User talk:PiRSquared17

>>> Important? Contact me on Meta.

Resolved.

Hello, PiRSquared17, and welcome to the Simple English Wiktionary!

We hope you will be happy editing here. Some helpful pages to begin with are Wiktionary:Community Portal, Wiktionary:Useful, Help:Contents, Wiktionary:Rules, Wiktionary:How to change a page, and Help:Creating a new entry.

If you want to talk with other members or ask a question, you can visit Wiktionary:Simple talk. Administrators can also help you with more difficult problems. You can also ask me for help. The best way to do that is to leave a message on my talk page. Just remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing "~~~~" (four tildes) at the end of your words.

Good luck and happy editing! · Tygrrr... 20:47, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Read all links. πr² (talk • changes) 05:35, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

New entries

Resolved.

Hi there! Nice to see you around here. Please review our layout guide before going on with creating more entries. It takes a lot of time to fix everything. It also may be good to review the pages linked from here. Have fun at Wiktionary. -Barras ^talk 19:14, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

OK. I will try to fix the mess I made. PiRSquared17 (talk) 19:16, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Another helpful page is Help:Creating a new entry :) Razorflame 23:11, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I will read that! πr² (talk • changes) 23:12, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Adjectives

Resolved.

When a word looks like a past participle or a present participle, try putting very in front of it. If it goes, then the word also exists as an adjective, but if it doesn't, then it's most likely just a verb. Often the meaning of the adjective will be different. For example, with dated, if the letter is dated (passive verb), it has a date, but if it is very dated (adj), then it has features which mark it as being from a previous time; it's out of date.--Brett (talk) 14:58, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Jello!

Resolved.

In case, I'm the same same person on Wikipedia. I-20 (talk) 01:42, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

What?

And one more note

Resolved.

Hi there! We appreciate the creation of new articles, but the number of articles is not our main goal. We want to have quality entries instead of entries en mass. It is much better to create only two new entries a day, but these with examples and all that is needed for quality entries. Hundreds of new articles without any example aren't that helpful. Please remind that when helping here. Have a nice day. -Barras ^talk 10:07, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

OK, I will put examples on all of my entries and make fewer per day. πr² (talk • changes) 12:36, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

That would be great, but keep in mind that simply using a word in a sentence is not necessarily an example. The sentence you've provided for underline, for instance, doesn't exemplify the use of that word. Almost any transitive verb could fit there. High quality example illustrate the way a word is used. This website should give you some ideas. If you plug underline in there, you'll find that it's most common with words like importance and need and that it occurs commonly in the passive voice (as illustrated in the underline PREP section as underline by). Clicking on the links there should result in some authentic examples sentences. You may then need to shorten or simplify them to make them useful to language learners, but when you do so, be sure to maintain the authentic flavour of the original.--Brett (talk) 16:30, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Ok πr² (talk • changes) 16:40, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your continued efforts. Could I ask that you endeavour to include countable/uncountable for nouns and transitive/intransitive for verbs. Also, defining words using words of the same family is not particularly helpful. Somebody who knows the verb create for example, is very likely to understand creator. If they're looking it up, we want them to get the meaning with one click, so rather than simply defining it as somebody who creates it would be more helpful to say something like a creator is somebody who makes something new.--Brett (talk) 00:26, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

The definition of make includes "create." The definition of create includes "make." This is circular... πr² (talk • changes) 01:14, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

All definitions are circular; some circles are just bigger than others. Where possible, it's good practice to define using more frequent vocabulary than the word being defined. Thus make is a good choice for create. If you can think of a better definition for make that is simple and avoids the immediate circularity, that would be great.--Brett (talk) 10:55, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Using words in explanations (definitions)

Resolved.

Thanks for adding transitive/intransitive templates. The next step is to make the explanations conform. In one case, you have (transitive), (rare) If you ashame, you... Leaving aside the question of whether ashame is attested and whether it's important enough to include in a simple dictionary, the problem is that ashame as you've put it here has no object, making it intransitive. It would be better as, (transitive), (rare) If you ashame someone, you... Hope that helps.--Brett (talk) 18:04, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, πr² (talk • changes) 18:31, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Interwikis

Resolved.

Hello again :) I've seen that you add interwikis to pages that are created by me, and I thank you for doing that, but I just want to tell you that it isn't necessary to do so. Interwicket, which is the Wiktionary's interwiki-adding bot, will add interwikis to any entry made on here, even if it has no interwikis on the entry :) So, there is no need to add them, which will save you time that could be spent adding new entries :) Anyways, I just thought that I'd tell you this :) Cheers, Razorflame 01:32, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice, πr² (talk • changes) 03:52, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Autopatrolled

Resolved.

Would I qualify for autopatrolled? I-20 (talk) 19:04, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

See WT:Autopatrol for this information. -Barras (talk) 19:05, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

newt example sentence

Resolved.

The reason why I removed the example sentence on the page newt is because it does not exemplify the word. Also, please do not space out the equals signs in the headers like you have been doing. Please make sure that you write headers like so:

==Noun==
===Synonyms===
===Antonyms===
===Related words===

Please also make sure that synonym, antonym, related word, and see also headers are all Level 3 headers in the future. Also, when dealing with nouns that are countable or uncountable, could you please indicate which kind of noun it is with a {{countable}} and {{uncountable}} templates please? Thanks, Razorflame 22:20, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Okay, sorry. πr² (talk • changes) 00:33, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

No problems :) I just wanted to help you out by letting you know what you are doing wrong at this point in time so that the next time this comes up, you'll be a better Wiktionarian, and you'll be a better person overall :) Everything that I do, I do for the benefit of others, so I hope that I didn't sound too harsh with you ;) Razorflame 05:10, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Entries

Resolved.

Hi there. One of your recent entries that you made was not formatted correctly. Can I ask that you please read Help:Creating a new entry and Wiktionary:Entry layout explained? Once you do that, you'll find that making entries here is much easier, and it'll make much less work for everyone else :) Thanks, Razorflame 17:58, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Actually I just copied (and slightly modified it) from mix. πr² (talk • changes) 22:06, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

plumbing(s)

Resolved.

As of yet, we don't have the countable definition of plumbing(s) yet...just the uncountable ones Purplebackpack89 (talk) 22:55, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

priming

Resolved.

Hello, I undid your edit, because that definition looks more loke a noun than a verb.  Hazard-SJ  ✈  04:44, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

I had it under a ==Noun== header ... πr² (talk • changes) 04:52, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, more like a verb than a noun.  Hazard-SJ  ✈  04:53, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

I don't know whether or not psychologists use it as a verb, but the enwikt definition for the verb doesn't include that sense, but the noun one does. So I was erring on the side of caution. πr² (talk • changes) 04:55, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

OK, but either way, "the action of" generally goes toward defining a verb.  Hazard-SJ  ✈  05:04, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

I can find several sources for priming as a noun in psychology but none for prime as a verb (relating to psychology), like enwiktionary. Priming is a noun (gerund forms can be nouns). I know this is Simple.Wiktionary not En, but I'd rather follow en.wiktionary's decisions on things like this where possible, to avoid cross-wiki discrepancies. Also, enwikt Wiktionarians know more about what they're doing. :P If you are sure "prime" is a verb in psychology, then maybe you should bring it up on enwiktionary too. Generally words like this can be considered nouns (for example: Oversight is the action of watching ... but oversight is a noun in this sense, not a verb). πr² (talk • changes) 05:11, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

I'm neither saying anything about prime, nor am I saying anything about priming not being a noun. I'm simply saying the definition that was used described it as a verb.  Hazard-SJ  ✈  05:15, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

I'll just add it to the verb sense then. πr² (talk • changes) 05:17, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Real Sorry

I am really sorry, I meant TC was bity. Sorry for saying your comment was bity. --Take a trip with Rani ^Rani 17:24, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

^In line with that, were you (in your lifetime) an admin? :) --Take a trip with Rani ^Rani 21:20, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi. I've never been a local admin on the Simple English Wikipedia or Wiktionary, but I was nominated for simple.wikipedia adminship by a former Simple Wiktionary bureaucrat (hint: someone who gave me advice above). However, I am currently a global sysop and an admin on Meta-Wiki. Being a global sysop is similar to being a local sysop, but normally global sysops aren't part of the community. Also, no problem with the "bitey" stuff. I just didn't want TC to discourage new users in general. One request: could you please put the word in bold in the definition, and look at the links someone gave me? πr² (talk • changes) 21:26, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Y Done, I see what you mean PIR! --Take a trip with Rani ^Rani 21:52, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

--Take a trip with Rani ^Rani 22:06, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Your change

Hi PIR! I saw your change on attacker, it is actually a verb. Cheers! --Rani ^Rani 17:38, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

attack is a verb, an attacker is a noun... πr² (talk • changes) 17:57, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Oops! I am so dumb!, accident! --Rani ^Rani 18:07, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

While, words like lest have been traditionally called "conjunctions", many linguists, starting with Jespersen in 1924, have argued that it makes more sense to treat them as prepositions taking clausal complements. The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language, for example, says, "Complements of a preposition, like those of a verb, may be objects, as in the examples just cited, or predicatives, as in They regard him [as a liability] or It strikes me [as quite reasonable]. Some prepositions, moreover, can take AdvPs or clauses as complement: I didn't meet him [until recently] and It depends [on how much they cost] . Within this framework, it is natural to analyse words such as before as a preposition in I saw him [before he left] (with a clause as complement) as well as in I saw him [before lunch] (with an NP as complement). And just as phrases of other kinds do not necessarily contain a complement, so we allow PPs with no complement. Thus in I hadn't seen him [before], for example, before is again a preposition. And in I saw him [afterwards] we have a preposition afterwards that never takes a complement. Many of traditional grammar's adverbs and most of its subordinating conjunctions, therefore, are here analysed as prepositions" (p. 58).--Brett (talk) 00:56, 13 November 2015 (UTC)