User talk:Nicole Sharp/archive

Nicole Sharp (talk) 11:01, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

=  (2021) =

Nicole Sharp (talk) 11:01, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Helionium
You may wish to examine Requests_for_verification/English -- 65.92.246.142 16:53, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

=  (2018) =

Nicole Sharp (talk) 10:14, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Switching to bullets to discussions
Please do not switch discussions from : to * as you did in. The most common discussion indentation is :, even though people sometimes use *. Switching a whole discussion from : to * is not a good idea. --Dan Polansky (talk) 08:32, 24 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I do find unbulleted indentations for threaded conversations to be confusing and annoying. Someone complained on Wikipedia recently about the same thing, so I will try to grind my teeth and ignore it :-/ .  Nicole Sharp (talk) 08:43, 24 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Using : is a very widespread practice. You are perfectly free to post your posts as *, as some do, but you should not change other people's posts. For instance, I just used :* in the present post to show how to make a bulleted response to a : post. --Dan Polansky (talk) 10:04, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

=  (2016) =

Nicole Sharp (talk) 17:12, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Equatoguinea

 * Hi. Where'd you find "Equatoguinea"? I see only 1 hit in a Google Books search and none on Google Groups; I think it may not meet our WT:CFI criteria requiring 3 durably archived citations. Equinox ◑ 16:05, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I found the original usage in English of "Equatoguinea" on English Wikipedia. I just found another usage of "Ecuatoguinea" in Spanish (referring to the country, not the airline) as well.  It appears to be an uncommon informal/colloquial shortening of the two-word country name.  A blogospheric search might turn up more citations.  Nicole Sharp (talk) 16:17, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
 * http://www.guineaecuatorialpress.com/noticia.php?id=1797

Star Trek
Greetings. I took the liberty of moving your "terms derived from Star Trek" discussion from WT:RFD to WT:RFM.

Reason: RFD is for entries only. WT:RFM is for category mergers. To be fair, it could also have been WT:RFDO (for category deletions). --Daniel Carrero (talk) 04:40, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I saw. Thank you. I did not know there was a merge-request page. Nicole Sharp (talk) 04:51, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

=  (2015) =

Nicole Sharp (talk) 06:35, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

astronomical demonyms

 * Please do not make a new category like this without discussion first. You do not understand how the category structure or naming system work, and that's okay, but it means that you need to discuss this with the community before doing it.  Please bring up the topic in WT:TR if you would like to proceed. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 17:30, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Understood: Please see talk:Herculina on why we need this category. New demonyms for minor planets and other astronomical bodies are best built from common etymologies and astronomical precedents for demonymous terms.  Nicole Sharp (talk) 17:34, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I checked the pre-existing categories, and will re-tag the words dually under "Astronomy" and "Demonyms" instead of one combining category. Nicole Sharp (talk) 18:27, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Apparently the category already exists: " ."  Nicole Sharp (talk) 06:44, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

fixes

 * Hi, I fixed the entries you created so far today. Just letting you know, so you can take it into account in the future. —CodeCat 00:49, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi, I fixed Mooninite again. Please pay attention to this. —CodeCat 01:13, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I am very poor at remembering to use templates, sorry. I do not even know most of them.  Is there a location with a list of all the templates that I should be using?  Nicole Sharp (talk) 01:18, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * No, there isn't a list. There should probably be one, though.  In any case, I'm talking more about the spacing.  You can see the rules we go by on WT:NORM. —CodeCat 01:20, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Oh. Do you mean   vs.  ?  I actually used to never put in whitespace for a long time, but I have been doing it now for a while since it improves legibility a little bit.  Probably any headers that I have written on Wikimedia since September 2015 or so all have whitespace in them.  I thought that MediaWiki ignores whitespace same as in any HTML?  Nicole Sharp (talk) 01:26, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * The rules on WT:NORM don't affect the actual appearance of the page, they only concern the wiki code. But that's standardised too on Wiktionary, albeit only recently.  Maybe we are neat freaks? —CodeCat 01:30, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I agree that consistent wikicode is important. I am surprised there are no wikicode normalization pages for Wikipedia or MetaWiki?  It is easier for contributors if they always create headers and lists they same way on each wiki.  By the way, on the matter of consistency, how come lists use spaces and headers do not?  Shouldn't lists be   instead of  ?  Nicole Sharp (talk) 01:39, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

taxonomy, etc. at Wiktionary

 * I am trying to improve our coverage of both taxonomic and English vernacular names without needlessly competing with the various taxonomic databases, all of which are much more complete than we are or are likely to be without having bots add entries.
 * My approach is to focus on taxonomic names that are topical, common, etymologically useful or interesting, or used as defining terms in Wiktionary, eg, for English vernacular names of groups of organisms. Our comparative advantage over other databases is limited to etymology, gender, translations, images, and linking. Also obsolete terms.  In each of these areas there may be databases that are superior to us, but I'm hoping we can combine these to be useful at least to some population of users.  We also have entries in miscellaneous areas that folks have taken an interest in, eg, flora and fauna of Finland, liverworts, many birds, certain spiders.
 * Do you think we have a chance to actually be helpful in any of these areas?
 * Also, I have been attracted to the recent publication by Ruggiero et al of a taxonomic classification down to the level of order to use as a default for the Hypernyms section of our entries at genus level and above. DCDuring TALK 18:30, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Official biological nomenclature requires the use of Latin. I have seen some really bad Latin translations used as species names unfortunately.  So, yes, having translations and etymologies of taxa I think is very important, especially for biologists trying to think of new species names.  New species are discovered nearly every day, and every single one requires a new name in Latin, so the (multi)linguistic resources of Wiktionary can make it arguably more effective at helping biologists than WikiSpecies does.  Nicole Sharp (talk) 04:15, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

=  (2013) =

Nicole Sharp (talk) 21:16, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

welcome
Hi, please take a look at some of the links below. I think there is a danger some terms you are adding, like sexual culture, may not meet our Criteria for Inclusion. Ƿidsiþ 12:42, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

hadron physics

 * Hi. If "hadron physics" is "physics of hadrons" then it may not be a good candidate for a dictionary entry (in the same way "brown leaf" is "leaf that is brown") &mdash; even though it's a good topic for an encyclopaedia. Equinox ◑ 13:41, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Except that "hadron physics" is a compound noun versus "brown leaf" is an adjective and a noun. It should be included along with other subfields of particle physics.  Nicole Sharp (talk) 13:44, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Conversation moved to talk:hadron physics. Nicole Sharp (talk) 14:11, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

not Wikipedia

 * Hi, just so you know, we don't include entries based on their encyclopedic value (in Wikipedia slang, being 'notable') but on their lexical merit as defined in WT:CFI. Either single words or multi-word terms that meet WT:CFI. Thank you, Mglovesfun (talk) 13:08, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

WT:RU TR

 * Are you aware of this page? It seems that some of the "typos" you're fixing may actually be correct per our romanization standards. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 04:43, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I have always used the official Russian/Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) standard of ISO 9:1995, Romanization of Russian / ISO 9. I didn't know about using the ɛ in loanwords for Wiktionary, I'm not sure if that is official or not, I've never seen that before.  I thought it was a typo from someone trying to write an IPA phonetic spelling instead of a Romanization.  I can revert the changes if it's not a typo.  Nicole Sharp (talk) 04:54, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, we have a local standard instead of the ISO standard. I apologise for any confusion. Please undo any changes you made from the standard, if you would be so kind. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 05:44, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
 * It was just the two, thanks. I see the nonstandard transliteration on the other pages too now.  How come Wiktionary is not using the official international standard for Romanizing Russian though?  Nicole Sharp (talk) 06:01, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
 * This was the result of much discussion and compromise. If you would like to raise the issue again, feel free to do so by creating a new section at Wiktionary talk:Russian transliteration. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 14:09, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
 * It seems there are a lot of posts complaining about the Wiktionary scheme and even one just about the use of Greek "ɛ" for a Romanization of Cyrillic "e" which I found jarring myself when I first saw it in a transliteration; I re-opened the discussion for input. Nicole Sharp (talk) 15:46, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

=  (2010) =

Nicole Sharp (talk) 21:16, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

welcome!
Hello, welcome to Wiktionary, and thank you for your contribution so far. Here are a few good links for newcomers:


 * How to edit a page is a concise list of technical guidelines to the wiki format we use here: how to, for example, make text boldfaced or create hyperlinks. Feel free to practice in the sandbox.  If you would like a slower introduction we have a short tutorial.
 * Entry layout explained (ELE) is a detailed policy documenting how Wiktionary pages should be formatted. All entries should conform to this standard, the easiest way to do this is to copy exactly an existing page for a similar word.
 * Our Criteria for inclusion (CFI) define exactly which words Wiktionary is interested in including. There is also a list of things that Wiktionary is not for a higher level overview.
 * The FAQ aims to answer most of your remaining questions, and there are several help pages that you can browse for more information.
 * We have discussion rooms in which you can ask any question about Wiktionary or its entries, a glossary of our technical jargon, and some hints for dealing with the more common communication issues.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wiktionarian! If you have any questions, bring them to the Information desk, or ask me on my talk page. If you do so, please sign your posts with four tildes: ~ which automatically produces your username and the current date and time.

Again, welcome! --EncycloPetey 02:11, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

=  (2009) =

Nicole Sharp (talk) 16:55, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

Cleanup tags
Please do not remove cleanup tags until a discussion has been concluded. --EncycloPetey 03:08, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Stargater
The entry you created seems to have been a protologism and has been deleted. If you are sure that it is a real word, please provide evidence of this word being used in durably archived media (mainly printed books, and usenet groups) as required by our inclusion criteria. For a term to be included, it must be used by at least three different authors, spaced in time by at least three years, and the authors must not explain the word's meaning. If you can find any such quotations, please add them to. --EncycloPetey 03:10, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Relativity
Wiktionary doesn't categorize the same way the Wikipedia does. Relativity is not a separate context. Would "Cosmology" work?

Also, please have a look at the formatting changes I have made to Minkowski spacetime. --EncycloPetey 05:16, 10 January 2009 (UTC)


 * OK, I've set up a Category:Relativity. The best way to add an item is to use the  context label.  Just put the template at the front of a definition line, like this:
 * # Put the definition here.
 * The template will say (physics) on the definition line (since that's the context), but will put the word into Category:Relativity. --EncycloPetey 05:46, 10 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Your editor may have used the wrong kind of apostrophe for Wigner's friend. I have moved it to the correct title. --EncycloPetey 05:58, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Translations
We use the name "Ancient Greek", not "Classical Greek" for that language. Likewise we use "Sanskrit", not "Classical Sanskrit". Also, we do not add hypothetical or reconstructed words to translations, nor do these words have entries in the main namespace. Only attested words receive entries. --EncycloPetey 22:22, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
 * When you add Ancient Greek translations, they should be in the original script, not a Romanization. When you add Latin translations, they should link to the terget page (without macrons), but may display macrons as an alternative form. --EncycloPetey 22:30, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Please add translations only for languages in which you have some fluency. Some of your Latin translations are incorrect. For example, the Romans had no specific name for their language. Latina is a modern cheat for the language name, but was not used in Latin. Romans used adverbs to describe the language of speech and writing, not nouns. So, you did not "speak Latin", you "spoke Latinly" or "spoke in the manner of Latin". --EncycloPetey 05:39, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Link in "mathematics" to "mathematica"
That was not a Latin typo. Article titles for Latin do not use macrons. Macrons are only used for pedagogical purposes within articles. &mdash;AugPi 19:37, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
 * This is explained better in section 1.2.1 of About Latin. &mdash;AugPi 19:40, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, I fixed the link to "mathematica": this is how the code looks now (pay attention):
 *  * Latin: 
 * See the talk page for for an explanation of the alt= parameter. &mdash;AugPi 20:32, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

=  (2008) =

Nicole Sharp (talk) 16:55, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

Welcome
Welcome!

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

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

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

Again, welcome! --Ivan Štambuk 05:13, 4 December 2008 (UTC)