Talk:ไม่เป็นไร

"No worries" is an Australian colloquialism. Most other people I've noticed using it have picked it up from being in Australia or Australians they've met. There are tons of Australians in Thailand. It wouldn't surprise me to find glosses with this Australian term and a Thai term. I don't know Thai and don't have somebody to ask but I would assume this is the standard Thai response to "thank you" whereas "no worries" is not the standard response, but a specifically Australian, specifically colloquial one. Including "no worries" within a full list of responses to "thank you" might make sense, but including it as a primary and separate sense doesn't seem right.

Of course it could be that this Thai term is primarily used to express a lack of prevailing concerns and only secondarily used as a response to "thank you" but that would be surprising and would need something to back it up. — hippietrail (talk) 03:54, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Your second paragraph hits it on the spot. I can't read or write much in Thai, but I have a fair grasp of conversational Thai, and I can tell you that the meaning is not usually a response to 'thank you'. Using RTGS to illustrate my point, if one says to a tuk-tuk driver "bai wat saket dai mai khrap?" and the driver responds "mai dai", you would respond "mai pen rai" to show that you're disappointed, but there's no conflict. It's a cultural thing. Perhaps you might avoid creating entries in languages you don't speak at all — or at least use the {{attention}} template. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 04:42, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. But to not create rough/sketched/starter entries goes completely against the wiki spirit. What we should be doing is creating more entries even if it's imperfect and cleaning up imperfect entries we find. I see you and a couple of other new (to me) users are doing a great job cleaning up the rough entries I make - that's as it should be. Exactly how wikis and all crowdsourcing works best. "Some information is better than no information".

Also I create the vast majority of such entries based on translation entries for English words. So if the rough entries I create need attention then it's also bringing attention to those translation entries which must've been rough before I came along. So when improving my rough entries it's probably a good idea to click on "What links here" and see if there are some other pages to improve too, translations, synonyms, related, derived, see also, and etymology sections.

Thanks again! — hippietrail (talk) 07:37, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

This Thai translation exists in three entries, two of them are mine (you're welcome, not at all), Not sure about don't mention it, the translit. is different there. I think creating entries from translations is fine, only extra care should be taken and one should also check other sources. This dictionary will break up Thai phrases, so you could see what phrases are made of. --Anatoli ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 12:28, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Hippietrail, the problem is that you're not marking the entries as needing {{attention}}, and you're not even making an effort to use language-specific templates, which has been most of my fixing (otherwise, I've mostly added Korean etymologies or other stuff I know). —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 14:16, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

In the ten or eleven years I've been active on Wiktionary the templates have been very much moving targets and very inconsistent across languages. I don't think we should pick on volunteers for not making effort when any attempt to add info to the project requires effort, considering how obtuse and convoluted our format and templates are. ((attention)) didn't used to be here so I'll have to learn it. Even for the heading templates, many languages have templates like ((xx-noun)) whereas others require ((head|xx|noun)) - I've started using the former, but getting a feeling for which languages need which approach. I'm considering doing some template hacking - something I haven't touched here for years. Anyway thanks again. — hippietrail (talk) 01:47, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, I know it can be hard, but this just comes down to us having different wiki-philosophies. {{attention}}, at least, should be easy, because it works the same way for all languages. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 02:29, 2 April 2013 (UTC)