆◆ 03:53, 18 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Now the bold face looks fine. I wonder if it's a browser issue? Any road, thanks for your edits. Cnilep (talk) 04:02, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

烟店
Hello! I have created a page that has a problem I can't fix on it: 烟店. The page reads: "For pronunciation and definitions of 烟店 – see 煙店 (“[[w:Yandian, Hubei; etc.”)."

It shouldn't say "(“[[w:Yandian, Hubei; etc.”)", it should say "(“Yandian, Hubei; etc.”)" or something like that.

How can I fix this problem? Thanks for any assistance! --Geographyinitiative (talk) 01:18, 21 April 2018 (UTC)


 * It has to do with some of the code in Module:zh but I'm not sure how to fix it. —Suzukaze-c◆◆ 22:16, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
 * (In Perl notation)  apparently works. The point is to match the part after   in a way that accepts (one-or-more) not only single characters but also clusters beginning with   and ending with   so that inner pipes will be regarded as part of the cluster and skipped. --Dine2016 (talk) 06:15, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Sadly, Lua implements a crippled subset of regex they call "patterns". :( Thanks for looking at it though., any ideas? —Suzukaze-c◆◆ 19:12, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

鴯鶓 spelling
Heya, this is getting complex enough that a proper discussion thread is in order. :)

I thought I'd read somewhere about this spelling reaching JA via CMN rather than YUE. I can't find that now that I'm looking for it again, so perhaps it would actually be better to leave out any mention of which flavor of Chinese was the source.

The Mandarin connection was from the pronunciation. Modern Cantonese is quite close to one of the expected on'yomi readings, so if this were borrowed from Cantonese, we would probably expect the on'yomi. But there's no Cantonese or Japanese reason for pronouncing 鴯 as e -- only Mandarin provides any such direction.

However, I sure can't find where I'd read that. Thank you for prompting me to dig into that again. For now, would you be open to going back to ? ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 20:18, 2 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Sure.
 * I think it is fairly plausible that English became Cantonese, c.f.  and.
 * And IMO it is irrelevant anyway, since JA took the hanzi from Chinese in general, and the pronunciation from English. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 23:00, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Re: EN → ZH, no real argument there. My earlier concern was due to confusion on my part, that Jyutping ji indicated an English-y "j" more like, rather than an English-y "y" like .   would align with JA じ, as the expected on'yomi.
 * Anyway, as you point out, the ZH reading is largely irrelevant anyway, so I removed that and essentially restored your earlier version. Thank you for the sanity check.  :)  ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 19:25, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

拉洋片
I don't mind the revert, but maybe you could edit it into one, concise sentence? ---&#62; Tooironic (talk) 04:41, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
 * When I made the entry I already tried to make it short (；´Д｀) I'm not quite sure what to do with it. I'd prefer to point to Wikipedia or an English entry or something, but that doesn't seem to be an option. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 04:45, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
 * The definition given by the Taiwan MoE is also pretty long anyway. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 04:49, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

ja-headword
I'm not really up to speed on Lua, but it looks like you passed the wrong parameter to the new function. At any rate, the Japanese entries in CAT:E and the Japanese Type-1 verbs were rapidly approaching identity- so I temporarily reverted you until you have a chance to look at it. Feel free to undo my undo once fixed. Chuck Entz (talk) 05:11, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Darn. I think I've fixed it. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 05:18, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
 * The module errors are going away, at least. I wouldn't know if the code is actually doing anything... I haven't been checking CAT:E much, lately, but I seem to have picked a good time: there were a couple hundred module errors from work Wyang was doing on the Korean modules, so the Japanese ones weren't on the first page where anyone would have seen them. All the Korean ones are gone now, and half of the Japanese ones (so far). Much better. Thanks! Chuck Entz (talk) 05:54, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
 * No, thank you for remembering to check CAT:E :) —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 06:16, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

-th
My personal theory is that they just can't wait to try out their favorite small shiny objects templates and labels, and throw them in everywhere they can think of. Chuck Entz (talk) 03:44, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

ポケット and ポケモン
Of course there is no devoicing. What a silly mistake. The appropriate transcriptions should be [po̞ke̞t̚to̞] and [po̞ke̞mõ̞ɴ] respectively, and I readded the proper transcription for the latter page. I'm kind of new here so I'm still getting used to the template parameters... Sorry about that. — Lucarubis (talk) 00:16, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Make sure you understand what the parameters mean, because you also copied improper parameters to ポケモン. :p —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 00:25, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
 * I understand, but it was an accident. Sincere apologies for my utter carelessness. —Lucarubis (talk) 00:27, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
 * I've been creating more pages lately out of sheer boredom. I just hope I don't screw things up again. In the meantime, I'll be on the lookout for vandalism. —Lucarubis (talk) 00:23, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

Dungan
Sorry to bother you again, but I have one random question. Is any one here proficient in Dungan? —Lucarubis (talk) 00:23, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
 * : There's no-one here proficient in Dungan. We use dictionaries and other sources we consider reliable. So, if your edit in can't be confirmed in dictionaries or other good sources, it must be removed. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 00:28, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
 * I have a feeling the tones I provided in 韓國 are incorrect, but not the readings. I'll remove it anyway. --Lucarubis (talk) 00:30, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
 * : The trouble is, Dungan may not even have a word for Korea, other than - . --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 01:04, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

Chinese Characters for Transcribing Slavonic
Hello, I have had some questions regarding the Chinese characters for transcribing Slavonic. Do you feel it would be alright to include their pronunciation (eg. 鿦 shows pronunciation as vin, 鿚 shows pronunciation as gi, etc.)?
 * 鿚 represents gi, but I wonder if gi is actually the pronunciation? (were they read using original Slavic pronunciation, were they read using a Chinese approximation...?) (鿚 = gi is definitely important information.) —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 21:54, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

Reply
--186.88.111.3 20:51, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

Hakka pronunciations for Malaysian place names
I'm wondering where you're getting these. We have really limited support for Hakka dialects - just Sixian and Meixian. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 19:15, 17 July 2018 (UTC)


 * I stumbled across "Hakka Lessons for Malayan Students" on Google Books. I am not sure what dialect it describes though. It's not easy to figure things out from 6-line snippets... —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 19:23, 17 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Whichever it's describing is definitely not Sixian, which is only spoken in Taiwan. I've removed the reading at 新埠 for now. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 19:33, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
 * This says that it's Huizhou Hakka, which seems to be common in Malaysia. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 19:35, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Oh, cool. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 19:36, 17 July 2018 (UTC)


 * It looks like Mantaro Hashimoto says it is the Meixian dialect. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 05:21, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Use of Template:bor for on'yomi terms
I think it was you that (I noticed) first started using for the etyms of on'yomi terms. Fumiko has decided to be a dick again over at, ,. (I've blocked her for three days for abusiveness and edit warring.) I have read the documentation, and it looks to me like  could apply -- especially as we haven't differentiated the historical stages of the Japanese language.

What's your take?

‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 01:29, 24 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Hmm, was it me? I tend to not add the etymology for kango (can't be too sure...). At this very moment in time, near the end of July 2018, I think would use ja for kango???? I'm not sure though. I can be inconsistent with the things I do when I don't have a terribly strong opinion either way. bor absolutely makes sense too, and I disagree very much with Fumiko's dickish behavior. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 04:03, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Fumiko is a she? Per utramque cavernam 20:39, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
 * IRL, dunno. Trying out  returns , which apparently means that the user hasn't set any gender preferences.  That said, Fumiko is definitely a feminine name, and in a , Fumiko stated that the username was a near-translation into Japanese of their real-life name.  Based on that, I use the feminine gender when referring to this user.  If Fumiko ever states a different preference, I'm happy to follow suit.  ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 20:52, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Ok, I see. Per utramque cavernam 21:02, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Technical issue with Template:zh-see
Hey suzukaze,

I'm seeing instances of the template showing "tr=-" text for unknown reasons, sometimes after valid linked words are shown. I figured you might know more about template issues than I do. Cheers! Bumm13 (talk) 14:46, 17 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Do you have an example? —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 20:35, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Finally found it. Here at 𧈡. Bumm13 (talk) 21:34, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
 * It seems to be faulty processing of . I think I've fixed it. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 21:59, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

non-optimal
I noticed in that you are adding  for alternative forms. That itself is fine, and no concerns from me. What is a concern, however, is the confusing format and output of this template. It says,


 * See etymology on the main entry.

... which links not to the main entry, as suggested by the format, but instead to Lemmas, which I think will confuse many users. It's not immediately clear at all even what the "main entry" would be.

I'd like to propose updating to, say, take the actual "main entry" term as an argument, and output a link? For the entry, it would then look more like:



producing:


 * See the main entry at for the etymology.

Would you have any objection?

‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 20:31, 24 August 2018 (UTC)


 * I agree that the link is misleading. I guess the main entry is already linked to in the rest of the entry though. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 20:37, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia has an article on:
For 不 and a hundred other articles, I added the template zh-wp which links to Chinese wikipedia. Although the content of the 不 zh.wiki article was not really related to the senses of 不 discussed on wiktionary, I thought that 1、不 is inherently related to 不 no matter the content in the articles and 2、"Wikipedia has an article on: 不" was a factual statement. I agree with your reservations and was hesitant to add the link, but for the two reasons stated above, I added it anyway. I'm not really too concerned either way; if you don't like some of the other zh-wp's I added, let me know. I will try to follow whatever established pattern or policy on relevance that we have. Also, let me know what you think of the pics I added. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 13:12, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
 * It's not related to any of the senses on the page though... If I see a link on Wiktionary saying "Chinese Wikipedia: 不", I might expect something on negative particles, not a South African song. IMO, it looks silly. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 00:18, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
 * The point of the Wikipedia links is to provide a source for encyclopedic information that doesn't belong in a dictionary. If the Wikipedia article doesn't elaborate on what the definitions refer to, it shouldn't be linked to from the entry. Chuck Entz (talk) 03:54, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I understand your points completely. I agree the link looked silly. I see now that a link to a wikipedia article is only appropriate if the wikipedia article being linked 'elaborates on what the wiktionary definitions refer to'. I will only add these links if there is a connection between the wiktionary definitions and the content of the wikipedia article. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 11:17, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

楊葉
I could explain my rationale for not creating that page, but it would sound silly. Looks fine. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 01:25, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
 * ? It could be possible, although Wikipedia seems to be fine with 葉, and 葉 makes more sense semantically as well. I suppose it would also be normalized into 協 in simplified Chinese, as well. Being too cautious isn't bad though. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 01:29, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Audio display issue with Template:zh-pron
Not sure if you saw the ping on Discord, so I thought I'd leave you a message. Seeing as this isn't going to be dealt with any time soon, is there a stopgap measure that can be employed? Weirdly excessive spacing for some people is preferable to IPA being obscured by an audiofile for other people. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 04:02, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Module:User:Suzukaze-c/zh-pron has a "fix" but it's weird and I don't know if it works in all browsers. I suppose it could be added to the live code if people determine that it's an OK hack. I can't figure out why the original audio player thing acts so terribly. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 04:14, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
 * It works on both Chrome and Safari for me (the current template works on neither for me). I think it's a vast improvement, but you'll have to poll the Chinese editorship before going live. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 04:26, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Pinging. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 21:58, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
 * The suggested fix looks good to me. I like how compact the MC and OC readings look. It may be slightly cumbersome to click on a particular arrow to reveal its IPA reading/audio file but I think it is a good stopgap measure we can use for the time being. I suggest we put it live for a few days to see if there are any potential hiccups with it. KevinUp (talk) 00:06, 12 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Is this for the audio only or for the whole template? The non-template model at present seems a bit 單調 to me. If we want to overhaul the template, I really like this. Wyang (talk) 00:49, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Just the audio, using the around the  element. Ignore everything else. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 01:26, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Ah okay, (don't know what it will look like but) certainly, any improvement would be good. Wyang (talk) 04:55, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
 * The new model on codepen looks really nice. I hope it can interact with the "Visibility" function in the sidebar. --Dine2016 (talk) 05:04, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

✅ —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 04:55, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

拉洋片
Hi. I'm a bit confused about your edit here. I've never seen three whole sentences used as a definition in a Chinese entry before. Is there a way we can use standard formatting here? ---&#62; Tooironic (talk) 04:43, 12 September 2018 (UTC)


 * My answer is the same as last time. I'd definitely like to replace it with a short English translation (rather than an "explanation") if there was one. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 04:47, 12 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Yeah, sorry for bugging you again about it. I just happened to come across it on my watchlist. I thanked Frank for his edit. I think it's a good compromise. ---&#62; Tooironic (talk) 12:52, 18 September 2018 (UTC)


 * No worries. I like the new revision too. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 17:05, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

Trimming Google urls
I noticed you did this at [[hooker]].

What part of the link to a highlighted page is superfluous?

Also, how do I prevent the occasional accidental display to users of parts of a google url? (I don't have an example handy.)

Even a less-than-definitive answer (a rule of thumb) would be useful. Thanks in advance. DCDuring (talk) 12:57, 15 September 2018 (UTC)


 * I try deleting everything that doesn't look necessary; at hooker, I have left what appears to be
 * a book id,
 * a page number, and
 * a search query,
 * and it still works.
 * I'm not sure what you mean by "occasional display"... —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 21:13, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Accidental display would result from a space in the URL, which causes everything after the space to be interpreted as part of the caption. Normally they would be converted to %20 or + in the URL itself, but modern browsers will let you get away with nonstandard formatting, and sometimes a space will get introduced in the copy-pasting process. Chuck Entz (talk) 21:56, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I have successfully applied your heuristic at [[skeeve]] (first cite).
 * I have a live example of the "occasional display": the 1993 cite at [[skeeve]]. I recall that Ruakh once helped me with the problem, but I don't recall how. DCDuring (talk) 22:46, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Ah, that problem. The quotation marks are not being recognized as part of the URL for whatever reason, so they must be manually percent-encoded into  . Compare to the URL for the Lou Cameron quote. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 23:06, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Excellent. Thank you. I'll try to get that into my PROM. DCDuring (talk) 23:15, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

Module:ja-headword

 * ゐ、ゑ and を are a large important part of the historical kana orthography. About 200 entries were in each newly created "history spelled with" category.
 * I have not yet come up with how to track historical わ. But this does not mean ゐ、ゑ、を should not be tracked. If you don't know either, do not obstruct others.

Huhu9001 (talk) 03:24, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Maybe a start would be having the module look for a headword or pagename containing わ and historical hiragana containing は, though I assume that sometimes わ and は do not correspond so there would be false positives. (This search query gives partial results: hastemplate:"Module:ja-headword" insource:/\{\{ja-[^|}]+\|[^|}]*わ[^|}]*\|hhira=[^|}]*は/ .) — Eru·tuon 03:58, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
 * To Eru: I think that is a good idea. Maybe we can find out some methods to also track きやう　→　きょう, しやう　→　しょう, etc. simultaneously. Huhu9001 (talk) 08:20, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I've added an easy-to-test function in Module:ja-headword/sandbox and started a list of examples at Module:ja-headword/sandbox/testcases. Could you help by adding some more examples of sound changes and possible category titles? — Eru·tuon 18:26, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I'd like to point out that, without additional user-provided information, it can be impossible to programmatically determine whether a given instance of しやう etc. is an earlier spelling of a modern monophthong. For example, the kana spelling of  is now しよう, from earlier しやう.  I may be wrong, but I don't think this term was ever read as monophthong .  ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 18:50, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
 * If I understand you right, that shouldn't be an issue, because the function is comparing the modern spelling to the historical one; it can't do anything if either one is absent. — Eru·tuon 19:03, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, given the modern spelling, it should be an easy task to “parse” or “regex match” the historical spelling using a table such as . The only issue I see is when the modern and the historical differ too much, e.g. あおぐ（仰ぐ） vs. あふぐ. --Dine2016 (talk) 15:07, 25 September 2018 (UTC) [EDIT: there are also irregular changes like がくかう→がっこう、てんわう→てんのう, etc. --Dine2016 (talk) 14:58, 26 September 2018 (UTC)]
 * Thank you both, I believe that fully addresses my concern. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 16:16, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

I have worked out a code for this issue in Module:User:Huhu9001/000. You can test it like this: (no longer available). @Dine2016 @Eirikr @Erutuon Huhu9001 (talk) 14:59, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Hm, if you're confident that it works, I think it is fine. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 23:44, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi. Thanks for your work. However, I have proposed to move the historical kana spellings from headword templates to . The problem with headword templates is that you have to repeat the historical kana spelling if a word has multiple parts of speech. Centralizing spelling information makes maintenance easier and pages less error-prone. --Dine2016 (talk) 00:29, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * To Dine2016: The code is not specific to module:ja-headword. If they are moved to module:ja-spellings, it should work as well. Huhu9001 (talk) 04:50, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Care to be an administrator?
I saw a few of your subpages in the list and was surprised to discover that you were not yet an administrator. Would you like to be? - TheDaveRoss  18:14, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Not really, no. It would definitely be more convenient for me in many ways, but I'm not interested in having the title. Thank you though. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 19:42, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Go on, become one. I dare you. --Wonderfool Dec 2018 (talk) 21:51, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * You first, mate. ;) —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 22:00, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * What- you want him to delete the Main Page again? Chuck Entz (talk) 00:48, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Start the New Year right. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 01:17, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Question concerning recent 隔音符號 edit
Hello! I saw your recent edit to the 隔音符號 page in which you removed the text '1=to divide syllables' from the 'zh-forms' module. The practical effect of this change was to edit the definition of the '隔音' in '隔音符號' from 'to divide syllables' to 'soundproof; to separate syllables'. In my view, this edit seems like an obvious degradation of the page rather than an improvement, because the '隔音' in the word '隔音符號' has nothing to do with the 'soundproof' definition (as far as I am aware). In the past, User Wyang has made changes on other pages very similar to your edit on 隔音符號 that also left me utterly befuddled. I would like to ask you why you believe that this edit makes an improvement to the 隔音符號 page. My best guess is that your edit reflects a 由来已久的 wiktionary policy that I don't have a grasp on yet. Thanks for any help. Sorry to bother. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 05:12, 7 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Hm. Including "soundproof" could definitely be confusing, but I somehow like the idea of leaving zh-forms to naively show all definitions from an entry. I'm terrible at explaining things, but I think my opinion has to do with curiosity (hm, this word has multiple senses) and common sense (this word has multiple senses but it is probably "this one" anyway). I also like to avoid hardcoding things (maybe the text at 隔音符號 would become out-of-sync with and disagree with 隔音 someday). I don't think there's any official policy on this. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 05:45, 7 November 2018 (UTC)


 * I understand what you are saying, but how do you feel about the definition given for the 生 character as found in 謀生 on the 謀生 page? I will give further response later. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 09:49, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I think have been persuaded by your argument. But I think what I want is the ability to tell people which definition of 生 is being used in 謀生 with the word 'livelihood', and which meaning of 采 is being employed when 采 is used in 興高采烈 ('spirit'). (I remember doing something like this with 幅員 too.) Maybe the box above the character isn't the right place to do this- maybe it needs to be in an 'etymology' section? --Geographyinitiative (talk) 11:29, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
 * After writing the above, I had a new opinion about the nature of 隔音 in 隔音符號- it's SOP?? --Geographyinitiative (talk) 11:37, 7 November 2018 (UTC) (modified)
 * I do not treat manual glosses for individual characters as harshly since there are a lot of definitions displayed, and they are not from our entries anyway. If I have any complaints, it is that manual glosses do not immediately look any different from the usual generic glosses.
 * I think the general consensus is that zh-forms for compounds generally makes Etymology sections refundant, cf. the recent deletion of zh-compound.
 * As for verb+noun phrases, I think it is more complicated. We have entries like 喝酒 不知道 好用 etc. which are arguably SoP, but there are no spaces in Chinese 🤷 This time I really can't explain why I suppose verb+noun entries, but I do. (不+x, not so much, for now, TBH) —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 07:39, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I was not able to understand what you were saying in your first paragraph about the manual glosses and generic glosses. I think I know what those terms mean, but in my understanding, a manual gloss for an individual character would likely have only one or only a few definitions displayed (not 'a lot of definitions'), while the generic glosses would have many definitions displayed- telling you all the different meanings of the character. Therefore I couldn't understand what you meant in that paragraph.
 * In response to your second paragraph, what I mean to say is that Wyang previously liked the 'manual gloss' I added for the 生 character as it is used in 謀生, but Wyang didn't like other glosses I made that were based on analysis found in the dictionaries I look at. To me, the discussion is moot for the moment since the topic we were originally discussing was the 隔音 in 隔音符号, and I can't think of the specific examples that Wyang reverted. It was a long time ago. (Also, 'refundant' sounds like something you do over and over that is really fun, or perhaps a source of reoccurring 'funds' funny!)
 * In response to your third paragraph, I made some edits to 喝酒, 不知道 & 好用 based on five/six dictionaries that I look at a lot. I came to the preliminary conclusion that hējiǔ and hǎoyòng were non-standard or nonsensical pinyin forms (but some dictionaries had the entry '不知道', so the pinyin forms 'bùzhīdao' & 'bùzhīdào' are tolerable enough though I have not yet confirmed their existence). If you want to revert my change at 隔音 and 隔音符号 and add the meaning 'to separate syllables', that's okay with me. I think this was first time I have ever used the SoP justification to delete something; I don't know what I'm doing. I called it a justification via SoP, but it was basically as a cloak for my ulterior reason, which was that I didn't find this meaning for 隔音 in the dictionaries I was looking at when I made that edit. Sorry if any of my response here was stupid. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 03:09, 10 November 2018 (UTC)


 * stream of consciousness response/elaboration:
 * the glosses shown for characters (such as 生: "to be born; to give birth; life; to grow; student; raw") are not taken from 生 (they are from Module:zh/data/glosses)
 * "to be born; to give birth; life; to grow; student; raw" is long and vague, and I support making it more specific,
 * unlike with entries like 隔音, since the content at 隔音 is more liable to change, and any changes would not be propagated to 隔音符号
 * →I like the edit at 謀生
 * I think that it would be nice if our entries signaled to users that a manual gloss was placed in zh-forms
 * ←"an editor took the time to manually adjust the gloss"
 * →maybe if we did this, I might have greater support for adding manual glosses for "words" ("words" referring to 2 characters 以上): "a manual gloss was inserted here"→"check the original entry to see if anything is different"
 * this still would cause a discrepancy between the original entry (隔音) and the derived entry (隔音符号)
 * (now I'm interested in the theoretical meaning of "refundant" as well&hellip;&hellip;)
 * The absence of 隔音 "to separate syllables" in other dictionaries might be suspicious, but we are not under obligation to follow them :)
 * There must be documentation of the correct pinyin orthography for words/phrases(?) such as 喝酒 somewhere.
 * thinking about it a bit, I don't really support every single theoretical 1-character-verb+1-character-noun collocation that exists. I don't know what my criteria are.
 * —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 04:22, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
 * —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 04:22, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

μπαίνω
Hi — I notice that you have added emboldened μπαίνω to Module:el-translit/testcases, as plain μπαίνω is already there I wondered why. — Salt  marsh. 06:50, 3 December 2018 (UTC)


 * I noticed a few days ago while browsing Recent changes that the ⟨mp-⟩ cluster is converted to /b-/ unless within bold formatting (as in a usage example), when it is transliterated to /mp-/, which strikes me as rather inconsistent and almost certainly undesirable. Revert if the code is indeed behaving correctly... —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 07:00, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Yes, we'd love to.
Sure. If we ever meet, we'll shatter your skull, break your limbs, and incinerate the rest of your jaundice, chinky skin. ;) 2607:FB90:33D:3016:F453:7E5F:34D3:1DF0 23:40, 4 December 2018 (UTC)


 * break me daddy <3 —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 23:41, 4 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Are you on drugs, little kid? Go see your pediatrician. 2607:FB90:33D:3016:F453:7E5F:34D3:1DF0 23:44, 4 December 2018 (UTC)


 * I was going to, but the people at the hospital told me I was too old this morning 😢 —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 23:46, 4 December 2018 (UTC)


 * You sound homo. Seriously. And we bet that you have a 1-inch penis, you little Asian! 2607:FB90:33D:3016:F453:7E5F:34D3:1DF0 23:50, 4 December 2018 (UTC)


 * yeetus penis please daddy —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 23:52, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

About Fuzhou language
Thank you for telling me. I am interested in this proofreading project, but I may only be able to take a little time to do this. I try my best.

(I don't know how to express this in English...) 顺便一提，"Dictionary of the Foochow Dialect"在Commons也有PDF文件，我想知道怎么处理这个文件，才能让它像"An English-Chinese Dictionary of the Foochow Dialect"一样，被切成一页一页，并可供校对？

"Dictionary of the Foochow Dialect" is also receiving crowdsourcing digitization. I think if this project is finalized and its results can be released under the appropriate copyright agreement, Wikisource can use it. Davidzdh (talk) 06:09, 10 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Cool :) I have been working on it, but I do not know Fuzhounese, and there probably are spelling mistakes.
 * For File:Dictionary of the Foochow Dialect.pdf, you should create s:en:Index:Dictionary of the Foochow Dialect.pdf.
 * I am also aware of cs.mindong.asia, and I think that it is interesting. s:Index:English-Chinese Vocabulary of the Vernacular Or Spoken Language of Swatow.djvu was also imported from another source. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 06:18, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you for telling me! Davidzdh (talk) 10:46, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Missing italics/bold.
Thanks, A review of my efforts would also be much appreciated, as whilst I'm going by what's in entries, a second set of reviewing eyes and expertise would be appreciated.ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:12, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
 * ^^ —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 22:37, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

哇
Bonjour! I'd like to say, I think I personally haven't heard sense 1 pronounced as wā... Dokurrat (talk) 04:36, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Hm, then does  need to be revised? —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 04:44, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I'd like to ask another person to make sure. Knock knock, bonjour, What is the pronunciation(s) you think you've heard for sense 1 "wow" of 哇? Dokurrat (talk) 05:00, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Not sure. I guess I have heard wā and 哇哦. ---&#62; Tooironic (talk) 05:11, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Dokurrat (talk) 05:16, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

雪女
Sorry to hound you, but would you like to add a citation to the linked term? ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  15:09, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I might do it sometime in the future. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 19:11, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

CAO NI MA!!! ЦО НИ МА!!!
Stop the Fuerdai vandal if you can, bitch on wheels!!

富二代！ 富二代！ 富二代！

Trump supporters must die (talk) 02:49, 14 January 2019 (UTC)


 * spank me daddy —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 02:50, 14 January 2019 (UTC)


 * You're a girl? Lol Trump supporters must die (talk) 02:53, 14 January 2019 (UTC)


 * 12/f/thailand —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 02:56, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

朋友
I guess you made the changes here as the examples sentences were a few many. However, they are not "quotations" as suggested by the drop-down button, so that doesn't look right either. ---&#62; Tooironic (talk) 11:38, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Mm, indeed they are not quotations. It was for consistency though; several of the preceding usexes used  formatting. The only thing I don't like is quotations  sandwiched between usexes . —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 01:50, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

Chinese Postal romanizations
Hey- I saw that you created the Chinkiang page recently, and I was wondering what you thought of my recent spate of postal romanization edits, both in Wiktionary and Wikipedia. Thanks for any pointers. If you look at my contributions, I started doing these edits on the 29th of January. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 02:36, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I believe you should be using postal romanization instead of postal romabization, but otherwise I have no particular comments ^^ (also, I might have time to fix them myself later) —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 03:02, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I have just made that change on these pages: Gaoyou Zhenjiang. I will begin changing them all over to 'qualifier' later today. Please let me know if you develop any other concerns or have suggestions. Thanks! --Geographyinitiative (talk) 10:04, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

Re: 結婚指輪
Hello. I wanted to reach out to you, re: 結婚指輪. I fixed it. Thank you. Johnnysama (talk) 05:11, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

彼女
IPs shouldn't be removing rfv- that should be done by whoever closes and/or archives it on rfv. That's my only objection. Chuck Entz (talk) 05:05, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Mm, I see that it was indeed premature, but User:荒巻モロゾフ is not an IP, and IMO a wholesale rollback is a bit aggressive, since many improvements were made as well. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 05:10, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, I'm not IP. I wonce wrote in Requests_for_verification/Non-English that "Japanese custom don't treat ship as female." But I found lemmatized example of that in the dictionary, and checked the source of a quote in it, and wrote and translated the relevant part. Do we need someone who closes the rfv?--荒巻モロゾフ (talk) 11:32, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

some thoughts on Japanese
--Dine2016 (talk) 17:21, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Japanese entries usually have multiple etymology sections, and can only help create the first. The other etymology sections must be created manually because  hardcodes   and L3 POS headers. What about adding another parameter to make the template generate   and L4 POS headers instead?
 * From the reader's perspective, reading Japanese entries is like reading a txt or rtf file—an ocean of text and locating the information you want requires a great effort. The introduction of added visual guides on the right side and was the first step in making the structure of the page clearer. I think we can take the following additional steps:
 * Avoid a mixture of bitmap and ClearType-optimized font—change the Japanese font to something like Meiryo UI for Windows.
 * As an etymology section consists of “etymology + pronunciation + POS + inflection table”, format the pronunciation template and the inflection table as little boxes (like the Chinese and ) to make the page 灰白相間、層次分明.


 * Sorry for the late reply. It sounds reasonable to me. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 03:02, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Nice work on User:Suzukaze-c/template consistency. Here are some of my additions:
 * rom → tr
 * Some form-of templates such as supports both t and 3 while some such as  only supports 3.
 * For most languages, one parameter is enough to enter a word (e.g. ), but for Japanese, two parameters are often needed (e.g. ). This leaves different ways to place the slots of those two parameters. For example, groups parameters by word, while  groups parameters by orthography. This is why I proposed a newer citation format of Japanese words   (inspired by the format of ) to make the syntax of Japanese templates more consistent and more predictable:  and, and more in line with the general norm of one slot per word: . --Dine2016 (talk) 05:46, 16 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Added!
 * Indeed. Editing templates to add support for t would also be possible, but we really need consistency, at any rate, and sometimes one is too lazy&hellip;
 * Ah, now I like it even more :) I also wonder how we could make things nicer for Korean hanja and Vietnamese han tu. The French Wiktionary has a tradi parameter that is used for Chinese and Korean. (oddly, it seems to be present only in fr:Template:trad, and not fr:Template:lien&hellip; but maybe they also need to think about consistency!)
 * —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 04:17, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

I can't believe you contributed to GNU Unifont, a project I have been admiring since junior high :) From their website: There is only a small degree of freedom how to draw an 'm' in a grid of 8x16 pixels so that you will not be dwelling on it for hours and progress much faster. I think part of the problem with Japanese entries is that there is too much freedom on what entries can look like, so that manual tweaking eats time and hampers the parsability of the page. For example By giving up control of the finer details of the page we can automate many things :)  --Dine2016 (talk) 15:49, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Changing rom to tr clashes with 'transitivity' :( --Dine2016 (talk) 16:03, 5 June 2019 (UTC)


 * hm, but my username's been removed from the release notes. who told you _(:3」∠)_ pixel fonts are fun. I've wanted to make a decently comprehensive CJK bitmap font for a[n absurdly long] while, but I'm not smart enough _(:3」∠)_
 * I agree with 1 and 2. As for 3, I think I still prefer delegating quotation information to a second template. I do really like the short keywords, but I wonder if perhaps it could be more flexible (adding chapter, translator name, link, etc.) [The idea of choosing between ctext and Wikisource makes me uncomfortable though (；・∀・)] But perhaps, then we might as well create/use Template:R:Analects. Oh well.
 * And as for quote-song vs. manual wikiformatting: I personally use the quote- templates so that I don't have to think about formatting. We already have enough consistencies _(:3」∠)_
 * (I've wondered if we could use Template:Q for Chinese, since it already exists, but I don't think it would work.)
 * —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 16:52, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Ah, you're right. If templates could retain semantic information in html then it's definitely superior to hand-formatting the citation.
 * It seems lemmatizing common wago at kanji has some support, so is a failure _(:3」∠)_ Maybe I should move the modern & hist kana to pronunciation section, and kanji spellings to :


 * : • (tatakau)
 * ( Tokyo ) た たかう [tàtákáú] (Heiban – [0])
 * ( Tokyo ) た たかう &#8203;  [tàtákáúꜜ] (Odaka – [4])
 * IPA(key):&#32; [ta̠ta̠ka̠ɯ̟ᵝ]
 * : • (tatakafu)
 * (I googled bing searched Umbreon126 the Script Importer on UTAU Lyrics Wiki before I realized it was you ...) --Dine2016 (talk) 14:12, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Ah, I almost forgot this one: {{collapse|title=:(|

Derived terms


}}

{{collapse|title=:)|

Derived terms
}} Similarly I hope quotations can take up only one line in the source. --Dine2016 (talk) 10:10, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Lua error in Module:zh at line 404: [fill in the blank] is not a recognized language.
I'm not sure exactly what went wrong with your edits to this module, but something did. Chuck Entz (talk) 03:51, 12 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Nothing went wrong, actually. The entries were always formatted wrong, but the code didn't check. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 04:38, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
 * It's all fixed now, which was my only point in bringing it up- whatever works! Chuck Entz (talk) 06:34, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

lemma spelling of Japanese entries
--Dine2016 (talk) 07:10, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Do you think wago compounds like and  should be lemmatized at the kana spelling? I think that, on one hand, they have a greater degree of variety in spelling (either part can be written in full kana, and okurigana for nouns and verb infinitives can be omitted for brevity) so they ought to be lemmatized at the kana spelling; on the other hand, they have a relatively fixed structure compared with single wago terms, making the choice of kanji narrower and the potential spellings less competing, so they can be lemmatized at the most common (or most regular) kanji spellings with no problem.
 * Kyūjitai is a tough problem not only because (1) wago terms involve different abstract kanji (みる→観・覧) and the same abstract kanji may have different forms (観→観・觀、覧→覧・覽), creating a two-tier hierarchy (sometimes three if you take Unicode codepoints into account) and (2) the poor font support (unless you resort to a Korean font, which is closer to the Kangxi printing style, or you resort to pictures, which have to be mass imported from GlyphWiki to Wikimedia Commons), but also because we have different degrees of oldness. For example, is still an extended shinjitai with no official status (according to ‎KevinUp). Should we list spellings such as  as perfectly shinjitai or half-shin-half-kyū, given the existence of ?
 * Do you think should implicitly make the page title one of its arguments—that is, should  read   or  ? The advantage of the former is brevity, and it's also what  do (using the page title as t), and the advantage of the latter is that you won't break things while moving entries.


 * I thought that 和語 compounds might be lemmatized at the kana spelling for consistency with non-compound 和語 terms. For example, the spelling of 引き摺る is surely rarer than 引きずる.
 * We could make shinjitai the canonical kanji spelling for simplicity, regardless of historical state. We also ought to include extended shinjitai if it's common, perhaps with a short qualifier noting that it might not be official.
 * I like the former. How often would we move pages in such a way that it would need to be fixed?
 * —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 20:08, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Ya, I too thought that the direction going forward was to lemmatize 和語 at the kana spellings (although I admit to a certain amount of inertia in that regard). Has that consensus (or at least, what I'd thought was consensus) changed in the past couple months?  ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 00:13, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi. Welcome back! Progress has been slow in reaching a consensus on the new Japanese entry format. As Suzukaze puts it, "it would be a massive change, and we can't decide on the details, which is why discussions don't last" or "I think that part of the problem is that our current setup is 'alright' and Good Enough™, and other editors don't feel an urgent need to change." I have a lot of ideas about the new Japanese entry format (some of them are here), but I'm too to push for changes. --Dine2016 (talk) 02:51, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
 * It feels like we have been discussing things in multiple places, and I have been having trouble keeping track. Could we compile a single list of past discussions related to entry/template reform? —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 04:56, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Probably, but there are many unsolved issues (such as kanji and kana spellings, inflected forms, and how to present Middle / Old Japanese or whether to use unified Japanese). I'll compile a proposal to show to other Japanese editors sometime. --Dine2016 (talk) 05:33, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

I think the most urgent issue at the moment is to switch existing usages of to the inline format. The vertical metric configuration of Meiryo leaves horrible gaps between kanji and kana, and the matching is sometimes wrong:. But even with these issues fixed, (1) the kanji is still too big compared with Japanese terms without ruby, causing disharmony, and the kana too small (as Eirikr reports), making uncomfortable reading. Also, Wyang said that templates like taking up too much vertical space would discourage editors to add more examples, synonyms, etc. (2) When citing wago,  leaves no way to link to the kana spelling, put kana before kanji, or have multiple kanji spellings, etc., which is incompatible with the kana-centric approach.

As for entry/policy reform, I actually don't mind lemmatizing wago terms (especially those with stable kanji spellings) at kanji spellings if it's not because doing so would require both and  which will take up too much space. This issue ( + taking up too much space) also troubles kanji entries. I think the long-term solution is to combine the two templates into a single morphology-showing template like. --Dine2016 (talk) 15:21, 7 April 2019 (UTC)


 * (Well, if you want to combine ja-spellings and ja-kanjitab, perhaps now is a good time to think of it... —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 20:38, 10 April 2019 (UTC))


 * What about this (conceptually)?
 * Usage: . We can use a data module to automatically assert that : is a kun'yomi and provide the gloss.
 * Irregular reading types can be provided manually, e.g. . --Dine2016 (talk) 16:36, 27 April 2019 (UTC)


 * ありだね. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 06:36, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

CSS
Hi. Can you change the Japanese font to Meiryo or Meiryo UI for Windows? --Dine2016 (talk) 15:43, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
 * The Chinese font has been changed to Microsoft JhengHei/YaHei and the Korean font has been changed to Malgun Gothic. Japanese is falling behind.
 * MS PGothic has only one weight, which means that bolding (the  element) has to be achieved by an increase of font size, causing disharmony:
 * 部分的な太字
 * コード switching.
 * If we change the Japanese font to a ClearType-optimized font, we can implement the  element by a true increase in font weight:
 * 部分的な太字
 * '''コード switching

Thanks. I think many usages of should be changed to an inline format. For example, the "See also" section of should read  instead of  What do you think? --Dine2016 (talk) 02:49, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
 * 億劫 ( おっくう,  okkū )
 * だるい ( darui )
 * やる気 ( やるき,  yaruki )


 * I'd be fine with the second one if other editors prefer it as well. Perhaps adding a second form within the parentheses needs to be incorporated into Module:links itself, as I mentioned elsewhere. This would allow us to use templates like der "normally" without need for, and might be useful for languages like Korean as well (when adding hanja). —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 04:44, 6 April 2019 (UTC)


 * One additional consideration -- bolded kanji can become hard to read. I'd actually thought that was why the templates used enlargement instead of bolding.  I think any use of bold for kanji should be well-tested to ensure that the bolded characters are still legible.  Turning things into blobs of color isn't very helpful.  :)
 * Also, FWIW, the furigana in the lower "instead of" examples are so small I can't read them (laptop running Windows 10). ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 03:40, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your reply. I have a bold idea: What about changing the behavior of to output the inline format by default? This way we don't need to mass-update entries in the mainspace.
 * By the way, my personal implementation of the new (inline citation template) supports the following functions: (1) putting the kana before kanji, or having multiple kanji spellings. (2) Automatic fetching of reading when given only kanji. Therefore  gives わぎも ( 吾妹, 我妹 ,  wagimo , “my dear (woman)”, literally “my little sister”), and  gives 国際音声記号 ( こくさいおんせいきごう ,  Kokusai Onsei Kigō ), but  gives 東京 [Reading?] because there are multiple readings. I think  can be made to work like this without breaking things. Please see also  above for the new format   in addition to  . --Dine2016 (talk) 04:18, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Can't add . in zh-x 求助
Hey- just like I couldn't add a space into a Chinese example text a while back (四十埠), now I can't add a '.' into a Chinese example text. It's on the 地牛翻身 page- a '5.6' earthquake was written with a. Tshiánn-mn̄g, is there a way to fix this that you know of? To-siā. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 00:32, 4 April 2019 (UTC)


 * I used more ( &amp;#46; ), tricking zh-x into not seeing a period, but still rendering as a period. 你|nei5 gok3 dak1 jyu4 ho4? —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 00:40, 4 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Hó! --Geographyinitiative (talk) 00:47, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

The 将棋 entry
Re: the 将棋 page: I restored the pronunciation with the right hiragana for that word. My apologies, sometimes my mind tends to go on autopilot for some reason. Johnnysama (talk) 05:20, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Japanese rōmaji
Why are you changing the rōmaji definitions for the pages I am creating? The pages to which I declare the definition state the page as the proper rōmaji. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 23:06, 13 April 2019 (UTC).
 * See WT:AJA. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 00:03, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

manatee
Why did you remove my usage example? It is not only illustrative of the word's usage, but also teaches children important things about Armenia's fauna. --Vahag (talk) 15:20, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Ehh 🤷 —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 15:36, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Is it better? Are you happy now? --Vahag (talk) 15:47, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
 * 🤷 —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 15:57, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

Min Nan shurufa
Hey, sorry to bother you, but I'm tired of this ridiculous tailo input software system https://depart.moe.edu.tw/ed2400/cp.aspx?n=BB47AA61331DDAC8&s=5900082022C17E11. I want to be able to switch between input of Jiaolo, Tailo or Hanzi with the click of a button or only a few clicks, and not be forced to use Tailo pinyin and do a billion clicks to switch between Tailo and Hanzi input. I want to be able to make the little dot after the letter o without copy pasting anything. This shurufa should exist somewhere.

I know I could probably ask other people, but I wanted to ask you to see what Min Nan input software is good, what is commonly used. I saw http://taigi.fhl.net/TaigiIME/, looks promising. Who should I contact that would likely respond to such a low level question? I bet the answer is somewhere on Min Nan Wikipedia, but I don't know how/where to look or how to search for this answer.

If Min Nan Wikipedia uses Jiaolo and not Tailo, why the fuck would I want an input system that can't write Jiaolo?

Thanks for any help or suggestions

--Geographyinitiative (talk) 01:29, 24 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Mm, I don't know what other people use. I would suggest RIME, but I'm not sure if the existing Hokkien schema does what you want. It seems like you can certainly type Tai-lo and hanji, but not POJ. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 02:47, 24 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Lí hó！Just following up. I installed the program I mentioned above and it works GREAT. It doesn't force you to use Tailo- you can use POJ to type characters or just type out POJ. Consider this idealistic impossible fantasy realized. Chài-kiàn！--Geographyinitiative (talk) 07:27, 24 April 2019 (UTC)


 * RIME 大灋好. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 07:44, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

ㅿ
Are you sure ㅿ is pronounced as 'z'? There are many other theories,too. https://m.blog.naver.com/PostView.nhn?blogId=pcocv&logNo=220161779335&proxyReferer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2F B2V22BHARAT (talk) 02:56, 7 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Regardless of my opinion, Yale uses 'z'. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 03:19, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

OK. Thanks. B2V22BHARAT (talk) 03:28, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

穰發聲音: 唐音：njiÉ‘ng / njiÉ‘ĚŒng. 汉语拼音 ：rĂĄng, / rÇŽng, / rĂŠng. B2V22BHARAT (talk) 03:48, 7 May 2019 (UTC)


 * If was ng, then what was ?
 * For example, here, we find, , , ,.
 * Middle Chinese:, , , ,
 * It seems particularly strange that should be ng in.
 * —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 21:06, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

According to Wiktionary, was pronounced as ȵɨɐŋX in middle Chinese, so that's why I have put r or ng because ng is what Koreans are pronouncing for the Chinese Characters that have r phoneme in China right now. I don't know for sure how Chinese pronounced when Hunmin jeongeum was made, so that's why I have put r or ng. Do you know the exact period of Middle Chinese(eg. AD xx~ AD xx)? How I see it is that seemed to have represented 'r' phoneme both in China and Korea back in the day, but changed to ng phoneme in Korea for the ease of pronunciation like. B2V22BHARAT (talk) 08:15, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

You're right. is ng, right? Then I think it's likely that have represented r phoneme for Chinese characters. I wasn't just sure of the period of Middle Chinese. B2V22BHARAT (talk) 08:18, 28 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia pages seem to say that the Middle Chinese period ends along with the Song Dynasty, so we must look at later dialects, probably . I'm not familiar enough with /  or the history of Korean to confidently make further statements. :(
 * I note that (Korean Wikipedia: ) mentions "日 ", so perhaps  was already not  by the time that 훈민정음 and 노걸대언해 were written. Then we can guess that  might be something like, or z ~ r.
 * By the way, do you know about Google Scholar? These articles are probably better than my amateur speculation. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 08:43, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

I'm just curious.. How can z pronunciation turn into r? Do you think it's logical? I understand s--> z part as in bus(z)iness but z..>r?? questionable.. B2V22BHARAT (talk) 09:41, 28 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Ah, I'm not saying that z turned into r, but that is a sound somewhat like z or r. What do you think of rǎng or rì? —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 09:56, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

By the way, the Pinyin of 穰 is ráng, not rǎng. ráng, rì. B2V22BHARAT (talk) 11:15, 28 May 2019 (UTC) I don't hear any 'z' sound from these examples. Also, for rǎng, there's no 'z' sound, either. https://zh.dict.naver.com/#/entry/zhko/4761dd9f91724a6ab2ba5b2d2fd08d54 B2V22BHARAT (talk) 11:15, 28 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Also, in the end, r is just the letter of the Pinyin alphabet that someone chose for the consonant in 日, just like someone decided that 어 should be eo in the Revised Romanization. The actual sound in terms of phonetics is more important. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 10:00, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

So are you arguing that acutual phoneme of 穰 in China has 'z' sound in it? Can you prove me with the examples? B2V22BHARAT (talk) 11:22, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

By the way, I'm not using that site(DBpia) because I have to pay money to read the content. B2V22BHARAT (talk) 09:50, 28 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Paywalls are indeed troublesome... —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 09:56, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

Yeah I agree.. By the way, if you want to use that site, you can enroll in the Korea National Open University, which costs only 700,000 won a year. Or you can apply for a library pass from a university nearby your place if you're in Korea and use it for free. B2V22BHARAT (talk) 09:59, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

Can you show me the "actual" examples of Chinese characters that have used in the past and have sound of 'z' in China? B2V22BHARAT (talk) 11:24, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

Oh never mind.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGv2AqPUBOQ z was not pronounced as z.. it was just a symbol for r.. B2V22BHARAT (talk) 11:34, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=79&v=hJ76swEnQX4 This person is also misinterpreting the phoneme of z as z like I did.. B2V22BHARAT (talk) 11:38, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2IctK2lCm-w I made a mistake. you're right. B2V22BHARAT (talk) 11:44, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

But still, I don't understand why they have assigned phonetic symbol ʐ instead of r or ɹ on 人民日报 Rénmín Rìbào. It's kinda confusing.. https://ko.wikipedia.org/wiki/위키백과:IPA B2V22BHARAT (talk) 12:15, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

Hmmm... pretty political.. To me, it sounds more like j and z not r.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-quzRI-ha6M 5:40~ But anyway, thanks I learned something new today. B2V22BHARAT (talk) 14:31, 28 May 2019 (UTC)


 * There is actually different opinion regarding the r sound in modern Mandarin. See the footnotes at w:Help:IPA/Mandarin and Standard Chinese phonology.
 * And if you think it sounds like j, then so did ;) —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 15:03, 28 May 2019 (UTC)


 * (chiming in) There are other contexts in which and  have intersected.  One clear instance, in a very different language family, is in the Germanic languages.  In the table at w:Proto-Germanic_language, you can see that all of the Proto-Germanic ("PG" in the header) endings with final  evolved into endings with final  in Old Norse ("ON" in the header).  Consider also 🇨🇬 from 🇨🇬, or 🇨🇬 from 🇨🇬.
 * Thinking through the biomechanics of speech, is a voiced alveolar sibilant.  As the tip of the tongue moves further back along the top of the mouth, this shifts to  or a .  From there, it's very easy to shift to a  or  sound, and then a further minor shift yields the  or  of the English  sound.  Considering the mouth shapes and broadly similar points of articulation, I could easily imagine that  might have represented a sound in this same general family, perhaps closer to  or closer to, which in Chinese later evolved into the  of modern Mandarin.
 * Cheers, ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 17:28, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

Oh I see. That makes me clear now. Actually, I saw in the wikipedia page explaining z phoneme relation to r phoneme, but it was English(Norman, Latin?) so I just igonred it, but I guess it can be also applied to Asian language phenomenon as well. B2V22BHARAT (talk) 11:13, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

Middle Korean font
What are you using? I'm using http://roman.cs.pusan.ac.kr, developed by Department of Information Computer Engineering at Pusan National University(AI Research Center) It's being co-produced by Nara Infotech and advised by Lee Sang-hyeok, a professor at Seoul National University.
 * I'm using NanumBarumGothic YetHangul and NanumMyeongjo YetHangul. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 05:06, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Well, http://roman.cs.pusan.ac.kr says that Korean Romanization is a way of Romanizing Korean, and has ①'Revised Romanization of Korean' (Republic of Korea standard, Ministry of Culture and Tourism Notice No. 2000-8, 2000. 7.7) ②'McCune-Reischauer Romanization' ③'Yale Romanization', Our romanization converter follows the above three schemes.

A method used in ① and ② is transcription, which represents the standard pronunciation of Korean language, while a method used in ③ is transliteration, which does not represent sound but only letters. So "YALE DOES NOT REPRESENT PRONUNCIATION BUT ONLY LETTERS." B2V22BHARAT (talk) 05:15, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Yale is suitable for expressing the morphological structure of a word, as opposed to the McCune-Reischauer Romanization or the Revised Romanization of Korean, which focuses on making the pronunciation of the whole word similar, so Yale notation is commonly used for linguistic analysis. B2V22BHARAT (talk) 05:18, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Any reply..? B2V22BHARAT (talk) 05:48, 8 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Well, I'm not sure what your comments on Yale have to do with fonts for Old Hangul (^_^;) —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 05:50, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

You first asked me about the font. 04:38, 8 May 2019 →‎Etymology: mm, are you using the correct fonts?

You're saying that my translation is incorrect. But I'm saying that Yale itself does not consider actual pronunciation, but focus on morphological structure of a word. B2V22BHARAT (talk) 05:58, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

You said that middle Korean phonetic should follow the Yale style, so that's what I did. B2V22BHARAT (talk) 05:59, 8 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Hm, this is what I see on my computer. In Yale, 아래아 is 'o', not 'wi'. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 06:05, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

There seems to be Middle Yale Romanization(중세 예일) and Modern Yale Romanization(현대어 예일). This program(http://roman.cs.pusan.ac.kr) seems to be using Middle Yale version one. Did you notice this? B2V22BHARAT (talk) 06:11, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

OK. I think it is an error. http://roman.cs.pusan.ac.kr states that the results presented by the Roman converter are automatic through the program, so there may be an error. Please point out any errors or omissions that I made next time. I'll fix the 아래아 part. Also, if there is any good automatic middle Korean translator progarm, please give me the link. It would save our time. Thanks. B2V22BHARAT (talk) 06:18, 8 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Yes, there must be something wrong with the website. The RR of ᄋᆞ is definitely not 'twi' either. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 06:19, 8 May 2019 (UTC)


 * You're using this one, is that correct? ^^ http://asaokitan.net/tools/hangul2yale/ B2V22BHARAT (talk) 06:30, 8 May 2019 (UTC) I'll use this, too next time.


 * It is an interesting link. However, I am currently writing the romanization manually. _(：3 」∠ )_ So there might be mistakes in my text too. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 06:35, 8 May 2019 (UTC)


 * I see. You can refer to this link, too. I think it shows correct Yale romanization except for the Chinese character. B2V22BHARAT (talk) 06:47, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

李=來+子?
Hi. What do you think about this claim? that 李's phonetics derived from 來? Because there was no source behind this argument, I have put a rfv on this claim.. Do you think you can back up this claim? B2V22BHARAT (talk) 10:56, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

I think this claim is plausible because of this reason: 李 is read 'li' and 來 is read 'lai'. So they're similar. However, in 木(mu) and 子(zi), there is no l sound.. so I think Wyang has a point, but just no source. Probably he read it from somewhere. It's unfortunate that he left. B2V22BHARAT (talk) 11:02, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

It's solved. taught me where the source came from. B2V22BHARAT (talk) 12:10, 9 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Also, you should keep in mind that Chinese pronunciation has changed a lot over time. 子 was not always 'zi'. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 16:23, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Also, you should keep in mind that Chinese pronunciation has changed a lot over time. 子 was not always 'zi'. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 16:23, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Oh as long as it does not contain l sound, it doesn't matter.. I was mostly interested in the 木(tree) part. B2V22BHARAT (talk) 17:03, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

What is m okm
. Do I need to use this format for middle Korean? Please explain. Thanks in advance. B2V22BHARAT (talk) 06:49, 3 June 2019 (UTC)


 * is Template:m. m is like l, except l is used in L ists (like ). m is for M entions of words (like inside   paragraphs).
 * is Middle Korean. ( is Japanese,   is English, etc.)
 * —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 06:55, 3 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Thanks. B2V22BHARAT (talk) 07:03, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

Thanks
Hello- I just want to say thanks for your years of dedication to this project. I'm sorry that I have come in conflict with you at various points. I know that you are a wise person and I thank you for the help you have given me as well as the criticism. I may seem erratic at times, but I will try to keep it to a minimum and do useful editing. Vigorous debate will increase the quality of the dictionary, not decrease it. Keep up your good work and keep fighting anything I do you think is wrong. Thanks again for your time and work. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 05:04, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

異形詞 example
Hello again- once again, sorry for causing problems. Anyway, because I am a doofus, I don't know how to add a dash (-) in the Mandarin Hanyu Pinyin for the example given on the 異形詞 page. The reason I want to put a dash between "Dì" and "yī" is that adding a dash there not only conforms to the way we write the pinyin in zh-pron on the page, it also conforms to normative practice for documents like this (for example: the first page of   has a dash between "DI" and "ER"). I'm asking you because you have helped me with similar pinyin-related problems in the past. If you can help me this one time, I will add the example to the Template:zh-x page so that I don't have to ask you again in the future. If you don't know, I may need to go to the tea room. I thought I would ask you first. Thanks for any help. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 10:47, 16 June 2019 (UTC)


 * I don't have a workaround for this issue. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 23:53, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

Duplicate arguments
Thank you for helping out with these. :) —Rua (mew) 10:30, 20 June 2019 (UTC)


 * No problem! —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 10:33, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

Rendering issues
Normally, for compounds in Traditional Chinese, a sans-serif font should be rendered in the page heading, while a serif font should be rendered in the heading in its corresponding Simplified Chinese page (e.g. vs ). However, I've noticed the simplified font shows up in the headings of and, at least when using a computer. I'm not sure if it's a client-side problem, or just a bug with Wiktionary. Can you suggest a way to fix it and get the Traditional Chinese font to be rendered? Thanks a lot. —RcAlex36 (talk) 14:59, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
 * You forgot the templates under the part-of-speech headers. They produce code that modifies the page header. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 01:08, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you! —RcAlex36 (talk) 03:44, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

女真文字の表記について
こんにちは、MiiCiiです、女真文字のリンクをラテン文字にリダイレクトされる時に( is Private Use Unicode. on my machine it looks like 아ᇫ)と説明をなされて、心より感謝いたします. 言われてみれば、女真文字は確かにハングルに似てますね. 女真語を研究するときに、女真文字は不可欠だといえます. 例えば、金朝の大定二十五年(1185)にツングース諸語に属す言語を初めて文字で記録した『大金徳勝陀頌碑』、明朝の永楽十一年(1413)の『永寧寺碑』や金啓孮氏が執筆した『女真語辞典』などです. そして、女真文字をラテン文字と表記することを推薦します. こう編集してもよろしいでしょうか.

Etymology
（略）

Numeral
duwin (Jurchen script: ) [※カッコを付けて、女真文字であることを説明した上、を入力する. 「Jurchen script」には英語版ウィキペディアのリンクを付ける. ]

1.four (4) MiiCii (talk) 09:38, 8 July 2019 (UTC)


 * こんにちは. えーと、「女真文字がハングルに似ている」ということではなくて「 という文字の字形は私用面の文字である、つまり、フォントごとに異なる」ということです. そしてMiiCiiさん側ではちゃんと女真文字に見えるでしょう. 女真文字は未だUnicodeでは収録されていないようですから仕方なくラテン文字の転写で命名した方が良いと思います. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 10:02, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
 * なお、見出し語に画像を置くことも可能です. エジプト語はUnicodeがいまいちとされているためそうしています（rḏj ḥr wꜣt）. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 10:08, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

Sorry
I understand that my perspective is not generally accepted and I can take a good ribbing. You are a great editor and I'm not worthy to edit on the website. I'm trying to explore what this website could be if our world were not as evil as it is- please be patient with me. I'm sharing my wacky perspective. You keep doing you man. You are truly awesome. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 23:01, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

collapsing in mobile
Hi. Do you know how to push for making collapsing work in mobile view? If we can't make table collapsing work in mobile, maybe we can use the "NavFrame" framework instead, hmm…

 --Dine2016 (talk) 11:39, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Mandarin
 * (Standard)
 * (Pinyin) : nǐ hǎo
 * (Zhuyin) : ㄋㄧˇ ㄏㄠˇ
 * (Dungan, Cyrillic) : ни хо (ni ho, III-III)
 * Cantonese (Jyutping) : <span style="font-family: Consolas, monospace;">nei5 hou2
 * Hakka (Sixian, PFS) : <span style="font-family: Consolas, monospace;">ngì-hó / nì-hó / ǹ-hó / ǹg-hó
 * Min Dong (BUC) : <span style="font-family: Consolas, monospace;">nṳ̄ hō̤
 * Min Nan
 * (Hokkien, POJ) : <span style="font-family: Consolas, monospace;">lí hó / lí hó / lír hó / lú hó
 * (Teochew, Peng'im) : <span style="font-family: Consolas, monospace;">le2 ho2 / lu2 ho2
 * Mandarin
 * (Standard Chinese) <abbr title="Add Mandarin homophones (click on this if and only if you know what you are doing!)"> [//en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Module%3Azh%2Fdata%2Fcmn-hom&action=edit +]
 * Pinyin : <span class="form-of pinyin-ts-form-of" lang="cmn" style="font-family: Consolas, monospace;">nǐ hǎo [Phonetic: ní hǎo]
 * Zhuyin : ㄋㄧˇ ㄏㄠˇ
 * Gwoyeu Romatzyh : <tt>nii hao</tt>
 * Tongyong Pinyin : <tt>nǐ hǎo</tt>
 * IPA (key) : /ni²¹⁴⁻³⁵ xɑʊ̯²¹⁴⁻²¹⁽⁴⁾/
 * [[File:Zh nǐ hǎo.ogg]]
 * (Dungan)
 * Cyrillic : <span style="font-family: Consolas, monospace;">ни хо (ni ho, III-III)
 * IPA (key) : /niː⁴⁴ xɔː⁴⁴/
 * (Note: Dungan pronunciation is currently experimental and may be inaccurate.)
 * Cantonese
 * (Standard Cantonese, Guangzhou)
 * Jyutping : <span style="font-family: Consolas, monospace;">nei5 hou2
 * Yale : <span style="font-family: Consolas, monospace;">néih hóu
 * Cantonese Pinyin : <span style="font-family: Consolas, monospace;">nei5 hou2
 * Guangdong Romanization : <span style="font-family: Consolas, monospace;">néi5 hou2
 * IPA (key) : /nei̯¹³ hou̯³⁵/
 * [[File:zh-yue-你好.opus]]
 * Homophones :
 * Hakka
 * (Northern Sixian, incl. Miaoli)
 * Pha̍k-fa-sṳ : <span style="font-family: Consolas, monospace;">ngì-hó / nì-hó / ǹ-hó
 * Hakka Romanization System : <span style="font-family: Consolas, monospace;">ngiˇ ho` / niˇ ho` / nˇ ho`
 * Hagfa Pinyim : <span style="font-family: Consolas, monospace;">ngi2 ho3 / ni2 ho3 / n2 ho3
 * IPA : /ɲi¹¹ ho³¹/, /ni¹¹ ho³¹/, /n¹¹ ho³¹/
 * (Southern Sixian, incl. Meinong)
 * Pha̍k-fa-sṳ : <span style="font-family: Consolas, monospace;">ngì-hó / ǹg-hó / ǹ-hó
 * Hakka Romanization System : <span style="font-family: Consolas, monospace;">ngiˇ ho` / ngˇ ho` / nˇ ho`
 * Hagfa Pinyim : <span style="font-family: Consolas, monospace;">ngi2 ho3 / ng2 ho3 / n2 ho3
 * IPA : /ɲi¹¹ ho³¹/, /ŋ̍¹¹ ho³¹/, /n¹¹ ho³¹/
 * Min Dong
 * (Fuzhou)
 * Bàng-uâ-cê : <span style="font-family: Consolas, monospace;">nṳ̄ hō̤
 * IPA (key) : /nˡy³³ ho³³/
 * Min Nan
 * (Hokkien: Xiamen, Zhangzhou, Kaohsiung)
 * Pe̍h-ōe-jī : <span style="font-family: Consolas, monospace;">lí hó
 * Tâi-lô : <span style="font-family: Consolas, monospace;">lí hó
 * Phofsit Daibuun : <span style="font-family: Consolas, monospace;">lie hoir
 * IPA (Kaohsiung) : /li⁴¹⁻⁴⁴ hɤ⁴¹/
 * IPA (Xiamen, Zhangzhou) : /li⁵³⁻⁴⁴ ho⁵³/
 * (Hokkien: Jinjiang, Philippines)
 * Pe̍h-ōe-jī : <span style="font-family: Consolas, monospace;">lí hó
 * Tâi-lô : <span style="font-family: Consolas, monospace;">lí hó
 * Phofsit Daibuun : <span style="font-family: Consolas, monospace;">lie hoir
 * IPA (Jinjiang, Philippines) : /li⁵⁵⁴ ho⁵⁵⁴/
 * (Hokkien: Quanzhou)
 * Pe̍h-ōe-jī : <span style="font-family: Consolas, monospace;">lír hó
 * Tâi-lô : <span style="font-family: Consolas, monospace;">lír hó
 * IPA (Quanzhou) : /lɯ⁵⁵⁴ ho⁵⁵⁴/
 * (Hokkien: Taipei)
 * Pe̍h-ōe-jī : <span style="font-family: Consolas, monospace;">lú hó
 * Tâi-lô : <span style="font-family: Consolas, monospace;">lú hó
 * Phofsit Daibuun : <span style="font-family: Consolas, monospace;">luo hoir
 * IPA (Taipei) : /lu⁵³⁻⁴⁴ ho⁵³/
 * (Teochew)
 * Peng'im : <span style="font-family: Consolas, monospace;">le2 ho2 / lu2 ho2
 * Pe̍h-ōe-jī-like : <span style="font-family: Consolas, monospace;">lṳ́ hó / lú hó
 * IPA (key) : /lɯ⁵²⁻³⁵ ho⁵²/, /lu⁵²⁻³⁵ ho⁵²⁻²¹/


 * WT:GP?
 * I wonder why Wikimedia personally hasn't done anything about . —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 05:38, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks, but it's been proposed before :) I heard that table collapsing wasn't implemented in mobile view because it would require sending extra JS to mobile users (and cost more data/money).
 * In the meanwhile, what about switching to NavFrame as shown above? The advantage is that audio now works properly (and can be moved to the collapsed part). The disadvantage is that we need extra CSS to undo the default style of NavFrame (e.g. gray background, smaller font, bolding of title, etc.) --Dine2016 (talk) 06:54, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Maybe feelings have changed since 2012. But personally I wonder about T31118. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 00:17, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

TOA-CAH-SOH
Hey. We're phasing out the headers "abbreviation", "initialism" and "acronym". Please give this a different part of speech. Phrase? --Mélange a trois (talk) 21:08, 2 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Tea_room/2019/August hasn't come to a decision, and I don't know what would be good either... —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 01:16, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/2A00:23C6:A002:AB01:56A:6BDF:F213:EBAA
This may have fallen through the cracks due to everyone being somewhere else over the weekend. I don't know that these are wrong, but based on geolocation (England) and the fact that they can't spell basic English ("earthan"? Really?), I suspect that they've somehow managed to get something wrong- probably the definitions at the very least. Chuck Entz (talk) 06:23, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

your revert at 刷
What do we do in this situation, when extra information is added to the translation of a usage example that is not present in the source? If it's not a gloss, how do we format that? Surely brackets are not enough. ---&#62; Tooironic (talk) 02:35, 14 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Sometimes I use qualifier, but mostly I just use plain brackets. gloss doesn't feel semantically correct though. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 03:02, 14 September 2019 (UTC)
 * So in what situations should we use qualifier, and in what situations should be use gloss? ---&#62; Tooironic (talk) 00:42, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I guess the template names are self-explanatory. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 05:26, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 03:06, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
 * A general-purpose template for additional information? --Dine2016 (talk) 04:26, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

acceleration template
On Wyang's last talk page (which got deleted), I mentioned the possibility of having some scripts that allow editors to edit the data model of an entry directly, by parsing the wikicode of the entry to get the data model, applying the changes, and encoding the data model again before saving the page. The assist code in translation tables on English entries may be considered an example of this. I recently discovered that template substitution can do this too.

The key observation is that when a substituting template reads the content of the current page, it reads the current version rather than the newly-saved version. As a result, one can write a substituting template that just returns. Then replacing the whole content of any entry with this template does not change the entry. If the template only returns the Japanese section of, then substituting the Japanese section of any entry (which is faster with AjaxEdit) does not change anything.

Now, make the template modify the source code after fetching it and before returning it, and you get a more efficient way to modify entries ("Ædit", Ctrl + A, Ctrl + V, save). I've used this quick method to add pronunciation sections and to entries. If the same method is used to accelerate new entries (e.g. drop-in replacement of ), it might be able to automatically number the new etymology section (and when the new section is, rename the older   to   and advance the level of subsequent sections by one), add multiple readings at once, as well as automatically handling   sections.

(Of course JS forms are better, but I haven't learned JS yet.) --Dine2016 (talk) 07:53, 17 September 2019 (UTC)


 * It sounds good to me.
 * It reminds me that I have also been thinking of a way to extract data from entries recently. Instead of using regex on raw wikitext to (for example) extract zh-pron, perhaps one could (1), and (2) use.
 * extract:zh-pron would be a template that reformats the parameters of zh-pron in a way that makes Lua processing easier. After  is applied, the results of extract:zh-pron should be easier to handle than raw wikitext.
 * I have't tried to implement this yet, though. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 00:45, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Good idea. I had similar ideas when trying to improve the  of Module:zh: instead of using patterns to extract the 2 or t parameter of the templates in definition lines, change the templates to corresponding "selectors" that returns its second or t parameter and  . I was probably inspired by TeX macros. --Dine2016 (talk) 08:34, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

托頭
Heya. Just thought you should know you forgot to add the simplified form at this entry. ---&#62; Tooironic (talk) 02:39, 20 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Yah, sometimes I don't bother to do it right away and do it while tidying up "entries with uncreated simplified forms". I probably shouldn't be leaving the "uncreated" messages on the entry though 🙃 —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 02:50, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

Reply to your question on 化学量論
Yes, actually. As you can see from the Babel template on my user page, I have a basic understanding of the Japanese language. I know enough Japanese to get around (for travel), and I can read simple stories, but not so much for newspapers or novels, etc. I know all the Hiragana and Katakana. I also recognize the meaning of most kanji (they're not too different from Chinese characters), even if I have doubts about their pronunciation. And whenever in doubt, it's fairly easy for me to consult a Japanese-Chinese dictionary. ωικιωαrrιor ᑫᑫ1ᑫ 11:28, 28 October 2019 (UTC)


 * then tell me the significance of the changes to the pronunciation section in —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 14:54, 28 October 2019 (UTC)


 * There are several different ways to pronounce Japanese kanji. Go-on pronunciation is based on the Wu dialect of Chinese. Kan-on is based on the dialect spoken in Chang'an, the capital of the Tang Dynasty. Tō-on is based on Chinese pronunciation during the Song Dynasty. Kun'yomi pronunciation is the native pronunciation of a kanji, not borrowed from Chinese. Finally, Nanori pronunciations are used mostly in personal names. ωικιωαrrιor ᑫᑫ1ᑫ 18:23, 29 October 2019 (UTC)


 * and the rest of it is? —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 19:11, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

reply to email
?

By the way I wonder if there can be some way to mark romanizations for indexing, e.g. . Then MediaWiki can compile indexes like pinyin, jyutping, etc. semi-automatically. It's similar to how you can search derivatives and compounds in bold type in the midst of an entry in online dictionaries like the OED. --Dine2016 (talk) 02:10, 31 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Insource works but isn't practical :/
 * MediaWiki was not meant for such things :D —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 02:18, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

Japanese Foreign Word of the Day nominations
There are many Japanese terms nominated for Foreign Word of the Day, but most of them aren't ready yet. The majority of those only lack a citation. Could you perhaps update one of these nominations once in a while? ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  13:52, 22 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Maybe someday. Probably not soon. Sorry. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 06:28, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

JA koshi
Curious about. I'm not opposed, just curious as to your reason for moving the lemma from to.

I'd thought the proposal to lemmatize wago at the kana spellings had fizzled. With User:Dine2016's invention of and, the technical need for doing so was somewhat lessened.

Also, if you're lemmatizing at, I'm a bit confused that etyms 2, 3, and 4 don't contain much of anything, yet also don't use ? That seems ... suboptimal, and poor usability.

Cheers, ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 23:26, 16 December 2019 (UTC)


 * My understanding of matters is that it's not straight out banned, is it? I think I prefer it this way.
 * As for 2/3/4, they didn't have a lot of content in the first place... —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 01:44, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Devil's advocate: Rather than wasting time in endless debates like this, why not move to EDICT where lemmatization is not an issue at all, and return when Wiktionary acquires Wikidata support? --Dine2016 (talk) 03:08, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Eh, I think I like Wiktionary better. Usage examples and whatever. Searching and entry layout have problems, but it's not enough to drive me away. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 03:57, 17 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Also, combining entries like 望む 臨む > のぞむ and 沸く 湧く > わく makes me feel Smart™. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 05:21, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I totally agree about のぞむ. :)  こし caught my eye as the body part generally just has the one kanji spelling,.
 * I'm not particularly worried about where things live. I just want to understand what I see other JA editors doing, so I can gauge if I should shift my own habits.  :)
 * Re: Wikidata, I've watched the discussions for years, and the devs and editors for Wikidata seem to have no clear understanding of the kinds of multilingual lexicographical support and data normalization that would be required for a real Wikidata — every-language's-Wiktionary integration, in the kinds of complete terms that have been proposed in the past. I actually hold no hope of this happening.  Not just in the near term, but at all.
 * In certain limited fashions, Wikidata could be used non-dysfunctionally in various Wiktionaries, such as for storing and sharing attributes of a given headword that don't require long-form explanations in the language of that Wiktionary (i.e. localized strings). These attributes could include:
 * Headword -- Just the headwords themselves. Whether or not a given Wiktionary builds out an entry for that headword is (potentially) orthogonal to whether a headword is listed in Wikidata.  For instance, some Wiktionary editor communities might view certain headwords as SOP, whereas others might not.
 * Headword POS -- However, even this might be contentious. How does one treat POS for terms in vastly different languages?  What is the Japanese POS  called in English?  In Finnish?  In Swahili?  Does that change over time as the editor community changes?  How easy is it to change the POS label for that term's type, and that Wiktionary's user language?  Is that localized label identical to some other localized POS label in that user language?  For instance, the EN Wiktionary community has called  different things over the years.  Most recently, we appear to be gradually coalescing around calling these "adjectives", identical labeling in English for the  POS, where we specify the differences in the inflection tables.
 * Synonyms / Antonyms -- This may be more straightforward. However, specifying which synonym or antonym applies to which sense(s) of a given term could require localized text, which gets complicated.
 * Alternative forms -- Perhaps the least bound by any localization issues of the individual Wiktionaries.
 * Pronunciation, at least for IPA -- Also presumably not bound by localization issues, aside from any explanatory remarks, or regional or other labels.
 * ... other attributes escape me at the moment. All other things I can think of are very localization-specific, which Wikidata cannot easily support -- if ever.
 * Anyway, back to the issue at, I'll have a go later at reworking etyms 2, 3, and 4; the current state just bothers me. :)  ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 18:26, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
 * We're already lagging behind the editors of EDICT in terms of efficiency. Their entry layout makes them advance very fast. If we want to catch up, we must fundamentally transform our entry layout. For example, must be eliminated (rather than improved, which is why I'm reluctant to add a label system to the alt parameter) in favor of a morpheme template like, and the inflectional templates must be eliminated (rather than unified) in favor of  generating inflections. These changes would make the source of entries more Wikidata-like.
 * Once they are made, we can surpass EDICT in some other aspects, for example by covering all stages of Japanese (including Old Japanese) under a single ==Japanese== header (note: this does not mean ==Old Japanese== and its layout would go). We can also provide both 学校文法 and 日本語教育文法 info to English readers to help learners know their difference at an early stage. There are many more things we can do better than EDICT with the current template/module system, but unfortunately we're lacking a Wyang for Japanese (i.e. a Unified Japanese plan and technical resources).

What I expect from JA wikt:

活用

 * 国文法： ラ行五段活用 はし-る            [表示]
 * 形態論： 子音語幹動詞（グループⅠ） hasir- [表示]
 * BTW: If "infinitive" is unacceptable as a label for 連用形, what about "V-i" and "A-ku"? They are pretty self-evident, but most importantly they eliminate the need of "", which is both tedious to type and tedious to read. --Dine2016 (talk) 09:00, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
 * One important consideration in comparing Wiktionary + Wikidata vs. EDICT is that EDICT is only targeting only English and Japanese readers, and only terms in English and Japanese, whereas Wiktionary and Wikidata purport to target pretty much everyone, supporting readers of all languages, and all terms in all languages (in theory, at least). The latter setup is incredibly more complicated, in ways that the Wikidata promoters haven't fully recognized, if past threads are any indication.
 * For the alternative analyses in conjugation, effectively kana-based for the 国文法 vs. phonetics-based for the 日本語教育文法, I'm all for including both. However, re:, I'm confused why we'd have a pronunciation template generate inflections.  That seems very strange to me.  I think we'd be much better off creating something new with a different, and more purpose-oriented, name, rather than reusing  and adding lots of non-pronunciation stuff to it.  I have no objection to reusing the code from , but I think the name needs to be something distinct and clearly related to what it does.  There's also the problem that, currently at least, the pronunciation is supposed to come above the senses, while the inflection is supposed to come below the senses.  I don't see a way for a single template to handle this, unless it's supposed to also contain the senses -- which just seems messy and hard to work with.
 * Re: 連用形, I confess I don't like the super-short notation you propose. It actually comes across to me as obtuse and unclear, and even harder for users who may be less accustomed to this kind of thing.  While such shortening might make sense for print dictionaries where space is at a premium, and aggressive abbreviation is the norm, I think it presents poor usability and a high barrier to entry, neither of which should we emulate.  It's also inaccurate, as verbs in the 連用形 don't always end in -i (c.f. 下二段 and 下一段), and adjectives in the 連用形 don't always end in -ku (c.f. 形容動詞).  There are also things that technically are neither verbs nor adjectives that have a 連用形, such as auxiliaries.
 * I don't find the "" notation particularly tedious to read, but I take your point that you and others may. (Input is easily enough dealt with using edittools and other approaches.)  I wish we could come up with a sensible English term that fits the same cognitive space.  For adjectives, the 連用形 is pretty clearly an adverb, so "adverbial" is a good fit.  But that doesn't work so well with verbs; the 連用形 here is sometimes functionally similar to an adverb, as when a clause ends in a verb in the 連用形, or when combining verbs into a compound-verb structure like 入れ込む, but then 連用形 verb forms used as nouns clearly aren't adverbial.  Or perhaps we just use "ren'yōkei" and link to the entry to explain what this is?  I'm loath to require users to click to some other page to understand things; perhaps we could create a simple template that plops in something like:
 * <abbr title="Continuative or stem form for verbs, adverb for adjectives: click to see a fuller explanation.">ren'yōkei 
 * If the main entry is the wrong place for a longer explanation, we could find or create some other glossary or appendix page.
 * While EDICT data may be easier to input, their user interface is ... not so good. For instance, have a look at this search for the English word "egg".  We don't get an entry page, instead we get a paged list of everything that includes the string "egg".  The expected simple translation  isn't shown at first; I had to click through to the 11th page of matches to find.
 * I vastly prefer our presentation, and presentation capabilities. :)
 * Cheers, ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 19:51, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
 * While EDICT data may be easier to input, their user interface is ... not so good. For instance, have a look at this search for the English word "egg".  We don't get an entry page, instead we get a paged list of everything that includes the string "egg".  The expected simple translation  isn't shown at first; I had to click through to the 11th page of matches to find.
 * I vastly prefer our presentation, and presentation capabilities. :)
 * Cheers, ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 19:51, 18 December 2019 (UTC)


 * (Well, Wiktionary searching isn't any better... —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 02:07, 19 December 2019 (UTC))
 * No, not when searching that way. But if one searches for just "egg", or goes to the  entry directly, one gets a list of translations -- which leads directly to the 🇨🇬 entry.  That's not possible using EDICT, as best I can tell.  ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 22:06, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

JA 師走 with the shihasu reading
Re:, it's not so much a synonym as just a (slightly) different reading. More like vs., that kind of thing. It looks like added Etym 2. Looking at the entry now, since both pronunciations are current, have the exact same pitch accent and exact same senses, I'd be tempted to collapse these into one etym and add an explanatory note about the は vs. わ pronunciation. Any strong opinions? ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 18:14, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

わめくｊ
Typo? Chuck Entz (talk) 04:25, 23 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Yeah. I left a request for help on the Wiktionary Discord server, hoping that someone would fix it before you found it :p —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 04:28, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I put the poor page out of its misery. — Eru·tuon 04:41, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

餃子 (yum!)
Heya, re:, I'd deliberately used as putting them in the headword template currently results in this confusing mess:

<blockquote style="border:1px solid gray;padding:4px;margin-left:2em;"> <strong class="Jpan headword" lang="ja"> 餃子<rp> (</rp><rt>ぎょうざ</rt><rp>)</rp> or <strong class="Jpan headword" lang="ja"> 餃子<rp> (</rp><rt>ギョウザ</rt><rp>)</rp>  or <strong class="Jpan headword" lang="ja"> 餃子<rp> (</rp><rt>ギョーザ</rt><rp>)</rp>  • ( gyōza )

From the reader's point of view, we have three identical kanji representations, with tiny ruby that differ not in reading, but solely in choice of kana. What we want to make clear is that and  are alternative forms, which  currently does much better than the headword templates.

If you can fix the headline code, that'd be great! Barring that, though, I think is the way to go. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 19:38, 30 January 2020 (UTC)


 * I don't have any particular opinions. ? —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 22:55, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
 * The fact that there are three headwords but one romaji leaves the reader no doubt that they are orthographical variants. That said, I have no problem moving the kana to somewhere else, but moving it to has the following problems:
 * The name of is no longer accurate, and we should replace it with a template like  whose primary role is to show alternative spellings and whose secondary role is to show reading patterns of the kanji spellings. Or better, a morpheme template as in the 精神分裂病 example.
 * or the new spellings/morpheme template is placed on the right of the page, which is inconvenient for readers with wide screens. I suggest either (1) make the new template not floating, but immediately below the ===Etymology x=== header, or (2) following the approach of English, Chinese, Korean, etc. and showing spelling info in pronunciation section. (Think of the "Pronunciation" as "Reading" (yomi).) --Dine2016 (talk) 04:57, 8 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Currently, unnamed parameters in headers are for alternative readings, not alternative spellings. The unnamed parameters are already a "confusing mess" in this case. You need a new parameter, or the code can not tell them apart. -- Huhu9001 (talk) 06:16, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Really? When I edited mod:ja-headword, there was code to determine whether the current kana is a new reading or a spelling variant of the previous reading. Maybe I deleted part of that code so that its intention was not clear? --Dine2016 (talk) 10:47, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

What should I do on char型
Hello Suzukaze-c! I am unpaired sock.

I have a question with. It is formed with English char + Japanese. In this case, how should I do in etymology section? If you use Template:com, char will be linked as char. But this should be linked as char.

Best Regards 片割れ靴下 (talk) 10:26, 7 February 2020 (UTC)


 * I edited the entry. Does it look good? —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 22:52, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your cooperation! 片割れ靴下 (talk) 01:03, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

Kinda curious, which POS system should be followed when linking to words in ? I prefer the second because it is very close to romaji.
 * 学校文法 → text.
 * 日本語教育文法 → text.
 * ??? → text.

By the way, I'm curious about how Japanese textbooks in the Anglosphere teach verb conjugation. Do they introduce the masu form or the dictionary form first? And what about -te form vs -ta form? --Dine2016 (talk) 04:43, 10 February 2020 (UTC)


 * 🤷 My current point of view is . Honestly, I'd rather link to  (or perhaps even ), but Category:Japanese verb forms is very empty.
 * 🤷 I've actually never opened a Japanese textbook.
 * —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 05:20, 10 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Oh, I remember being in a classroom for a while and being baffled at how the dictionary form was being derived from the -masu form. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 05:44, 10 February 2020 (UTC)


 * It's been decades, but ya, English-language beginner-level materials for Japanese start off with the -masu form. I suspect it's because this is the socially safest register for a beginner.
 * Re: which form to link to, I'd push for 行って over [[行っ]]て. The small-っ for gemination isn't a proper morpheme, so splitting there seems super weird to me.  Also, English-language materials treat [[行って]] and 行った as integral, indivisible forms, while ください is generally regarded as a wholly separate word.  I'm also a fan of us actually populating the currently-missing entries for ～て, ～た, and other verb forms.  ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 07:26, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Also,. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 05:02, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

And  instead of   because it's easier. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 06:12, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

Crazy idea
I have a crazy idea that would dispense with the need of filling Category:Japanese verb forms:
 * 1) Modify the inflection templates so that 行く is categorized as
 * Category:Terms with form 行か,
 * Category:Terms with form 行き,
 * Category:Terms with form 行って,
 * etc. (CSS may be used to hide the red links at the bottom of entries.)
 * 1) Then you get something like this.
 * 2) We can make the searching function even better by having it check Category:Terms with form X when the user searched X. This can be achieved by this mechanism.
 * If we take this step, we can soft-redirect not only inflected forms, but all sorts of romaji as well. (In case the romaji leads to an entry in another language, you need to provide both "Go" and "Search" buttons.) Also, we can replace the categories with module tracks.
 * 1) Finally, we can modify the MediaWiki software so that /wiki/X (whether the page exists or not) automatically displays a list of pages in Category:Terms with form X, above the entry or page-does-not-exist message.

(Sorry for the late reply. I accidentally unwatched this talk page at some time.) --Dine2016 (talk) 17:52, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

Teochew tone sandhi issue
I recently created the pages, and for some reason it's showing in the IPA section. Why is there tone sandhi in the second character? RcAlex36 (talk) 16:38, 13 February 2020 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure, but it appears to be a feature of Module:nan-pron, and not a bug. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 06:18, 14 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Just to confirm, is tone sandhi in the second character here an intended feature? RcAlex36 (talk) 04:05, 15 February 2020 (UTC)


 * It's not a bug, but not applicable to all dialects of Teochew. Chaozhou, Chenghai and Jieyang have this 後字變調 that occurs when the first character is 陰上 and the second character is 陰上, 陰去 or 陰入. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 06:28, 15 February 2020 (UTC)


 * I see. Thanks for your reply! RcAlex36 (talk) 06:30, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Requiring an edit
Hi, Suzukaze. Could you please fix and publish my last edit on くびながりゅう?. In a moment of not paying the due attention, I mistakenly use a wrong formatting, using romanization one instead of hiragana one. I tried to fix and appeared a message saying it was forbidden...


 * ✅ —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 00:32, 23 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Thanks a bunch! Have a nice weekend! Cpt.Guapo (talk) 00:35, 23 February 2020 (UTC)


 * you too! —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 00:37, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

Just wanted to say thank you
Hi Suzukaze-c, thank you for correcting my mistakes with the Japanese entries. I've been doing Japanese on Duolingo and sometimes I notice Duolingo gives a different translation to here, so that's why I've been editing them. Anyway, just wanted to thank you for all your effort on here :-) CcfUk2018 (talk) 16:26, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

Blockety block block
Hi. I've got a feeling this user is spamming lots of admins. Could you block the account and protect the project? Or just stand aside and see Wiktionary crumble under the user's terrible vandalism spree. --Vitoscots (talk) 19:41, 26 April 2020 (UTC)


 * not an admin ✌️ —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 19:43, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

dummy out
Hey, I just tried to the etymology on the entry, but I'm not too sure how accurate the etymology is. Since I you're much more equipped with deal Japanese-based terms like this compared to me, can you have a look and fix it if you can? Thanks for helping! — oi yeah nah mate amazingJUSSO ... [ɡəˈdæɪ̯]! 00:38, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm not familar with video game terminology. —Suzukaze-c◇◇

Fixing conjugation of hoti.
Thank you, but the actual error was subtly different. The act from the demoted* was formally a duplicate, but it should have been converted to act. I haven't yet documented the new parameters started with 'futu_' - I only got them working a few days ago and the modified module,, is still being shaken down. --RichardW57 (talk) 08:56, 31 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Most futures will be handled in, which should probably become . I intend, however, to treat future tense forms with special semantics as related lemmas. --RichardW57 (talk) 08:56, 31 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Good to know. That's why I ping people when 'fixing' entries. :D —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 09:26, 31 May 2020 (UTC)


 * please take a look at brūti. When you make changes to a module that's transcluded in entries, you should always check CAT:E for a few days. Chuck Entz (talk) 21:39, 31 May 2020 (UTC)


 * That was lucky. The module was not designed to work for the likes of, so it was missing from the testing.  It so easily have started to generate unexpected erroneous entries. --RichardW57 (talk) 23:13, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

イン change and rfv
Heya, saw that you an RFV at, presumably for the  sense. Multiple reference works list this sense at the Kotobank page. Does that suffice? ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 18:01, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Not really. —Suzukaze-c (talk) 19:50, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Hmm, that's interesting. What about the presence of this element in various Japanese company names, like, or ?  This book also includes eleven instances of 「真木町イン」; possibly a fictional place and I'm uncertain of the kanji reading, but the book's audience was expected to know what an イン is in this context.
 * Among other hits. ご参照に.   Cheers!  ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 21:46, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Historical readings
Could you clarify your opinion about which historical readings should be shown (e.g. on pages of kanji)?


 * 1) Readings from 1900-1946
 * 2) For modern 答える ： こたへる
 * 3) For modern 考える ： かんがへる
 * 4) Readings from some later part of Late Middle Japanese and Early Modern Japanese until 1900
 * 5) For modern 答える ： こたへる
 * 6) For modern 考える ： かむがへる
 * 7) Readings from Early Middle Japanese and Classical Japanese
 * 8) For modern 答える ： こたふ
 * 9) For modern 考える ： かむがふ

Directly before spelling reform in 1900, む was used for both: In Early Middle Japanese, む was supposedly used for:
 * 1) /mu/
 * 2) /N/
 * 1) /mu/
 * 2) /m./
 * 3) /n./ (or /N/?)
 * 4) /ũ/ (e.g. -am- + -u → -amu conjectural/volitional suffix)

Your recent edits seem to suggest showing only readings from 1900-1946. Would it be possible to show all of them in appropriate order?

Example: かんがえる (kangaeru, 考える, Jōyō)←かんがへる (kangaferu, historical)←かむがへる (kangaferu, historical)←かむがふ (kangafu, historical)←かむがふ (kamugafu, historical)

(Support for multiple romanizations of む is probably not yet implemented in code used by templates...)

Arfrever (talk) 07:21, 16 July 2020 (UTC)


 * (chiming in)
 * One challenge I see here is conceptual fuzziness -- your examples conflate "reading" and "kana spelling", with a dash of "historical forms never used to represent this lemma".
 * "Reading" is closest to "pronunciation". This is difficult to represent well in kana due to the inherent limitations of the writing system.  Romaji and kana diverge out of necessity when describing Japanese past a certain age.
 * "Kana spelling" is what we use parameters like  for.  This only applies to historical spellings of the same word, in the same conjugation.  This historical spelling is what you find in monolingual Japanese dictionaries in smaller font right after the headword, and this is the kana representation prior to the spelling reforms of the 20th century.
 * So for, the modern hiragana spelling is かんがえる, and the historical hiragana spelling is かんがへる. See this Daijirin entry for 考える as one such example.
 * む is only one of many possible glyphs to represent either or historical, and the actual kana む was not used consistently.  Given also the variance in orthography for ん prior to the 20th century, we generally don't use む for this phoneme unless it's derivationally relevant -- and derivation is information for the   section.


 * Lastly, かんがふ / かむがふ / kangafu is not any kind of historical spelling of 考える. Instead, these represent historical spellings of classical verb 考う, as shown here in Daijirin or at right as shown in my local electronic copy of the KDJ.  Classical  (or, depending on how we ultimately choose to lemmatize classical forms) is a separate term from , with its own conjugation and usage.  Moreover, the classical verb has no form かんがえる; the closest we get is somewhere between the attributive かんがふる and the irrealis / continuative かんがへ.
 * The string you list is not appropriate for any listing of historical spellings -- instead, it illustrates the development of the term, which is what we put in the  section.
 * In addition, we must be careful about romanizing incorrectly, since romanization is more closely tied to pronunciation. For instance, we know from the 1603 edition of the  entry for the verb  that it was likely never a kamugaferu pronunciation -- as seen here, in 1603, the verb was still conjugated according to the classical paradigm (no -eru ending at all), and we see the following forms:
 * Cangaye -- the irrealis / continuative
 * uru -- indicating the attributive ending, i.e. the full form would have been cangayuru
 * eta -- indicating the past-tense ending, i.e. the full form would have been cangayeta
 * Since the fe → ye shift and mu → n shift had both already happened before we ever see the 下一段活用 shift that produced the -eru ending, we can ascertain that there would never have been any kamugaferu pronunciation -- and thus it is incorrect of us to use this as a romanization.
 * (It is possible that some dialect may have pronounced this word as kamugaferu after the 下一段活用 shift, but without textual corroboration, we should not include this.)
 * To sum up:
 * The  parameter is only for the historical kana spelling used in the late 1800s, early 1900s (after standardization of hentaigana).
 * The kind of information you list, with some tweaks for historical accuracy, belongs in the  section.
 * Hope this helps! ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 19:08, 16 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Regarding 「"Reading" is closest to "pronunciation".」: Currently used historical readings in Wiktionary seem closer to transliteration than transcription. E.g. on 考 page, there is 「かんがへる (kangaferu, historical)」. I am aware that え, ゑ and some non-initial へ (those which firstly underwent [pe] → [we] change) were pronounced as [je] for long time, until recent change to [e].
 * Early Middle Japanese says that [e] and [je] merged into [je] in the 10th century.
 * Late Middle Japanese says that [we] merged into [je] "by the 12th century".
 * Regarding 「uru -- indicating the attributive ending, i.e. the full form would have been cangayuru」: It should have been cangauru (spelled かむがふる or かんがふる in hiragana) or cangoru or something similar (due to probable realization of /au/ as [ɔː]).
 * That 考う looks like transcription of Middle Japanese form into Modern Japanese...
 * Should 「かむかへる (kamukaferu, ancient)」 reading be dropped from 考 page? At least k (instead of g) in this reading looks anachronistic.
 * To prevent future confusion, documentation of  /   parametres in Template:ja-noun, Template:ja-verb etc. needs to be updated to state what it is supposed to be. It would be good to mention some examples of intended usage.
 * It seems that there will need to be another discussion about what to write in Etymology section (e.g. how to represent ふ pronounced as [u] or え/ゑ/へ pronounced as [ye])...
 * Arfrever (talk) 00:20, 17 July 2020 (UTC)


 * : I noticed that you removed classical conjugation table (並ぶ) from 並べる page, but including these tables even when lemma (終止形) is slightly different looks harmless and potentially useful for other readers. I sometimes happen to see classical forms of words in modern sources (films, books etc.).
 * There are many pre-existing pages with such tables. E.g. 見える has table for 見ゆ, and 聞こえる has table for 聞こゆ.
 * Arfrever (talk) 01:12, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Hello
 * Re: -uru → cangauru, you are correct, it was a mistake on my part to not remove the "y".
 * Re: 考う, that's how some dictionaries lemmatize. Others lemmatize at 考ふ.  It seems that this is not a settled matter in Japanese lexicography.  I suspect it depends on approach: lemmatize at the kana spelling matching the pronunciation that modern learners of classical Japanese (i.e., nearly everyone in Japan) will have heard in school and may thus have more readily in mind, or lemmatize at the historical kana spelling.  For that matter, we at Wiktionary are still figuring out our approach to classical and Old Japanese.
 * Re: the page and the readings listed there, I'm not certain, as I have not done the research -- if that kana string かむかへる can be attested, then that's what we should include.  If that kana string cannot be attested, then we replace it with an attested form, or remove it.  Romanization should hew as much as possible to the known or reconstructed pronunciation for the period in which each listed form was actually used.  (This is a much more difficult issue, requiring further research, and as you note, our current template infrastructure does not support this very well.)
 * Re: documentation of our params, etc., that has always lagged actual practice, a common issue in any group endeavor. Most of us find it more important and more rewarding to work on the lexicography, rather than the meta work of documenting how we go about it.  If you feel motivated to work on documentation, more power to you.  :)
 * Re: classical conjugation tables, those should never be included on pages of forms that are not classical. The  table does not belong on the  page, because 見える as a verb form never existed in the classical conjugation paradigm.  It'd be a bit like insisting on including 🇨🇬 as a verb form in conjugation tables in the modern 🇨🇬 entry.
 * I think that responds to all your points that included or implied questions. Cheers!  ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 03:08, 17 July 2020 (UTC)


 * My understanding, regarding the basic question of my reversions: The status quo is to add standardized 歴史的仮名遣い (note the Wikipedia link in ja-readings, "historical"). Connecting こたえる to こたふ in this section is out of scope. —Suzukaze-c (talk) 22:06, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

formatting ?
Hi, After your undo. Isn't it better to correct the formatting problem, than to remove definition ? I believe there is still lot of words to add in wiktionary, and play to ping pong is only a lose of time.Popolon (talk) 18:45, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Probably, but both of your edits to 粽子 did not inspire my confidence in your edits. (→肉粽) —Suzukaze-c (talk) 01:13, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
 * And 噌 is a 多音字 (https://dict.variants.moe.edu.tw/variants/rbt/word_attribute.rbt?educode=B00425), which doesn't make anything better. —Suzukaze-c (talk) 01:14, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Correction on 力量
Hey there! I really appreciate you explaining the "tl=y" and clicking expand, as I'm not familiar with Wiktionary so I hadn't realized that. I'm wondering though, what's the purpose/benefit of using tl=y as opposed to just writing it toneless in the first place, since then it would show up that way in the main box? Is it because toneless is a variation on how it would normally be pronounced? I thought the toneless is the only version in this case. I notice this is also used for 太陽. Thanks, ChromeGames923 (talk) 06:18, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Words like these are known as 重·次輕詞語, where the final syllable can be read with either the normal tone or a neutral tone. 现代汉语词典 indicates such words by putting both a dot before the syllable and the normal tone on the vowel. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 18:19, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that information, that's very good to know! So what I'm understanding is that in the cases where 重·次輕 occurs, Wiktionary lists the "original" pronunciation first, and then uses tl=y to indicate the variation? This does seem a bit unclear if the toneless variation is the most common one nowadays, but if that the way it should be listed then I will keep that in mind. Thanks, ChromeGames923 (talk) 20:11, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Perhaps the toneless version is the most common in northern China, but in southern China, Taiwan, Malaysia and Singapore, the version with the normal tone is probably more common. It is a little unclear with the current layout, and display of such information should definitely be more clear, so if you have any suggestions as to how we can improve display, that'd be great. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 01:16, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Gotcha, that makes sense. I was going off Taiwan MOE's dictionary entry of the term, but it's very understandable that this is variation. I recall a different page had two possible pinyin pronunciations separated with a comma. That could perhaps be preferable, or one under the other, with an additional statement about it being a "toneless final syllable variant". Normally I would not click the expand button and would just take the main pronunciation given, so I agree it could be improved. ChromeGames923 (talk) 01:56, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
 * As a side note, 教育部重編國語辭典修訂本 isn't "standard" for Taiwan in terms of pronunciation. The MoE actually recommends 國語小字典 and 國語辭典簡編本 for educational purposes. (See question 3 here for more details.) According to 簡編本, the "standard" pronunciation is lìliàng. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 02:08, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I see, thank you so much for pointing that out! I didn't realize there are multiple dictionary versions, so that very good to know for the future. No wonder all of the example sentences had been from such old passages as well. Thanks again! ChromeGames923 (talk) 02:19, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Improving atmosphere
Hello again! I remember a time not too many years ago when I was a lot more close to you in overall thinking. I know I have said some things that have made you and others potentially offended or mad. I am not nearly as important as other editors and most edits I make are minor, but I still try my best. I'd like to ask: ideally, if there was one article I could read or thing I could do that would help to restore your confidence in me as an editor, what would that be? In these trying times, I believe Wiktionary should be a force for unity and cooperation among all people, not a cold war battlefield. The better Wikipedia and Wiktionary are, the more informed the general public is and the better our world can be. That's my feeling. Take care! Geographyinitiative (talk) 06:38, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I am making critical, valuable edits that editors that don't get made fun of don't make. None of my major complaints about Wiktionary are actually illegitimate as far as I am currently aware, but if they are, I need to know that. Jokes at my expense are fine, but remember that I can't return a joke for danger of instant, permanent blocking. I have special and rare skills that can be helpful in producing Wikipedia and Wiktionary for the public good, and I urge you to see the good in me if you can. Of course I have my viewpoints an biases! But I still want to use mainland China Hanyu Pinyin official orthography, and I remember you wanted to do that. I want to create a situation where people can see various points of view and have access to as much accurate information as possible. Geographyinitiative (talk) 10:49, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Re: Special:Diff/60115941/60115984 and "why not use the |lit= parameter?"
Often the literal is a better illustration of the term. In the natural translation, the headword is missing entirely. If we use, the output results in the literal translation appearing afterwards on a separate line, further from where it's needed and visually presenting a more confusing format.

For, I'd suggest either reverting to the previous format, where the literal translation more clearly illustrates how the headword fits in -- or we use a different sample sentence, which itself more clearly illustrates the headword. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 05:48, 21 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Indeed; but this is how Template:usex (= the rest of Wiktionary) does it. As for changing the usex, I think that providing good usexes and natural translations is good (=nothing to change here on that basis, IMO).
 * (Honestly, I don't really like the parentheses and quotation marks either.) —Suzukaze-c (talk) 05:51, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

阿曾 Mandarin reading
I got the Mandarin reading from the first reference. Should it still be omitted? Fluoromethyl (talk) 07:48, 21 August 2020 (UTC)


 * I still don't think it should be included. "阿曾 (ā zēng)" is not a Mandarin word, and there is no context in which one would say "ā zēng", except perhaps when talking about Wu. —Suzukaze-c (talk) 07:55, 22 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Also, are you sure about the reading of "zen a"? It seems to be reversed. —Suzukaze-c (talk) 07:55, 22 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oh, sorry. I've corrected it. Apologies for the error. Fluoromethyl (talk) 09:42, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

Once you go black, you never go back.
Hello I understand your changes and why you intended to make them however this phrase is not only used in a sexual way. As a person of this community I’m upset by the constant sexualization of our phrases. Yes there is a way that it can be used sexually but every time I’ve made a change I have stated like many of us in this community do, we use the phrase for multiple different situations and not only sexual. Irohasw (talk) 14:45, 29 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Hm, I've personally always understood it as a racist joke (about sex, yes). I'm not a member of the African-American community though.
 * At Wiktionary we have criteria for inclusion so that people don't make things up. What you need is 3 compliant cites that back up your addition. :) —Suzukaze-c (talk) 04:17, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Quote templates
Hi Suzukaze,

Do you know how to show the source of a quotation using Template:quote, as in 川理? I couldn't find anything relevant in the template documentation, and there doesn't seem to be a more specialized template like Template:quote-poem or such. Thanks in advance!--Karaeng Matoaya (talk) 06:38, 5 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Template:quote-book should be applicable, but not using a template at all is also fine. —Suzukaze-c (talk) 06:40, 5 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Thanks! The quotations have been fixed for the three OK entries.--Karaeng Matoaya (talk) 07:15, 5 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Were the poems part of a book? Directly using the name of the poem as the  was not my intention when I suggested Template:quote-book.   might be more fitting. —Suzukaze-c (talk) 07:20, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Were the poems part of a book? Directly using the name of the poem as the  was not my intention when I suggested Template:quote-book.   might be more fitting. —Suzukaze-c (talk) 07:20, 5 September 2020 (UTC)


 * The eighth-century hyangga poems are included in the Samguk yusa, which is otherwise entirely in Classical Chinese with these (very few) poems the only Old Korean text in them. In academia the hyangga texts are always cited by the name of the poem, or sometimes by a number designation given them according to the order the poems appear in the text.--Karaeng Matoaya (talk) 07:23, 5 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Then using a template isn't necessary in the absence of a more suitable one IMO. —Suzukaze-c (talk) 07:27, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

<<...>>
Hi,

I'm not familiar with this markup <<...>>. Is it documented somewhere? Thanks. Uranographer (talk) 05:30, 8 September 2020 (UTC)


 * See Template:place. —Suzukaze-c (talk) 05:30, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Ah...I see. Thanks for reverting that so fast; I might have changed others! Uranographer (talk) 05:34, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Why was my edit reverted?
Hi, I just edited Chink and you reverted my edit. This revert was incorrect. It is perceived a swear word, it is equally offensive as nigga or nigger. It is vulgar and definitely a bad word. I reverted it back. Please accept this. Thanks.
 * It's pretty redundant to "offensive" and "ethnic slur". —Suzukaze-c (talk) 07:38, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Template for Old Korean forms
Hi Suzukaze-c,

Thanks for cleaning up after a lot of my edits. If I could ask a favor of you, is there some way that the first paragraph in 心音 could be made into a template that I just have to fill in with lexemes for the whole paragraph to show up? Something like this:

becomes:

In Old Korean orthography, native nouns and verbs with clear Chinese equivalents are usually written with an initial Chinese character (logogram) glossing the meaning of the word, followed by one or more Chinese characters (phonograms) that transcribe the final syllable or coda consonant of the term. In the case of [ENTRY TITLE], the first character shows that this is the native Old Korean word for [MEANING], and the subsequent character(s) show(s) that the [CODA CONSONANT/FINAL SYLLABLE] of this word is [*-WHATEVER]. Because the semantics and the coda consonant match, the word is conventionally reconstructed as [*RECONSTRUCTION], the ancestor of [MIDDLE KOREAN].

I keep saying the same thing over and over again for Old Korean entries, and this would be a big help. Thanks in advance!--Karaeng Matoaya (talk) 12:04, 8 September 2020 (UTC)


 * ✅ Template:oko-construction —Suzukaze-c (talk) 19:21, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Change at わわる
Hallelujah, that works! Thank you for. :) ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 00:59, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Please add this if you have time because an IP who doesn't know how to format is attempting to add this. Thanks! RcAlex36 (talk) 05:08, 17 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Alright it has been added by Justinrleung. RcAlex36 (talk) 05:12, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Sorry again :(
Super sorry for this, but if you have the time and the knowledge could you help me address the two Lua issues I mention here? I’m unlikely to be able to contribute nearly as much beginning next week for RL reasons (school), so I’d like to take a break after having made a functioning model for the defining prosodic feature of a full third of Korean speakers. Thanks in advance!--Karaeng Matoaya (talk) 00:04, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks so much for the help!! Everything went swimmingly :D --Karaeng Matoaya (talk) 15:11, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
 * ^^ —Suzukaze-c (talk) 00:37, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Template:synonyms documentation
Heya, re:, thanks for the tweak! The documentation for doesn't say anything about   params. Could you update that? ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 01:17, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Really I just assumed they might exist and published the edit because it really did work. ;P
 * From looking at Module:nyms, it seems like people couldn't be bothered to update the documentation of the 10 templates that rely on this module. NGL I don't feel like doing it either 😔 —Suzukaze-c (talk) 04:10, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Re: からだ
Re:, I had a major hardware failure when I was partway through editing the entry -- SSD died Tuesday night, and I lost a lot of work. Thanks for the fix. I'll get back to that at some point. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 18:13, 1 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Oh no :(( I hope there wasn't serious data loss. —Suzukaze-c (talk) 01:43, 2 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Cheers, thanks! More than I'd like, but nothing crippling.  :)  ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 05:39, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

Translingual Hanzi entries
Should there be definitions in translingual sections? If not, what should I do if I see them? İʟᴀᴡᴀ–Kᴀᴛᴀᴋᴀ (talk) (edits) 21:25, 5 October 2020 (UTC)


 * It's the Unicode Consortium's data. The definitions really should be moved to the proper language section, but I don't trust Unicode's data (gathered from mysterious sources and translated by mysterious people as a side project of an organization whose main focus is definitely not producing a quality dictionary with accurate definitions), so I personally prefer to ignore it, so that someone who cares can review and repair them appropriately. —Suzukaze-c (talk) 01:33, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
 * That is how I interpreted the situation. Thank you for the advice. Currently, my only goal is to consolidate Cantonese and Mandarin entries and add precollated information. İʟᴀᴡᴀ–Kᴀᴛᴀᴋᴀ (talk) (edits) 03:05, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Chinese editing
Thank you for pinging me, but I have every page I edit send me an email when a human makes a further edit so I can improve. Since I am new to editing Chinese, I pay particular attention, so if you edit a page I edited I will likely learn about it within 24 hours whether you ping me or not. İʟᴀᴡᴀ–Kᴀᴛᴀᴋᴀ (talk) (edits) 18:20, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Oh, cool. —Suzukaze-c (talk) 20:39, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

부아 vote
Hi. I need your opinion on this issue. https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Wiktionary:Beer_parlour/2020/October If you have time, please vote and if you don't it's OK. B2V22BHARAT (talk) 12:56, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

リチウム kanji
In your, you removed the bit. This kanji + reading combo shows up in a few sources, including Jim Breen's entry and the JA WP article. Given the timing and comparison with a few other first-half-of-the-1800s terms, this might have been an Udagawa term with a Chinese spelling, where the kanji later fell out of use.

I confess I didn't entirely understand your edit comment. Would you be opposed to restoring the ? ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 21:58, 2 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose re-addition without actual attestation. —Suzukaze-c (talk) 23:45, 3 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the push-back -- I've learned that I might be giving too much credit to certain sources.
 * Poking around in Google Books, I couldn't find anything valid at and then selecting only books with preview available (since Google's OCR for Japanese is often terrible, I feel like we need to visually confirm accuracy, especially for rare and graphically dense characters like this), and indeed Google included a lot of confusing scannos from various editions of an Urdu magazine.  ?!?  Even after filtering those out with  and then again selecting only books with preview available, all I got were scannos -- not a single valid instance of  in Japanese text for any reading or meaning.
 * Digging around in Udagawa Yōan's actual book, I find here (scroll down to page 6, right-hand page, bottom of the third column from the left; also here if Wayback isn't working) that he uses the spelling . I haven't gone through the whole book to confirm a complete absence of any instances of  (it's many volumes, and I can't find an electronically-searchable version), but I think odds are good that, if he was going to use this spelling, he would have done so even at the beginning of the book.
 * Given my findings, I added a usage note at in this, please adjust as you deem appropriate.
 * Cheers! ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 01:08, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

あつりょくなべ
Why not 圧力鍋? -- Huhu9001 (talk) 03:02, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
 * User:Suzukaze-c/sandbox. —Suzukaze-c (talk) 06:02, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

Korean entries
Please stop editing Korean entries when you're not familiar with Korean. B2V22BHARAT (talk) 04:37, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

ko-hanja
What do you think about User:LoutK/sandbox? I know, very original. The wording could be changed, perhaps. Thanks! — LoutK (talk) 09:32, 21 November 2020 (UTC)


 * I will definitely work on implementing this (and updating ko-hanja-pron), but I have not been in the mood for coding recently :( —Suzukaze-c (talk) 17:58, 28 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Thank you!! I'm just grateful that you're willing to help :) — LoutK (talk) 00:54, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Undoing older revision after intermediate edits
Hi,

I have a technical question: how do you undo older revisions like you did in without getting the error: "The edit could not be undone due to conflicting intermediate edits." --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 01:08, 15 December 2020 (UTC)


 * I clicked on "Undo" and MediaWiki didn't give me that error, because there were no intermediate edits that prevented the undo from cleanly happening, so I undid it. —Suzukaze-c (talk) 01:12, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Strange. I am never able to do that if there are subsequent edits. I can see Shāntián Tàiláng edited after Fumiko Take. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 01:17, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I believe it depends on where the intermediate edits were done. You can undo things if the following edits were to different parts of the entry. I'm not sure how smart the system is about determining how local the edits were if someone clicks edit for the whole entry but changes only one section. I do know that if the first edit was to one section and the subsequent edits were to different sections, there's no problem at all with undoing the first edit. It's all a matter of which edit link was clicked to start editing. Chuck Entz (talk) 03:34, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Move ja-ojad to the Conjugation section
Hi, this is Dine2016. Last year I created the ja-ojad template and added it to the Pronunciation section of Japanese entries. But it was a mistake both logically and aesthetically -- I should have added it to the Conjugation/Inflection section, making the template similar (in appearance) and next to the modern and classical conjugation tables. Can you fix my mistake with a bot?

I now use and contribute to EDICT/JMdict, but none of its interfaces (WWWJDIC, Jisho.org, etc.) can show the accentuation of conjugated forms, so I still look them up on Wiktionary, occasionally. I am ashamed to see my contribution to the mess in the Pronunciation section every time I revisit.

There are many aspects in which I'm unhappy with the entry layout of Japanese entries, but my inability to write good English has prevented me from getting them understood. --2409:894C:3C18:8DA:A1A1:87C7:BF8B:6598 08:39, 18 December 2020 (UTC)


 * I'll add it to the to-do list.
 * (And while you are here, can I ask for clarification of template purpose at User_talk:Poketalker#ja-gv?) —Suzukaze-c (talk) 04:06, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you for volunteering to fix the ja-ojad problem.
 * The soft-redirect templates were a failure -- I implemented them through trial and error, going through several iterations without documenting the changes or explaining the rationale.
 * ja-gv was confusingly named. I should probably have named it as ja-see-kyu (standing for kyujitai). The difference between ja-see and ja-gv is that ja-see is for conditional variants while ja-gv is for unconditional variants. ひ is a conditional variant for 日 because it doesn't apply to the 'Sunday' and 'Japan' senses under the reading Nichi, but 燈 is an unconditional variant of 灯 for obvious reasons. My preference was to treat all variant spellings as conditional except those differing only in shinjitai/kyujitai, itaiji, and kanji repetitive marks. This way I was able to make ja-gv copy the kanjitabs as well. (As a result ja-gv is not suitable for 阿しゅく如来/阿閦如来, which have different numbers of kanji and can not share kanjitabs.)
 * I admit that this is too complicated; this is why I stopped working on soft redirect templates and instead pushed for the 'one word per page, one page per word' change. --2409:894C:3C10:2C3:D3BE:1176:D694:E784 08:05, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
 * (Oh, and it's nice to see you again, even if only for a trivial message like this &mdash; I thought I had written this in my first reply, but I guess I accidentally deleted it. —Suzukaze-c (talk) 08:24, 19 December 2020 (UTC))

I think the best way for Wiktionary currently is to get rid of the soft redirect templates (i.e. remove them from mainspace with a bot) and instead develop a searching interface that allows you to type any spelling of a word (including romaji) and instantly land on the lemma form. I suppose this is possible with a javascript gadget that doesn't require additional software on the MediaWiki servers. (You probably have something similar for SC->TC, too.) --2409:894C:3C18:97A:FE2A:D029:DA06:671D 02:18, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Hm, so non-lemma pages would have no Japanese content? It's a strange idea to me.
 * I also believe that a (theoretical) advanced searching interface would be best hosted on Toolforge (or whatever it's called today), to allow for complex design and free rein (underlying database of a list of entries or something), unfettered by the restriction of having just one JavaScript gadget. —Suzukaze-c (talk) 00:14, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

A few years ago you made this edit. I was wondering, why did you regard 華盛頓 as PSM? RcAlex36 (talk) 18:57, 2 January 2021 (UTC)


 * The semantics of 華 and 盛 gave me that impression, but I don't really care either way. —Suzukaze-c (talk) 01:13, 3 January 2021 (UTC)


 * I think it's not clear. It's just pretty characters used to adapt the loanword, which isn't quite necessarily PSM. I've changed it to just borrowing. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 02:26, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the Corrections
Thanks for the corrections! Keep it coming if you see more. Also, I learned the more correct way to use the quote book module to give page numbers from your example. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 09:47, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

鎧袖一触
Hiya. Do you think it's appropriate to have a Japanese term in "Chinese terms with usage examples"? (If you're already aware of the problem, just ignore this.) ---&#62; Tooironic (talk) 22:54, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

承德, Chengde
It appears you (or someone else) turned Chengde into a Hubei city (it's in Hebei). Would you mind fixing it? ---&#62; Tooironic (talk) 22:20, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
 * This mistake is wildly common, and I would say more common than the confusion of Henan and Hunan. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 22:48, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

まばら
Meant to ping you from the edit comment but forgot. :) ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 00:01, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

"maybe heavy intensive due to invocation of Module:script"
I was wondering why 6 new entries popped up in CAT:E with out of memory errors at the same time, so I started going through the revision histories of the transclusions to see what had been changed recently. This is the first one I found from today. Chuck Entz (talk) 07:32, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
 * yeah :')
 * I directly copied the text into the module now. Maybe it will be better. —Suzukaze-c (talk) 07:36, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
 * The two that I hadn't already cleared by other means just required null edits. I checked one and it's now 2.63 MB below the 50MB limit. I was going to ask about that Japanese entry with the mid dot, but I see you got to it first. It's gone. I wish they were all this easy... Chuck Entz (talk) 08:03, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Doubts about the reversion
Hi. Hope everything's going well in these turbulent days...

Concerning the reversion you did it here, I was wondering why not keep the links on particles and punctuation, since this site is one of the greatest tools of learning and research, languages-wise? Speaking for myself, a continuous Japanese (and other languages as well) learner, I'd like to check all words and entries of the language I would have doubts about, and if they can be accessed from the same page, it would be very very handy... That's the reason I "linkfied" them. Besides, I already heard from some guys who are learning and to whom I talked about Wiktionary, that they thought very strange not to have links exactly on the particles, which is one of the most tricky matters when learning the language... Then, I went a little further and included the punctuation too. So, couldn't this be considered, from a learner/layman point of view? If I were one of them - and I kinda am -, I'd like to check everything I could and in a practical and accessible manner...

By the way, is there some official policy about this? Could you please point it out?

Finally, about the edition on やって来た at that same entry, I didn't get it. Since normally there's no specific entry for verbs in past tense (or other inflections), I always put the link to the main entry, so that people could check the conjugation and see the words are related. Why did you isolate the た again?

Thanks in advance.

Cpt.Guapo (talk) 21:32, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Technically speaking, there shouldn't be any wikilinks in usage examples, but no one is going out of their way to enforce that (especially in languages that have active communities with their own practices). I, personally, don't care one way or the other. See WT:USEX Chuck Entz (talk) 22:13, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Interesting. The relevant bit:

<blockquote style="margin-left:4em;border:1px solid gray;padding:4px;"><ul><li>not contain wikilinks (the words should be easy enough to understand without additional lookup).</li></ul>
 * I can broadly agree for English, but for usage examples of text in other languages, I think other considerations should hold -- our readership can only be assumed to have knowledge of English.
 * My 2p, anyway. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 01:02, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
 * In my opinion, Wikilinks are useful in usexes. If I haven't provided them in my edits or they are incomplete, then I just didn't get around to do it. The longer usex, the longer it takes to make them but long usexes may be useless for complete beginners. I don't think we need to link to the punctuation but particles may also be useful for beginners.
 * The policy should be definitely revisited, since all Chinese, Thai and Khmer usexes are already in "violation", since their corresponding language-specific templates automatically link to individual terms, which is very useful for the complex scripts, especially with no spaces between words. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 02:02, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Hm, I wasn't aware of that. My personal style is to lean towards linking non-function words; after that, particles and conjugation, etc. is visually distinctive (unlinked), similar to how we choose what words to link to in definitions (text vs. text). One can then see that the "core" part (root) of a long complex item like  is 食べ i.e. 食べる.
 * As for punctuation links, I just find it incredibly odd, since they are the most basic items, and I doubt anyone would click on it.
 * In the end, I recognize that it's just personal style, and really I wouldn't have bothered to revert your edit if you didn't link to the punctuation, which really stood out to me as peculiar.
 * As for WT:USEX&mdash;I'm actually a bit astonished by this (especially as someone who often links to policy when disputing things). I add links firstly because of precedent from editing Chinese, and secondly to assist readers in word recognition (they're on a dictionary; it's natural they will want to look up the words they encounter: why not help out by adding links in advance?). —Suzukaze-c (talk) 02:12, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Also, it's a nice way to quickly find out if an entry is missing from Wiktionary. I make the links directly on the page instead of manually inputting every word in the search bar or relying on intuition, then save the links to the page because they're helpful to others as well. —Suzukaze-c (talk) 02:17, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
 * First of all, thanks a lot for the heads-up, answers and opinions, guys.
 * I concur with that idea of revisiting the policies, mostly, but not only limited to, the languages using complex scripts. All in all, considering those experiences with other learners, and also with those people who is just curious about other languages - e.g. who are doing a little research for their eventual work or study - I'm using such perspectives to give my contribution to the Wiktionary. I agree about the oddity on linked punctuation, but from there to conclude that nobody will look up for them is debatable. Looking from a language instructed person point of view is ok, but as for other people? Since it's a different script compared to your language, the doubts will normally appear...
 * For example, CURRENTLY I know about "maru/handakuten" and "tenten/dakuten", because I have a minimum knowledge on the language thanks to my other studies - and to the Wiktionary too -, but what about those who haven't? I had the same questions in the past... "Wait, why do they use that little circle there? And what about those 'quotes'? Those brackets are strange..." I think it's pretty fair to think that you will find that out on a Japanese dictionary, since those are specific to such language...
 * My opinion is, since this is a social platform as well, that is necessary to have some empathy and think like those learners, "searchers" and curious guys to build a better platform. Otherwise Wiktionary will ended up being too scholastic, too literary, kinda dismissive... Of course, the best of both worlds is the ultimate goal I believe, and finally not forgetting all policies necessary to keep everything organized. Cpt.Guapo (talk) 22:03, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Japanese kyujitai entries
Hi! Thanks for updating some kyujitai entries with the new template. But I have a question: the updated versions do not show that the entries are kyujitai forms, but only that they are "alternative forms". Is there a way to show it? Jonashtand (talk) 10:03, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
 * The wording is currently as intended . —Suzukaze-c (talk) 10:09, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Kana-spelled lemmas
I've noticed you tend to sometimes add the hiragana forms of words as the main lemma page and use a redirect for the same word spelled with kanji, even when such hiragana form is generally not used (for example, recently added きぶとり has 800x less hits on google than 着太り). I don't think this a good practice, so I want to ask you why of this. On the other hand, it seems there are also some other people doing this (identity protected), so I figure there must be a good reason. Alves9 (talk) 11:44, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
 * (chiming in)
 * There was a round of discussion some time back (1? 2 years?) about lemmatization schemes here at Wiktionary, to try to deal with the structural incompatibility between how the MediaWiki back-end works, and how Japanese terms are often many-to-many when it comes to spellings and readings and etymologies. Japanese electronic dictionaries (both the old-school hardware kind and modern software ones) seem to handle this through a much more elegant indexing system than we have here -- a user can input a search term in either kana or kanji, and if there are multiple hits for the search string, they are presented with a short list of matches to choose from, or, depending on the platform, they're presented with a combined view collating all of the matches.
 * After much discussion, we decided that yamato kotoba are more likely to have homographs and homophones, and thus we (the JA editing community at the time) decided to lemmatize these at the kana spellings. Consider the many spellings and senses for, which ultimately share their etymological origins.
 * At the same time, we decided to keep kango at the kanji spellings, since kango terms are much more closely tied to their graphemic representation.
 * We considered that there would be cases for yamato kotoba where a given kana spelling only has one matching kanji spelling, etymology, term, etc., and we came to the conclusion that this was not a blocker. Where needed, we could add   and  to clarify.
 * I hope that helps explain the background. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 01:21, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
 * ^ —Suzukaze-c (talk) 08:16, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I think it simply would be common sense to only use such a convention for the words that have multiple different kanji spellings who are both equally widely used and whose meanings overlap to some extent with each other (the only widely used modern spelling for "つける" (apply), which is a bad example in the first place since it is seldom written with kanji, is "付ける", the alternative spelling 着 (附 is just a variation of 付) being fundamentally only used for slight nuancing. The other spellings besides this one are completely different words, which means they should not be on the same page. The example is not a good one; no problem, however, as I've given a better one below.) Such a case is relatively rare if you stick your head outside of elementary school-grade Japanese, so even the existence of a convention in the first place, which would be otherwise justified it was exactly kept just for those few numbers of words, becomes disagreeable when you apply it to all words irrespectively of usage. The result is a dictionary that not only looks like it was written by a child but is also hard to read, not mentioning absurd cases like prioritising the lemmatisation of a spelling that is 800x less common than another for some vague sense of uniformity.
 * So, since your example was not good enough, I will give a better one. Take a word such as 知る. It clearly means "know", having no other extant spellings. But since it is a "yamato kotoba" it must be spelled with hiragana! Now it's sitting on the same page as also "yamato kotoba" 汁, even though they have no connection whatsoever and their pronunciations are different. Clearly this is not a good system, if you're willing to follow through with it. If you're not, then you prove my point that words like 着太り whose kanji spelling's frequency outnumber their hiragana by a factor of 800 should not follow the convention. The reason why this is an important point is because someone has been moving pages to a hiragana spelling recently, which must mean uniformity is a factor in this. Alves9 (talk) 13:52, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
 * In this case, lemmatization at the kana spelling is not at all indicative of most-common form, but simply a technical consideration, as I tried to make clear further above. For various entries, discerning the "most common" spelling becomes an exercise in subjectivity.  We thus settled on across-the-board lemmatization of yamato kotoba at the kana spellings, as that is an immediately understandable standard for editors.
 * Looking at your example, しる "to know" has additional (albeit less common) spellings (c.f. KDJ entry, quite rare at ) and  (c.f. WWWJDIC entry, actually not that rare at ).
 * Re: tsukeru, arguably all of the transitive senses are extensions from a core meaning of something like "to stick something with, into, or onto something else". Splitting those all out into individual entries for each kanji spelling makes about as much sense as splitting up each sense of 🇨🇬 into separate entries.  Monolingual dictionaries generally group the senses for つける under immediate derivation, as seen in the Daijisen entry.
 * Other technical approaches we discussed included locating the actual entry data at unique kanji + kana combinations, such as by creating a page at 知る/しる that would contain the actual entry, and have that transcluded into the appropriate sections at しる, 知る, 識る, 領る. We never hit upon a fully satisfactory structure, and set that challenge aside for later, preferring to focus on building out the actual entries -- which can always be moved later, if and when we collectively decide on a different structure.  ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 07:06, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Can you elaborate on those "technical considerations"? As far as I see, creating a page with the main kanji spelling (which is not subjective) and having the alternate, less common spellings under the alternative spellings header would make much more sense from a technical standpoint than copy-pasting entries, which seems to be what you're advocating. It seems like a lot of work for almost no gain; but fortunately that's not what I'm arguing for. My only concern is that such a convention is extended to entries which have no explainable reason for following it, and which are actually actively harmed by it, like the multitude of native Japanese words which do not feature multiple, commonly used spellings with non-overlapping meanings, or even those which do not feature any alternative spellings at all, like the 着太り entry. 知る could also be argued to belong to the former category, as the alternative spellings 識/領 have the exact same meaning and can be used interchangeably with 知 at will (which they will most of the time, as they're highly academic spellings that most of the current Japanese populace will not know how to read). As for your argument that setting one single unified standard for all entries would make it easier for others editors to understand the convention: the people who actively and regularly create new entries in the Japanese dictionary could be probably counted in one's hand. There's no reason to simplify the issue; if explaining it is too much trouble, then one could just make a temporary effort to move the very few number of native Japanese words that check the above conditions to their hiragana pages while keeping the other entries intact. I know that's not too much work as, like I've mentioned, someone has already been working on moving pages to hiragana, although they aren't the words that you'd expect, and some of them don't even possess an alternative spelling (example). Alves9 (talk) 14:30, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

To explain my silence: the discussion is long and distant, and I don't have the interest, time, or memory to revisit it for you. I will note that for comparison, the Japanese Wiktionary has an entry for ja:はしりや, and not ja:走り屋. —Suzukaze-c (talk) 23:48, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Failure to show up in an argument, or to rebuke any of its points, simply means you lose. I don't see how you have any right to show up a month later to make a non-sequitur about how the Japanese wiktionary happens to have one single entry to agree with your absurd terms (which might have been made by the same people in this discussion anyway, in which case that is exactly who I'm trying to convince). I will turn your expression of discontent against you: if you don't have time to respond to my comments, then neither have I to go back and look at those which were made years back. However, I'm glad you reverted those entries, as I'd thought you had just given up on the issue completely. Alves9 (talk) 03:12, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I have no interest in 'winning' against someone who has no interest in investigating the background. —Suzukaze-c (talk) 03:22, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Anything you or I could say would in all certainty be a rehashing of points that have been made before. I have no interest in this. —Suzukaze-c (talk) 03:23, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
 * If I'm right, it doesn't matter whether those points were made before or not. Unless you have that little confidence in your arguments (or they are identical to Eirikr's), I'd like to see them here, if only to prove you actually care about the issue. Alves9 (talk) 03:26, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm a shitty arguer, and I have less confidence than you think I do. I don't have the interest, time, or memory to revisit it for you. —Suzukaze-c (talk) 03:29, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't think you understand the point of this. I am not here because I want to argue with you personally. I'm here to restart the discussion that was made years ago, which I think had an unfair conclusion. If nobody can bring a convincing argument to keep the current standard in place, which I find ridiculous, then you must admit that I am right ("won"), and therefore devise a new standard. That is what argumentation is, it isn't a platform to crush your opponent. Whether you actually have the interest or not is mostly irrelevant. Alves9 (talk) 03:36, 4 March 2021 (UTC)


 * , remember that this is a collaborative volunteer project -- one "wins" by gaining the respect and agreement of the other editors, not by pursuing the same argument until others stop responding to you.
 * None of our current approach involves copy-pasting entire entries, FWIW -- non-lemma entries use and related templates and backing modules to dynamically fetch and display relevant information from the lemma entries, while directing users to click through to the lemma entries to see fuller detail.
 * I too have little interest in rehashing past arguments. We (the JA editors) hit upon a functional approach, and we are generally more interested in building the entries out than in revisiting technical details.
 * If you would like to discuss the structuring of JA content, I recommend that you open a thread at WT:BEER and ping JA editors. Any individual's Talk page is ultimately not an appropriate forum for determining policy changes of such a potentially broad impact.  ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 06:45, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

I could be wrong...
but there seems to be a problem with Module:ko-pron. See CAT:E. Chuck Entz (talk) 15:21, 2 March 2021 (UTC)


 * :') —Suzukaze-c (talk) 23:14, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Epenthetical vowels
Would it be possible to set up ko-suffix so that ko-suffix for e.g. shows the headline as —(으)니까 and categorizes it as Category:Korean suffixes with epenthetic 으?--Tibidibi (talk) 00:27, 3 March 2021 (UTC)


 * ✅ —Suzukaze-c (talk) 00:53, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Why:
See 오래간만입니다. There's no reason at all to transliterate 오래간만 입니다! The whole point of the head parameter is to bypass all the code that processes the headword. That's true for every every other language, so making an ad hoc exception for one language is just going to confuse people. If you need to deal with oddities like parentheses, you should create a parameter just for that. Chuck Entz (talk) 05:51, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't see why one wouldn't transliterate it. Why should the exclamation point be excluded from the transliteration? And it is the same affair for Arabic vocalization, where vowels inserted in |head= are reflected in the translit. :s
 * The error message about non-Hangul is due to overly paranoid code that needs to be relaxed appropriately. —Suzukaze-c (talk) 06:10, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Nemaki in katakana?
Is there any solid lexical reason to have an entry for ネマキ?

Basically any term can be spelled in katakana, depending on what effect the author is trying to impart. The number of native 和語 that should be spelled in katakana is rather small. I note that we don't generally have entries for English terms in ALL CAPS, for instance, unless there's a lexical reason for doing so, such as or.

Curious as to your thoughts. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 03:46, 9 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Feel free to delete it ("created in error"). —Suzukaze-c (talk) 04:26, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Cheers, thanks! Done.  :)  ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 04:55, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

Template:ko-IPA
Inspired by the sandbox of, I've set up some examples of what ko-IPA might eventually look like in User:Tibidibi/Sandbox.

Ideally there would be a question mark after each line with hover text for each line ("Standard Korean pronunciation, based on Seoul speakers in the early twentieth century; the formal standard in both Koreas, but rarely strictly followed in either" / "Common pronunciation by speakers born in Seoul in the 1990s" / "Likely common pronunciation by speakers born in Pyongyang in the 1990s; irregular sound shifts may not be taken into account.")--Tibidibi (talk) 03:50, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

せえ
Heya, re:, thanks for the explanation in the edit summary -- agreed then that the usex probably deserves the clarifying note.

Should the sense line also have the label?

My first-hand experience living in the language was all in the Kantō and Tōhoku regions, where I never heard. In my more limited experience in Nagano as a visitor over the span of a few weeks, I also don't recall encountering this there. If this is is indeed absent from northwestern Japanese, we should find a way to record that somehow in our entry. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 22:15, 15 March 2021 (UTC)


 * I would be thrilled if "dialectal" was made more specific. I don't have that information. —Suzukaze-c (talk) 01:37, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Good to know, cheers! :)
 * , are any of you familiar enough with the dialectal details of to have a go at clarifying the sense label?  ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 18:37, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
 * https://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q12128990377 -- Huhu9001 (talk) 21:53, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Fix ajaxediting section-0
こんにちは. 雖然enwikt無法編輯section-0，其他項目可以. 編輯section-0並Save會導致section-0編輯框無法收縮，以及section-0多餘的Ædit標籤. 爲此，我已自行修復，若能參考我的代碼，我將不勝感激. --EdwardAlexanderCrowley (talk) 13:57, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
 * 哦，感謝. 但您是如何編輯section 0的？(?_?)想親自試一下.
 * —Suzukaze-c (talk) 07:51, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
 * 在zhwikt 參數設置開啓第一項為頁面的序言章節添加[編輯]鏈接，或enwiki Preferences開啓Add an [edit] link for the lead section of a page EdwardAlexanderCrowley (talk) 07:58, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
 * 好， 已更新！—Suzukaze-c (talk) 08:15, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Module:ja-see
Heya, any idea how to keep from generating the  Invalid &lt;ref&gt; tag  errors at ばしゃうま?

One workaround would be to change the  self-closing tags back to the full format, but that seems less than ideal. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 00:59, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
 * The problem is that the named refs are a property of the whole page rather than of the part of the page you're extracting. That is, if the form with ja-see is a synonym for only Etymology 3, there's no guarantee that the  type of tags aren't in Etymology 1 or Etymology 2. The only foolproof way to handle this is to have separate code that creates a table of ref names and their content. Then it's just a choice between making sure that the first instance of each named ref in your extracted text has the content in it, or  substituting a pair of plain ref tags with the content between (i.e.  ) for every self-closing/contentless named ref tag (i.e.  ). I hope I'm not just explaining the obvious. Chuck Entz (talk) 06:12, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

I would modify ja-see to strip away the refs. —Suzukaze-c (talk) 06:21, 14 April 2021 (UTC)


 * I realized that the crux of the issue was that I had tried putting refs on the sense line to back up the explanation, experimenting with an approach in response to Huhu9001's puzzling distaste for etymology sections. I've just now moved the sense development details into the etym section at 馬車馬, and that seems to have resolved the issue at ばしゃうま.
 * Thank you both for your responses! ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 00:32, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

ka ending adjectives
Re: ja:w:カ語尾, do we have a conjugation table for these, that we could add at entries like 強か or 熱か? ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 21:44, 23 April 2021 (UTC)


 * No. —Suzukaze-c (talk) 23:11, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

～ば as object marker?
Re:, I don't think I've ever encountered this. There's をば that still has some dialectal use, in turn from object を + topic / emphatic / contrastive は. Perhaps this is a contraction of that? Do you have any usexes or other details? Curious, ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 23:30, 1 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Fukuoka (全国方言辞典), Yamagata, Hakata (ja.wp), Hokkaido, Sendai, Hakata, Kyushu (ja.wt). ^^ —Suzukaze-c (talk) 23:35, 1 June 2021 (UTC)


 * The northern end of Honshu is where I've personally run across をば before. That Goo page has no derivation information, but the JA WP link indicates a contraction of をば.  In the few examples I've seen so far, this ば occurs where the preceding noun ends in ん, like 本ば or ラーメンば, or where the preceding noun already ends in, like ほいじょば, which are the phonological environments where we might expect the を to contract out.  I also see now over in the KDJ entry at Kotobank that they also derive this usage from をば, first dating it to the early 1800s.  Interesting!
 * Thank you for the links! ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 00:03, 2 June 2021 (UTC)


 * I didn't think about the etymology, and I feel greatly enlightened knowing about をば :) Adding that to the Etymology section would be great. —Suzukaze-c (talk) 00:08, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

濁 and yomi types
Heya, is there any publicly available online Koujien? I don't have much by way of good resources for kanji yomi types -- the major works just broadly lump all the on'yomi together.

More specific to the entry, it surprises me that the goon would be じょく -- the JA WT entry gives the goon as daku and the kan'yōon as joku; also, the 🇨🇬 reading of  suggests daku rather than joku. The anon's edit-comment mention of 捉 didn't make much sense to me, since the 🇨🇬 is so different. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 23:58, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Duplicates Question
Hey- thanks for finding those duplication errors you have found. Are you looking at 'Category:Pages using duplicate arguments in template calls'? How are you finding these? If you can tell me how to do it, I will watch for errors I make. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 21:26, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
 * You can add it to your Watchlist. When a page enters it, the addition will appear in your Watchlist, if "page categorization" isn't hidden/disabled. —Suzukaze-c (talk) 21:42, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Also, you can link to categories like this: Category:Pages using duplicate arguments in template calls —Suzukaze-c (talk) 21:43, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Specifically, I used to check it manually, but got tired of finding the right people to ping for ~50 entries at once, so I subscribed to the RSS feed ("feed-icon.svg Atom") at Special:RecentChangesLinked/Category:Pages using duplicate arguments in template calls, and I don't use my Watchlist productively. —Suzukaze-c (talk) 21:47, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

頔
why did you delete my edit for 頔? Doesn't the Hanja Dictionary here:https://zetawiki.com/wiki/%E9%A0%94 literally say that I am right that the Hanja for 頔 is 적? I'm sorry I am new to this website. — Blahhmosh (talk) 10:24, 15 July 2021 (UTC)


 * It was a malformed entry, missing a definition line or rfdef. 跳 is an example of a fuller entry that you could mimic. —Suzukaze-c (talk) 03:07, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Your reverts
Hello

I have found a series of nonsensical IP's edits of Talk pages, which I deemed spam. You have reverted me: https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Special:MobileDiff/63661783&markasread=23476741&markasreadwiki=enwiktionary&diffmode=source Why so?

See their descriptions and some cross-wiki LTA notes who it may have been.

Bows Zezen (talk) 04:39, 15 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Beer_parlour/2018/August. —Suzukaze-c (talk) 04:42, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

Oh, I have read one of these articles: now I understand your "disabled" note. Ta. Zezen (talk) 04:52, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I have to wonder about your understanding of what spam is. I can understand mistaking these for random or intentional gibberish, but "spam"? These have no obvious meaning, they don't link to anything, they have nothing in common with any website that anyone would want to promote- no real spammer would waste their time and bandwidth on anything like this. There's a difference between getting rid of obvious garbage that someone has just added and removing cryptic comments that have been sitting unnoticed on a talk page for 5 years. If you can't tell the difference, maybe you should check with someone first. Chuck Entz (talk) 05:31, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Dear @Chuck Entz (and Suzukaze): see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:LTA/GRP https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Long-term_abuse/Wikinger or ask e.g. Ferien (without a ping) why it looked similar to such spam at first sight. (Or I can write more, but in private.)
 * Have a fine Sunday! Zezen (talk) 05:48, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

によって
There seems to be something about your recent edits to this page that ja-see is unable to deal with. Both に因って and に依って have invisible module errors. Chuck Entz (talk) 22:42, 15 August 2021 (UTC)


 * ✅ —Suzukaze-c (talk) 23:05, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you for correcting my mistake; it should've been obvious to me once I stumbled upon 搾乳器 that sakunyū is used as a noun. I suspect you're also the IP who helped over at 揃い. I apologize if I miss anything when creating these entries; I'm currently learning Japanese, and I'm trying to fill out red links that I come across should I be able to verify them through an external dictionary. TheTechnician27 (talk) 20:32, 22 August 2021 (UTC)


 * NP, and good luck with your studies! And I am not that IP address, but have been intrigued by their tidying. —Suzukaze-c (talk) 20:37, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
 * A quick question: I noticed that the entry for 搾 has only three compounds listed, whereas there are two others (圧搾機 and 搾乳器) not included. Is this just a result of an editor forgetting to put 圧搾機 there (I haven't put 搾乳器 there yet because of this) or do we intentionally only include compounds with two characters? Furthermore, how are those three compounds organized? It seems like 圧搾 should be first since its first component kana 'a' comes before 'sa'. TheTechnician27 (talk) 21:36, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
 * AFAIK, there are no particular rules on order or length (although alphabetical is certainly sensible) or demands for thoroughness. —Suzukaze-c (talk) 21:45, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Gotcha. I also learned there's a formal word for what I meant called gojūon. Sorry to keep bugging you, but I've decided for literally no good reason to go down the rabbit hole of expanding the category ja:Dairy farming, and there was something I was curious about: my understanding of 器 and 機 is that 器 connotes a smaller device while 機 is more like a larger apparatus. Therefore, I was wondering if 搾乳器 would count under ja:Dairy farming, i.e. if it connotes something that's sizable enough to milk a cow. When I went out to look for this using "搾乳器牛", the first result I stumbled across was this page which actually has "搾乳機器". And this wasn't the only instance of that. The next result was this where they once again use "搾乳機器". I found it again on this site ostensibly selling cow-milking machines. Does using both 'ki's together just signify a medium-sized machine? TheTechnician27 (talk) 13:50, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
 * , I see what you mean since 機 tends to mean big machine and 器 tend to mean small one. But based on my experience, 機器 doesn't have to be medium-sized at all, it's more general and can refer to machine with any size, similar to 機械.Shen233 (talk) 20:03, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I personally don't have an answer for 器 vs. 機 😅 —Suzukaze-c (talk) 21:59, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I think has it correct. Either way, "搾乳機器" definitely warrants its own entry, as a search turns up hundreds of exact results, not to mention a usage on Asahi, in a press release from Farmnote, and a report from the Nagano Prefectural Matsumoto Livestock Hygiene Service Center (as authors from the center have contributed to numerous entries in prestigious journals, I think it's reasonable to trust them as an authority for usage here). TheTechnician27 (talk) 22:14, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Historical kana spellings in lists
Re: your, apparently it was in  from April 2013. The IP geolocates to the UK, so this might be our fun and clueless British anon. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 22:34, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

やなぎ split etyms?
The surname is clearly from the noun, and the only difference is the pitch accent. Shouldn't these two etym sections be combined? ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 18:27, 24 September 2021 (UTC)


 * For this case, I don't really mind, but sometimes I wonder about the possibility of false herrings for proper nouns that appear to be derived from homophonouns/homographic nouns.
 * Splitting also seems to be saner / cleaner for entries like かおり &mdash; or should 佳織 go in ja-kanjitab for (what is currently) Ety 1? Really I don't know how proper nouns should be dealt with, though. —Suzukaze-c (talk) 23:12, 24 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Ya, as you state, this case is more cut-and-dried than we see for many names. Surnames are, I think, often less mysterious, but given names can have a ridiculous number of potential spellings and multiple possible derivations.
 * Re: かおり, that is probably from the "fragrant" sense of the main noun, but who knows. Keeping etyms separate for given names is probably smarter, unless it's clear that the given name comes from a specific term.  ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 00:08, 25 September 2021 (UTC)
 * I also wonder if the difference in pitch accent merits mention in the etymology (the text field itself, not the notional section). —Suzukaze-c (talk) 02:34, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

すすき name sense
It seems there are very many attested spellings: http://nihongo.monash.edu/cgi-bin/wwwjdic?2MUJ%E3%81%99%E3%81%99%E3%81%8D ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 18:30, 24 September 2021 (UTC)


 * I don't want to copy from ENAMDICT. —Suzukaze-c (talk) 23:13, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
 * That's fair, and a very good idea. :)  I was pointing there mainly as an illustration.  Anything we add to our entry should be a synthesis based on multiple resources.  ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 00:08, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

飲む
Chuck Entz (talk) 14:21, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

一層の事
I removed the Alternative forms section and kept the  part in ja-kanjitab, otherwise other spellings' page will show "The following entry is uncreated: 一層の事." --TongcyDai (talk) 07:37, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

かしこい
?? ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 19:21, 11 October 2021 (UTC)


 * For moving 賢い to かしこい. —Suzukaze-c (talk) 19:26, 11 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Cool. Do you need help doing that?  I saw that it's been about five days, which is longer than I'm used to seeing for this kind of operation.  ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 22:29, 11 October 2021 (UTC)


 * It takes a while for deletion, so I usually don't get around to it immediately. I put them on my watchlist and check it whenever I remember to. —Suzukaze-c (talk) 00:01, 12 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Cheers, no worries then. I went ahead and moved things around.  The かしこい entry still needs expanding, but I don't have the bandwidth right now to dive in that deeply.  ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 16:36, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

Term is not divided into morpheme + suffix. (×21)
Chuck Entz (talk) 04:19, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

陽部
I entered the term at the tool Quiet Quentin for attestations. --Apisite (talk) 06:00, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
 * which attestations? —Suzukaze-c (talk) 06:00, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

your revert Special:Diff/64416821
I've looked up all terms using search engines before adding to make sure they're attested (which is why not all languages from Wikipedia are included). I've also made sure the genders are correct. Can you point me to a single incorrect translation? Fytcha (talk) 08:00, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
 * suzukaze is right in principle that you shouldn't do that, and I certainly wouldn't add translations that are written in scripts I can't read (the Hindi, Sinhalese and Tamil ones, for example), unless I'd found them in entries created by reliable editors here. But I think he may have thrown the baby out with the bathwater in this case. You seem to have worked carefully, and I can see some of your additions are supported by the IATE.
 * Btw, when you add Bulgarian, Ukrainian and Belarusian translations, please don't omit the stress marks! PUC – 09:24, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your input! I will keep it in mind.
 * With regards to the mentioned foreign scripts: When I added the translations yesterday, I found an attestation of the Tamil term in an official Swiss document which to me is a strong indicator that it is indeed the right translation, despite me having no knowledge about the script (this is in addition to us having the entry மக்களாட்சி). Fytcha (talk) 09:35, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

--Fytcha (talk) 16:17, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
 * As PUC said. —Suzukaze-c (talk) 21:05, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
 * He said you may have thrown the baby out with the bathwater in this case. Fytcha (talk) 21:21, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Entirely as PUC said. —Suzukaze-c (talk) 21:22, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

汝
Re:, would なむち be the "ancient" 仮名遣い? Or is "ancient" reserved for "reconstructed pre-historical"? ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 05:10, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Honestly I don't know wtf "ancient" is. I just implemented ja-readings according to the discussion at the time. —Suzukaze-c (talk) 05:32, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
 * 😆 Well, thanks anyway. :)  Cheers!  ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 07:45, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
 * —Suzukaze-c (talk) 08:26, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
 * “Historical” is supposed to be the pre-WWII spelling, whereas “ancient” is for even older forms of the words. You might well say here e.g. なんじ-<なんぢ-<なむち- and you’ll have the second one labelled “historical” and the third “ancient”. I think that would be appropriate for this word. – Krun (talk) 18:04, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

する
Why did you remove this from Category:Japanese irregular verbs? —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:27, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Why did you add it to irregular verbs? —Suzukaze-c (talk) 01:28, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Because it's irregular. I didn't see that Category:Japanese suru verbs is a subcategory. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:29, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

謹厳実直
Just noticed this...it's marked as a noun but the definition is an adjective...which is it? User: The Ice Mage talk to meh 16:37, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

wgping
I don't know if you still want to get pinged on Chinese matters, but if you do, you'll have to fix zh. The ping in failed. Chuck Entz (talk) 05:01, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

이 & 해
What was wrong? Ffffrr (talk) 05:25, 19 December 2021 (UTC)


 * Nothing; that's why I reverted you. w:WP:REDLINK —Fish bowl (talk) 05:28, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Not to mention the first message on their talkpage. Maybe next time it will sink in.... Chuck Entz (talk) 05:48, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

I thought I was helping link to words that already existed, maybe I was mistaken. Ffffrr (talk) 10:48, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

I see you created the missing redlink so thanks I guess Ffffrr (talk) 11:22, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

Deletions
I can just clear this out if you want so that you don't have to flag everything manually. &mdash; Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 02:37, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Sure, thank you! Could I request User talk: as well? —Fish bowl (talk) 02:40, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Yep, will do. &mdash; Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 02:42, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

乗る
if 乗りやすい is sum-of-parts then のる appears to be missing a sense. General Vicinity (talk) 03:23, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Windows is Windows
Hello. Regarding [//en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=%E3%82%A8%E3%83%A9%E3%83%BC&type=revision&diff=65303630&oldid=65265431 this edit], I don't know that it is true that "windows is windows". I don't know whether, for example, Windows 10 has the same error message as Windows XP. I don't suppose that it matters a whole lot, but I'm more inclined to 's suggestion that the citation is marginal, given its lack of dating and other specifics. Any road, happy editing. Cnilep (talk) 05:48, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Etymology
What happened now? Ffffrr (talk) 04:36, 19 January 2022 (UTC)


 * stupid formatting: using  + m instead of just putting the word directly in der; and using der when it's clearly bor. —Fish bowl (talk) 04:39, 19 January 2022 (UTC)


 * There has sometimes been the issue where the redlinks disappeared when I did that but alright. Ffffrr (talk) 04:41, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Duplicate arguments
Thanks again! How did you know? Are such errors flagged up somewhere? — Salt  marsh  🢃  09:37, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
 * The page appears in that category: —Fish bowl (talk) 09:56, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

That anon from Japan
Re:, blocked for 6 months. I'd permablock given their track record of obstinacy and breaking things, but I'm loath to do that for an IP. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 23:28, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Oops! ×24
See CAT:E.

Thanks! Chuck Entz (talk) 13:03, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Japanse Pitch Accent
I'd just like to appologise here and now for my past (and most likey future) pitch accent mistakes. Do you know of any resource I could use to actually find the correct accent for terms? FishandChipper (talk) 09:26, 25 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Legally, a more recent copy of Daijirin is available via Internet Archive (https://web.archive.org/web/20170000000000id_/https://www.weblio.jp/content/さかいめ, good to set up as a browser search engine). Less legally, the first web result at 広辞苑無料検索 provides an (apparently) older copy of the Daijirin as well as the NHK accent dictionary. —Fish bowl (talk) 09:53, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
 * ありがとうございます！ FishandChipper (talk) 09:55, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Chinese translations
Hey. The RFD-deleted Federal Reserve System had the following blue links as translations:



Do you think the non-short forms in this list should also be nominated for deletion for being encyclopedic? &mdash; Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 09:31, 3 March 2022 (UTC)


 * It looks so to me. —Fish bowl (talk) 09:37, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Re:
Oi vey.

Thanks for the fix! 😄 ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 04:40, 7 March 2022 (UTC)


 * it happens to all of us :) —Fish bowl (talk) 04:45, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

Translations
Why? Ffffrr (talk) 06:17, 10 March 2022 (UTC)


 * I felt that importance nuance was lost or mistranslated. —Fish bowl (talk) 06:20, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Will you try to add an improved translation? Ffffrr (talk) 06:21, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I would like to not try at the moment, as the person who actually left the translation parameter empty. —Fish bowl (talk) 06:23, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Ok Ffffrr (talk) 06:26, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

わかもの
You've requested the deletion of that page with the reason "vacate for page move" but nothing has been moved there for a week now. Should the old page be restored? &mdash; Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 09:56, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

Pseudo-loans
Hi! Thanks for your edits to expand certain etymologies. :) However, I have removed the pseudo-Japonisms category from them. A pseudo-loan is when a term is thought by speakers to have originated in a certain language, but in fact was created within their own language (potentially to look like the other language). If a term actually did originate from the other language, it's just a regular loan, not a psuedo-loan. If the meaning has been changed, it may be a false friend (for which there are certain templates, like Template:U:false friend and Template:U:es:false friend), although I think this is generally(?) only noted when the meaning is counterintuitively different, and not when it's just specialized a little, like using the Japanese word for "dirty" for a dirty genre, or using for a German woman in particular, where the glosses (and your explanatory text) in the etymology are sufficient. :) (Side note, Wiktionary should probably change the pseudo-loan category naming scheme so people don't have to come up with -isms for languages and can just use "[language name] pseudo-loans from [language name]", but that's my fault.) - -sche (discuss) 03:26, 19 March 2022 (UTC)


 * That's fair, and thanks for explaining it to me :)
 * As for waifu and husbando specifically, I suspect that they are like problemo. Although from a Google search I learn that the show mentioned at waifu indeed has a line where a character refers to his wife using the weird Japlish phrase mai waifu; is this actually Japanese?
 * —Fish bowl (talk) 04:21, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

笑 on 長文
Hello. You remarked on 長文 that 笑 seems "very punctuation mark-y". It is true that, like English <g>, the meaning can be understood without reference to pronunciation. But it is also true that the form can be pronounced either わらい or わら (which led to “LOL”).

Adding something like  would remove the double-width character from the romaji line. I prefer letting the hiragana line of the template do the work, though. It is simpler, and adds information. Happy editing, Cnilep (talk) 01:06, 24 March 2022 (UTC)


 * I suspect that "w" is a artifact of typing ease, rather than an actual pronunciation. That being said, "w" also seems like a good candidate for romanization of 笑. —Fish bowl (talk) 07:33, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

Japanese 尼港 - obsolete term for Nikolayevsk
It's used in the term. Does this merit an entry? RcAlex36 (talk) 19:23, 26 March 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ —Fish bowl (talk) 21:19, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

Inserting redlink categories
Why are you doing this? Why is this an improvement? —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 00:56, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

Thx!
Hey! I was an editor at zh.wp but have since quitted and started contributing here at en.wikt. I just want to thank you for your correction of the entry I recently created. --185.217.119.46 02:21, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

暴論
Is this a Japanese word? If so, can an entry be created? Thanks. RcAlex36 (talk) 15:07, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

Q re: bor+
Heya, re:, I may have lost track of the score -- last I knew, it sounded like was super controversial and was going to be removed. Is that no longer the case? ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 00:20, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I didn't bother to follow the controversy too much, but it seems to be safe for now, so why not. —Fish bowl (talk) 00:27, 21 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Interesting. Re: me personally, I was worried about how long "safe for now" will wind up being.  The reason "why not" to use it is because the previous version (manually writing out the wikicode for  ) already worked, and if the new version  is at risk of suddenly not working (due to template removal), the change violates the old dictum, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it".  :)
 * That said, it does appear that the RFD discussion ended in favor of keeping, clearing up the "how long" worry and resolving my concern. Cheers!  ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 19:04, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

天璽
Why did you remove this compound? It is legitimate. 218.188.210.224 02:09, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Excellent Work!
Excellent work with the 350bot & second round simplified characters! --Geographyinitiative (talk) 16:39, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

Request
Hey man, zh-pron for multi-syllable Chinese character entries is missing Wade-Giles. Here's a dictionary showing the forms of Wade-Giles for multi-syllabic Chinese character terms:. Is there something, anything I can do to add Wade-Giles to the zh-pron box for multi-syllabic Chinese character entries? It's embarassing that Tongyong Pinyin and Gwoyeu Romatzyh are in the box, but Wade-Giles is absent. Thanks for any guidance on what to do about this issue. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 01:00, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

Looking for a Smarter Way
In this, I add several hidden components, which are the Chinese character names corresponding to the English language text. However, to the reader who doesn't edit the page, that information is not utilized. They will more than likely be utterly befuddled by these words. Do you have a smarter way to handle this situation? Thanks for any guidance. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 12:58, 25 May 2022 (UTC)


 * What about ? The downside is that it automatically downgrades the English-ness of that text, and it can't be a link to   anymore either. —Fish bowl (talk) 13:00, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Ata
Ag 112.200.102.247 05:27, 29 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Cu —Fish bowl (talk) 05:28, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

reverting 雷 and 蕾 edits with "chinese given names are an open set"
I don't understand these reverts. How are Chinese given names any more of an open set than Paul, which includes a definition "2. A male given name from Latin of biblical origin."? And is reverting due to "open set" a policy? James A Hinnant (talk) 06:09, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
 * re edits [蕾 edit 67240185] and [雷 edit 67240185] James A Hinnant (talk) 06:14, 4 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Category:Chinese given names was deleted because any character or combination of characters can be used as long as it is felicitous. —Fish bowl (talk) 21:36, 4 June 2022 (UTC)

Speedies
I'm going to delete the ones where the user pasted foreign-language definitions verbatim for copyvio, but I don't think the annoying "needs xy" (that often replied to) or even the legitimate discussions such as Talk:改 should be deleted. &mdash; Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 13:37, 22 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Just FYI, I deleted all those that contained a copyvio and all where the guy just talks to himself but I've kept the ones where somebody else has replied. If there's more work to be done, you can ping me or write on my discussion page. You can spare yourself the trouble of tagging every single one as a speedy; if there's a list or a search query I can just mass-delete them with AWB. &mdash; Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 20:11, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

Thank you 😊
Very much Intheend00 (talk) 03:08, 9 July 2022 (UTC)

つくえ
Should such entries have references? My gut feeling says no but WT:AJA doesn't make any prescriptions. &mdash; Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 21:40, 11 July 2022 (UTC)


 * I think they should not, and frankly would also favor removal of all mentions of "The Oxford Starter Japanese Dictionary" (very unimpressive and reflects poorly). Over 10 years have passed for these entries; hopefully the majority are sufficiently improved at this point. —Fish bowl (talk) 04:12, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I could remove them all (134) with AWB but that would leave some entries (such as 先ほど) unsourced. Not sure if this is a problem though because the terms this reference was added to are extremely common. If concurs, I'll remove them. &mdash; Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 11:10, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I have no concerns about removing "The Oxford Starter Japanese Dictionary" entirely.
 * I'd be happy to rework . Before doing so, I want to ask -- given the general push to lemmatize yamato kotoba at the kana spellings, should we move things around so our lemma entry is at  instead?  ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 18:22, 12 July 2022 (UTC)

Admin
Hi. I know we've asked you three times already, but would you like to become an administrator here? I'll set up a vote for you Dunderdool (talk) 08:19, 1 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Sure whatever it'll be funny. I can be really irresponsible, it'll let more people hate me, and maybe it'll accelerate my mental illness and make me finally leave or something idk. —Fish bowl (talk) 03:11, 2 August 2022 (UTC)


 * This is a bad idea btw. —Fish bowl (talk) 03:12, 2 August 2022 (UTC)


 * No wonder you hate Dubеolsik–QWЕRTY. --186.122.88.144 21:02, 3 August 2022 (UTC)


 * actually give me that shit i need to destroy this little freak (derogatory) <3 —Fish bowl (talk) 04:23, 4 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Wiktionary:Votes/sy-2022-08/User:Fish bowl for admin is the place to go Dunderdool (talk) 21:27, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

that was extremely funny and we should do it again <333 ily —Fish bowl (talk) 23:39, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Could you please check whether what I have written is grammatically incorrect?
My native language is not English so I need some help. There are two.

The first content to which I refer is here, the second one of the section "Punctuation mark". —NasalCavityRespiratory (talk) 08:37, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

The second one is here, in the section "Usage notes". —NasalCavityRespiratory (talk) 08:37, 21 October 2022 (UTC)


 * They are not very grammatically correct and I am not sure what they mean either, so I cannot correct them. —Fish bowl (talk) 21:06, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Request to run bot
Would you mind running your bot to change in every entry at Category:zh:Pharmacology to, except for the following entries: 仿製藥 佐劑 催吐劑 原研 原研藥 學名藥 激動劑 抗抑鬱藥 抗抑鬱 抗生素 抗菌素 抗雄激素 抗雌激素 拮抗 拮抗劑 效價 標靶 毒物學 毒理 毒理學 特效藥 環素 生物等效性 生物製劑 突釋 窄譜 廣譜 給藥 緩釋 耐受 耐受性 耐藥性 腸溶 藥代動力學 藥劑 藥品 藥物 藥理 藥理學 藥效動力學 藥效學 藥物 藥物治療 處方藥 質子泵抑制劑 賦形劑 雞尾酒療法 非處方藥 氣霧劑 口服液 含服 噴霧劑 利尿劑? RcAlex36 (talk) 16:05, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

Vandalism?
Which edits specifically do you have a problem with? 178.120.10.249 05:21, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

"Is this an appropriate correction?" for Swedish multiword verbs
Your edits look alright to me. I have to admit though that looking back, it would probably suffice to leave those entries without explicit conjugations and direct readers to the only parts that actually change forms, namely the verbs themselves. An exception would be short phrasal verbs like or, which have distinct participles and so need at least a table that links to them.

Verbs with three words or more (like or, which you edited) don't have present or past participles at all. Thus, a list of conjugations probably isn't as necessary as I thought back when I was going through Swedish multiword verbs to change them without discussion. Glades12 (talk) 13:44, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Kawanakajima shogi
The shogi variant and could at least be brought up at the Chess Variants subreddit. -- Apisite (talk) 22:53, 16 March 2023 (UTC)


 * and what does that have to do with wiktionary —Fish bowl (talk) 22:54, 16 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Spreading awareness of the shogi variant at least online. --Apisite (talk) 00:32, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

錯置
Could you explain why you put "cùzhì" for the pinyin here? ---&#62; Tooironic (talk) 07:17, 30 April 2023 (UTC)


 * It is the reading recorded by the Taiwanese 教育部 and automatically loaded by zh-new: https://www.moedict.tw/錯置 —Fish bowl (talk) 07:27, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Oh, I see that it is a totally different sense though (I guess I just accepted zh-new's without checking). —Fish bowl (talk) 07:29, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

About all-caps
I also feel very ??. Since "VOCALOID" is not an acronym, it should not be written in all capital letters. This includes "Yamaha" as well. But I don't want to dwell on this issue too much. After all, even the Wikipedia, which has clear guidelines on this matter, still has cases of capitalization confusion with trademarks. Ryti😈M (talk) 00:40, 11 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Acronym-ness has nothing to do with it? It's the way it is stylized, as on the entire Japanese Wikipedia page: —Fish bowl (talk) 02:57, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Why not give an example from the English Wikipedia? The Japanese Wikipedia itself doesn't have any specific formatting requirements for titles. Also, according to your argument, you should change "Yamaha" "Toshiba" and "Sega" to all capital letters to conform to the stylized format, otherwise you would be engaging in double standards. Ryti😈M (talk) 09:05, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Firstly because those are English-language entries, while VOCALOID is a Japanese-language entry. Secondly, English-language speakers care less about it: Yamaha Corporation; Toshiba; SEGA / Sega Europe. And finally because I have nothing to do with those entries? I'm not the God of Wiktionary. —Fish bowl (talk) 09:48, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
 * If you can show with WT:ATTEST that Vocaloid is more common than VOCALOID, I have no objection. —Fish bowl (talk) 09:53, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Bot request
Hello, can you run your bot to replace all instances of with R:yue:ISO 10646? There are a few entries lack the part number – I'll sort these out manually afterwards. Thanks in advance. – Wpi (talk) 13:48, 17 May 2023 (UTC)


 * I suppose so; but since you bring it up: Are the PDFs any different from http://www.iso10646hk.net/jp/database/index.jsp : is R:yue:Jyutping Database perfectly fine as a replacement? —Fish bowl (talk) 22:50, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
 * They are the exact same source, but R:yue:Jyutping Database links to the search page whereas R:yue:ISO 10646 links to the PDF pages (which I created not knowing the other one existed). I think it makes mores sense to use the latter since it links to the resource directly, but we might want to rename it to the former since that name is more transparent. – Wpi (talk) 10:24, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Using ja-def plus ja-see
Hello, Fish bowl. You commented at おかま, "using {ja-def} affects the display on the relevant page (オカマ) and (thus?) is the right way to do this as i understand it". That doesn't seem right to me, though. If you look at オカマ you will see the katakana bolded (because it is transcluding itself?) and all of the other senses there without boldface katakana. If you look at お釜, neither of the katakana senses with ja-def appear at all. These do not seem like desired outcomes, do they? Cnilep (talk) 00:53, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Oh, hm. That's what I expected on お釜, but on オカマ I expected the opposite where only the marked senses would appear. I guess it only works when all senses have ja-def (as on 沸く)? —Fish bowl (talk) 01:00, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

Surprised and Astonished
Even after being such an experienced and great editor, you are still not an administrator! Shall i vote for you Word0151 (talk) 05:00, 23 October 2023 (UTC)


 * :3c —Fish bowl (talk) 21:28, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
 * ? Word0151 (talk) 02:58, 24 October 2023 (UTC) :(
 * It is because this guy hates Dubeolsik–QWERTY, the best Korean romanization system of the world. 118.68.238.167 20:14, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
 * nice to hear from ya babe, get a better hobby instead of thinking about me <3 —Fish bowl (talk) 20:21, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Kyoto and Kagoshima
Are you able to program Kyoto and Kagoshima accent pattern into Module:ja-pron? I have extracted the Kagoshima and Kyoto accent patterns from Zenkoku Akusento Jiten:

Kagoshima accent is divided into two groups: A and B (ordered by syllable count; also the dashes followed by accent is a particle)

A class accent (the only accented mora is on the penultimate mora):
 * 1. F-L
 * 2. HL-L
 * 3. LHL-L
 * 4. LLHL-L
 * B class accent (the only accented mora is on the final mora):
 * 1. H-L
 * 2. LH-L
 * 3. LLH-L
 * 4. LLLH-L

There are no Kyoto monosyllables. All monosyllables in the standard Japanese lengthen into disyllables in Kyoto.

The accent is even more complex for Kyoto; there are accent patterns that differ with and without a particle.

Kyoto disyllables: Quadrosyllables: Chuterix (talk) 01:00, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 0. HH-H
 * 1. LH ~ LL-H
 * 1:25. LF ~ LH-L
 * 2. HL-L
 * Kyoto trisyllables:
 * 0. HHH-H
 * 1. LLH ~ LLL-H
 * 1:35. LLF ~ LLH-L
 * 1:3. LHL-L
 * 3. HHL-L
 * 2. HLL-L
 * 0. HHHH-H
 * 1. LLLH ~ LLLL-H
 * 1:4. LLHL-L
 * 1:3. LHLL-L
 * 4. HHHL-L
 * 3. HHLL-L
 * 2. HLLL-L


 * Sorry, I don't think I have the time to work on this. —Fish bowl (talk) 02:38, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
 * OK. Chuterix (talk) 02:38, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Sources for Chinese Dialectal Synonyms and Dialectal Pronunciation?
Hey! I'm wondering, where are the Chinese dialectal synonyms and pronunciation modules sourced from? Respectively they are Module:zh/data/dial-syn and Module:zh/data/dial-pron. Suspecting the latter is from zhongguoyuyan.cn, but I can't find anything online for the first one. I'd love to do some research on them. Thanks! 74.101.125.9 03:15, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Redundant / duplicate template parameters
Hello Fish bowl (talk). I saw that you edited my own vocab list template call and also the newly still in development marathi noun declension template and removed the duplicate (numbered and named) template parameters. But they were there for a reason to slowly and gradually switch template calls from one syntax to another. I would suggest to keep them for further data migration and to make these new templates suitable to test them first with new syntax and then use them in the old structure until everything is migrated there. Can you maybe leave them in that state for a while because I first promised to develop a Lua Module for declension and also promised to adapt the transliteration Marathi module to be suitable for two different scenarios (as a helper module for IPA transcription and on the other hand in the declination / conjugation tables for the expected ISO transliterations there). If you have some experience with these kind of tasks some help is highly welcomed, but behaviour / test expectation wise have a close contact with the natives or at least Marathi well enough knowing people who are involved there. I am still working on a test driven approach to get the expectations (from the linguistic point of view) on the modules clear.


 * Thank you for the feedback; this is why I send notifications to people during such tasks (clearing Category:Pages using duplicate arguments in template calls).
 * On Template:mr-decl-noun/basic/documentation: I removed those because (1)  conflicted with   (which is also , but implied; hence   should have been  , and so on), (2) because it did not match the previous actual template call, (3) because instructions to simultaneously fill in named and numbered parameters would produce redundancy, and (4) because Template:mr-decl-noun/basic does not presently have any support for numbered items; those instructions would not be effective, either.
 * I would suggest implementing the numbered parameters first, and then introducing them separately in the documentation, with a note that the named parameters are now obsolete (and keeping in mind that  should have been , or even   for simplicity).
 * As for User:Undekagon30/vocab/Marathi 1,  was paired with , and   was also paired with  ; to resolve the duplicate argument I made the judgement to repair the first one to.
 * —Fish bowl (talk) 22:20, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Please stop and revert your deletion of i=1 in instances of Template:taxon

 * You are wrong to rely on membership in the category without understanding what is going on. This is what I have been afraid of: uninformed use of these as cleanup categories. I can mostly blame others, but you should stop. In particular, removal of "i=1" from taxon is wrong. The parameter exists to allow italicization of parameter 3 in taxon, which is needed for taxa in kingdoms Archaea, Bacteria, and Virus. I wasn't sure that that parameter was the cause of the miscategorization, but didn't think that anyone took those categories seriously. DCDuring (talk) 02:18, 29 February 2024 (UTC)


 * As noted in the edit summary, I was undertaking maintenance work; please see the description written at Category:Pages using duplicate arguments in template calls. Namely: . i=1 was already there. —Fish bowl (talk) 02:21, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes. You are correct and thank you. I didn't see that the "i=1" was at the end of the templated content, because it has been my practice, at least lately, to put it next to the item being italicized. I appreciate being pinged when these changes are made, so that I can avoid that kind of oversight. DCDuring (talk) 02:48, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I'll make sure to keep i=1 in that position if it comes across my radar again.
 * I always ping during this to avoid making a bad correction; sometimes I end up pinging people multiple times in a row, so I'm relieved to hear that you appreciate it. —Fish bowl (talk) 23:09, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

天和 and others
Just noting I added 天和, 夢天‎ and 問天‎ as Skylab, Alpha, and others was also already on the site, so hopefully it passes WT:WWIN. Kungming2 (talk) 19:56, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Why did you add a red link?
In the page "啤酒燒烤", you have added a category link "Mandarin terms derived via romanized wordplay" and it's a red link. NasalCavityRespiratory (talk) 11:48, 6 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Partially because I don't have confidence in the naming and partially because i forgot lol. —Fish bowl (talk) 19:20, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

ポケットモンスター
Why is it rfd? It has an article in ja.wikipedia. It also has results in Google images. 178.120.0.250 13:20, 11 May 2024 (UTC)