User talk:Razorflame

From Wiktionary
Jump to: navigation, search

/Archive 1


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)

kung fus[change]

Hey Razor. I've nominated your page, kung fus for deletion as I don't think it's an actual word in the English language. As always, you are free to pop over to the discussion to have a say. Thanks!--Gordonrox24 | Talk 02:57, 11 February 2011 (UTC)


It looks like this isn't working.--Brett (talk) 06:20, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Yeah. I don't know what to do in order to get it to work. I think it has to do with the fact that we might not have modules enabled on this project, which would be the source of the error meessages. Not sure how to go about fixing it at the moment. Razorflame 06:38, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
You would seem to have misspelled it as "utilties". Try adding an extra 'i'. :-) ObsequiousNewt (talk) 20:32, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the info :) Razorflame 17:56, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

First-person examples[change]

Why is it that you've decided to remove first-person examples?--Brett (talk) 06:40, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

I removed them because I thought we didn't allow first person in examples or definitions? Am I wrong? Razorflame 03:53, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
I'm not aware of any such restriction, nor can I see any reason for one. What would you do for words like myself?--Brett (talk) 05:53, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
OK, I'll remember this in the future! Razorflame 10:22, 9 October 2014 (UTC)


To my mind, the point of listing synonyms and antonyms in a learner/simple dictionary is twofold:

  1. To provide extra information to help the user understand the meaning of the head word.
  2. To provide a useful alternative to the head word in case the user wants some variation.

Neither of these goals is served by including rare and obscure words in the list. If the user doesn't know the word being looked up, then chances are they're not going to know rarer words, and as a teacher of English as a foreign language, I can tell you that it's not uncommon for students simply to choose a random alternative from the list of synonyms and use it in writing. If this is a rare word, it's often misused or inappropriate. Moreover, the longer the list is, the harder it is for the user to read, understand, and use it is.

I offer these comments because you recently asked about simple English. When it comes to synonyms and antonyms, my advice is to restrict them to words that are at least as common as the headword. When that is impossible, I recommend not straying beyond the top 2,000 words families of the BNC.--Brett (talk) 06:53, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

All right. I'll try to restrict them to the headwords in the BNC 2000 list from now on. Razorflame 03:56, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
I don't understand. Why have section titles such as "Homonyms" is there is no homonym? Are these simple words, or not?

Use of word in explanation[change]

I hope you don't feel like I'm pestering you. When you explain an adjective, consider whether it's more typical for it to be used attributively (e.g., genetic material) or as a predicate (e.g., this material is genetic), and then look for a way to frame your explanation in the most typical manner (e.g., genetic material, engineering, testing, etc. all relate to genetics or genes.)--Brett (talk) 06:10, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Nope, I don't feel like you're pestering me. I've been away for a while, so I still got a bit of getting used to writing entries in the Simple English Wiktionary again. I've been away for quite some time, and it appears that I've gotten a bit rusty ;) I'll try to do this for any future entries, but the problem is, I'm not very good at being able to determine whether or not adjectives are able to be used attributively or as a predicate. I mean, I'm able to identify attributive uses fairly easily, but the predicate uses are extremely difficult for me to identify, which is probably why you see me screw them up so often. Again, I'll try to make sure that I write the explanation in the most typical manner possible in the future! Razorflame 10:22, 9 October 2014 (UTC)