User talk:Robin van der Vliet

Ultimateria (talk) 18:07, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

H-system
How would you distinguish ĉh from cĥ? Or would such distinction be unnecessary? --kc_kennylau (talk) 04:38, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I am sorry for my late response, I forgot to respond and did not check my talk page before. Both are written like "chh" in the H-system and I think it would be better if it would default to "ĉh", as "ĥ" is a pretty uncommon letter. 22:43, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Infinitive form in vo-conj
Hello, could you place the infinitive form on top of ? Thank you. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 21:51, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Done. You noticed my new module pretty quickly, do you know more about this language? 22:43, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Not really. I just feel like the infinitive form should be at the top for aesthetic reasons. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 22:49, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

vo-conj
There's a "not enough memory" module error at gudükumön, and, after looking at the entry, I can see why. To start with, Hans-Friedrich Tamke, in typical, obsessive fashion added 50 Related terms and See alsos. Just pruning it down to significant lemmas might even solve the immediate problem.

The conjugation template, on the other hand, is huge- if the tables were printed out, it looks like one could wallpaper a small room with it. Given the absolute regularity of the morphology, there has to be some way to condense things- it's hard to find anything in the oceans of text, and the unreadable black-on-purple color scheme around the edges doesn't help. I just don't see anyone spending enough time with it to find it useful.

At any rate, you need to do something with that one entry, because the conjugation box doesn't even display. Whether you do something with the template & module is up to you, but I would highly recommend it. Chuck Entz (talk) 01:15, 16 May 2016 (UTC)


 * , I also suggested that vo-conj be similar to in that it has a series of collapsible tables. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 03:43, 16 May 2016 (UTC)


 * The entry at gudükumön does seem to work now for some reason. I just looked at and it might be a good idea to make it similar to that template. I already changed the color scheme and it is a lot easier to read now.  09:28, 22 May 2016 (UTC)


 * I asked for help at the Grease pit and someone fixed the memory problem. It had something to do with Lua's poor handling of strings. Thanks! Chuck Entz (talk) 14:45, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Suffix categories
How can a suffix end with a hyphen? Equinox ◑ 16:56, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Because there needs to be a grammatical suffix (,, , etc.) after each suffix, look at the other categories here. 17:00, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
 * However, in Esperanto, every root has an inherent part of speech, and this affects the meanings of other parts of speech created by swapping out the ending. I wouldn't be surprised if the same happened with suffixes too. —CodeCat 18:01, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Abbreviation header
The header "abbreviation" is deprecated, so can you please not use it anymore. Also, you forgot the headword template on. —CodeCat 18:00, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
 * I replaced the header "abbreviation", I hope it is good now. You used the code "es" for Esperanto, but that is Spanish, I also fixed that. 18:10, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Oops, sorry! —CodeCat 18:15, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

persoon and common gender in Dutch
Hi, the substance of your edit at was perfect, but it is preferred to add   or   instead of replacing the existing gender with c (using common gender puts the entry in ). Also beware that (on-line) Van Dale is often unreliable as a source on gender (though especially on masculine vs. feminine). ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  12:43, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Don't describe my edits as 'vandalism'
And don't refer to your own edit as a 'source' in your edit summary. Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 10:13, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Please now add a user example to demonstrate the translation of 'u' you have insisted on including. Thank you in advance. Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 10:15, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
 * The translation او is mentioned at they since 2005. The word they is also a singular gender neutral pronoun in English, so it perfectly translates او. The page Citations:they is full of translations which attest that they has a singular gender neutral meaning. 10:49, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

Bot
Your bot is still not authorized to act as a bot, since the vote about giving it bot rights did not pass. &mdash; surjection &lang;?&rang; 19:32, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I gave up on my previous request, I won't do what I described there. The pages I made today were different. I constructed those myself in a text editor, I only used my bot to upload them, instead of manually copying it. I just read on Bots that I should have done it on my own account, because the task was so small. 22:41, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Gender-neutralising definitions
Please be careful that you are not overzealous in making definitions gender-neutral. For instance you changed to a gender-neutral wording, but very few dictionaries have this as gender-neutral. Moreover I yet have to see an instance of spuitgast in the singular being used for a woman; that sounds very dudey to my ears. That said, in the plural it can be used to include women. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  13:41, 19 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your comment, you are right. The addition of "especially a man" makes it better. 16:27, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

Dutch gender
Please do not add masculine gender to feminine nouns just because they are common gender in spoken Northern Dutch, and certainly don't change them to m/f which is totally mangled and kind of chauvinist. Entries should conform to About_Dutch. The Woordenboek der Nederlandsche Taal is usually a reliable reference, De Vries' Nederlands Etymologisch Woordenboek is often even more reliable. Even in formal Northern Dutch some of these words retain their gender; der stad, der kerk, etc. (a tryhard who says "des kerks"/"des kerken" sounds like an oaf). ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  12:22, 13 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Is woordenlijst.org a reliable source for Dutch gender? I always use that website to check the gender of words. It is the official list of the Dutch Language Union. The website says that the gender of the words kerk and stad is m/f. This page on onzetaal.nl also says that the word stad is both masculine and feminine. If both genders are officially usable, this should be mentioned somewhere. 18:07, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
 * It is a prescriptive source for gender, so it often isn't reliable for masculine vs. feminine as a reference for a descriptive dictionary. It is unfortunate that they chose to label them as both genders rather than feminine and optionally common gender in the North; and again the order they chose is also objectionable. It is true that the current approach of Wiktionary also has its shortcomings from a descriptivist point of view and ideally there would be a special parameter for describing the Northern merged common gender, but the current setup is preferable to that of the Taalunie. Optional common gender can be easily inferred, anyway. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  19:29, 18 February 2021 (UTC)