User talk:Zcreator

Welcome!

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

If you are unfamiliar with wiki editing, take a look at Help:How to edit a page. It 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.

These links may help you familiarize yourself with Wiktionary:

• Entry layout (EL) is a detailed policy documenting how Wiktionary pages should be formatted. All entries should conform to this standard. The easiest way to start off is to copy the contents of an existing page for a similar word, and then adapt it to fit the entry you are creating.
• Our Criteria for inclusion (CFI) define exactly which words can be added to Wiktionary, though it may be a bit technical and longwinded. The most important part is that Wiktionary only accepts words that have been in somewhat widespread use over the course of at least a year, and citations that demonstrate usage can be asked for when there is doubt.
• If you already have some experience with editing our sister project Wikipedia, then you may find our guide for Wikipedia users useful.
• The FAQ aims to answer most of your remaining questions, and there are several help pages that you can browse for more information.
• A glossary of our technical jargon, and some hints for dealing with the more common communication issues.
• If you have anything to ask about or suggest, we have several discussion rooms. Feel free to ask any other editors in person if you have any problems or question, by posting a message on their talk page.

You are encouraged to add a BabelBox to your userpage. This shows which languages you know, so other editors know which languages you'll be working on, and what they can ask you for help with.

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! Wyang (talk) 16:16, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for finally creating an account! Keep up your great work, especially in filling our gaps in Chinese. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 04:27, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

• Welcome! ---> Tooironic (talk) 05:56, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello!

Wiktionary:Votes Hi! Could you vote on my application status bot? Thank you --Pavliukdanila (talk) 14:23, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

Korean

Please be very careful, there are several errors on the 등신 (deungsin) page. The Sino-Korean etymology should be 等神, and the word is pronounced with a long vowel. Wyang (talk) 15:19, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

"This form has other meaning"

Hi Zcreator, thanks for adding this feature. I just think that this statement might not be true in all cases. For example, 电线杆 is the simplified form for both 電線杆 and 電線桿, but both actually have the same meaning. Also, the sentence is kind of ungrammatical; it should be "This form has other meanings" or "This form has another meaning". Is there a better way of wording this? @Wyang, Dokurrat, Suzukaze-c, any suggestions? — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 18:46, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

@Justinrleung: Something like "This simplified form corresponds to more than one traditional form; it may or may not have other meanings" ? I'm not sure either... Dokurrat (talk) 20:48, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

@Justinrleung and the gang: I think we really should start looking into the option of assigning IDs for individual etymologies/senses. Wyang (talk) 07:43, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Changed the wording to "This form has one or more other meanings." ت Wyang (talk) 08:16, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Japanese entries

If I may, I would like to request that you make Japanese entries as subpages of your user page, like Vietnamese. —suzukaze (t・c) 22:42, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

good work

Good work on finding all those SoPs. ---> Tooironic (talk) 15:22, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Korean hanzi section

Dear ZCreator,

I've seen you removed the verb forms for Korean on several hanzi forms without any notes

Can I please hear your justification on this?

'Hanzi' based words can be used as both verb and noun in Japanese and Korean.

For example ~する and ~하다 are identical in the way they represent the dictionary form of the verb.

However Japanese verb forms are allowed to stay while the Korean forms have been removed by you, For example the するform of BOTH 認證 and 認証 are allowed to stay even though 證 is an obsolete form of 証 in Japanese. (In other words a case that is worse than the use of hanzi in Korean) Before you say anything, please read my words:

replacing words with Hanja is acceptable in literature and writing and example is seen here: https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcS_jG1z7193CLemdsf2mi3VMUCiQTIbaqWNBsYQtvEWb9BqHvcbsbRNc3Y7

Therefore the verb forms would both be legimite in the hanja and non hanja writings.

Thinking of equality, I would think of reverting the removal or removing the verb forms on the Japanese articles... But more often than Chinese, Korean and Japanese often require added grammar to specify the usage of the word (and is is normal for dictionaries to specify if the word is a noun verb etc)

One might argue the Japanese verb forms deserve to stay over the Korean ones because it's acceptable literature to write without hanzi in korean.. but then one could argue to remove the Korean sections completely because it's not mandatory...? But then we also have two separate article pages for Japanese 例えば and たとえば as both forms are accepted with or without hanzi.

(Also ~される = ~되다/나다 although I could comprehend the removal of the passive form as it is a conjugation)

I think your main basis of removal would have been redundancy - if that is case would you mind if I ask if you have a Korean background or some form of valid education in Korean? Based on the redundancy rationale here is the summary of my proposed solutions: revert the deletion of 하다 forms in hanzi articles or delete the する forms in hanzi articles; deletion of Japanese subsection on 認証; delete article たとえば

Please ask for clarification if you are unclear about any of what I have said! I might add anything more I think of!

Sorry for the long post! I look forward to hearing your rationale! 😊 I wanted to express my thoughts instead of just reverting..

Jayshinkw (talk) 03:47, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

(butting in) Unless I am mistaken, Korean -hada forms are not treated the same as Japanese -suru forms, so there would be one page for 認證 and one page for 認證하다. I think @Atitarev or @Wyang should know more though.

(By the way, thanks for adding Korean sections for Hanja words. It feels like Korean is underrepresented here.) —suzukaze (t・c) 09:45, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

Oh I see. It was a little bit grey to me. I have just recently discovered the page 食事, and it seems to place it under the 'Derived terms'. Feels a little odd, but at least it's included somewhere Jayshinkw (talk) 09:53, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

Yes, we treat Japanese する verbs and Korean 하다 verbs differently, even if the usage is very similar. First of all, Korean uses spaces between words and 하다 verbs form words and they are lemmas. For the majority of Japanese する verbs the lemma is the form without the する part (認証 but not 認証する) and we only have entries for those, which include both noun and verb sections. Also, I think for modern Korean, entries like 認證하다 would of very low value and I think making them would be a waste of time (perhaps a redirect?) and a duplication. We have entries like 인증하다 (injeunghada), which are formed from 인증 (認證, injeung) + —하다 (-hada). --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 11:12, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

上海

What does "upriver river confluence to the sea" mean? — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 02:44, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

It's a contradiction in terms. An "upriver river confluence" is a junction of two rivers close to the source of the river(s), and "confluence to the sea" refers to the point at which a river flows into the sea, which is inevitably far from any point that could be called "upriver". Richwarm88 (talk) 00:07, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

浦 means "the point at which a tributary flows into a lager water course or the sea" (i.e. a confluence) 支流匯入大河或海的地方。今多用於地名。 [1] According to this source [2], Shanghaipu (上海浦) was a tributary of the Wusong River (aka Suzhou River), and the name Shanghai came from the name of this tributary. They are saying 上海浦 was the name of a tributary to the Suzhou River. So the notion that 上海浦 is a "confluence to the sea" may be incorrect. Richwarm88 (talk) 00:56, 21 June 2019 (UTC)