User talk:Shāntián Tàiláng

Thanks for your work on Ancient Greek given names. Here's the standard welcome message:

Per utramque cavernam 00:50, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, for greek names
Ni hao ! You know soooo many greek names! Very nice of you to add them. sarri.greek (talk) 08:00, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

Unblock request

 * I also disagree with this block. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 05:51, 30 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Comment: I think the duration of this block (1 year) is a bit too harsh. Then again, the block is placed for a reason: Substandard edits done in the past. I would advise User:Shāntián Tàiláng to take the time to look at the various (bad) edits that were done and attempt to fix these after being unblocked.
 * On the other hand, I am concerned by the vast number of Japanese entries created for given/personal names. Do we really need these kanji compound entries? To my knowledge, kanji readings for names are unregulated and many variant readings exist. KevinUp (talk) 17:34, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
 * What are your thoughts on such entries (kanji compounds for names)? I think listing them at Appendix:Japanese given names would be sufficient. I propose the deletion of such entries. I think nanori readings listed at individual kanji pages are good enough. KevinUp (talk) 17:34, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Nevertheless, it seems that User:Shāntián Tàiláng is well aware of his own mistakes and has even apologized for it. Yes, many of our Chinese templates lack documentation. If you have the time, you can write it up or request for help on the template talk page. A lot of cleanup is needed for Chinese entries (e.g. merging Cantonese/Mandarin to Chinese) and User:Shāntián Tàiláng's edits in this area is not too bad. KevinUp (talk) 17:34, 31 January 2019 (UTC)


 * I've decided to unblock based on suzukaze-c's request. Wyang has made some blocks that seem excessive or abusive, and we don't need to drive away an editor who seems to genuinely want to improve. That said, it is now incumbent on you to make sure you've discussed any more potential issues with other editors in these languages before proceeding. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 21:14, 31 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Thank you, . I have removed this page from the "Requests for unblock" category. Shāntián Tàiláng (talk) 21:38, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Given name request
Hi. Would you mind to temporarily stop creating kanji entries for Japanese given names until User:Eirikr replies? Selection of kanji for given names is often arbitrary, and there are no clear rules for it. I noticed that some of the entries created are based on celebrity names. Perhaps you can focus on Japanese surnames instead? Another option is to create hiragana pages for given names with possible kanji readings that are not linked. KevinUp (talk) 03:24, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I'll stop for now, . I just want to tell you (hence this new section)...I don't know if your Japanese name idea will fly or float (in general, that is—I don't mean specifically with ), because while there's ),, and (one reading of which is ), the name Miyoshi cannot be spelled 美 nor 美, even though several Japanese names do have such reduplicated kanji, even when each of the kanji have different readings, such as  (but as I said, not Miyoshi) or  (but not *Umikai or *Umia, as in ).
 * And speaking of given names...what about, 's own given name? The equivalent in Japanese of his full name is : it uses on'yomi, which is most odd. But even odder, to me, is that not only is Mao's first wife 's given name used as a male name in Japanese (although with two different readings), but *沢東 (Takutō) isn't a given name at all, even though  and  (both also Korean; the latter is also 's given name) are. Lastly, as far as I know (but correct me if I'm wrong), only Japanese has three-Hanzi given names, like . Shāntián Tàiláng (talk) 20:21, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I don't see how 美 or 美 could be spelled as or . The on/kun readings of 美 just don't match. May I know what source you are using for the readings ? As mentioned, I would prefer for kanji characters to be added to hiragana pages such as, rather than creating new pages for kanji compounds that are only used in given names (I'm fine with surnames though).
 * Yes, Japanese have given names that are read entirely in on'yomi such as ), but isn't a Japanese name, that's a translation, and translated Korean/Chinese names written in kanji are read using on'yomi, not in kun'yomi. Plus, we don't allow names of famous people on Wiktionary (See WT:CFI). There are up to 148 possible kanji readings listed for the given name, but I don't think there's a need to create a separate page for all the kanji listed there. KevinUp (talk) 21:41, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi. I've set up a beer parlour discussion here: Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2019/February for other members of the community to discuss. KevinUp (talk) 03:50, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Quick reply--I know very well that I shouldn't create . But what I thought you already knew is that usually, names and words coming straight from modern Chinese are read irregularly in Japanese (because they're borrowed from Mandarin), like, , , and , although some, like and , can either be read irregularly or with on'yomi. And I guess I should have mentioned  or , rather than , because my point was not that Amiri was all on'yomi, but because it had three kanji. See [美々] and [海々] and scroll down to the "JMnedict" part for the source of those readings. And as far as I know,  is for repeated kanji, not repeated readings, as stated on its page. (Incidentally, I think if English were to use Chinese characters, then "Hannah Grace" or "Grace Anne" would be spelled with that 々 mark, perhaps as 々 or something, since "Hanna" comes from the Hebrew word for grace.) Shāntián Tàiláng (talk) 20:34, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for replying. Indeed, Japanese terms borrowed from Chinese, particularly those from Mandarin have irregular readings. However, in such cases, katakana is often used instead of kanji (these are known as ateji). Yes, Japanese given names may have three kanji given names. Some even have up to five kanji for their given name, e.g. . However. it's not a good idea to copy readings from online dictionaries because mistakes do occur. It is better to refer to printed books before creating these entries. For Wiktionary, each entry needs to be attestable (See WT:ATTEST ), so some entries might not be valid (it might be a reference for parents to choose potential names for their children). Currently, I'm going to wait for other senior editors to reply the beer parlour discussion. KevinUp (talk) 07:58, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

May have a connection to 紹
https://ctext.org/dictionary.pl?if=gb&char=紹 --Geographyinitiative (talk) 15:00, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Whoops I originally wanted to put this on the 綤 talk page. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 15:02, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Regarding
Hi. it seems that you've been editing some English entries. Generally, the formatting of entries in WT:WOTD is considered up-to-date.

I noticed you have converted  to. Just want to point out that  also works and seems to be the preferred format. KevinUp (talk) 18:56, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

幺
Hey. I saw your question on the 幺 page, and I thought I would try to give you the explanation for the problem you were encountering. As I understand Template:zh-der and Template:zh-new/der, zh-new/der is "extracting any relevant term in Module:zh/data/wordlist/1, 2, 3 (from 教育部重編國語辭典修訂本)". When you look at http://dict.revised.moe.edu.tw, you will see that all the compounds are listed under 么 and not under 幺. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 01:17, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

The in
For, , and : the is a suffix indicating direction, while the  is a suffix of indication or uncertainty. For, , , etc: is the apophonic form of possessive particle , while  is an element indicating direction, just like chi above.

I might be wrong, anything else? ～ POKéTalker（═◉═） 01:28, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

說不清
Hello. You forgot to add an entry for the simplified form here. ---&#62; Tooironic (talk) 23:03, 25 August 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)

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)

OK. 19:30, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

NV etyms
Heya, bear in mind that the two NV editors most active in the past few years -- User:Stephen G. Brown and User:Julien Daux -- have been inactive for some time. Stephen may well have passed, while Julien I think has simply moved on to other projects. I believe User:Seb az86556 is a native speaker, but s/he (user gender unspecified) hasn't been very active here, which I'm guessing is due in part to the unfortunate policies in place here that make it very difficult to create and maintain entries for truly limited-documentation languages like Navajo.

Consequently, I wouldn't expect any quick response to your recent additions of in Navajo entries. I hope I'm wrong, FWIW. :) ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 19:56, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

*-ēhundą
As far as I can tell, this is a remnant of the PIE suffix seem in decades such as and. It's obviously not a direct descendant, and underwent some morphological and analogical changes on the way, but I believe that's the general idea of it. Let me see if I can find more info. —Rua (mew) 10:04, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

I found this bit, autotranslated from Danish:


 * What lies behind the numbers 70-120 in the Germanic languages ​​(except Old Norse) is very controversial, and it does not look the same in all languages. Szemerényi imagines the following, at least for the Gothic:
 * The Indo-European system survives roughly in 70-90, cf. ie. *septm̥̄k̂omt, *ok̂tōk̂omt, *neu̥n̥̄k̂omt > germ. **seftunhand, **ahtōhand, **newunhand.
 * Also the earlier decades (20-50, but not 60) had on Indo-European long vowel in front ie. *k̂omt, e.g. *penkwēk̂omt "50", and they also had it originally in Germanic, e.g. germ. **fimfēhand ”50”.
 * First germ. **-hand > *-hund in analogy with the word for "100".
 * The new suffix germ. *-ēhund was set to 60, which was distinguished by not having an element between the base number and *-hand / *-hund, ie. germ. **sehshand/sehshund &rarr; *sehsēhund.
 * From here germ. spread *-ēhund on to the numbers for 70-100, but the new form germ. *seftun-ēhund "70" seemed strange compared to the base germ. *sibun, why it was changed to *sebunt-ēhund, which was then reanalyzed as *sebun-tēhund.
 * BSSH: I imagine the chronology a little differently, but never mind!
 * Now the suffix was germ. *tēhund born and was transferred to all the numbers in the range 70-120.
 * The made decades (20-60) were already formed or were later formed using germ. *tigiwiz, cf. above.
 * For the West Germanic forms, Szemerényi imagines analogy from germ. *ahtōhund "80" as well as some later analogies, e.g. loss of *-hund in Old High German.

—Rua (mew) 10:14, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

嬰
Hi, I'm quite certain that 自嬰屯蹇 means "to encircle myself with hardship and difficulties" and the 嬰 is not passive. Also, I doubt your claim on your user page that you don't know Chinese. RcAlex36 (talk) 17:13, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
 * , I swear by everything, I can't speak Chinese. I got that 嬰 quote from here when I was trying to find an English definition for 屯蹇 so I could create it. (Sometimes I have to use, as I did with 飣餖 and this Japanese passage back in Sept. 2018 before I had my account, to help me out.) Other times, I might use moedict.tw and copy the given definition into Template:zh-forms; it can often take a while for me to separate the words/characters correctly using type. Trust me, I'm no match for a professional translator, like, say, 's translated poetry that I quoted over at —on my own, using Template:zh-forms, I would've translated that 3-line passage as (literally) "Uneven duckweed, left and right flow[eth] it. Quiet and elegant virtuous woman, qin and se [are] her friend[s]. Uneven duckweed, left and right choose it [i.e. choose it from the left and right]." And lastly, FYI, the reason I picked my username—I got it from the Mandarin pronunciation of . So it's meant to convey an "" who is seen through an unusual lens (or, perhaps, wandering aimlessly through a foreign country), sort of thing. Sorry for the confusion. Shāntián Tàiláng (talk) 18:37, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
 * No worries! RcAlex36 (talk) 18:39, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

Recent edits
Hi, I just wonder what sources you are basing your recent edits on. RcAlex36 (talk) 16:21, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Mostly from moedict.tw, or from Yabla or Yellowbridge. Shāntián Tàiláng (talk) 16:23, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I was asking because the quality of your recent Chinese edits is rather inconsistent. The definition you put at was off, for example. Personally, I would work with monolingual Chinese dictionaries and translate from the Chinese definition given. RcAlex36 (talk) 16:27, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Well, this is the definition given from : I knew the definition I put was the literal meaning, but I couldn't figure out what the metaphorical meaning was. (See, I can't attach comments  to the definition using subst:zh-new, since it automatically removes them.) Now, if those words had been, I might have been able to decipher the second part. Sorry about that. Usually, I don't have that issue. Shāntián Tàiláng (talk) 16:48, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

摺紙
Do you have a source for "Japanese 折り紙 (origami)"? Chinese paper folding existed before Japanese origami. (This particular term could still have come from Japanese, but we have to be careful.) ---&#62; Tooironic (talk) 05:17, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

Etymology of
Hi, do you have a source for the etymology you have added? RcAlex36 (talk) 04:25, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

I just pulled that etymology from English Da Nang. See, I wanted to know why the @&#$ that Chinese word was "phonetic" when most Chinese orthographic borrowings are not. (Yeah, I should add the Vietnamese section for that word when I get a chance.) BTW, I only happened to do it b/c I was watching (well, actually, my parents were—I'm not really a fan) and in that episode, Magnum was wearing a hat with "" on it. I know Magnum's a Vietnam War veteran, yet I couldn't recall what kind of place Da Nang was. Shāntián Tàiláng (talk) 15:53, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Султанбеков & Сұлтанбеков
The surname Султанбеков is a Russian term transliterated from the Kazakh surname Сұлтанбеков because the letter ұ is not used in Russian orthography. You may as well change the content in the page Султанбеков or I shall do instead. Vtgnoq7238rmqco (talk) 18:12, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

Meaningless Hangul syllables
Hi, is there a particular reason you're making these?--Tibidibi (talk) 14:33, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Just in case anybody making, say, a Middle Korean entry needs to link to these. Like with 푸성귀 and 플. Shāntián Tàiláng (talk) 14:40, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
 * It would better IMHO if they were left as redlinks so readers would understand the relevant MK entry hasn't been created yet. These aren't words any more than "plo" in "exploded" is a discrete unit, to use an analogy with your edit summary for 졌.--Tibidibi (talk) 14:53, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
 * OK, but just remember that unlike the "plo" in "exploded", they're actually distinct Unicode entries.Shāntián Tàiláng (talk) 14:54, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Sure, but it's not necessarily Wiktionary's mission to describe all Unicode entries.
 * I am just unsure about who exactly this benefits or is intended for. The only possible demographic I can think of is people who 1) have zero knowledge of Korean, but 2) decide to look up Korean characters anyhow, and 3) not just any characters but ones that are not actually words in the language. I don't really think this is a large group of people.
 * I don't really like it because it 1) clogs up Category:Korean lemmas with non-lemmas, 2) is inconsistent because we have been removing these in entries with etymologies for actual words, and 3) might not be the most productive use of your time because an automated bot could make hundreds upon thousands of them within ten minutes.--Tibidibi (talk) 15:02, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

A request
You appear to have a poor understanding of Chinese parts of speech and Chinese in general. Given that you do not know the language and seem clueless even with a dictionary, may I suggest that you refrain from editing Chinese all together. Thanks a lot. RcAlex36 (talk) 18:10, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
 * , what recent edit of mine prompted you to say that? Because what I think you really mean is for me to refrain from CREATING new Chinese entries altogether. Shāntián Tàiláng (talk) 18:13, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Oh, and by the way,, I wasn't using a dictionary for 被髮. I just needed to create it since it was a redlink on 人面獸心. Shāntián Tàiláng (talk) 18:15, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I had to rewrite 經世, 被髮 and 歡娛, and send 枚乘 to RFD. Is that not enough? RcAlex36 (talk) 18:16, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Well, if it's any consolation, I did have some doubts about whether or not to create 枚乘. Besides, I only put "statesmanship" for 經世 because of what it said here. (At least I've corrected that one now.) Shāntián Tàiláng (talk) 18:30, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Oh! One last thing for today―do you think you can create 濟民 for me? It's a redlink at 經世濟民, and it's purty awkward to have a two-character redlink on a chengyu's page. (Especially since 經世 was also a redlink less than an hour ago.) Shāntián Tàiláng (talk) 18:34, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

I asked you to stop. Why didn't you stop? RcAlex36 (talk) 15:17, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

I was in a rush when I created 往者. Sorry about that, I won't rush through page creation like that again. And at least I asked you for help with many of the other ones. You OK at all with that? Shāntián Tàiláng (talk) 15:36, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
 * If you are to create an entry and leave its definition blank, why don't you just refrain from creating the entry altogher in the first place? Why create entries just to let others fill out their definition sections? RcAlex36 (talk) 15:45, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
 * "In a rush" is not an excuse. It appears that you have a wrong understanding of the word 往者, which would result in you putting the wrong definition regardless of whether you were in a rush. RcAlex36 (talk) 15:47, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

You're right, maybe I should stop doing that particular thing. But hey, it's not my fault moedict.tw doesn't say what part of speech each word is. Shāntián Tàiláng (talk) 15:48, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Which means you can't determine the parts of speech of a word yourself. Or have you actually considered checking other dictionaries?, I find it unacceptable that a user who doesn't know can edit Chinese entries in such a frivolous manner. RcAlex36 (talk) 15:53, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

OK, OK. I was just curious to see what each term meant, and in the past, it often seemed to me that if I didn't create the entry, then no one would (at least not for a long time). I'll stop with them for now (unless I can find a good English-language source, as I did with 倚馬可待). Shāntián Tàiláng (talk) 16:04, 5 August 2021 (UTC)


 * No information is better than misinformation. If you would like an entry made, you can always request it at WT:Requested entries (Chinese) (I know there's a big backlog, but it will eventually get made.) — justin(r)leung { (t...) 16:21, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

OK then. Shāntián Tàiláng (talk) 16:23, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Linking to Numbered Things in Other Pages
Executive summary: Don't.

What happens when someone adds or deletes an etymology section before the one you're linking to? Or they decide to rearrange things? Suddenly, "Etymology 2" is something else. This applies doubly to senses within a POS section.

Also, your linking in whinchat to the whole etymology section at tick wasn't very helpful- the sense you wanted is literally the last one, with several more familiar ones above it. Only the more persistent readers would find it.

Fortunately, there's a better way: use senseid in the target entry for a sense and etymid for an entire etymology section. Then put id in your link template (see my edits to whinchat and tick).

Precise, clear to other editors, and unlikely to be scrambled by perfectly reasonable edits to the target page.

Any questions? Chuck Entz (talk) 14:33, 3 August 2021 (UTC)


 * OK, thanks. I just knew that linking to an etymology section had been done before with, say, . You understand? I won't do that kinda thing again, I swear. Shāntián Tàiláng (talk) 17:07, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

魔星
I think you should stop editing Chinese entries altogether. You don't seem to realize what you have put at is completely wrong. RcAlex36 (talk) 15:50, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I did have my doubts about this one, but the definition I found (魔障、冤家. 如：「你真的是我命中的魔星，前輩子欠你的. 」) seemed to point to "destined love". It does literally mean "demon star", but I figured it could either mean "hardship, turmoil" or "destined love". Shāntián Tàiláng (talk) 15:55, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
 * So you are just inferring the meaning from the sample sentence, instead of reading the definition given in the dictionary? Also, why are you copying and pasting the sample sentence onto Wiktionary?, I really think punitive actions should be taken. Warnings have been given in the past and yet they continue creating entries they are unfamiliar with. RcAlex36 (talk) 16:00, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
 * OK, I'll stop with this Chinese entry creation stuff, alrighty? So sorry, I just wanted to find out what 紇剌星 meant. Shāntián Tàiláng (talk) 16:01, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

捲曲
Explain to me why you put 鬈曲 as an alternative form of 捲曲, and why you put quánqū as another pronunciation of 捲曲. RcAlex36 (talk) 16:55, 7 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Both 捲曲 and 卷曲 were linked to under "curly". When I attempted to create the latter using Template:zh-new, it didn't list "juǎnqū" as the Mandarin pronunciation, it listed quánqū (which already linked to 鬈曲). See, 鬈 ("beautiful, curly; curly hair") and 捲 ("to curl, to roll up; curly, rolled up") have similar meanings. That's why I put that stuff for 捲曲 and quánqū. Guess I was jumping to conclusions. So sorry! By the way, what's the chengyu 情見力屈 mean? I think it has something to do with military and that it means being exposed (to the enemy) and at a disadvantage. A book I've found translates it as "The condition is exposed and the strength exhausted". (In Chinese, the definition is 情：真實情況；見：通「現」，暴露. 指在軍事上情況暴露而又處在劣勢的地位.)  And am I correct that the chengyu 計窮力屈 means "to be at the end of one's tether; to be at one's wits' end"? Shāntián Tàiláng (talk) 17:17, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

大車無輗
This entry was a little concerning. The definition that you put in is quite off. I would suggest that you should refrain from creating Chinese entries because it seems like you have trouble understanding Chinese (as you seem to know from your self-reported zh-0) and because you have already said so above. (Ironically, you going back on your words is kind of reminiscent of this idiom. If you continue to create subpar Chinese entries, further action will be taken.) If you need an entry, just add it to WT:Requested entries (Chinese). — justin(r)leung { (t...) 02:40, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Really? I could've sworn that 大車無輗 was meant to be used as a synonym for "an untrustworthy person", as it literally translates as "large carriage without the crossbar", almost as if that were part of a xiehouyu. And to me, my stated definition wasn't ENTIRELY off, it just didn't have the "cannot receive trust from others and be established in society" part. At least I DID use James Legge's translation to help. My sincerest apologies. Shāntián Tàiláng (talk) 03:55, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
 * 大車無輗 doesn't mean "large carriage without the crossbar" (noun phrase) but it's a sentence meaning "a large carriage does not have a crossbar" (as a hypothetical). I don't know where you get definitions, but Legge doesn't really help with the definition of the term itself, only with the term's source text. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 04:32, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Also are you sure 小車無軏 is a chengyu? It's not found in any chengyu dictionaries here by itself, but it's always paired with 大車無輗 (as 大車無輗，小車無軏 or 小車無軏，大車無輗). — justin(r)leung { (t...) 04:54, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Well, 小車無軏 was already listed under at. Shāntián Tàiláng (talk) 16:42, 4 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Well, if you would check the edit history, it was an IP who added it in this . And how would you know that it's a synonym of 大車無輗? — justin(r)leung { (t...) 16:48, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Wolio
Hi, how is a synonym of ? –Austronesier (talk) 17:25, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
 * They both mean "sharp", don't they? Shāntián Tàiláng (talk) 17:27, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Oh yes, my dumb. This was a copypaste error from when I have created the entry. I speak a little Wolio, so I haven't even seen the wrong gloss; means 'dry'. Sorry! –Austronesier (talk) 17:40, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

Unblock request 2021

 * I won't lift the block. It's just a week, so please wait it out. As for the specifics:
 * There are other reliable sources in Chinese, but I'm not sure if they are necessarily helpful if you seem to have trouble with understanding Chinese (based on your self-claimed zh-0 and past actions).
 * It is not quite helpful to have empty entries. Just use WT:Requested entries (Chinese) and link to a quote so that other editors who have a better command of Chinese would be able to work on them.
 * Based on dictionaries, it seems to be right.
 * I'll let RcAlex36 answer that. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 18:58, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Block evasion is a very bad idea. —Suzukaze-c (talk) 22:28, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello, can you please tell me which IP accounts are making you and suspect block evasion? Because I honestly don't recall evading any blocks anytime today. Shāntián Tàiláng (talk) 23:02, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Wait–,, , & , are you referring to 2603:3021:3A38:0:4D1F:328:309F:CF90? That doesn't look like any of my previous (pre-account) IPv6 addresses–they all began with "2600:", not "2603:", and if I were in fact evading this block, my IPv6 address(es) would still begin with 2600. Besides, if you look carefully at the pages created by that IP (like 冠纓 and 肝腦塗地, for instance) like I just did, you'll notice they have Category:zh:Headwear or Category:zh:Death rather than zh-cat as I always use. Shāntián Tàiláng (talk) 13:22, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Viewing and entering data into web pages is a far more complicated process than you realize. In order to do that, your browser software shares quite a bit of information about itself and your operating system with the website's servers. This is normally not visible to anyone without system-level access to the server, but those of us with checkuser privileges are given access to some of that, as well as the IP addresses used. Your account used 84 different IP addresses in the three months I have access to, including ones in exactly the same ranges as the IP edits in question. The browser details are identical for both logged-in and logged-out edits, with only the version numbers changing when your browser gets a software update. If I were to take the logs for all of the IP and logged-in edits, take out all of the account information and sort them in chronological order, it would be impossible to tell which were logged in and which were directly using IPs. While it's indeed possible to minipulate such data with the right software, there's no sign of that here. It looks pretty open-and-shut to me. Chuck Entz (talk) 15:11, 27 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Typical case of 唔見棺材唔流眼淚, or 不撞南牆不回頭. 自作孽不可活, 死不足惜. RcAlex36 (talk) 16:39, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I realize you are correct about my account using that IP address's range, but I want you to know that I would never add categories to Chinese entries without using zh-cat. For instance, I know I made edits using the IP address 71.246.155.68 both here and on Wikipedia before I had my account, even though, as you can see here, here, and here, that particular IP address's range (or a similar range) was also used by Til Eulenspiegel, who I most assuredly am not. (Yes, that was quite an inconvenience, my IP address being blocked when I didn't even have an account and didn't know who User:Til Eulenspiegel was.) Shāntián Tàiláng (talk) 16:51, 27 October 2021 (UTC)


 * So you're telling me a random IP who isn't you is editing/creating entries related to and  after you mentioned interest in them... You're funny. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 17:00, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Well, in any case, I just do not remember creating at all. I think somebody else just happened to stumble across 絕纓, like I sort of did pre-account with 萬壽無疆, which I'd found on an old porcelain teacup in my house. (And no changes to 往者 were ever made, either, even though I mentioned interest in that one as well.) And it should be worth noting that the last time I was blocked, I never evaded that block. But in any event, do you suppose we might be better off if we all wait out a week (or month) before we discuss this further? Shāntián Tàiláng (talk) 17:15, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * No further discussion is needed. You're blocked forever anyway. Remember 種瓜得瓜，種豆得豆. RcAlex36 (talk) 17:24, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Look, I'm OK with being blocked right now. But seriously, what if I notice one day that there's an edit that needs to be made? Like, say, with decomposing the first two characters of 唔見棺材唔流眼淚 into 唔見 rather than into 唔 and 見? Or adding 唔見 to Vision? What on Earth should I do then?? Because honestly, I never meant to be this foolish or hurtful or anything. Perhaps you can just limit this block to page creation, as Wikipedia did with all unregistered users following the ? Shāntián Tàiláng (talk) 17:36, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Your problem extends well beyond your problematic page creations. For some peculiar reason you think 觸手可及 is derived from 觸手. Since you showed little to no respect for the language you were editing, I think you shouldn't be editing anything at all. As a result of your repeated offences you have forfeited your right to edit on the site. Denying that you were attempting to evade the block by using different IPs just demonstrates you have no remorse for your actions. RcAlex36 (talk) 17:57, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I never actually thought that 觸手可及 is derived from 觸手; I only put zh-forms, not zh-forms on 觸手可及. The Chinese 觸手 entry just looked...terribly short, so I added subst:zh-new/der. I admit I must not have been paying enough attention, and for that I am truly remorseful. And it's not that I have no remorse for block evasion, I just can't remember ever creating, even though I now believe you are right that I must have done so. I only assumed someone else must have done it because I still can't remember what could have prompted me to put "die a terrible death" for the definition or Category:zh:Death instead of zh-cat. I do remember that I was feeling rather tired around that time of day yesterday, if it's any consolation. I'm terribly sorry for anything I ever did to...offend any of you. I don't think I'll ever try to edit anything (Wiktionary or otherwise) when I'm that tired, ever again. Shāntián Tàiláng (talk) 18:58, 27 October 2021 (UTC)


 * I have no expertise regarding Shāntián Tàiláng's Chinese edits.
 * I can say that they have been helpful in editing Japanese entries, and I would not want to lose that.
 * To mix up some of Satan's guacamole (c.f. alternative senses possible for 🇨🇬, "avocado of the devil", i.e. to play devil's advocate), is there any chance that a user might make anonymous edits without realizing they're doing so? I seem to recall doing that myself in the past, when my session ended for some reason and I didn't notice right away.  ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 21:00, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Eirikr, you should read the discussion above. When you're blocked, you don't accidentally make logged-out edits (the IP address is also blocked, so you have to consciously change it). And when those edits are mentioned, you don't accidentally deny that you made them. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 21:07, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * @Μετάknowledge, I get that Shāntián Tàiláng was blocked at that time. My point, poorly expressed, is that the following sequence of events could lead to such a blocked user not realizing that they're blocked, and also editing from multiple different IPs.
 * User logs in via mobile device, edits.
 * User gets blocked while not actively editing.
 * The session on the mobile device expires, reverting the user to anonymous editing the next time they edit.
 * The IP assigned to the mobile device changes automatically based on changes in the local connection point.
 * The user resumes editing, potentially not realizing that this is now via an anonymous session, and from a different IP than the one associated with the block.
 * This is essentially the same scenario that Shāntián Tàiláng outlines below. Are we certain that the anonymous edits that Shāntián Tàiláng made after the block, were made in order to intentionally evade the block?  My concern is that we might be imposing a permanent ban based on an intention that did not exist.  ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 06:10, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
 * It doesn't matter. They were found using an IP (72.82.45.69) to edit and evade the block again on 28 October, 2021. RcAlex36 (talk) 06:24, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Aha, well, that pretty much moots my concerns and shuts the door. Thank you for that additional detail.  ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 18:28, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I didn't actually intend to deny those edits. I was just highly skeptical that I had made them, since I couldn't remember making those edits (and still can't, sadly); I think I must have been sleep-deprived or something at the time of those edits. But think of it this way: If you happen to own 3 or more different computers/mobile devices and each of them uses a different IP address (because it's in a different location and/or using a different ISP), and you haven't logged in a while on one of the 3, that can very well cause you to accidentally make logged-out edits that don't get blocked, because the IP address wasn't the one recorded at the time of the block. Shāntián Tàiláng (talk) 21:35, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

―I only changed your words because that link pointed to a page with mostly zh-see. And think: what about all the edits I've made to single-character Chinese words? Do those fall under my, offendingly spurious edits? Or the "improved quotes" edits I've made in the past? Either way, I doubt it'd be all that productive to block me forever. And back to the "denial" thing: What I'm trying to get at here is not that I never made those recent anonymous edits. It's just that I couldn't recall making those edits, so I was thinking "but that's impossible!" when I first saw your, uh, accusations of block evasion. Right now, I have no doubt that I must have done those edits, although my memory regarding actually making them is still (mostly) a blank. (Think like that tattoo that got while in the British Navy―he got it all right, but he could never remember actually getting it.) Shāntián Tàiláng (talk) 16:02, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
 * If you think you were justified to change the words in my message "because that link pointed to a page with mostly zh-see", then I must conclude that you simply cannot be reasoned with and you are beyond help. Cheers. RcAlex36 (talk) 16:11, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

No, I don't exactly think I was justified about that. I just wanted you to understand why I did it in the first place. After all, I would later correct 's spelling of "guacamole" (he misspelled it with a "q"). Please forgive me for changing your link. Shāntián Tàiláng (talk) 16:17, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

And : what would make you lift my lifetime block? Because had it not been for my foolish block evasions (I'll be darned if I know why I did those), I might still be waiting out a week-long block. And for you, : I find it hypocritical for you to say, "No information is better than misinformation" and then tell me not to create Chinese words without a definition. Why do you not believe that Chinese entries without a definition are better those one with a bungled definition? Especially when there are thousands of single-character Chinese words without any definitions? Lastly,, why did you refer to me as "buddy"? To me, it sounds incongruous for an authority figure to call a rule-breaker that word. I am sorry for breaking those rules, believe me. And I seriously doubt I'm beyond help, especially when you could've elaborated on just why it was wrong for me "to change the words in [your] message 'because that link pointed to a page with mostly '". Please remind me―when (if ever) is it OK to edit someone else's message? (Yes, I know it's OK when the message is unsigned.) Shāntián Tàiláng (talk) 18:45, 28 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Please stop pinging me and other editors. The case is closed based on the checkuser evidence. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 22:55, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Shāntián Tàiláng (talk) 23:34, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Request
Hi, hate to ping you, but I really need you to do me a quick favor (it does not involve Chinese entries or hasty Japanese name creation at all). At brandschatten's etymology, can you please add  to the end of the "Equivalent to..." sentence? I would do the same if I weren't blocked. (And trust me on this― I really wish I could mentally time-travel back to October 25 and keep myself from evading the block & from making those disruptive edits, so that I wouldn't be in this godawful mess.😭😭) Shāntián Tàiláng (talk) 19:08, 29 October 2021 (UTC)