User talk:Mofvanes

Welcome Message
--Lo Ximiendo (talk) 13:40, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Double check
Hello. Thank you for all the entries you've contributed thus far, and for the thoroughness you put into them. Just a quick thing--make sure that you double check your entry before you submit it to screen out small formatting errors, like an extra "=" or the like. You can use the "show preview" button next to the publish button to look for these. Thank you! --SanctMinimalicen (talk) 03:38, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I'm usually more careful Mofvanes (talk) 17:48, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
 * No problem--we all do it. --SanctMinimalicen (talk) 18:43, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

zondags
Hi, please be careful not to remove too much lexical information. Though the two adjectival senses can each indeed be translated as "Sunday", it is more useful to users to explain the difference in meaning. For instance, few people these days would reserve their "Sunday Best" exclusively for Sundays any more. (On an unrelated note, these adjective-adverb pairs on usually have different etymologies, but it is fine to leave them as is when adding them.) ←₰-→  Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  08:13, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Understood. FYI, I re-added the declension to . While you're here, may I ask you a few questions about Dutch entries?
 * 1. Do other days of the week have such a double meaning, that I should add?
 * 2. How would you deal with diminutive Dutch nouns without a non-diminutive like ?
 * 3. Should I list idioms like as a verb or a phrase?
 * Mofvanes (talk) 13:45, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't think there's anything in contemporary language, though the WNT gives "damn, darned" for zaterdagsch. Their cites are all in obsolete spellings, however.
 * I'd prefer lemmatising the diminutive in that case. Whether you use n or nl-noun-dim is up to you, but my preference goes to the first option.
 * A verb in this case, and you can use maken instead of a conjugation template. But if the verb never conjugates you could consider turning it into a phrase.
 * ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  07:19, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Klingon
Hi! Please stop creating Klingon entries. Due to copyright issues, most of what you have created will unfortunately probably need to be deleted. See Beer_parlour/2018/July. - -sche (discuss) 21:12, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Ok. :( . This was not made clear. I suggest you add a notice to Appendix:Klingon for the future. Mofvanes (talk) 21:21, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
 * You'll probably be OK, actually. Keep 'em coming - if we decide to keep them, great. If not, we can always delete them later. --Harmonicaplayer (talk) 20:24, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
 * If one keepes the entries coming and they get deleted later, then some amount of work will be wasted. Thus it's better to wait and discuss the issue first (somewhere else like WT:BP). -84.161.57.43 20:25, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

gender in Dutch
The gender at was incorrect. Compounds take the gender of the head (in this case ), with only few exceptions, though there can be complexities with words that have or had multiple genders. You can also leave the gender parameter empty if you don't know sure. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  09:38, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Noted. I knew that. (I think) I used a different article as a template, but forgot to change the gender. Thanks Mofvanes (talk) 10:01, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Borrowing
Please use the "bor" template in etymologies only when the target language really borrowed that word from the source language. For example, Kanin has several intermediate steps from Old French to modern German. And since Old French ends at 1350 it's really virtually impossible for modern German to borrow a word from Old French. (Unless a modern German writer actually took it from an Old French dictionary.) Use the "der" template in any case of doubt. Thank you.
 * Noted Mofvanes (talk) 21:24, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Whether it is correct or not, it's not uncommon to use / together with other /. By the same reasoning (OFr. ended 1350, NHG and NE started around ca. 1500) Category:English terms borrowed from Old French should be (almost) empty and Category:English terms borrowed from Latin be smaller (e.g. without ). And by similar reasoning Category:English terms inherited from Proto-Germanic and Category:English terms derived from Proto-Indo-European should be (almost) empty too. Yet these cats aren't empty... -84.161.57.43 20:25, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

Attestation
-84.161.57.43 20:25, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
 * "Attested in Duden", "Attested on German wikipedia", "attested on wiki", "attested on redensart-index, pons, dict.cc, etc." :
 * You do know that all these source do not attest anything as for English Wiktionary's WT:CFI, do you?
 * "Info from de:[..]" :
 * You do know that there's much much nonsense in the German Wiktionary, do you?
 * Perhaps "attested" isn't the right word, "appears" might be better; I know it doesn't meet the standard for WT:CFI, I just want to make clear that the terms exist. Regarding the German Wiktionary, they cite their sources, so I'm inclined to trust them. Mofvanes (talk) 21:37, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm surprised to read that about de.wikt. I thought they were a serious bunch, albeit too prescriptivist. Per utramque cavernam 21:07, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
 * It's very easy to find obvious mistakes in de.wt, e.g. de:Randale (obviously incorrect inflection), and from today de:Empfängerin (hypernym =  but example refering to a company). -22:04, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Lutherbibel
FYI, the quote in was wrong (wrong year (edition) or wrong text). I kept the year and corrected the text; alternatively the text could be correct, but the year wrong. Possibly more Lutherbibel quotes need to be fixed... -20:52, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
 * It's the correct year and text, it's just modernized spelling (which tbf, I should have indicated) Mofvanes (talk) 21:05, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
 * If it's for example the 1912 Lutherbibel, then it's more than just "modernized spelling"; and if it's modernized but another year is given, it's not "correct year and text" anymore. -84.161.51.5 22:04, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I thought it would be OK. You rarely ſee KJV quotes conteyning the original ſpelling. Now I know. Mofvanes (talk) 00:06, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Ok. I now realise it is, in fact, the 1912 Bible, just for some reason Biblegatway said it was the 1545 version. I'll update the quotes Mofvanes (talk) 04:10, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Directions and derived terms
as e.g. Norden + Nordmann, Nordwind. Please see Nord, Süd, Ost, West. --Norman Mapot (talk) 21:37, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Danke für den Hinweis. Ich dachte, Nord/Süd/Ost/West (ohne -en) wären nur zusammengesetze Formen (wie z.b. Schule + Bus -> Schulbus) /mof.va.nes/ (talk) 16:30, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Aufläger
Hello Mofvanes, thanks for all those German entries! How sure are you of the plural Aufläger? I´m not familiar with this term and there are many oddities in German lects, but it sounds wrong to me. Besides, neither Duden nor de:wt seem to know it. --77.4.121.150 17:11, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Google Books finds some clear examples of Aufläger going far back. e.g.
 * 1913 Angewandte Chemie, vol. 26. p.61
 * Vf. bespricht einzelne Bauunfälle an Betonbauten, die auf Sehalungsfehler, Temperatur, Überlastung oder schlechte Aufläger zurückzuführen waren
 * Others seem to be an variant spelling of Aufleger (publisher?). In any case, it exists, but is uncommon. /mof.va.nes/ (talk) 17:42, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Most of the hits in GoogleBooks are misreadings of Ankläger in Gothic script. But there must have been a noun Aufläger (cf. Dinglers polytechnisches Journal, Band 24; Band 274,J. G. Cotta, 1889, p77: "ein Aufläger vor der Mitte des Kessels, die anderen beiden rechts und links davon"), which could denote some kind of substructure. I think we should treat all clear occurences of Aufläger in the plural as forms of this noun as long as there isn´t a clear counter-example linking it with Auflager. --77.7.81.74 09:51, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Fair enough /mof.va.nes/ (talk) 13:43, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Community Insights Survey
Share your experience in this survey

Hi ,

The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey about your experience with and Wikimedia. The purpose of this survey is to learn how well the Foundation is supporting your work on wiki and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. [mailto:surveys@wikimedia.org Email us] if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely, RMaung (WMF) 14:34, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

Reminder: Community Insights Survey
Share your experience in this survey

Hi ,

A couple of weeks ago, we invited you to take the Community Insights Survey. It is the Wikimedia Foundation’s annual survey of our global communities. We want to learn how well we support your work on wiki. We are 10% towards our goal for participation. If you have not already taken the survey, you can help us reach our goal! Your voice matters to us.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. [mailto:surveys@wikimedia.org Email us] if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely, RMaung (WMF) 19:14, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Reminder: Community Insights Survey
Share your experience in this survey

Hi ,

There are only a few weeks left to take the Community Insights Survey! We are 30% towards our goal for participation. If you have not already taken the survey, you can help us reach our goal! With this poll, the Wikimedia Foundation gathers feedback on how well we support your work on wiki. It only takes 15-25 minutes to complete, and it has a direct impact on the support we provide.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. [mailto:surveys@wikimedia.org Email us] if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely, RMaung (WMF) 17:04, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

Dutch entries
I noticed you have been adding a large number of Dutch entries and they seem to be of good quality. Thank you! ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  11:47, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

Voß' Ilias
Hi, I've noticed you quoted that work quite a lot.

Please make sure, that your quotes are correct. See for example: (cp. Voß' Ilias (5th ed., 1821)). Your link - which by URL might imply it's from the edition from 1821 - is dead, so I've no idea, what it stated. Now it's which under "Quellenangabe" states: So it's not claiming to be the version from 1821; instead it doesn't reveal anything about the real edition. --B-Fahrer (talk) 20:09, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
 * The now dead Spiegel link itself had a Quellenangabe which also stated it was from 1821 and I thought that was correct. I will make sure to cite it correctly in the future. /mof.va.nes/ (talk) 20:44, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Your quotes might be from the 1844 edition - when Voß was already dead -,, e.g. in . --B-Fahrer (talk) 09:43, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

We sent you an e-mail
Hello ,

Really sorry for the inconvenience. This is a gentle note to request that you check your email. We sent you a message titled "The Community Insights survey is coming!". If you have questions, email surveys@wikimedia.org.

You can see my explanation here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:48, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Please be careful with verb conjugations
Hi. I've noticed a lot of mistakes in verb entries you've created. Some examples: einschwören (which you created as weak when in fact it is strong, like schwören), similarly zerbersten; abliegen, anliegen, beiliegen, brachliegen, etc. (all of them missing 'ge-' in the past participle); you marked durchliegen as having auxiliary either haben or sein when it is transitive/reflexive and hence can only be conjugated with haben; similarly you marked zurückstehen as transitive with auxiliary sein, which is impossible (in fact the verb is intransitive and conjugated normally with haben, but with sein in Austria and Switzerland); auftürmen, aufkeimen, aufbegehren etc. missing the prefix 'auf-' in the headword, similarly auslernen and ausrollen missing aus- in the headword, abschöpfen missing ab- in the headword; ausbessern given the conjugation of anbessern; ausbrennen given the past participle abgebrannt in the headword; auslöffeln given the conjugation of löffeln; etc. These are mostly just the mistakes in verbs starting with a that I've caught so far; there must be dozens more. Benwing2 (talk) 04:23, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Another example: Confusing transitive and intransitive usages of verbs that may be separable or inseparable. Generally, separable verbs are intransitive (and conjugated with sein if they refer to motion) while corresponding inseparable verbs are transitive (and conjugated with haben), but you've confused this in at least durchschwimmen and durchwaten. Benwing2 (talk) 21:19, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
 * herauskommen, dazukommen, einkommen, etc. missing the past subjunctive in the conjugation. Benwing2 (talk) 21:52, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Reference template
Hi, I see you've taken on interest in Mohawk. It's a good idea to add a "references" section to the entries you're creating and add a reference template to it. I've created Template:R:moh:Deering:1976 for Deering (1976), you can just add it to a reference section like so and use the page parameter to specify the page a word is mentioned on. Feel free to ping me if you have any questions and happy editing! Thadh (talk) 21:45, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much! I will use it. I will also make a similar template if I start using other references a lot /mof.va.nes/ (talk) 22:21, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

Invitation
Hello, I noticed that you enjoy working on and with Klingon, but have been slowed down because some people worried about copyright issues. If you wish to continue putting your energy into this beautiful hobby, I'd like to invite you to join the Klingon Language Wiki (follow klingon.wiki). Your knowledge of languages could also be helpful, since it is set up in four languages and always looks for translators. PS: I have edited your Klingon Swadesh list and added it to the Klingon Wiki. Thanks for that great idea. -- Lieven (talk) 06:10, 7 September 2023 (UTC)