User talk:Minorax/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not change what is on this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or add comments to an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Thanks

Thank you for all your edits!--Brett (talk) 14:24, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

User:Brett No problem! Also, can you take a look at eventful to see if I'm on the right track. 大诺史 (Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 16:21, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

Note the changes Brett made to eventful and the changes I made to punching bag. Try to have your sentences like A punching bag is a ... rather than A bag.... Hiàn (talk) 15:15, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

@Hiàn: Alright, noted :) 大诺史 (Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 15:17, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

You're an editing machine! All your cleaning up is really appreciated.--Brett (talk) 18:18, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

As the year winds down, I just want to express, again, my appreciation for all your efforts and achievements on this site.--Brett (talk) 15:13, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for acknowledging it! 大诺史 (Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 15:38, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

Word forms

Hi there 大诺史. Seeing as you're filling in the missing word forms, I thought I'd point you towards User:Conrad.Irwin/creation.js. This streamlines the process significantly and I've found it quite useful. Hiàn (talk) 14:56, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

@Hiàn: Wow, didn't know that the script existed. Thanks! 大诺史 (Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 15:05, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

Explanations

When you explain the meaning of a word, avoid saying "it means". For example, 2 is better than 1

1. If you eat something, it means that you put it in your mouth, chew, and swallow it.
2. If you eat something, you put it in your mouth, chew, and swallow it.

@Brett: Noted. 大诺史 (Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 03:02, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Archaic words

I would discourage adding archaic words like abstringe. Was there some particular reason for adding it?--Brett (talk) 12:35, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Nope, just came to my mind just now. 大诺史 (Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 12:39, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

So can we delete it along with accoucheuse. The users of this dictionary aren't likely to run across those words and look them up here. And if they happen to stumble across them and decide to use them, their readers will likely be confused.--Brett (talk) 19:41, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

Sure :) 大诺史 (Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 05:49, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Processes, states, and conditions

When explaining a word like confinement, it's best to explain its meaning without using the base word. Somebody who knows the word confine is almost certainly going to understand confinement. For example, "Enforcement is the act of making people follow a law, rule, or decision" instead of "Enforcement is the act of enforcing."--Brett (talk) 19:44, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

Alright, noted. :) 大诺史 (Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 02:16, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

AFK

Hi, there are some issues with my computer so I won't be here for a few days. 大诺史 (Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 17:12, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Sniper rifle

This is simple a rifle for a sniper, and the entry is just what is often called "sum of parts". I don't think it would be helpful to multiply the number of entries in this way. I suggest deleting it.--Brett (talk) 13:12, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

Deleted. 大诺史 (Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 13:47, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

@Brett Actually, if it's a noun (vertical stablizer, sniper rifle), I think that it will be ok to have it. There are already several entries that exist, such as, gas chamber, human being, internet service provider. 大诺史 (Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 10:07, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

There are two issues here. The first is sum of parts, and the second is frequency. In general, I hope that we work from the most frequent words to the least. Though there's nothing stopping anyone from putting in words like acnestis, there's just not much point. Most people looking up infrequent words like this will probably have enough vocabulary to use en.wikt. Sniper rifle and sniper rifles together appear about one time per four million words in the Corpus of Contemporary American English, which is pretty rare.

So what about sum of parts? To my mind, vertical stabilizer would merit an entry under this criterion, because nobody would guess from those two words that it is part of the tail assembly of an airplane. Similarly, a gas chamber is not simply a chamber holding gas. It's a murder device. On the other hand, it's hard to imagine what else a sniper rifle would be except one used by snipers. It could, I suppose, be one to shoot snipers, but that seems a little far fetched. I'll leave it to you to be the judege.--Brett (talk) 13:01, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

Rollback

Thanks, but I only have 9 undos here... --DannyS712 (talk) 04:41, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

Threshold for rollback here is quite low, and you know what you're doing. So.. 大诺史 (Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 04:43, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

Well, thanks --DannyS712 (talk) 04:44, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

Keeping it simple

Thank you, as always for all your work! When you add a new explanation, it's often full of links. As much as possible, it's preferable to explain using a very simple defining vocabulary. Compare revisions of petroleum for an example. --Brett (talk) 15:00, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Noted and thank you for cleaning up! 大诺史 (talk) 15:14, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

intransitive vs passive

In deform, you use a passive clause and labeled it as intransitive. This may simply have been an oversight, but just to clarify, a passive verb will not have an object, not because it's intransitive but because the natural object is in subject function (e.g., the pressure deformed the wall --> the wall was deformed).--Brett (talk) 15:21, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Yep, was an oversight. Thank you for correcting :) 大诺史 (talk) 15:23, 12 December 2019 (UTC)