User talk:Razorflame

From Wiktionary

Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

[change] Welcome!

Welcome to the Simple English Wiktionary!

We hope you are happy editing here. Some helpful pages to start you off are Wiktionary:Community Portal and Help:Contents.

For an explanation of the editing format here, see Wiktionary:How to edit.

If you want to meet and talk with other members, you can visit Wiktionary:Simple talk. Just remember that you should sign your messages on Talk pages by typing "~~~~" (four tildes) at the end of your words.--Brett 02:51, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm glad you're getting your feet wet. I made some formatting changes to cross, and I simplified the definition. I don't think ford is a very simple word. I hope these are helpful to you.--Brett 02:51, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi Razorflame! It's nice to see another familiar face around here. :-) - Tygartl1 -talk- 14:03, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
You are Tgyrrr from S:WP right? -Razorflame 18:21, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
Yes. My name used to be Tygartl1 over there too but I had it changed. I will probably change it here when I see a bureaucrat around...or we get a new one. - Tygartl1 -talk- 19:19, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
I know it used to be your old username, I've already read that in the archives. -Razorflame 19:20, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

[change] Adjectives

When an adjective's comparative and superlative forms use simply "more" and "most" respectively, use {{adjective|more=true}} to avoid linking to the "more" and "most" forms, as they are not really words and it's really common sense as to what it means (even for Simple English projects). Maxim | talk 02:14, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Yep, thanks for the help. I noticed this right after you fixed my edit to flowing. Cheers, Razorflame 02:17, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

[change] Defining verbs

Although both styles are in use, the standard here has been to define verbs using an if rather than a to. For example:

  • If you alter something, you change it, usually in a small way.

rather than

  • To alter something, is to change it, usually in a small way.

It's not a bid deal, but the philosophy is that it's more like you're explaining it to somebody, and it's nice to be consistent. Either way, to is not part of the verb and should not be bolded.--Brett 00:41, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

For verbs, the infinitive form is "to <insert word here>" for verbs. That is why I bolded the to. Secondly, I would be more than happy to define verbs using an if instead of a to. Cheers, Razorflame 00:43, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

[change] Countability

Sorry to be dumping so much grammar on you. Countability is a difficult topic. When we say that a particular sense of a word is uncountable, it doesn't necessarily mean that the word has no plural form. In fact, almost all uncountable nouns actually have plurals which are used to talk about different kinds (though some words such as crockery, appear to have no plural at all.) For example, if you say the company makes three butters, you mean it makes three kinds of butter. But we would still classify butter as being generally uncountable. This applies to cream cheese. It's uncountable, but it does have a plural form.--Brett 00:59, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Sure. That makes sense now that I think about it. Cheers, Razorflame 01:00, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

[change] 150

Congratulations on getting 150 entries under your belt!--Brett 01:02, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks :). It took some work, but I finally managed to get 150 down. That still doesn't compare to the 5,600+ articles I have written for the Simple English Wikipedia, though. Cheers, Razorflame 01:03, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

[change] US & UK spelling

Your edit on offenc/se suggests that the US spelling is the standard and the UK spelling is a mere variation. Policy is to treat both UK and US spellings equally.--Brett 18:41, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

I was writing the definitions according to what the English Wiktionary wrote on both of those pages. I do believe that I was correct in moving the page from offence to offense. Cheers, Razorflame 18:44, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
En.wikt has hundreds of thousands of word and only a handful of competent people looking them over. There's lot's up there that is problematic. Don't take it as gospel. If you're a British dictionary maker, like Oxford, then it makes sense to say "American spelling of..." If you're an American dictionary maker like Merriam-Webster's, then it makes sense to say "British spelling of", but we are neither. Check out other words, such as colour/color.--Brett 20:56, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Got it. I will go and fix offence right now and will do things like that in the future. Cheers, Razorflame 21:00, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

[change] Horizontal

What's the rationale behind deleting the noun?--Brett 12:41, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

The page for horizontals does not exemplify the noun tense of the word. It actually exemplifies the verb tense of the word, which is why I moved the definition from the noun tense to the verb tense. Furthermore, horizontals does not have a page on the English Wikipedia, and dictionary.reference.com does not have an entry for the word horizontals, which makes me believe that the word is not a real word. That is my reasoning behind the deletion of the noun. Cheers, Razorflame 00:38, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

[change] Don't rely on en:wikt

Razorflame, can you please get into the habit of checking a number of dictionaries before taking actions such as moving pages, deleting content, or suggesting deletions. en:wikt is a great project, but as I've said before, it's also full of mistakes and missing an awful lot. ant hill is a perfectly good way to spell ant-hill or anthill. And there is a noun content which has a meaning similar to the adjective, but which has different grammatical properties. Some excellent candidates include the Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English, the Oxford Advanced Learner's dictionary, and Merriam Webster's Learner's dictionary. These will not always match what we have here 100%, but they are a good place to start. They're also focused on using simple English.--Brett 18:25, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes, of course. I will definitely check several other dictionaries before I go and make any big changes in the future. I have realized that the English Wiktionary is full of mistakes and will definitely take your advice in the future. Cheers, Razorflame 18:30, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

[change] Related words

For related words, please stick to derivationally related words rather than inflectionally related. For instance: complicate gets complication but not complications.--Brett 18:38, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Sure :). I will remember this in the future. Thanks for the tip :). Cheers, Razorflame 18:38, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

[change] Admin

Congrats! I think you'll do a fine job. · Tygrrr... 19:16, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you Tygrrr. I'm currently checking out how to tell if an IP address is an open proxy or not. Cheers, Razorflame 19:17, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Yes, congrats! Maximillion Pegasus 19:49, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Congrats, Razor! TheAE talk 00:29, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Thank you all :). Cheers, Razorflame 00:30, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Congrats! Juliancolton 00:48, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Thanks :). Cheers, Razorflame 00:49, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Congratulations! I'm sorry I didn't see your RfA until after it was over. ☺Coppertwig(talk) 21:19, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
Thank you Coppertwig. Your congratulations means a lot to me :). I'm glad that we worked past our differences! Hope to see you around, Razorflame 22:09, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
I have found your T-shirt (the delivery people had trouble getting over here :P). Don't lose it. ;) Chenzw  Talk  14:34, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Admin T-shirt.svg
Thanks and cheers, Razorflame 14:35, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

[change] Ping!

You've got mail! · Tygrrr... 20:17, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Email? Cheers, Razorflame 20:18, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Yep. · Tygrrr... 20:19, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Replied. Razorflame 20:22, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Replied. · Tygrrr... 20:41, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Replied. Cheers, Razorflame 20:45, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

[change] Templates

I noticed you've added a bunch of plurals. Thought I'd save you a little time with a tip. With plurals you only need to type {{noun|dog}} (or whatever the singular is). The template will automatically add an 's' on the page itself. You only need to type out the plural if it's irregular. Same thing goes for verbs. For rain, simply type {{noun}} and {{verb}}. It fills in the different versions of it. Again, you only need to do it by hand if they're irregular. This time-saving tip brought to you by: · Tygrrr... 20:25, 5 February 2009 (UTC) :-)

Thanks for the tip. I will try to use them whenever I go ahead and create plurals from now on. Cheers, Razorflame 20:28, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

[change] Deleting redirects

When deleting redirects, please move all links to that page. For example, Indian Occupied Kashmir has 12 pages that link to it, including 3 pages that redirect to it. Those should all be directed or redirected to Kashmir. Also, how is Asiatic peafowl an encyclopedic entry? Seemed like a dicdef to me... · Tygrrr... 21:34, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

To respond to your first point, I will definitely move all pages that link to that page in the future. Thanks for telling me about that. Second, Asiatic peafowl is the name of a bird and belongs in a Wikipedia, not a Wiktionary. Wiktionaries are meant to be used for the definitions of words, not birds (there is Wikipedia for that). I hope that that makes it clearer for you. Cheers, Razorflame 22:44, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
No, it doesn't really clarify it. Should we not have pages for eagles, geese, ducks, etc because they are types of birds? Asiatic peafowl is basically a peacock. It belongs here in our dictionary, imho. · Tygrrr... 22:59, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Ok, I can restore that page then. Sorry for the confusion. Cheers, Razorflame 23:00, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Razorflame, I know you're excited to finally have access to admin tools, but please be more careful in your deletion decisions. Don't prove people at SE WP right that you would be reckless with the mop because of your eagerness. That's the last thing I want to see happen. Please don't hesitate to ask for guidance if you're ever in doubt. · Tygrrr... 23:47, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for this message. I will definitely be more careful with my deletion decisions. I do want to prove that I wouldn't be too eager with the tools, and I have already realized that I am being a bit too eager with my deletions. I will definitely be more careful. Razorflame 00:02, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

It would be encyclopedic if it included a bunch of information about it being a national animal of Pakistan, or where it breeds, or that kind of thing. I'd only delete it if it included just that without a clear definition.--Brett 23:53, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for this guidance. I will use it in the future to help with the deletion decisions. Razorflame 00:02, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

You did it again... · Tygrrr... 22:50, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Gone through and cleared out those links to the deleted page (mostly). Cheers, Razorflame 23:45, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done. Finished moving the links to the correct space. Cheers, Razorflame 23:51, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

You did it again... · --Brett 12:59, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done. Finished making the links correct on all articles affected. Cheers, Razorflame 21:47, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

[change] How about...

I know it doesn't look so impressive on the edit count, but how about slowing down and working carefully through some complete pages from the BNC lists including full definitions and good examples? Of course, you can keep adding plurals if you like...--Brett 01:02, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Don't worry, I plan on taking care of the more elaborate pages once I get done with those pesky plurals :). Once they are done, I should easily be able to get down some of those longer pages :). Cheers, Razorflame 01:06, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
I've created pages for words like volcano now. I will continue to do this every once in a while until I run out of plurals to create, when I will start creating the base words. Cheers, Razorflame 14:34, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

[change] Your first barnstar :)

Barnstar Congratulations: You have been given a Barnstar!

For writing so many, many pages, and for becoming an admin, I award you your first barnstar. Good job! TheAE talk 19:32, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Thanks, Razorflame 19:51, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

[change] thesaurusi

Are you serious?--Brett 22:37, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

I assume that you probably meant that you didn't want me to make the changes to that page. I have undone them all. Do you want me to delete that redirect? Razorflame 23:11, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

[change] spelling

Hi (once more!). I spelled channel with one 'L' because that's how it is on the channel page. Wouls you change it if you are correct spelling it with two 'L's Thanks, Yotcmdr 17:08, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Both channeled and channelled and channeling and channelling are both ways of spelling it. I have fixed the channel page to say that. Cheers, Razorflame 17:12, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for adding them. Yotcmdr 17:16, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Yep, no problems :). That one was a tricky word ;). Cheers, Razorflame 17:17, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

[change] What's a tense?

See tense.--Brett 17:37, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Eh. My bad...I probably mean form. Cheers, Razorflame 17:41, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

[change] Thanks...

...for the barnstar.--Brett 22:02, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

No problems :). Cheers, Razorflame 23:09, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

[change] Speaking as a Wikipedia contributor..

..It is a bad idea to just go around tagging usertalk pages with "welcome to project X!!!!!" tags, instead only tag the pages of editors with contributions. At the best of times it can be patronising and slightly scary "waggh, they are sending me a message about my contributions, I haven't touched anything!" and you can also end up hitting autocreated accounts of long-term editors to other projects, sending them pointless emails which prompt them to go over to anotherwiki and give a message to a user which they have to give to users 2 or 3 times a week on their own wiki, and are sick of giving. 194.81.110.83 20:01, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

I only welcomed users which I knew through other projects. Cheers, Razorflame 20:13, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

[change] Vandalism?

I'm just wondering why you called this vandalism. Thanks. ☺Coppertwig(talk) 20:57, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

It is vandalism because he was just copying the contents of the Main Page onto the talk page for the main page. Therefore, vandalism. Cheers, Razorflame 20:59, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
Also, the user in question has already been blocked on the Simple English Wikipedia for the same reason. Cheers, Razorflame 21:34, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

[change] Bot status on Ms.Wikipedia

I think you should lessen the frequency of your bot's activity should you want your request approved. It has been flooding our RC and we're not happy with that. Alistaire 03:00, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

I have lessened it down to half speed. Cheers, Razorflame 21:46, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

[change] Thank you

For the welcome. Mind you, I got an 2 emails saying you created it. SimonKSK 01:38, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Slow internet speed equals having to click the submit button twice XD. Cheers, Razorflame 02:58, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
It's my keyboard. SimonKSK 03:00, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
Ah. If you need any help here, feel free to ask me or any of the other active editors here on this site. Cheers, Razorflame 04:59, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

[change] re:SB39Bot

I put this on Brett's page as well, but...

Actually, Brett is correct about SB39Bot. All of the links should be in English. Unlike Wikipedia where the interwiki lead to what the page is called in other languages (i.e. the translation of the word in other languages), on Wiktionary the interwiki should all be of the same word, no translation, no spelling changes. For example es:dog would say, in Spanish, 'dog is the English word for perro '. If you notice, dog has everything as language:dog, not es:perro, etc. Make sense? Therefore SB39 is adding the wrong links. Also, it should be flagged before it can be run here and that hasn't been done yet. Once SwirlBoy has made the appropriate changes he can run some tests here and then get a flag from Brett if the tests work and the bugs seem to be fixed.

I'm a little surprised and worried that you did not know this already. But I'm glad that you didn't just unblock him yourself. Also, SwirlBoy should be able to communicate with us about fixing the problems on his bot's talk page or by signing in as himself. I'm not sure why this was dealt with off-wiki. · Tygrrr... 16:09, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

I didn't ask him to communicate with me off-wiki, it just happened that way. I was already on IRC and he asked me to unblock him, and I said that I would be uncomfortable with doing this and that I would rather he ask Brett about getting him unblocked himself. Yes, I do run my own bot, however, I rarely run it on Wiktionary, because of all of the bugs that it has when it edits Wiktionary. Hope this helps you understand my position a little better :). Razorflame 16:15, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
No one said you asked him to talk to you there. A responsible admin would have directed him to take up the conversation here since his methods of communicating here have not been blocked. It's worrisome but not wholly surprising that you chose to deal with it that way. If you were uncomfortable doing it and knew it wasn't the appropriate way to deal with it, why'd you do it? I wish you didn't have to backtrack and try to rationalize yourself out of your mis-steps. I'd rather you just think things through before you act.
Also, how does your bot add interwiki? If it's the same was as SwirlBoy's bot, you should fix yours as well. · Tygrrr... 16:24, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
Sorry. I didn't know that I shouldn't have talked to him on IRC. I will direct him to talk about Simple English Wiktionary issues on my talk page here from now on. Thanks for letting me know this.
I very rarely run my bot here, so this shouldn't be a problem. Furthermore, I check over every single one of my bots' edits because of the fact that I know that pywikipediabot is not a very good bot to use for Wiktionaries. I got my bot under control. But thanks for worrying about it :). Don't worry, I am very vigilant when it comes to making sure that my bot makes the correct changes :). Also, my bot already has a flag here. Cheers, Razorflame 16:30, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
You're still not quite getting what I'm saying. It's not that you talked to him on IRC. The problem is that you were trying to fix a problem off-wiki that's needs to be dealt with here. The responsible thing to do is direct the user to discuss it with the blocking admin. It was completely inappropriate to ask Brett to unblock when he was completely right. Not only did you step in where it wasn't your place, but you were wrong. You gotta think things through before you do them. I'm still not convinced you have the demeanor and instincts to be an effective admin, and you're honestly not doing much to improve that opinion. I'm baffled that after so much time on various Wikipedias that you can still not understand basic things. Marjorly and I don't often agree, but I found his oppose vote to your 10th RfA yesterday and I agreed 100% with his assessment (except when he said you do things only in the hopes of gaining adminship. I may be naive but I don't believe that's completely true). Frankly, I am unnerved by your adminship here. I am trying to deal with it, but I keep feeling like I'm getting confirmation that the mop isn't for you. I'm not giving you an ultimatum, or intentionally trying to upset you (although I suspect me saying all this probably will upset you), but I want you to know that if my uneasiness continues to be confirmed by poor decisions on your part I may have to do request it be removed. Please note that this discussion is not solely because of this bot incident, but an accumulation of things I have noticed since you gained adminship. If you want to discuss this further with me in private, I would be happy to. Just let me know.
P.S. It's great that you say you've got your bot under control, but as an administrator, you're also now responsible for making sure other people's bots run properly and make the correct changes. · Tygrrr... 17:02, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
Actually, I did ask him over IRC to contact the blocking admin. That was one of the first things that I told him to do. I am sorry that you think that I handled this situation wrongly. I will try harder in the future to slow down and make sure that I am thinking through my actions before making them reality. You did not upset me. However, shouldn't administrators only have their bit removed if they are abusing the tools? I don't see where exactly it is that I am doing that (if you can prove me wrong, though, I am all ears!) We all make mistakes, and I believe that this mistake was an honest one. I was partially saddened that you think that I am confirming the fact that I would be unfit for the mop and I really hope that I can prove you wrong still. If you are referring to the section up there a ways where I forgot to check what links here when I deleted a redirect, I really don't see that as a big enough issue for someone to be desysopped over because frankly, I forgot that administrators were supposed to check the what links here button. If you will notice, I have started doing that for every single page that I have deleted :). It was your pointing this out that helped me understand what I was doing wrong and helped me to fix it. I would like it very much if you and me can talk on wiki about discussing this further, because I believe that there should be no secrets hidden from other users here. Razorflame 17:11, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
You have not abused the tools. The issue is much less tangible than that. People have a hard time expressing why they are uncomfortable with you having adminship, in case you haven't noticed in your 10.5 RfAs (+2 here). I am among them. I am uncomfortable with your protecting and deleting sprees right after you got the tool. I didn't like that you weren't being thorough in your deletes. The pages you have protected have had nothing done to them to warrant being protected, imho. I think you handled this particular situation poorly. I am uncomfortable with you requesting adminship for someone who has only been here one month and has less than 500 edits. And those are just a few of the things off the top of my head that have bothered me lately. I don't want you rationalize each of the things I've listed. I am tired of hearing rationalizations from you. These aren't new issues that I'm bringing up, but you just don't seem to learn. All I'm letting you know is that if it somes to a breaking-point for me, I will do what I feel is in the best interests of this wiki. · Tygrrr... 17:42, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
I know that you are tired of hearing rationalizations from me about things, but I am only going to rationalize one thing: I looked over Maximillion Pegasus's edits here, and I believe that this Wiktionary would benefit greatly from his ability to get the mop. I thought that he has been around since the middle of December, but I was wrong. I also thought that he had more than 500 edits here, otherwise, I would have been much more wary. Furthermore, I believe that he would be a net positive to this Wiktionary if he were given the tools; that was the main reason why I nominated him for adminship here.
I will agree with you that I probably handled the situation poorly. I did not know that you weren't supposed to use the tools as much as I did as soon as you got them. I thought that when you got them, and you saw something that needed fixing, imho, you would use the tools to fix the problem. I know that since I am new and all, that I would make mistakes, and I greatly appreciate you pointing out to me my flaws and what I have done wrong so far. I knew that I would make mistakes, and I am grateful to have someone like you to point out when I do do something wrong. I will be talking things over about this Wiktionary here...I only use IRC to help facilitate discussions about less important things and for getting in contact with an administrator if there is something that needs to be dealt with on the Simple English Wikipedia, and it looks like no one else is on to help with the situation. I also use IRC to monitor all recent changes to help combat vandalism on more than 50 other wikis, so IRC, imho, is a pretty important tool :).
I thought that my reasoning for the protection of the parts of speech template was good enough for what I was doing. After all, other other Wiktionaries and Wikipedias, administrators have protected said templates, so I did not see a problem with protecting them. Preventing tampering of templates that are used throughout the Simple English Wiktionary, imho, is a very important thing to do.
I will make sure to think through my actions carefully before I do them from now on. Thanks for all of your help so far, Razorflame 21:34, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
BTW, he was helping me on IRC get my bot fixed in #pywikipediabot. That's why we talked there. ѕwirlвoy ₪ 17:04, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

[change] Night owl

You're up late too, huh? :-) I'm off to bed now, see ya later. · Tygrrr... 06:29, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Yep. Ok. Night. Razorflame 06:51, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

[change] Oops!

Thanks for catching that! [1] ☺Coppertwig(talk) 21:22, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Yep, no problems :). Us administrators need to watch each others' backs :). Cheers, Razorflame 21:24, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

[change] En:wikt references

Please don't say you created a page from the en:wikt entry when it doesn't exist at en:wikt. Thanks. · Tygrrr... 01:11, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

In fact, if all you're doing is putting in inflected forms, what's en.wikt got to to with it at all?--Brett 02:23, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

I was pretty sure that I just created the page for stealths on the English Wiktionary. Anyways...if you don't want me to GFDL satisy every entry I make (because I do look at the English Wiktionary to make sure that there aren't any pronunciations or alternate definitions), that's fine with me. Anyways, if you don't want me to do that, then I will stop. Cheers, Razorflame 04:38, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
You've added interwiki a couple of times to pages at English Wiktionary that don't exist there. That doesn't sound to me like you're checking every single one... If it doesn't exist there, please don't put an interwiki link here to a non-existant page there. That seems like a simple request to me. Can you do it? Thanks. · Tygrrr... 15:06, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
Of course! I'll double-check each entry that I make here to make sure that they exist on the English Wiktionary before I link to them from here :). Thanks for the note! Razorflame 15:19, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

[change] Stubs

All senses should have examples. Those without are often marked stubs. Rather than deleting the stub tag, replace it with {{exstub}} in such cases.--Brett 15:49, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Sure thing. I will do that for every page that I create that doesn't have any examples. Thanks for the tip! Razorflame 15:51, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
A note before you go crazy adding exstub everywhere, it's probably only needed on the headword definition pages, not the plurals or the various forms of verbs. I think adding examples for those words is not a bad idea, but it's not as needed as on the headword pages. Thanks. · Tygrrr... 16:13, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
Sure. I'll keep it to the headword pages only. Cheers, Razorflame 16:15, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

[change] Darkicebot@dewiktionary

Hi,

I've left a note here. Regards, Pill 13:43, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

I've left a response. Thanks for the message! Razorflame 20:02, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

[change] Redirects

Redirects can be useful, they don't all need to be deleted. You're creating yourself extra work switching the templates, imho. There's really no need to do it. That's why redirects exist. Also, please don't delete {{obsolete}} as a redirect to {{old}}. · Tygrrr... 16:49, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your message. I have already undeleted {{obsolete}} as I realized that it would be a useful redirect, and I thank you for pointing out a mistake that I made. Thank you for the advice. I would agree that not every redirect needs to be deleted, but Wiktionary isn't meant to have a lot of redirects. It is supposed to have entries and very few redirects. Anyways, I have been thinking more about actions before I make them and I definitely think that I have improved as an administrator here. What do you think? Razorflame 17:28, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

[change] Blocking

I am very concerned about your recent blocks:

  1. Blocking for 1 day without warning for one edit of removing content (which could have been a good faith removal)
  2. Blocking for 1 day without warning for creating one page that at first glance appears to be pure vandalism but actually could have been a good faith edit cosidering en:wikt has a page on fuck with
  3. Blocking for 1 week without warning for creating one nonsensical test page

These seem like highly extreme reactions. Please explain what you were thinking. As things appear right now, this may be borderline abuse of tools. · Tygrrr... 17:24, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

You are right. This was an extreme reaction from me. I will take the time to calm down and think about the situation first from now on. Please understand that people make mistakes. I will fix this. Thanks for the message. Cheers, Razorflame 18:02, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
To be clear, every admin does things a little differently, so I may react one way and Brett another, etc. This is perfectly normal and acceptable as long as no one is responding inappropriately. FWIW, here is how I would have handled those particular situations:
  1. revert but not give a warning unless they do something else
  2. moved page to fuck with and recreated with appropriate info or simply deleted, depending on how much free time I had at the moment, and I would not have given a warning unless they did something else
  3. deleted and warned with test2 or 3
Of course there are multiple appropriate ways to have handled the situation, but yours were not among them. I'm glad you understand this. · Tygrrr... 18:49, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for helping me understand what I did wrong, and thanks for helping me by giving me other solutions. I will utilize them in the future. I didn't unblock the first two IPs that I blocked because their blocks were very short. Thanks for the help! Cheers, Razorflame 18:50, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

[change]  ?

Why exactly did you create a user talk page for me with a greeting, on a project that I have never edited and am not active on? I cannot possibly imagine that being helpful. Swatjester 13:40, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Why should it matter? I was welcoming you to this project because I knew you from the Simple English Wikipedia, so I thought that you might become active in the future. Thanks, Razorflame 18:14, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
But I'm not on this project. Why would you welcome me to something I'm not participating in? Swatjester 18:44, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
Because I know you and because I thought you might become active on this project. Thanks, Razorflame 19:45, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

[change] Darkicebot on pt.wiktionary

Hi Razorflame!

I have temporarily blocked your bot on the pt.wiktionary. It's customary over there to wait at least three days after making the bot request before activating it. This is to allow other contributors to ask questions or comment on the new bot. Please de-activate your bot for now. If there are no questions nor comments after three days, I'll give you the bot flag and then you can run without flooding the list of recent changes. Thanks.

--ValJor 16:06, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Bot is automatically deactivated when you blocked it. Please remove the block from my bot and make sure to remove the auto-block as well, because that prevents me from editing there. Thanks, Razorflame 16:07, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
OK, I have unblocked the bot and corrected the other problem, too.
--ValJor 16:42, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
Ok, thanks, Razorflame 16:43, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

[change] Thanks for the welcome!

Great to see your editing here! --Dylan (user · chat · en:wp) 03:53, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm an admin here, so of course I'm editing here :P. I hope to see you editing here. Razorflame 16:32, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

[change] Thanks for the welcome and cleanup...

...but accelerations is a perfectly valid word, last time I checked.--SarekOfVulcan 16:26, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I've looked at the English Wiktionary page and saw that it can be both countable and uncountable, so I fixed the entry to have both the countable and uncountable definitions :P. Cheers, Razorflame 16:27, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

[change] Yo

When are you coming back, Razor? Simple.wiktionary just isn't the same without you! --Dylan620 Speaketh · @ en.wikipedia 16:41, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I have not been able to access it for a while....it just kept on timing out. I was JUST able to get back to this site now. Sorry for not being able to log in, but I tried to get on here as often as I could, but never was able to. Cheers, Razorflame 14:12, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

[change] ammunitions?

Are you sure this can be pluralised? en.wiktionary says it's uncountable, and has no plural entry. Cheers, Tempodivalse @en.wikinews 02:39, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Hmmm....not really sure. Some of the online dictionaries agree with the English Wiktionary's take on this...Yes, I guess that it could be uncountable, although ammunitions feels like one of those words that could be used to detail different kinds of ammunition, although I could be mistaking the word for munitions...cheers, Razorflame 02:44, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

[change]  ::snort::

Yah, yah, yah... - Amgine 05:07, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Lol. I know that I welcomed you to the Simple English Wiktionary, but do you think that this is a little sarcastic? Razorflame 05:09, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

[change] Hey

Good to see you back here Razor! Hope you stay. :D Pmlineditor  Talk 08:00, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

No need to worry. I'm gonna be staying for a while at the least, so don't worry :). Cheers, Razorflame 09:13, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

[change] Patrolling

Welcome back! Good to see you around again. One note on marking pages as patrolled. Before marking a page as patrolled it is a good idea to check for the following things:

  1. That the word is real and belongs in our dictionary
  2. That the word is not a plural or verb tense of a word that has not been created yet
  3. That all parts of speech for the word are there (if they are missing, please add them)
  4. Check to see if a pronunciation section exists for that word on EN WKT (and if so, please add it)
  5. Regardless of whether or not they have it on SE WKT, think about whether the word has any homophones or alternate spellings (and if so, please add them)

While you have been absent, I have been the only one patrolling new pages and had a nice system for myself. I like to copyedit all new pages, but I currently have a large backlog due to so many users using the acceleration script. The yellow helps me keep track of where I have left off (for yours and Brett's creations I just have to keep track of where I left off manually). You are welcome to help me with the backlog, but I'd like to know you are doing the above items so that I know I don't have to double-check your work. Thanks! · Tygrrr... 14:50, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Of course. I am more than willing to help you with the backlog, and I will definitely follow this system of yours. You will note that I have indeed started doing this starting with the cougar article and I will continue doing this in the future. Thanks for the note, Razorflame 19:27, 12 August 2009 (UTC)


[change] Synonyms

Could you please comment here?--Brett 13:01, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done Razorflame 09:17, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

[change] Block of Barras (de)

I think you should unblock this block. This clearly shows that it is Barras' sock. Thanks, Pmlineditor  Talk 08:20, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Oh well, Barras did it. ;) Pmlineditor  Talk 08:52, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
I unblocked my second account. --Barras || talk 08:58, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
Ok, if it was your secondary account, then yes, the unblock should have occured, but I followed the username guildelines to block that account as it was too similar to any administrator on this site. Cheers, Razorflame 09:17, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

[change] negative modals

There are many negative auxiliary verbs in definitions and I don't see any point in avoiding or replacing them (e.g., isn't -> is not).--Brett 12:17, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

It is general Wikipedia and Wiktionary Manual of Style to avoid using contractions. I am just following it. If you would rather me not, then I will stop. Razorflame 13:07, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

[change] delete

Why did you undelete the page? Did you forgot something, or is the page actually good for something? Griffinofwales 04:38, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

The page cannot be deleted as it is used by other templates. Razorflame 05:20, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

[change] reminder

Before you forget, remember to request that your rights be removed at simpleWP. Remember what happened last time. Griffinofwales 21:00, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

I already have. If you read the Simple Talk notice I left, you will see that I have already requested this. Cheers, Razorflame 22:47, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
I left this before you left the note. I hope you enjoy your time here, I'm sure you will be an asset here. Griffinofwales 23:17, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
He does not need to remove his rights if he doesn't want to. It is not your right to request that he requests his rights be removed. Microchip08
I did not request them be removed because of this message. I had already requested they be removed before I even saw this message. Cheers, Razorflame 23:20, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

<-*sigh* Razor knows what I meant. Griffinofwales 23:36, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

[change] Homophones

Am I missing something with cavassed/canvased? Aren't these simply alternate spellings?--Brett 00:32, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Well, this is where it gets really complicated. Both canvas and canvass have their own separate definitions that are not shared between each other, and while they are definitely alternative spellings, they are also their own words with their own definitions, hence the dilemna. What do you think? Razorflame 00:34, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
Apparently I was missing something. Thanks!--Brett 11:02, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
No problems. Cheers, Razorflame 21:26, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

[change] A friendly note

Just if you wanted to know, I've withdrawn my RfA per the concerns you raised. I've replied to what you said here. Regards, Pmlineditor  Talk 05:21, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

I have a feeling that you will make a good administrator here in the future; I just don't think that you are quite ready yet. I look forward to seeing you apply again at a later point in time. Cheers, Razorflame 21:27, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

[change] POV IP editor

first off thanks, I was starting to look for someone to deal with him. Also as soon as you blocked it looks like he may be back with 92.0.241.14 Jamesofur 00:50, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

and already done...00:50, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
Already blocked. Cheers, Razorflame 00:50, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

[change] Rollback

Could you give me the Rollback flag, Razor?--  † CR90  05:00, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Permission assigned Please becareful with the tool. (Sorry Razor, that I've stolen your work :) ) Barras 11:35, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

[change] Brother as a part of verb

Where's that from? ;) I can't find it anywhere! :) I think PeterSymonds removed it (I was going to wait to see what you said) but seems a little bit of a stretch/neologisim, I looked at a couple other dictionaries and wasn't able to find it. Jamesofur 19:17, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

It is not a valid use of the word, so therefore, it was correct to remove it. Cheers, Razorflame 20:53, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
yea, I was quite confused when I saw you added it ;) that's why I paused before deleting it. Jamesofur 03:23, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
I added it? I don't remember adding it...Razorflame 03:25, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
looks like it ;) [[2]]Jamesofur
My bad, then ;). Cheers, Razorflame 14:11, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

[change] NPOV

Please explain this tag on the article talk page. Thanks, Griffinofwales 14:51, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

I am retired from Simple Wikipedia. Therefore, I will not explain. Razorflame 15:08, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
So I will remove the tag. Griffinofwales 15:09, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
Go ahead. Razorflame 16:00, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

[change] Vacation

Enjoy your holiday vacation. Microchip08

Thanks. I got back quite a bit sooner than expected, so I should be back to editing the Simple English Wiktionary within the next day or two. Cheers, Razorflame 15:27, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

[change] Crat

How would you feel if I nominated you as a crat? I know the it's not a big deal but Bret isn't around much right now as shown on his userpage and the open RfA. In the end having a 2nd one may be better so that it's more likely one is "around" when needed and I thought you may be the best one for the job here. Jamesofur 00:23, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

I humbly accept your offer to nominate me for bureaucrat. Thank you for offering. Cheers, Razorflame 02:50, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

[change] IP block exemption

Hi, Razor. Just wanted to let you know I've removed you from the IP block exempt user group, as IPBE already comes packaged with sysop status, admins don't need to add themselves to that group. Hope you don't mind. Cheers, Tempodivalse 02:15, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Ok then. Thanks for the information. No, I don't mind. Cheers, Razorflame 02:16, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

[change] Request for...

...rollback, please. Snake311 (talk) 23:26, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

[change] Proper nouns/Key Largo was deleted....

Hi Razor you deleted Key Largo awhile back i'am just wondering why because you said your reason was it was encyclopedic entry I just have added Bahamas and Costa Rica and I think the english wiktionary allows Proper noun places around the world. Barras is also helping me. Thanks Shyguy (talk) 16:26, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

The English Wiktionary does allow entries for countries from around the world, as well as cities that have some historical or religious importance. Otherwise, such articles do not fit the scope of the Wiktionary project, and therefore, are not correct to be made here. I believe that my first deletion of this article was correct because it does not fit in the scope of the Simple English Wiktionary. Razorflame 19:52, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

[change] I admire your great work

keep up the good work Razor! 67.244.243.248 (talk) 20:26, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

I intend to :). Cheers, Razorflame 21:31, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

[change] Semi-active?

Far from having made fewer than 50 edits in the last two months, I've made over 1,000. Try to be a little more careful.--Brett (talk) 20:57, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Well, I know that you've made a lot of edits...which isn't exactly what I was meaning by semi-active...I was meaning semi-active as not around as often as other members. I know that you edit very sporadicly (meaning you come on for like 30 minutes at a time), instead of a few users who are on for hours a day...that was what I was trying to get at. I know that you are very active, it is just that you are usually active for small periods of time per day...that was what I meant. Razorflame 21:00, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
If you mean not around all day, then say not around all day instead of some nonsense about fewer than 50 edits in two months.--Brett (talk) 23:47, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
I wasn't the one that wrote that in the first place. I was merely just heightening the limits from 30 to 50 edits. I've moved you back to active anyways because you are indeed active here. Sorry for the misunderstanding, Razorflame 01:01, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

[change] Your block of 79.176.57.147

Just wondering, why did you block 79.176.57.147 (talk · contributions)? While I agree that the entry defenestration was a copyvio and not appropriate, there was no vandalism, and the offence didn't seem severe enough to warrant an immediate 24-hour block. The IP could have been trying to help, we should assume good faith. I think it might have been better to simply leave a note on his talk page explaining him why the entry wasn't appropriate for this wiki. Blocking immediately, without even a warning, seems too drastic. Just wondering. Cheers, Tempodivalse [talk] 23:03, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

I've left the account creation option open because the user was making bad pages (copyright infringments). After talking it over, I believe that I was indeed just a tad too hasty with that block, but I believe that copyright infringment is a serious thing that should be taken seriously. Cheers, Razorflame 23:30, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
I agree copyvio is a serious thing and should be strongly discouraged, but still it would have been more appropriate to give a warning first, imho. "Users should be warned [...] before administrators block them" (Wiktionary:Bans and blocks). The IP may not have been aware that copying from Wikipedia would constitute a copyright infringement. Tempodivalse [talk] 23:35, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
Yes, that it exactly what the other administrator that I talked to said. Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I will strive to correct this in the future. Thanks again, Razorflame 00:06, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
No worries. :-) Cheers, Tempodivalse [talk] 01:21, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

[change] Note

Hi RazorFame. Why are you creating entries such as "narrowing‎", "narrowed‎", "narrowest", and "narrowest‎"? I don't think someone would search for them, and even if they would, the root word is narrow so that's the where the definition is (the entries you created don't have a useful definition). It also clogs up the random entry feature with content-less entries. 99.224.31.185 (talk) 01:41, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

They are still words nonetheless, so they need to be created. Furthermore, if you look on the English Wiktionary, you will notice hundreds of thousands of those form of words that have already been created. They need to be created as they are English words that are in the dictionary. There is no real good way of making the entries for them as they are fairly straightforward. Furthermore, you say that nobody would search for them, which is not true. People probably search for them every day, and by creating such entries, we make the Simple English Wiktionary more complete. Razorflame 02:37, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

[change] bully

Hi! Thanks for your improvements to my new definition :) I'm still learning the correct layout - but I think i'm getting there! The adjective form is not "uncommon" as such, rather it is considered out of date and old - it's not used in day to day conversation (at least here in England) but is still well defined. How should it be formatted to be included? --Skenmy talk 20:10, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Oh! If it is out of date and not used, then just use {{old}} before the definition of the word. Therefore, it would be as such:

==Adjective== {{tl|adjective|more=false}} #{{tl|old}} <insert definition here

Something like that, but without the spaces. Cheers, Razorflame 20:13, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

[change] your deletion of Cooperstown?

En wikt has towns names and i looked on here and Zealand is a real place why did u delete cooperstown? GoofyBirdy64 (talk) 01:52, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

I deleted Cooperstown because the city itself is not of historical importance and did not have anything important happen there. Dictionaries have certain towns in them that are important to a vast majority of people. Otherwise, they are usually reserved for the encyclopedias. Hope this helps you understand, Razorflame 02:27, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

[change] Block of CarsracBot

Please, make sure that you read the local bot policy before blocking bots here. The other burocrate asked for global bots here. My bot has the botflag to run here with the pywikipedia software with the -wiktionary option on. So making your point by blocking my bot is not the way to do it. Removing my bot flag after discussion about the iw bot policy is a better way to do it. So please, please lift the block on user account CarsracBot, because I have stopped editing here and I will only start editing here with my bot if someone else from the simple.wiktionary.org community asks it nicely. Carsrac (talk) 16:50, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Account unblocked. How should we see if the bot works correctly. Just a few false positives. THis happens and the bot op can't see if it works after fixes if the bot is blocked. Just remove the bot flag. You are crat, such mistakes and bad decisions shouldn't happen. --Barras (talk) 19:01, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
The block was justified because the account was making incorrect changes. Brett blocked my bot after it made some of the same changes, so I followed his lead and did the same here. Please note that I thought it through before blocking and to tell you the truth, the block should've stuck. I will now remove the bot flag. Razorflame 19:53, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
Just because Brett did this doesn't mean it is ok. Even the block by Brett on your bot was wrong. --Barras (talk) 20:06, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://simple.wiktionary.org/wiki/User_talk:Razorflame"