User talk:Dominic

/Archive 1

Thanks for replying to my question, and good luck with your thesis. Heck, I've just finished a 3 year computing degree and it was hard at times. AC. --Sunstar NW XP 23:29, 30 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

Seems to have gotten itself logged out. Has only done two pages since. Robert Ullmann 16:58, 31 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

I'm not sure what's going on with it. It started asking for my password after every edit. Dmcdevit·t 16:59, 31 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

Or rather, it says it's making the change, and then asks me to log in before the next change, but the edit never really makes it to the wiki. Dmcdevit·t 17:05, 31 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

A few are appearing under the IP. It has lost the original session cookie, and doesn't know how to recover it midstream when it gets "loss of session data". (I think). Can you start again (w/o retrying all the edits it did do)? Robert Ullmann 17:09, 31 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

Yes, it took a couple attempts at logging in again to catch on for some reason, but it's finally doing the right thing again. Thanks. 17:12, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

FYI: the edits are flooding the XML dump process, so won't be fully reflected in the next dump or dumps. Not a problem, just don't be surprised if you pick up a dump done after the run and find a large chunk of McBot edits not reflected. (It effectively prioritizes non-bot edits when flooded.) Robert Ullmann 17:37, 31 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hi. What exactly don't you like about the entry? --Vahagn Petrosyan 00:19, 26 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Okay, I noticed the discussion. I'll respond there. --Vahagn Petrosyan 00:23, 26 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, I didn't mean to be rude. I got distracted before I thought to contact you about why I had reverted it. Normally the person who closes the RfV discussion will remove the tag, and it shouldn't be removed while discussion is still ongoing. Dominic·t 02:41, 26 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

No problem, I should have noticed the rfv discussion. And it's a good thing you reverted my edit. After giving a thought I find the entry should be deleted after all. --Vahagn Petrosyan 10:02, 26 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Nice job citing, etc. Why didn't you let someone else remove the RfV? DCDuring TALK 10:22, 28 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Oh, I didn't remove the RfV notice, I just moved it to an "rfv-sense" tag on the sense in question, since there was an unrelated sense. I suppose I could have been clearer in the edit summary; it didn't occur to me. Dominic·t 13:45, 28 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

I hadn't realised I was talking to a veteran and would have double-checked. I just like the idea of at least two people being involved in most significant changes. DCDuring TALK 16:56, 28 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Don't worry about it. I'm sill getting used to the new username too. :-) Dominic·t 13:29, 29 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi Dominic,

Since you commented at Wiktionary:Beer parlour#Transwikis from other Wiktionaries., I wanted to make sure you were aware of the resultant vote, Wiktionary:Votes/2009-03/Transwikis from other Wiktionaries.

—Ruakh_TALK 13:44, 31 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

P.S. Unrelatedly — I totally had no idea who you were until just now, when I read the banner at the top of your talk-page. I was like, who is this knowledgeable person that I'd never heard of before? :-)   —Ruakh_TALK 13:44, 31 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Appreciate your unblocking me. It was rather interesting to see what a block looks like, but it did amuse me that my history showed I'd edited subsequent to my being "blocked". Presume an artifact of the common login... Thanks - Williamborg 03:32, 23 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

It's actually because articles you'd edited were imported here. Because imported edits get inserted directly into the edit history, users on the project imported to will have edits appear in their contributions that they made elsewhere. Dominic·t 03:47, 24 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

It's been over a year ago so I don't blame you if you forgot. I'm planning to restart the sister project interview and you have indicated that you can help. If you still have time for the interview, please let me know. OhanaUnited 17:49, 27 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

You can write the answers on w:User:OhanaUnited/Sister Projects Interview/Wiktionary OhanaUnited 06:08, 28 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

Do you still want to take part in the interview? If not, I will start finding another admin to do it. OhanaUnited 17:38, 9 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, I left that unfinished and it slipped my mind. I'll have it by tomorrow, if that works for you. Dominic·t 01:48, 11 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

• social entrepreneurship
• grool (It caught on, maybe.)
• automatic data capture (ADC)
• web year - Like a dog year, allegedly.
• Internet appliance aka hollow PC
• NSP (for network service provider)
• religio licta
• via decumana, via principalis, and miscellaneous others
• Castrophile (maybe Castrophilia by extension)
• wave the bloody shirt (w:waving the bloody shirt)
• Mississippi appendectomy
• Mexicanese
• majoritively and negativistic (sic)
• I'm just saying
• you're not the boss of me
• it's a free country
• cadaver story
• resurrection man (an alternative form of resurrectionist - the entry for which lacks the original meaning of one who believes in the Biblical resurrection)
• corpse provider (a doctor) and corpse-reviver (alcohol)
• white man's grave (a name given to the African climate by the British soldiers)
• medicosocial/medico-social
• Monilia
• thalamotomy
• hyperirritability
• fornicotomy
• behaviour disorder/behavior disorder
• neurosyphilitic
• racial hygiene (see Rassenhygiene)
• Reichsbauernführer
• Rheinlandbastarde

The references section of naïveté is lovely. Recognizance 22:00, 9 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

I was cleaning up Category:Verb forms and noticed there were a bunch of unused subcategories created by you. Is there something going on with them? I remember something being discussed about verb form categories being created by templates but I can't find the discussions now. Anything keeping us from deleting them? --Bequw → ¢ • τ 20:43, 16 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

If they are orphaned, that is because they were removed from the template. There was an experiment early on to create a kind of category tree, where each verb form entry had a category for its specific inflection (like "informal second-person singular present indicative" or something), and then that specific category would categorized based on all of its components. That way categories actually grouped similarly-inflected verbs together. I'm not sure if it ever was very useful, though I am also not sure what is useful about unnavigable categories with 70,000 or 100,000 members either. In any case, the unused templates were scrapped, so there is certainly not much use for them anymore. Dominic·t 07:04, 17 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

In light of your participation in Wiktionary:Beer parlour archive/2009/September#SI units and abbreviations, please contribute your thoughts to Wiktionary:Votes/2009-12/Proposed CFI exception for SI Units. Cheers! bd2412 T 21:02, 18 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

I do not want to come across as contumelious but please consider casting your vote for the tile logo as—besides using English—the book logo has a clear directionality of horizontal left-to-right, starkly contrasting with Arabic and Chinese, two of the six official UN languages. As such, the tile logo is the only translingual choice left and it was also elected in m:Wiktionary/logo/archive-vote-4. Warmest Regards, :)--_thecurran Speak your mind ^{my past} 03:15, 2 January 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hi there :) Could I please request you remove the following pages from the Spanish nouns category: User:Dominic/test and User:Dominic/test1. I noticed them when I was cleaning up the nouns category. Cheers. Tooironic 21:52, 18 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

I urge you to vote. (I don't know which way you'll vote, but I want more voices, especially English Wiktionarians' voices, heard in this vote.) If you've voted already, or stated that you won't, and I missed it, I apologize.​—msh210℠ 17:00, 21 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

..for the unblock. -- OlEnglish ^(Talk) 19:43, 25 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

Regarding the recent entry I tried to place, thanks for pointing out the discussion; I would have never realized that it was there. I took a look at the Criteria for Inclusion page that you pointed out, but it only gives me a rather vague "Many names of specific entities should be excluded while some should be included. With the exception of geographic entities (for which see the section "Place names"), there is no agreement on specific rules for the inclusion of names of specific entities." I could not find anything supporting the deletion nor inclusion of Wiktionary; if you could explain to me further, I'd appreciate it. Lastly, I'm going to say that we have an entry on Wikinews, which is, in my opinion, an even less widely recognised term than Wiktionary. Could you please tell me how Wikinews would meet the CFI, but Wiktionary would not? Thanks so much for the welcome. TeleComNasSprVen 00:08, 26 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

Well, I was thinking that the "Company names" section is most relevant to this term, since that is what "Wiktionary" is equivalent to (i.e., if it were another website that weren't non-profit, like dictionary.com, it would clearly apply, and there is no lexicographical difference between "Wiktionary" and "dictionary.com;" the difference is economic). Wiktionary:CFI#Independence is also very relevant. I think that the term is not one that has entered the vocabulary of the English language; it does not form a part of the average English speaker's lexicon. This is especially true when you look at how short of a time span (relatively speaking) the term has existed. Regarding Wikinews, you have a good point. I don't think it meets the CFI either; it was just never challenged, and I wouldn't mind nominating it for verification. Dominic·t 00:26, 26 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

You took it out, which is fine, I was just following the guidance. If that is no longer correct, then maybe it could be updated. PS. A preload in Citation: ns would be useful for the very occasional contributor. Billinghurst 15:25, 9 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

Oh, it's a good thing you mentioned that. I must have been editing an old revision somehow. I don't usually have anything {{seeCites}}. ;-) I didn't mean to remove anything; I was just making a few aesthetic changes. Though, now that I see it, I think it is more common to have short lists of quotations between the definitions, with the subpage reserved for when a long list gets unwieldy. Dominic·t 22:32, 9 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

I was just working from Wiktionary:Citations which is linked when one starts a new citation page. Now we are going to have to split hairs over a quotation vs a citation; and I thought that WS was quirky! Billinghurst 09:52, 10 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hi Dominic,

I would welcome your input at Wiktionary:Beer parlour#Malagasy Wiktionary (mg.wikt), if you have a chance.

Thanks in advance,
—Ruakh_TALK 20:01, 15 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

utterly classic dude. ;)Lucifer 00:54, 12 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

by the way, what is "##wikipedia-kingdom-of-chile"?Lucifer 01:32, 12 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hello. Can you please change MediaWiki:Anonnotice to use <span></span> (or some variant), rather than &nbsp;? Non-breaking spaces are not invisible! Using such code adds unsightly space to the top of every page for anonymous users. --MZMcBride (talk) 16:58, 9 April 2012 (UTC)Reply

Thanks! --MZMcBride (talk) 22:11, 10 April 2012 (UTC)Reply

User:Koavf has been tagging files to be deleted or moved to commons, and I've been deleting the no-longer-needed ones and moving the useful ones. I was going to move this one, but you didn't formally licence it. Could you stick a Creative Commons licence on it, or re-upload it to Commons yourself? - -sche (discuss) 20:05, 26 April 2012 (UTC)Reply

I just uploaded it for some experimenting I was doing in my userspace. I think I would have tagged it, but Wiktionary doesn't even have the GFDL tag the original Commons image (same name) uses. This is really just an exact derivative of the Commons image created by someone else, except I decreased the brightness, so if you are moving it to Commons, I think it should be uploaded under the same license and with the normal tagging/copying over of metadata as for other derivatives on Commons. Dominic·t 23:46, 30 April 2012 (UTC)Reply

Hi! Many years ago, you created entries for some Shabo words. Do you still have the reference(s) you found them in? It might help clarify Wiktionary:Requests_for_cleanup#ɪmaha. - -sche (discuss) 08:54, 18 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hey. A vote has been set up to remove your admin powers. So you know --A230rjfowe (talk) 21:44, 8 August 2015 (UTC)Reply