User talk:Vanished user ab79f50dfac6e6fca17843c01c8bb362

वानर

I didn’t include any false etymologies. Vānara is a vriddhi form of vanara, which clearly means "(something) relating to forest" or the secondary meaning of "ape/monkey" in Sanskrit, and is an adjective derived from the word for forest, vana, affixed with -ra (like in namra, bhadra). Also, if you know Sanskrit, it has clear sandhi rules or tendencies, and only vana + -ra can yield vanara, not vana + nara (the word for man/human), which would otherwise yield *vananara. Hopefully, you have understood. Thank you for your time. Upamedhika (talk) 17:24, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

भ्रातृ

In Sanskrit orthography, writing the words separately OR combining them whenever possible are both valid. Thus both मात॒र् अध्रु॒ग् अग्ने॑ and मात॒रध्रु॒गग्ने॑ are correct. Many texts use the former style, there is nothing wrong with it. If, for quotation, I have to highlight a particular word, I will of course try to separate it from others, so I can highlight just the word. Then for consistency, it is only fair that all the combined words are separated. It is just a style of writing, it has no effect on the pronunciation whatsoever. If you notice, I did not separate the words at इन्द्र because the word I want to quote (इन्द्र) is already a stand-alone word in the phrase स ज॑नास॒ इन्द्रः॑ ; so there is no need to separate the words. -- 𝘗𝘶𝘭𝘪𝘮𝘢𝘪𝘺𝘪^{(𝘵𝘢𝘭𝘬)} 03:19, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

Your page moves

Another issue I have to take up with you is your moving pages to the visarga form. अप्सरास् is the actual nominative singular; अप्सराः is how it appears in most cases, because the visarga (ः) is the allophone of the word-final (-स्) in Sanskrit. Check out any Sanskrit dictionary, that is how they give the nominative singular. Also, द्युः is not the nom. Sg of द्यु; it is द्यौस्. -- 𝘗𝘶𝘭𝘪𝘮𝘢𝘪𝘺𝘪^{(𝘵𝘢𝘭𝘬)} 03:32, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

If you actually explained what I did wrong instead of putting "If you think this rollback is error" on every revert, I would simply stop doing it. The talk page is always open. Rau6590 (talk) 04:12, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

And don't say not to edit pages I don't know about. Rau6590 (talk) 04:14, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

It's the default message that shows up whenever I hit the rollback button. But I'll make sure to let you know if any issue comes up next time. -- 𝘗𝘶𝘭𝘪𝘮𝘢𝘪𝘺𝘪^{(𝘵𝘢𝘭𝘬)} 05:23, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

Your Sanskrit edits

So it seems you have now taken to editing anonymously after being reverted a few times, presumably to avoid being detected. You are adding accentuated text to the quotations and this is actually helpful. But while you are at it, you are changing the translation too. Why would you do that? Do you believe that these new translations you are adding are better? Have you looked at them? They often make the quote so much harder to understand that even with the accents that you are adding, there is a net loss of information. I often have to drop whatever I am doing to clean up after you; so a while later, I began to revert you directly.

If you continue being disruptive, I will block your IPs on sight. However, it doesn't have to be this way. You can be a valuable and trusted member of the Sanskrit community at Wiktionary. I am always happy to have fellow editors who are interested in Sanskrit. Start using your account again and take inputs from other; please understand that the translations in my quotations have not been carelessly pasted; I usually take them from Griffith and rewrite the parts which I feel are not clear or have a poor choice of words. I would be the most supportive if you stuck to just adding accents without touching the translations. 𝘗𝘶𝘭𝘪𝘮𝘢𝘪𝘺𝘪^{(𝘵𝘢𝘭𝘬)} 14:51, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

I tend to change the translations, because I feel they're too archaic, because they use words like; 'thou' 'thine' 'thy' 'art' etc. And also because there are translations available where I find the accented version of the verses. I can't guarantee that I will not change the translations, but I'll try to keep translation changes as few as possible, and thanks to you not berating me over it. Rau6590 (talk) 04:41, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

These archaic sounding words were already out of fashion when the Western translators translated the Vedic literature. They consciously added these words to give it a feeling of a religious hymn. They are quite harmless to have. 𝘗𝘶𝘭𝘪𝘮𝘢𝘪𝘺𝘪^{(𝘵𝘢𝘭𝘬)} 02:26, 13 July 2024 (UTC)