User talk:Geofferybard

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, welcome to Wiktionary, and thank you for your contribution so far.

{{en-proper noun  DOUBLE CURLY BRACKETS      (proper nouns) or
{{en-noun|-DOUBLE CURLY BRACKETS  (uncountable common nouns).

• How to edit a page is a concise list of technical guidelines to the wiki format we use here: how to, for example, make text boldfaced or create hyperlinks. Feel free to practice in the sandbox. If you would like a slower introduction we have a short tutorial.
• Entry layout explained (ELE) is a detailed policy documenting how Wiktionary pages should be formatted. All entries should conform to this standard, the easiest way to do this is to copy exactly an existing page for a similar word.
• Our Criteria for inclusion (CFI) define exactly which words Wiktionary is interested in including. There is also a list of things that Wiktionary is not for a higher level overview.
• The FAQ aims to answer most of your remaining questions, and there are several help pages that you can browse for more information.
• We have discussion rooms in which you can ask any question about Wiktionary or its entries, a glossary of our technical jargon, and some hints for dealing with the more common communication issues.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wiktionarian! If you have any questions, bring them to the Wiktionary:Information desk, or ask me on my talk page. If you do so, please sign your posts with four tildes: ~~~~ which automatically produces your username and the current date and time.

Again, welcome!

PS. Have a look at my changes to HMIS if you haven't already. :) —Internoob (Disc•Cont) 04:24, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Hello Geofferybard. Considering that your last contribution here was made over two years ago, I suppose it's unlikely that you'll see this message; nevertheless, you're the only person listed in Category:User bo, so you're the only person I can ask about this, really.
Can you tell me what the Tibetan word for "princess" is please? There is an image here which purports to be a PNG image of that word. However, I don't know if it's accurate, I can't read the Tibetan script, and I can't input the characters displayed in that image. What I'm looking for, ideally, is copyable text of that word in Tibetan script with a Romanised transcription and an IPA transcription of its pronunciation; can you help me with any of that? Any help you can give would be much appreciated. Thanks.

I removed your definition as it was incomprehensible, perhaps you should just tell me what it means and I'll add it.

one of the three vehicles Mahayan, Hinayana, Vajrayana.

Hi. On this entry, you included a usage note that I removed, so I'll explain what the problem was. The problem was that it was encyclopedic content rather than lexicographic. There's sometimes a fine line between the two but I think that in this case, it was more encyclopedic. When an entry starts talking more about the general topic of a word rather than the word itself, the content is probably better suited for Wikipedia.

Also, are you sure that this word is pronounced the same way as arhat?

No it probably has a different syllable but I don't know how to properly write that in wiktionary style for Sanskrit. Regarding the encyclopedic/dictionary line, that material is right on the border. It pertains, actually, to usage. Sounds like a great idea for a Wikibook.Geof Bard 19:18, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

OK. If you're not sure about the pronunciation, it's best not to include it.

The reason that I determined that it was more encyclopedic was that it could easily get out of hand if we tried to do the same thing for everything. If we had, for example, on the entry predestination, what each Christian sect believed about predestination, we'd have quite a long thing that would read more like a Wikipedia article.

Oh no not at all. The point pertains to how you can use it and is essential to understanding of what the connotations are. Quite different than these expansive encyclopedistic ramblings. If I don't convince you I am OK agreeing to disagree. Maybe it should be reverted but in a more concise manner? Geof Bard 19:33, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Okay, I'll agree that you can add it back because you probably know better than me that it's relevant. It should probably read more like a usage note, however, stating that the word is more common in Theravada circles than Mahayana ones, if that's what you mean to say.

Yes precisely. More in use and BTW, more highly esteemed; Mahayanists think it is of greater merit to defer full arahantship in favor of altruistic endeavor.

You seem to be a young adult who has not yet learned the customs of Internet discussion. Would you care to read some of the netiquette guidelines available on the Internet? (Admittedly, I do not know which one to recommend.) Some points: (a) use short discussion titles; (b) avoid boldface, with some exceptions; (c) avoid capital letters (LIKE THIS); (d) avoid writing long contributions to discussions on a project on which you are new; first look around and learn how things are being done here; (e) avoid talking about people, and talk about the subject matter instead. Sticking to these and similar points should make it easier for you to contribute to Wiktionary.

On another note, Wikionary is a descriptivist dictionary. It describes how language is actually used rather than prescribing how it ought to be used. You are entitled to not liking various words or their forms, but your disliking them has nothing to do with what should be documented in Wiktionary.

On yet another note, "show me the policy" is sometimes the right request to be done, but more often than not it is pretty meaningless. As a newcomer to a project, you should try to figure out common practices rather than asking for formal policies that codify these practices. The most important Wiktionary policies are WT:CFI and WT:ELE, in case you are looking for policies, but many practices remain uncodified, and some points from the mentioned policies suffer from the lack of consensual support, so are in fact invalid.

After all that's transpired, must I continue to be subject to these tirades that amplify any variance from your personal preferences into a thought crime?Geof Bard 21:05, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

I don't understand what you are saing. You seem to be using figurative and hyperbolic way of expression, such as "thought crime". I would appreciate you talked to me in plain English, so I do not need to guess what you are trying to say.

Didn't you ever learn that it is fundamentally rude to start off a lecture on (n)etiquette by speculating "you seem to be a young adult who..."? You then proceed to recommend that I read something, but you can't quite seem to figure out what exactly it is that you want me to read, except that you seem to think that it should be something about (n)etiquette. Perhaps you should follow your own advice. If you would like an itemized response to the rest of this Bill of ParticularsI have no problem providing it to you, but it is 2:30 PM on a Friday and I have both business and social events on my calendar. I don't know how they do things in C.R. but on this side of the pond we put LOW PRIORITY nit-picking like these items you are so concerned about over to the next business day.

Pending a further detailed response to your summons and complaint, you may wish to ponder the following quotes,loosely translated, which have the advantage of being available,in the original, in the Czech language. Perhaps you can correct the translations with nuances not available to myself. When it comes to Czech, it's Greek to me.

File:Pdnbtn.png

Kindness is better than biting!

These quotes were selected and ordered by myself and they proceed to a definite point regarding all the static and drama going on here lately: VH

"The attempt to devote oneself to word craft alone is a most deceptive thing, and often, paradoxically, it is language that suffers for it." VH

"There's always something suspect about an intellectual asserting himself triumphant and his opponent vanquished." VH

There's always something suspect about an intellectual on the winning side. VH

The deeper the experience of an absence of meaning - in other words, of absurdity - the more energetically meaning is sought VH

Hope is a feeling that life and work have meaning. You either have it or you don't, regardless of the state of the world that surrounds you. ~VH

Hope is a state of mind, not of the world. Hope, in this deep and powerful sense, is not the same as joy that things are going well, or willingness to invest in enterprises that are obviously heading for success, but rather an ability to work for something because it is good.

~VH

Your editing style is pretty unique for a new editor, don't get many new editors who after less than 24 hours are writing draft policies. See WT:BOLD. I admire your boldness, but if I went on a wiki I didn't know and started changing a load of stuff I'd be fully prepared to be criticised. Gotta face the consequences of your actions, and if you can't don't act in the first place. Be a man about it.

What's the problem you don't here me whining. I've got plenty of hope in my back pocket and more where that came from. Nonetheless, there is a lot of hypocrisy going on and less attention to the merits of my definitions than to this putatively outrageous hubris. Aw, well, it's The Week End and I am going to enjoy it.

"Isn't it the moment of most profound doubt that gives birth to new certainties? Perhaps hopelessness is the very soil that nourishes human hope; perhaps one could never find sense in life without first experiencing its absurdity." Vaclav Havel

Geof Bard 22:43, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Geof Bard 22:43, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

I do not understand the point of your response. You seem to refer to Czech being my mother tongue, as it that had to do with anything. The purpose of the list of quotations provided by you, presumably by Vaclav Havel, escapes my understanding.

I thought you might respect him as much as most Americans do. Albeit I have met Czechs who don't like him. The point being I am enroute to an engagement and want to parse my contributions to make sure I have not messed anything up. I thought that pointing to the message of hope with which your countryman has dazzled the world might inspire you to ratchet back the impulse to polemicize and we could defer the discussion until Monday. I don't know about you but as far as I am concerned Vaclav Havel has made some awesome good points in comparison to which all of the argumentation and disputation looks quite pointless. Many of the items you are lecturing about have already been covered. I need to get away from this monitor sometime before now and the great day of judgment. Part of the problem is the lack of focus and prioritization. When I address concerns, some of which are not entirely spurious, new ones come in at a faster rate...for instance Mg complains about a question or a suggestion I made on my own sandbox as though it was an attempt to usurp...I think Jeff is indicating by his silence that he, unlike most others, is more concerned with the work of this wiki than the jumping in. And he sees some real quality work in my definitions, such as correction of just the most egregious misinformation at Hinayana, or the omission of legitimate Calvinist idiom, and the dire need of someone to work on this wiki who has at least the ability to do well researched work on Tibetan Buddhist terminology. Which, having done transcription work for probably some of the leading Buddhist scholars in the world, I do possess. But rather than focus on streamlining the learning curve I get an endless succession of hostile challenges accusing me of everything short of blood libel, causing the Tsunami, and disrespecting the Holy Virgin. It just never ends. There have been two or three helpful people, and Jeff K was very cool about things once he could see that I do, in point of fact, usually have at least as good or better idea of what I am talking about than most of the nitpickers. And frankly I think that the message of hope by your countryman V Havel warrant your attention, because you are so caught up with litigiousness that you are putting your capacity to be a visionary in jeopardy. You could probably be a prominent translator if you transcended but you need to be able to latch onto a humanitarian vision rather than a technocratic skill. If you can't do better by a newbie to your boards than this gauntlet run of primarily inflated or unjustified criticism, you are wasting your talent and the world will lose potentially one of its finest interpreters of Havel, perhaps also Jan Huss and others. But no.

Edging Rock Climbing Shoes Edging shoes often have supportive 'board lasting' inside the shoe to take the 'edge' out of standing on one. In general, these are stiff and are recommended for the beginning climber as they have a lining that protects the feet and are easier on the leg muscles, especially the calves.

PING

Can you please stop using long section headings? The heading "I'd appreciate if someone would PING this so I can mark it as read and get it off my talk page. Thanks." is very long. A section title is not a sentence and should not read like one.

Just forget this mess and move on. Geof Bard 05:00, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Have you read WT:CFI and the other links someone posted at the top of this page? Equinox ◑ 09:43, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm the new kid on the block so maybe I am missing the obvious, but is there someway for me to know which edit or new entry this refers to...all I remember is that I didn't think that you were incorrect, just that the thought crossed my mind that perhaps there was a splittable hair, or, if not, that the matter should cue me to do some lexicographic work somewhere else. I don't mean that as a quit-threat, just, that perhaps there are certain aspects of lexicography which may interest me, going forward, which do not fit the wiktionary model, or, perhaps, even the WMF model, as well.

You removed "respell" from an entry (forgotten which one now) saying it could not be a word without a hyphen. See for example the search results of published books at [1] Equinox ◑ 12:44, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

At least I assume that's what your "Cite policy" comment was regarding. If not, it might have been Game: the names of pop stars etc. are for Wikipedia, not Wiktionary.

Not sure how your link justifies re-spell. It looks wrong like respite, res-pell. IMO

It includes hundreds of books, including those from a century ago, that use "respell" as a single unhyphenated word.

I don't not believe you. I think you meant " If you find the link on this page you will find a lots of old books, and I have gone throught them and that is how they spelled it back then."

And I take it you assert that is contemporary usage.

I am pretty sure I have seen it that way but have always detested that word and that spelling. It seems like the way they would spell things when they were still burning whiches.

PING

Hi. People are more likely to see your public remarks/requests if you post them in the normal discussion areas: WT:TR (for discussions of specific words) or WT:BP (for discussions about the project).

I prefer to vet my ideas with people who have offered their assistance before involving a lot of other people who may not be interested in working with l'[estrangier].

http://www.abc-of-rockclimbing.com/info/climbing-shoes-types.asp

Edging Rock Climbing Shoes Edging shoes often have supportive 'board lasting' inside the shoe to take the 'edge' out of standing on one. In general, these are stiff and are recommended for the beginning climber as they have a lining that protects the feet and are easier on the leg muscles, especially the calves.

I thought Tibetan was written in a different script?

Let me get this straight - you are suggesting that there is not a role for English language definition of Tibetan words that Americans and UK folks encounter and wish to look up?

Or, on the other hand, should I code the word as "English" and indicate Tibetan derivation?

If this is an used in English context, then it counts as an English word, and should have an English header and an etymology section indicating that it came from Tibetan. The entry for Tibetan word should have the title as it would be written in Tibetan.

I just made that change before. But see my comment on Discussion.

Um, what flag? Do you have the "country flags" option in Special:Preferences turned on?

Yes but I think that begs the question. Many readers who just want information will likely be quite put off when studying Tibetan Buddhism to see the Union Jack.

I agree that your phrasing might be better, but how is the original definition a "run-on sentence"? Equinox ◑ 00:48, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Maybe that's too harsh mayber there was just an extra clause.

So, not Panther? Usually words derived from proper nouns are also capitalized.

Correct.

You actually nominated the entire entry for speedy deletion. What you should do, if anything, is use {{rfv-sense}}.

BTW it would be easier for me, and I would say for others too if you reply here to comments left here. Otherwise the initial question is one place, and the reply somewhere else. Also, when defining words please use more 'formal' English and use a spellechecker such as the one Microsoft Word provides. I'd expect a 'good' dictionary to be free from spelling mistakes and 'rambling' definitions that are difficult to understand.

"when defining words please use more 'formal' English and use a spellechecker "

I have no idea what you're talking about. Where are you suggesting that my English is not formal enough? I thought actually, way too formal. I think you are joking.

You sort of 'waffle' on as if to you were giving your personal opinion on the word, instead of 'meanings'.

You need to link to specific examples. In many cases, I provide a nuanced explanation rather than a blunt, incorrect definition. But this conversation is meaningless in the abstract. Please provide link to the specific entries you are worried about. Thanks. Geof Bard 23:40, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Please use short section titles of discussions. The section heading "བྱང་ཆུབ་སེམས་དཔའ is this legal? Search that, look at what is there, discuss,if so inclined." (used by you recently) is definitely too long and unfit for a heading. The alternative "Legality of བྱང་ཆུབ་སེམས་དཔའ" would wholly suffice.

Yes, I take your point. I thought it might be easier to scan the TOC and see what is up but no it is confusing even me, and I wrote it myself!Geof Bard 07:27, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi, FYI: if instead of this you just wrote there [[Scotus]] and previewed instead of saving you would get there as well. Cheers, --Thrissel 01:27, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Cool, yeah, I think you see that I figured out the work around. It was fun to find that. But you are pointing out that much can be done even in preview, obviating the need to necessarily mark up the "old" page.

I've been on wiktionary only seventy hours but it moves so much faster than wikipedia, where I have 5+ years, that I am learning stuff at warp speed. It amazes me how the bot formats up some relatively bare entries that I made drawing on personal knowledge, allowing me to plow forward and dump my knowledge and not waste time on stuff the bots can do. If I have any talent at this, it is a certain instinct for the language that I think is being lost in the world of commodities and instant gratification.