User talk:Spacestationtrustfund

Welcome Message
Apisite (talk) 06:16, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

You don't need to remove the blank line after ko-noun, etc.
Entry_layout —Fish bowl (talk) 19:36, 8 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Please do not remove blank lines that are in conformity to WT:NORM. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 06:56, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Place names in Chinese
I see that you have created a few entries for place names in Chinese. Please be advised that you should not create entries with the administrative division in the entry title. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 06:33, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Empty entries
Please avoid adding entries that only have pronunciations and no definition. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 14:13, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Dialectal Chinese entries
Hi, I'm wondering what you are basing your edits on for these dialectal Chinese entries. There are some errors/inadequacies in these entries. For example, entries for non-standard or non-Beijing Mandarin generally should not have pronunciations in m in. Also the entry for 老婆子 is pretty much completely inaccurate. Please be careful with your edits. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 15:55, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Langs you don't know
Please don't create entries in languages you don't know. 1) Someone could have added an SOP translation and isn't aware of what meets CFI or not 2) You... don't know the language. That should be enough. Vininn126 (talk) 23:42, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

Vitay
Vitaj, nazywam się Pleja, przybywam z Plejad, aby oznajmić dobrą nowinę: mięso to morderstwo, otwórzcie oczy.

PS. Polecam gorrrąco konto tej użytkowniczki: https://twitter.com/katarzyna01040 - poetki, myślicielki i osoby prostolinijnej. Shumkichi (talk) 23:54, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

Korean entries, grammar, and usexes
Hi, thank you for your contributions to Korean and adding many very needed entries. While doing so, please be a bit more careful with how you divide up and analyze words. You've created categories and etymologies that have not-the-best understanding of Korean agglutination, and it may be better to leave those to others while still learning. For example: is not a suffix, it is  +. is not +, but  +. This also applies to entries like which is more of a univerbation as a compound than a noun + suffix. Notice how is a verb on its own and is not attached to nouns freely. It's not a light verb. Same thing applies to which is just  +  +. is +  +  (or  if you want to condense those two). I'm unsure what you've used to learn Korean, but please please make sure to verify beforehand and make sure that you're aware of how Korean grammar is typically broken down. There are many resources that go into this and feel free to ask for some. You can also always verify with dictionaries such as 우리말샘 to see if native Korean dictionaries consider them as suffixes or not, which is a good starting point. There are so many entries that'll need fixing, so for now, I'd also suggest that you slow down making Korean entries for now.

Additionally, with where certain words come from, I'd be more careful. does not come from nor is there a verb  that aligns with this. It comes from Middle Korean + the suffix, and this is verifiable at the 우리말샘 entry for 풍기다.

On a final more serious note, which could actually lead to consequential actions, I've noticed that you've been taking sentences and translations from Oxford Advanced Learner's English-Korean Dictionary, possibly through Naver Dictionary, and using them as usexes, as with the examples at which can be found here. Please stop. This is likely a copyright violation. Please review WT:USEX. There it states that usage examples must be made by Wiktionary editors themselves, and examples from dictionaries and other sources should not be used in them. They belong in quotations. Additionally, the examples in Oxford Advanced Learner's English-Korean Dictionary may not always be the best ones to use for the entries, so I'd be a bit more mindful there as well.

I hope that you'll keep contributing after this, but overall, please please please be more careful. AG202 (talk) 01:43, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Compounds
Greetings, there is some discussion about what are compounds and what they are not. However, full sentences are not compounds by any stretch. --Dan Polansky (talk) 13:49, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Babel
Would you add Babel to your user page? It's not mandatory, just useful. --Dan Polansky (talk) 13:50, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Compounds v2
Not all mutli-word phrases are compounds, or at least shouldn't be categorized as such. English sometimes does that but not all. Vininn126 (talk) 18:07, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

usex in pantouflard
Please don't add links for every other word in the usage examples. See Example_sentences for an explanation why. Jberkel 23:27, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

Korean pronunciation and conjugation templates
Please stop putting, , and on entries immediately. See: for an explanation. Some of the entries that you've added to, such as, explicitly had the template removed when the aforementioned user kept adding the template everywhere. If you had checked the history of the page at all, you would've seen the reverts. Additionally, in the case of the conjugation templates, it does not make sense whatsoever to add a standard Korean conjugation template to entries like which are entirely dialectal terms. They are not conjugated in the same way, and for now, there's no way to show conjugation patterns for them. If you were more familiar with the language, this would be clear to you.

Overall, unfortunately, the work that you've done to Korean entries has been much more harmful than good, and the work of reverting your changes will be tedious, so I'm going to have to ask you to stop editing Koreanic entries entirely. If you continue, I will be forced to request a permanent block on your account, especially since you have yet to respond to any of the talk messages here nor change your behavior after your prior block. AG202 (talk) 16:22, 11 December 2022 (UTC)


 * I've gone through all of their Korean edits and boy, was it tedious! Cleanup should be done, for the most part. — 153.222.177.246 05:08, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

You wrote:
 * 벌게지다: 벌게 + -지다
 * 벌게: root of 벌게지다 and 벌겋다
 * 벌겋다: abbreviated from 벌게 + -하다 (and didn't add  either)

Sigh. --2607:FB91:38C:6C96:8599:2AC1:9B1D:6AEB 02:17, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

You wrote:
 * 뵤: modern Korean reading of 屛, 平, and 屏

Really? --2607:FB91:38D:4BCB:8DB6:7FCE:C5B3:C720 03:12, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Bogus "native Korean" etymology
You had added that erroneously when the  entry, which is clearly a borrowing from English -- there's nothing natively Korean at all about that term, neither the compound nor the constituents. Anything borrowed into a language, by definition, cannot be native. Please be more judicious in your use of. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 17:15, 26 September 2023 (UTC)