text: seht vor

title: seht vor


text: sah vor

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: sah vor


text: sahst vor

title: sahst vor


text: sahen vor

title: sahen vor


text: saht vor

title: saht vor


text: sehest vor

title: sehest vor


text: sehet vor

title: sehet vor


text: sähe vor

title: sähe vor


text: sähest vor

title: sähest vor


text: sähen vor

title: sähen vor


text: sähet vor

title: sähet vor


text: sieh vor

title: sieh vor


text: wuchst

title: wuchst


text: wuchsen

title: wuchsen


text: wüchse

title: wüchse


text: wüchsest

title: wüchsest


text: wüchsen

title: wüchsen


text: wüchset

title: wüchset


text: waschend

title: waschend


text: wasche

title: wasche


text: wäschst

title: wäschst


text: wäscht

title: wäscht


text: wascht

title: wascht


text:
wusch

Etymology 1
See the lemma.

Etymology 2
Onomatopoetic.

Interjection

 * 1) whoosh expresses speed

title: wusch


text: wuschst

title: wuschst


text: wuschen

title: wuschen


text: wuscht

title: wuscht


text: waschest

title: waschest


text: waschet

title: waschet


text: wüsche

title: wüsche


text: wüschest

title: wüschest


text: wüschen

title: wüschen


text: wüschet

title: wüschet


text: wasch

title: wasch


text: wegfliegend

title: wegfliegend


text: weggeflogen

title: weggeflogen


text: fliege weg

title: fliege weg


text: fliegst weg

title: fliegst weg


text: fliegt weg

title: fliegt weg


text: fliegen weg

title: fliegen weg


text: flog weg

title: flog weg


text: flogst weg

title: flogst weg


text: flogen weg

title: flogen weg


text: flogt weg

title: flogt weg


text: fliegest weg

title: fliegest weg


text: flieget weg

title: flieget weg


text: flöge weg

title: flöge weg


text: flögest weg

title: flögest weg


text: flögen weg

title: flögen weg


text: flöget weg

title: flöget weg


text: flieg weg

title: flieg weg


text: zerfließend

title: zerfließend


text: zerflossen

title: zerflossen


text: zerfließe

title: zerfließe


text: zerfließt

title: zerfließt


text: zerfloss

title: zerfloss


text: zerflosst

title: zerflosst


text: zerfließest

title: zerfließest


text: zerfließet

title: zerfließet


text: zerflösse

title: zerflösse


text: zerflössest

title: zerflössest


text: zerflössen

title: zerflössen


text: zerflösset

title: zerflösset


text: zerfließ

title: zerfließ


text: zurücklassend

title: zurücklassend


text: zurückgelassen

title: zurückgelassen


text: lasse zurück

title: lasse zurück


text: lässt zurück

title: lässt zurück


text: lassen zurück

title: lassen zurück


text: lasst zurück

title: lasst zurück


text: ließ zurück

title: ließ zurück


text: ließt zurück

title: ließt zurück


text: ließen zurück

title: ließen zurück


text: lassest zurück

title: lassest zurück


text: lasset zurück

title: lasset zurück


text: ließe zurück

title: ließe zurück


text: ließest zurück

title: ließest zurück


text: ließet zurück

title: ließet zurück


text: lass zurück

title: lass zurück


text: zurückschreibend

title: zurückschreibend


text: schreibe zurück

title: schreibe zurück


text: schreibst zurück

title: schreibst zurück


text: schreiben zurück

title: schreiben zurück


text: schriebt zurück

title: schriebt zurück


text: schrieben zurück

title: schrieben zurück


text: schreibest zurück

title: schreibest zurück


text: schreibet zurück

title: schreibet zurück


text: schriebest zurück

title: schriebest zurück


text: schriebet zurück

title: schriebet zurück


text: schreib zurück

title: schreib zurück


text: überfahrend

title: überfahrend


text: überfahre

title: überfahre


text: überfährst

title: überfährst


text: überfährt

title: überfährt


text: überfahrt

title: überfahrt


text: überfuhr

title: überfuhr


text: überfuhrst

title: überfuhrst


text: überfuhren

title: überfuhren


text: überfuhrt

title: überfuhrt


text: überfahrest

title: überfahrest


text: überfahret

title: überfahret


text: überfahr

title: überfahr


text: überfallend

title: überfallend


text: überfalle

title: überfalle


text: überfällst

title: überfällst


text: überfällt

title: überfällt


text: überfallt

title: überfallt


text: überfiel

title: überfiel


text: überfielst

title: überfielst


text: überfielen

title: überfielen


text: überfielt

title: überfielt


text: überfallest

title: überfallest


text: überfallet

title: überfallet


text: überfiele

title: überfiele


text: überfielest

title: überfielest


text: überfielet

title: überfielet


text: überfall

title: überfall


text:
überschreitend

Adjective

 * 1) exceeding, transcending, transgressing

title: überschreitend


text: überschreite

title: überschreite


text: überschreitest

title: überschreitest


text: überschreitet

title: überschreitet


text: überschritt

title: überschritt


text: überschrittest

title: überschrittest


text: überschrittet

title: überschrittet


text: überschritte

title: überschritte


text: übertreffend

title: übertreffend


text: übertreffe

title: übertreffe


text: übertriffst

title: übertriffst


text: übertrifft

title: übertrifft


text: übertrefft

title: übertrefft


text: übertraf

title: übertraf


text: übertrafst

title: übertrafst


text: übertrafen

title: übertrafen


text: übertraft

title: übertraft


text: übertreffest

title: übertreffest


text: übertreffet

title: übertreffet


text: überträfe

title: überträfe


text: überträfest

title: überträfest


text: überträfen

title: überträfen


text: überträfet

title: überträfet


text: übertriff

title: übertriff


text:
Module talk:UnitTests

Pattern match instead of exact equality
I think it might be better to match output on a given pattern, or some other kind of check, rather than testing whether it's exactly equal to something. Variations in output should be harmless. For example, if the output of a module is changed so that it wraps text in a differen CSS class, or if we decide to reverse the order of some displayed things, that shouldn't really be an error. 18:16, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

nowiki option should be set by default
Why not? --Giorgi Eufshi (talk) 06:25, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

title: Module talk:UnitTests


text:
Citations:Herodiani

 * AD 382–4, St. Jerome (translator), Biblia Sacra Vulgatae Editionis, Evangelium Secundum Marcum, chapter III, verse vi:
 * exeuntes autem statim Pharisaei cum Herodianis consilium faciebant adversus eum quomodo eum perderent
 * The Pharisees went out, and immediately conspired with the Herodians against him, how they might destroy him. ―  translation

title: Citations:Herodiani


text:
𐭮𐭯𐭠𐭧𐭯𐭲𐭩

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) general, spahbed

title: 𐭮𐭯𐭠𐭧𐭯𐭲𐭩


text:
ημιαστέρας

Etymology
,, from quasi-stellar radio source

Noun

 * 1)  quasar

title: ημιαστέρας


text:
korephilia

Etymology
From the, coined by analogy with.

Noun

 * 1)  Erotic attraction of a  or older  toward young girls;.
 * 2) * 1991, Geoffrey Scott Puterbaugh (username), “Morning Gays at the AHA” in, :
 * It seems safe to assume that the panelists were referring to (pick your term) man–boy love, pederasty, ephebophilia. They may also have been referring to korephilia (woman–girl) and (looking internationally) may have been referring to paedophilia, since Dutch reformers seem to have seized on this term to refer to all inter-generational sex.
 * 1) * 1998, Ruediger Landmann (username), “Re: Proposal: alt.binaries.korephile” in, :
 * How many posts about korephilia are being made to already existing newsgroups at the moment?
 * 1) * 2007, James T. Sears (editor), The Greenwood Encyclopedia of Love, Courtship, & Sexuality Through History VI: The Modern World, “Pederasty”:
 * Unlike pedophilia, which defines adult male or female attraction to a prepubescent girl or boy under thirteen, and korephilia, which denotes adult female attraction to girls, pederasty specifically defines emotional, intimate, and physical adult male attraction to teenage boys.
 * 1) * 2008, Bonnie G. Smith (editor), The Oxford Encyclopedia of Women in World History III: Kaffka–Service Sector, “Pederasty”:
 * Contemporary pederasty and korephilia differ from classical norms in that the younger partner may…take sexual initiative rather than be passive in serving the pleasures of the older partner.
 * 1) * 2008, Bonnie G. Smith (editor), The Oxford Encyclopedia of Women in World History III: Kaffka–Service Sector, “Pederasty”:
 * Contemporary pederasty and korephilia differ from classical norms in that the younger partner may…take sexual initiative rather than be passive in serving the pleasures of the older partner.

Translations

 * Polish: korefilia

title: korephilia


text:
Herodiani

Etymology
From the adjective : as a noun, a substantivisation of the masculine plural; as an adjective, regularly declined forms.

Proper noun

 * 1) the followers of, Herodians
 * 2) * AD 382–4, Biblia Vulgata, Marc. 3:6:
 * Exeuntes autem statim Pharisaei cum Herodianis consilium faciebant adversus [Iesum] quomodo eum perderent.
 * The Pharisees went out, and immediately conspired with the Herodians against [], how they might destroy him. ―  translation

title: Herodiani


text:
سپهسالار

Etymology
.

Noun

 * 1) A sipahsalar.

Etymology
From earlier, from.

Noun

 * 1) sipahsalar

title: سپهسالار


text: ημιαστέρα

title: ημιαστέρα


text: ημιαστέρες

title: ημιαστέρες


text: ημιαστέρων

title: ημιαστέρων


text:
implantat

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) an implant (something implanted in the body)

Noun

 * 1) an implant (something implanted in the body)

Noun

 * 1) an implant (as above)

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) implant

Noun

 * 1) an implant (something implanted in the body)

title: implantat


text:
extraordinnaithement

Adverb

 * 1)  extraordinarily

title: extraordinnaithement


text:
Herodianus

Adjective

 * 1) of

title: Herodianus


text:
samodzielny

Etymology
From. Compare 🇨🇬.

Adjective

 * 1)  handmade
 * 2) independent, self-sufficient, self-reliant
 * 3) solo, unaided
 * 4)  independent
 * 5) stand-alone
 * 1) stand-alone

title: samodzielny


text:
سردار

Noun

 * 1) leader, head, chief, military commander
 * 2)  Sardar, prince

Etymology
Probably borrowed from. , which is from 🇨🇬, a genuine Persian development.

Noun

 * 1) military commander
 * 2) Sardar rank

Etymology
.

Noun

 * 1) chief, commander, leader

Proper noun

 * 1)  Sikh (a title)

title: سردار


text: erwog

title: erwog


text: erwogst

title: erwogst


text: erwogt

title: erwogt


text: erwöge

title: erwöge


text: erwögest

title: erwögest


text: erwögen

title: erwögen


text: erwöget

title: erwöget


text: umfahre

title: umfahre


text: umfährst

title: umfährst


text: umfährt

title: umfährt


text: umfahrt

title: umfahrt


text: umfuhr

title: umfuhr


text: umfuhrst

title: umfuhrst


text: umfuhren

title: umfuhren


text: umfuhrt

title: umfuhrt


text: umfahrest

title: umfahrest


text: umfahret

title: umfahret


text: umführe

title: umführe


text: umführest

title: umführest


text: umführen

title: umführen


text: umführet

title: umführet


text: umfahr

title: umfahr


text: gehe um

title: gehe um


text: gehst um

title: gehst um


text: geht um

title: geht um


text: gehen um

title: gehen um


text: ging um

title: ging um


text: gingst um

title: gingst um


text: gingen um

title: gingen um


text:
êtèrnellement

Adverb

 * 1)  eternally

title: êtèrnellement


text: gingt um

title: gingt um


text: gehest um

title: gehest um


text: gehet um

title: gehet um


text: ginge um

title: ginge um


text: gingest um

title: gingest um


text: ginget um

title: ginget um


text: geh um

title: geh um


text: übergefahren

title: übergefahren


text: fahre über

title: fahre über


text: fährst über

title: fährst über


text: fährt über

title: fährt über


text: fahren über

title: fahren über


text: fahrt über

title: fahrt über


text: fuhr über

title: fuhr über


text: fuhrst über

title: fuhrst über


text: fuhren über

title: fuhren über


text: fuhrt über

title: fuhrt über


text: fahrest über

title: fahrest über


text: fahret über

title: fahret über


text: führe über

title: führe über


text: führest über

title: führest über


text: führen über

title: führen über


text: führet über

title: führet über


text: fahr über

title: fahr über


text: gehe über

title: gehe über


text: gehst über

title: gehst über


text: geht über

title: geht über


text: gehen über

title: gehen über


text: ging über

title: ging über


text: gingst über

title: gingst über


text: gingen über

title: gingen über


text: gingt über

title: gingt über


text: gehest über

title: gehest über


text: gehet über

title: gehet über


text: ginge über

title: ginge über


text: gingest über

title: gingest über


text: ginget über

title: ginget über


text: geh über

title: geh über


text:
ᜠᜨᜣ᜴

Etymology
From, from , from.

Noun

 * 1) child a female or male child, a daughter or son

title: ᜠᜨᜣ᜴


text: êtrangiéthement

title: êtrangiéthement


text:
omnipresently

Adverb

 * 1) In an omnipresent manner.

title: omnipresently


text:
geshe

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) A Tibetan Buddhist monk or nun who holds a certain academic degree.

title: geshe


text: geshes

title: geshes


text:
êtraitement

Adverb

 * 1)  narrowly

title: êtraitement


text:
gimed

Etymology
From.

Adjective

 * 1) foolish, mad

title: gimed


text:
shiksappeal

Etymology
, coined in the  episode “”.

Noun

 * 1)  The sex appeal of a non-Jewish female (a shiksa) to a Jewish male.

title: shiksappeal


text: Ven.

title: Ven.


text:
baskuligar

Verb

 * 1)  to rock, cause to sway or swing

title: baskuligar


text:
unguiding

Adjective

 * 1) Not guiding.

title: unguiding


text: baskuligez

title: baskuligez


text: Powhatans

title: Powhatans


text:
Powhatan

Noun

 * 1) A member of a Native American confederation of tribes in Virginia.

Proper noun

 * 1) Their eastern Algonquian language.

title: Powhatan


text: baskuligas

title: baskuligas


text: baskuligis

title: baskuligis


text: baskuligos

title: baskuligos


text: baskuligus

title: baskuligus


text:
gimedlik

Etymology
From.

Adjective

 * 1) foolish, mad

title: gimedlik


text: haptophores

title: haptophores


text:
stork bite

Noun

 * 1) nevus flammeus nuchae

title: stork bite


text: stork bites

title: stork bites


text:
Talk:korephilia

With reference to this reversion, who said it's a pedophilia? Pedophilia and especially paraphilia are clinical terms ("Paraphilia" isn't usually (mis-)used colloquially) with specific diagnostic criteria. There's nothing in the DSM-5 about korephilia. I would say that it's a kind of pedosexuality, if anything. Leucosticte (talk) 20:55, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Sexual orientation vs. paraphilia
With reference to this revert: are sexual orientation and paraphilia mutually exclusive? Was homosexuality, for instance, considered a sexual orientation at the same time that it was considered a paraphilia, back in the days of the ? Leucosticte (talk) 15:30, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I may be wrong, but I think that the term "sexual orientation" was created specifically to describe homosexuality vs heterosexuality. My guess is that it would have been seen that way before it officially stopped being a paraphilia, but I don't know when the first use of "sexual orientation" was. --WikiTiki89 15:38, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
 * sexual orientation, n.
 * Originally: (the process of) orientation with respect to a sexual goal, potential mate, partner, etc. Later chiefly: a person's sexual identity in relation to the gender to whom he or she is usually attracted; (broadly) the fact of being heterosexual, bisexual, or homosexual.In early use prob. not a fixed collocation.
 * 1931  J. P. Lichtenberger Divorce xv. 369   Courtship..is a normal, but in the absence of sex knowledge often a bungling process of sexual orientation.
 * 1946  G. H. Seward Sex & Social Order xi. 153   Deviant sexual orientation in later life may originate in the child's inability to identify himself with his like-sexed parent.
 * 1953  Amer. Q. 5 340,   I was dealing with..psychoanalytic characterologies which are based on sexual orientation—Freud's oral, anal and genital types.
 * 1967  N.Y. Times Mag. 3 Dec. 32/2   He calls for research on how homosexuals become homosexuals... We must research why heterosexuals become heterosexuals—or rather, what forces determine sexual orientation in general.

 * Sexual preference is not in OED.

 * sexual inversion  n. Psychiatry and Psychol. (now disused) a theory according to which homosexuality is the result of abnormally close identification in early life with role models of the opposite sex; the process described by this theory; (also more narrowly) homosexuality regarded as a pathology or perversion: see inversion n. 11.
 * 1883  A. M. Hamilton Man. Med. Jurispr. iii. 185   A great many arrests have been made..of men dressed in women's clothes who were engaged in soliciting for a purpose too vile to mention. This sexual inversion has been described by several German writers.
 * 1897  H. Ellis Stud. Psychol. Sex I. ii. 27   It seems to have been in Italy that the convenient term ‘sexual inversion’ was first used.
 * 1901  J. A. Godfrey Sci. Sex v. 206   Sexual inversion—that is, the turning-in of the sex instinct towards individuals of the same sex—is an abnormal phenomenon.
 * 1958  Amer. Jrnl. Orthopsychiatry 28 424   Many workers fail to distinguish between homosexuality and sexual inversion, or more accurately, sex-role inversion. Freud..himself..equated the two terms.

 * I would call this a cretial orientation.
 * Lysdexia (talk) 06:12, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

RFV discussion: January–July 2014
I think there are some special considerations for -philia and -phobia entries, so I'm submitting this here. 19:37, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Special considerations? They have to be cited same as anything else, don't they? I found a grand total of 4 hits on Google Books, some of which suggest that korephilia is specifically the attraction of adult women to underage/prepubescent girls:, , , . —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:48, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
 * In the past, I think a lot of people expressed concern with phobias that had words invented for them for the sake of it? 19:53, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Like sesquipedaliophobia? --WikiTiki89 19:58, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

 * Note that the entry currently lists three senses; if there are only 4 BGC hits, then it looks like some of the senses need to be removed / combined. - -sche (discuss) 21:17, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Please see Citations:korephilia, which now has five citations. Of those, the actual text of one (1983) is unavailable (which presumably makes it invalid for now), one comprises two quotations – one using the term and the other mentioning it (1993), one merely mentions the term (1996), and the other two use the term (2007, 2008); that makes three legitimate citations, AFAICT. From the evidence they present, I think it is right that we infer that korephilia is specifically a paedophiliac lesbian sexual attraction/orientation. The 1996 citation exhibits the same act/inclination conflation found with paedophilia. If more quotations are needed, the 1983 source would provide one, and the term was probably used in the 's 1978 publication Paedophilia: Some Questions Answered (as suggested by endnote 44 to chapter 8 in Sexual Citizenship, cited as the 1993 source). — I.S.M.E.T.A. 04:32, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

I found two more quotations on Usenet, so I've added them, too. I removed the three definitions that were in the entry, and redefined the word as: Does that seem alright to everyone? — I.S.M.E.T.A. 17:01, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
 * (rare) Erotic attraction of a woman or older female toward young (chiefly pre- and/or peripubescent) girls; lesbian pederasty.

 * Shouldn't it be "lesbian pedophilia" instead of "lesbian pederasty"? Pedophilia is about attraction; pederasty is about an act. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:20, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

 * I don't think it should: the sources (1991, 2007, 2008) tend to present korephilia as pederasty's feminine equivalent, and the 2008 source even suggests that korephilia mirrors pederasty's "institutional" character. Pederasty isn't an act, as such (see Pederasty); you may be thinking of . — I.S.M.E.T.A. 19:39, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

 * That page defines pederasty as a homosexual relationship (...), which involves acts; mere attraction does not create a relationship.--Prosfilaes (talk) 20:26, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

 * That's incorrect, IMO; according to that definition, it can be said of a pederastic couple "they started their pederasty [i.e., their pederastic relationship] two years ago", which usage sounds just plain wrong to my ears. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 21:47, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Passed. — Ungoliant (falai) 17:21, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Etymology
Is there actually any basis in the etymology for saying that this word shall only describe a characteristic of adult women? I can't see anything in the etymology to support that definition; rather it seems etymologically to narrow "paedophilia" to attraction of an adult of any gender toward girls.

title: Talk:korephilia


text:
nevus flammeus nuchae

Noun

 * 1)  A congenital and usually temporary capillary malformation in a newborn. It is generally pink and flat, and is caused by the dilation of blood vessels.

Translations

 * Estonian: kurenokajälg
 * Finnish: haikaran purema
 * French: nævus simplex
 * German:, Bossard-Fleck
 * Icelandic: storkbit, storkabit
 * Swedish: storkbett

title: nevus flammeus nuchae


text:
User talk:Ruakh/2014

= January 2014 =

Unsorted interwikis
I noticed this edit by Rukhabot and that the interwikis on the page are unsorted. Aren't they supposed to be sorted? Why doesn't Rukhabot sort them? --WikiTiki89 23:57, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

 * They are sorted. Per MediaWiki:Interwiki config-sorting order, en.wikt uses the meta-native-languagename ordering, which is given at m:MediaWiki:Interwiki config-sorting order-native-languagename. (See Interwiki sorting order for more information.) —Ruakh 00:19, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

 * Oh. I didn't realize that we sorted them that way in the source code as well. --WikiTiki89 00:24, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

 * That's how it works: those pages tell bots how the interwikis should be ordered in the wikitext, and the software just preserves that order when it renders the page. (The software itself doesn't know anything about MediaWiki:Interwiki config-sorting order or m:MediaWiki:Interwiki config-sorting order-native-languagename, it's just a convention.) —Ruakh 01:06, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

 * Does that mean that when we add interwikis to a page, they appear in the same order that they're in the source code, just like with categories? 21:38, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

 * Yup. —Ruakh 21:45, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

"attention"
I noticed you're adding to pages as you fix them, but I'm not sure if that's really necessary? I mean, just adding a headword template doesn't seem like something that would need to be checked. 21:36, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

 * The isn't asking people to check my work, it's asking people to check and improve the entry. There may be a more-specific headword template that can be used; there may be gender or other information missing; the whole entry may be wrong from the get-go; and so on. I'm removing some obvious evidence of wrongness, but that doesn't mean everything is O.K. now. —Ruakh 21:44, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

 * Ok, I just think that if I came across an entry like that, I'd be confused about the template because I wouldn't know what it was for. In the past, I've used a bot to add the correct headword-line templates, so calling for attention has never really been needed for me. Instead, the templates that the bot added would themselves add the appropriate categories, like Category:Dutch nouns needing inflection which adds. It's much clearer that way I think.  21:47, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

 * I take it you've never actually read the description atop the attention categories? :-)  —Ruakh 21:48, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

 * I think that all attention tags should have a reason given as a second parameter. Otherwise who would ever be able to fix them if they don't know what's wrong? --WikiTiki89 21:50, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

 * That seems backward. The person who's giving attention should be the person who can tell if something is wrong (and if so what). —Ruakh 22:12, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

 * The person who adds the attention tag needs to have something in mind otherwise they wouldn't add it. There needs to be some kind of hint for the person checking it even if it's just "verify headword template". --WikiTiki89 22:16, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

 * So ? I'm not sure what benefit that adds. —Ruakh 23:53, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

 * Well there has to be reason that it "seems to have been created by ...", so that reason should be in the attention tag. For example: "poor formatting", "suspicious gender/number/declension/etc.", "suspicious definition", etc. You can't expect people to notice the same things that you do even if they are more familiar with the language in question. More importantly, when the person checking the entry looks and finds nothing wrong, they will hesitate to remove the attention tag if they don't know what it was for, or they will remove the attention tag before whatever it was there for is fixed. --WikiTiki89 03:07, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

 * Sorry, I think you're misunderstanding me. Actually, I think you're misunderstanding the conversation here. The reason it "seems to have been created by ..." is that it had a glaring problem; but I addressed that problem, so it wouldn't be helpful to call it out. So now I just want the entry to be glanced at by someone who's qualified to glance at it. —Ruakh 03:14, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

 * Then perhaps would be best. That way the checker knows that there is no specific complaint. --WikiTiki89 03:18, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

 * O.K., I can do that. —Ruakh 03:21, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

User: Kc kennylau
This contributor is certainly very enthusiastic, but the sheer volume of edits has me a little concerned: one bout of accelerated page-creations hit 78 in 12 minutes. I don't know the limitations of the system, but I seem to remember you cautioning someone at one time against setting the throttle on a bot to a fraction of that speed. Even if I knew more about editing in Chinese, I couldn't begin to patrol that. They're also asking for AWB privileges. That said, I know how much I don't know, so I thought I'd bring it to your attention and let you decide if any action is necessary (or even a good idea). Thanks! Chuck Entz (talk) 03:10, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

But if you're concerned about patrolling, I definitely think it's reasonable to ask Kc kennylau to edit more slowly. —Ruakh 03:28, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
 * One edit every 9.23 seconds is fine from a system-limitations standpoint; I actually run my bots at a higher edit-frequency than that. (Of course, if 78 edits in 12 minutes means something "burstier", with a bunch of edits at once followed by a break, then the situation is a bit different.) (Also of course, I run my bots with the maxlag= parameter set, telling MediaWiki that it's O.K. to reject their edits if the system is lagging, as it frequently is; Kc kennylau obviously isn't doing that.)
 * If you're not worried, I'm not worried. I'm not qualified to patrol Chinese except for language-independent stuff, anyway. Chuck Entz (talk) 03:57, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

logique
I am curious, have you ever taken a course on logic, or perhaps read a book on such? --Æ&Œ (talk) 18:19, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

 * Sure — both math-ish and computer-engineering-ish. Why do you ask? —Ruakh 01:07, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

 * I thought that if it helped you, it would also help our friend; you could recommend that he train hisself to be a logician (an unofficial one), assuming that he wants to improve hisself, of course. --Æ&Œ (talk) 03:10, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
 * In my experience, the people who would most benefit from that are the ones least likely to resort to it. After all, if you're always right and everyone who says otherwise is out to get you because they disagree with you or don't like you, then you're liable to tell everyone else to study logic, because their thinking is obviously flawed- not yours. Chuck Entz (talk) 03:42, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Besides, his problem isn't that he's got the formalisms wrong, it's that he doesn't think critically or make rational arguments (or even try to do so, SFAICT). I don't think a course in logic can really help with that. —Ruakh 05:14, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

So fix it
If you want to fix "bugs", fix them, don't just "click the warning message away" and think that solves it. The error is there for a reason, and removing it doesn't suddenly make everything fine. Don't stick your head in the sand and start edit warring over it. 12:00, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

 * The bug is the script error, as explained in the discussion you claimed to read, where the vast majority of editors agreed.
 * The point is, missing asterisks do not cause long-term problems — we can easily find, identify, and fix them. Script errors do cause long-term problems — they make it look like Wiktionary is broken, and they drive away contributors that we cannot get back.
 * I know the error is there for a reason, but it is wrong.
 * If you revert again, I will block you.
 * —Ruakh 17:21, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Rukhabot activities
At Votes/2011-04/Representative entries it had been discussed that the default sorting order within a category should not be overwritten. IMHO it is completly another thing to avoid that each entry in a category gets a headline of this entry. Please look to Category:Kangxi radicals to understand what I try to explain: in opposition to the first few entries, all the characters are precided by an additional headline of the character itself. This is rather disturbing than of any use, doubles the lines and makes it difficult to get a swift overview.

The headings are useful where severeal entries with the same leading letter should be bundled together, making this way partitions allowing an easier overview. They are totally useless in categories of single letters, where they are just doubling each single enty.

I categorized the items in Category:Han rad sup with to avoid the generation of this unwanted headline - this does not change the sorting order mentioned in the votes (when it is done with all entries). As I see now, your bot changed this in January 2013 in 8 of 16 category entries. I repaired it, just to see later that in the above mentioned Category:Kangxi radicals much more entries are affected. Would you mind to undo that last edit there (33 cases) ? I think it will be done faster with the bot instead of by hand.

BTW, Category:CJKV radicals contains 275 entries, all of them with the headlinings because of the categorizing without the "| "-sequence. Is your bot able to add this sequence to all the pages in this category? Toda  sarang ♥ 사랑 09:24, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

—Ruakh 18:24, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry about that. I see that you've now fixed most of Category:Kangxi radicals by hand; I'm sorry you had to do that. (I should have replied faster.) I've now fixed up the last three pages.
 * For Category:CJKV radicals, I'd certainly be willing to do that, though I'd rather it were mentioned at Beer parlour beforehand (to make sure everyone's on board with this change); 'be bold' does not apply to bot-edits. Would you be willing to post there?
 * Thanks,

= February 2014 =

hihkaista
Can you recall, why you added attention -tag on this entry back in 2012? I don't see any problem in it. --Hekaheka (talk) 21:27, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

 * It just had some weirdnesses, such as weird use of parentheses ("shout (shrilly)", "my (Finnish) passport"), and I felt that a Finnish-speaking contributor should look at it. If it seems fine to you, then it's fine. —Ruakh 06:19, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

= March 2014 =

tense v. aspect in BH
I think may interest you. (But I must admit I've only read the first section and the summaries and skimmed the balance.) —msh210℠ (talk) 05:19, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

 * It does; thanks! —Ruakh 17:45, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

= April 2014 =

Feature request
Hi,

I've made a feature request for you at User_talk:Ruakh/Tbot.js. Please reply when you can :). --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 01:48, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

הדס
The " " sense, with two cites, seems non-distinct from the other sense. The cite to Esther would be a good one, except that it's to a different word. Arguably, it's simply a feminine form, but, anyway, that's the sole cite, I think: the Zechariah cite is I think to the "myrtle" sense, with the metaphor not of lexical interest. And the Esther cite is arguably to Hadasa as a smart or stupid or pretty or ugly or brave or cowardly woman just as much as it may be to a righteous woman. I gather from your inclusion of the sense and its cites that you disagree with what I wrote about both cites, and am curious to know your reasoning. Moreover, I was about to add the modern-Israeli " " sense, but worry that it's redundant to the "n-g|term for a righteous person" sense. —msh210℠ (talk) 04:49, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

 * Re: "I gather from your inclusion of the sense and its cites that you disagree with what I wrote about both cites": No, I actually thought about the same things you did, and strongly suspected that someone would message me asking about it. (I actually find the Esther cite even less relevant than you seem to: hadasá appears to be a proper noun in that cite — Esther's "Jewish name", essentially, just as many Jews today have both Jewish and secular names — and so, at best, using a sense derived from a "righteous person" sense.) I was just following the presentation at the he.wikt entry, figuring that that was the best approach for an edit whose edit-summary claimed it was taking its information thence, and that if we disagreed with their presentation, we could make changes in follow-up edits. —Ruakh 05:09, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

 * Then I think one such change should be removing the second sense. (And another should be adding the given-name proper-noun sense.) Any objection or tweak? —msh210℠ (talk) 05:38, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

 * Sounds good. —Ruakh 06:06, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Done. —msh210℠ (talk) 06:18, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

= June 2014 =

Edit-warring with me on my page
If you are going to put the unblock request back, could you at least mark it as accepted or declined? Purplebackpack89 (Notes Taken) (Locker) 20:12, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
 * "Edit-warring" after one revert… and this is the person who demands others to assume good faith of him. Typical. And no, he could not. Nobody bothered to add this functionality to the unblock template, or to create another one. — Keφr 21:20, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Kephir, it's a no-no across all Wikipedia projects to edit-war with another editor on their own page. If a person wants to remove content from his own page, he is perfectly entitled to do so.  Purplebackpack89  (Notes Taken) (Locker) 21:50, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Again, one revert does not an edit war make. Mentioning "edit-warring" just serves to paint Ruakh as an aggressor of sorts, and suggest bad faith on his part. So hello, pot. And no page belongs to one user, even user pages. Pages belong to the whole community, should serve the community's purpose, and may be administered at the collective or individual discretion of its members. Which is also true on Wikipedia, otherwise they would not have things like w:WP:U5. While we do not require archiving user talk pages, this recent block is still relevant to current discussions, and therefore the unblock request should not be buried in edit history. Also, we are getting quite tired of reminding you that this is not a Wikipedia project. — Keφr 22:36, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Putting comments back on another user's talk page after that user has deleted or archived those comments is in bad faith, Kephir. That's on Meta and applies to all WikiProjects.  Your "no page belongs to one user" isn't entirely true.  If Ruakh decided to delete this entire conversation, I wouldn't argue with him.  Likewise, he shouldn't argue with me when I want to remove content from my page.  Again, this applies to all projects, including Wiktionary, and there's nothing in the Wiktionary policies on userpages that says otherwise.  Purplebackpack89  (Notes Taken) (Locker) 23:03, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Re: "Putting comments back on another user's talk page after that user has deleted or archived those comments is in bad faith, Kephir": That is not true, and I don't see how you can think that it is. I won't bother linking to our page on good faith, because I know you don't care, but you should at least read the first few paragraphs of w:Wikipedia:Assume good faith. "Bad faith" means that someone is acting maliciously, and is trying to harm the project rather than help it. You are, of course, welcome to believe that users should be allowed to remove anything at all from their talk-page, without restriction or encumbrance; but do you really believe that any contrary action is inherently malicious? —Ruakh 00:41, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Well, it flies in the face of talk page guidelines, starts the beginnings of an edit war, and does nothing to improve mainspace (my definition of "helping the project"). Hardly the most productive use of time...or the one most in line with rules.  It's not vandalism, but there's no reason at all to make the edit.  But if thought it was a REALLY bad idea, how come I didn't try to remove it again, even though I am entitled to do so?  Also, consider what you would do if I did that to you.  You would certainly gripe about it on my talk page.   Purplebackpack89  (Notes Taken) (Locker) 01:02, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Your Bot
Hello. I've been seeing a lot from your bot within the past few months, and I've been wondering...

How does one (or, I suppose quite literally "you" in this case) operate a bot like that? I'm not interested in operating one myself or anything like that, but I'm just interested how one operates a bot like that to do what it does.

For instance, does it work whilst you're offline or when your computer is shut down? Tharthan (talk) 18:41, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

 * I run it on my personal laptop, so it can only run when that computer is turned on and connected to the Internet. And I don't run it as a daemon process or whatnot; rather, I run it in an open Command Prompt (shell) window, so I manually control its starting (and its stopping, usually), and am always more-or-less aware that it's running.
 * Does that answer all of your questions?
 * By the way, if I may ask — why aren't you interested in operating one yourself?
 * —Ruakh 03:56, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I see. Yes, that answers my questions, thank you. The reason why I don't wish to operate one is because the types of things that I do on Wikimedia projects aren't really things that a bot could do. See, anent Wiktionary, I focus more on correcting factitious information, uploading audio files and creating new pages more so than anything else. And, in regards to Wikipedia, I work mostly on creating new pages and correcting factitious information. As such, I really can't see how a bot could make that any easier for me. Tharthan (talk) 14:44, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Do you like video games?
--Æ&Œ (talk) 03:00, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

 * Not really. I mean, I've enjoyed them when I've played them, but I rarely play them. Why do you ask? —Ruakh 04:00, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

 * No particular reason, but perhaps I had the idea of asking it because a while ago you said that they are not durable sources for citations (or something to that effect). --Æ&Œ (talk) 09:30, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I've cited a video game once or twice before. I don't see any reason why video games shouldn't be considered valid cites — at least ones that receive a hard copy release. We allow music, movies, and TV shows to be used as cites. Video games are just another type of popular media. -Cloudcuckoolander (talk) 19:44, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I third this. Tharthan (talk) 19:50, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I agree, but caution is required: there are some that are poor translations from another language, so aren't really English usage- the most famous example being "all your base are belong to us". Chuck Entz (talk) 00:29, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

 * I don't remember that conversation, but — there are a number of reasons to be extremely cautious with video games. For one thing, a video game is a piece of software, lacking the determinism of something like a piece of music or a movie or a TV show; if I say that a certain quotation appears 1 hour, 7 minutes, 12 seconds into a movie, anyone with a copy of the movie can check that. If I say that a certain quotation appears after you beat level 13 of a video game, provided that in level 6 you chose to discard weapon A in favor of tool B necessary to unlock the quotation, that becomes much more difficult to check; and if I don't even realize that there are preconditions that enabled me to ultimately see the quotation (such as, perhaps, a certain seed value to a random number generator), then it becomes effectively impossible for anyone to check. For another, video game formats and form factors have historically changed more quickly, and remained more proprietary, than those of music and video media, and video games have generally not been as reliably ported between formats and form factors. If a given quotation appears in the Nintendo Wii version of a game — even assuming that it does so very reliably — you can't be very confident that it will appear in any other version of the game. The quotation may be completely unverifiable without specific proprietary hardware. —Ruakh 18:17, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

 * "For one thing, a video game is a piece of software, lacking the determinism of something like a piece of music or a movie or a TV show; if I say that a certain quotation appears 1 hour, 7 minutes, 12 seconds into a movie, anyone with a copy of the movie can check that."

 * Not all copies of a film in existence are necessarily identical. There's the original theatrical cut that's released in the film's primary market. But then there may also be an extended edition that's later released on home media, which adds scenes that were cut from the original theatrical release. Or a director's cut which might adds, subtracts, or rearranges scenes because the theatrical cut didn't meet the director's original vision. Or a censored cut produced to comply with the laws of an international market, which has had scenes of nudity, sexuality, graphic violence, or anything deemed offensive to local cultural mores removed. Or a television cut which has had swear words censored and fifteen minutes shaved off the original theatrical runtime so that it'll fit in a typical two-hour "Movie of the Week" timeslot.

 * In addition, sometimes dialogue is too garbled or indistinct to parse from a film's audio, and one must rely on captions or a copy of the script to know what is being said.

 * My point, basically, is that a person's ability to verify a movie quote may depend upon their access to the "correct" version of the film and the correct hardware on which to play it. Someone who only owns a DVD copy of the censored cut of a film released in their country isn't going to be able to verify dialogue from a removed scene. Someone who only owns an ancient VHS copy of a movie released before captions became standard isn't going to be able to verify garbled or indistinct dialogue.

 * I don't see the complexities presented by video games in terms of citing as being all that different from the complexities presented by films. What matters is that quotations are verifiable by people with access to the correct copy of a particular film or video game, and the hardware to play it (or, barring that, the right emulator...), not that they're immediately verifiable by everyone. And I don't see an issue with noting the specific conditions under which dialogue appears in a game if it's not default. It's like noting the edition of a book, since what page a particular quotation appears on may differ between the hardcover and paperback editions, the American and UK editions, etc. -Cloudcuckoolander (talk) 22:38, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Plus, Ruakh, there are movies like Clue where your copy may well have a completely different ending than your next-door neighbour's copy. Tharthan (talk) 01:52, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
 * "In the film's home video release, all three endings were included." --WikiTiki89 15:46, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Well, so what? I didn't say "all movies are magically perfect sources of citations, whereas all video games were sent by the Devil to confound our citation scheme", I said "there are a number of reasons to be extremely cautious with video games". —Ruakh 07:39, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
 * @Wikitiki89 I wasn't aware that such was the case. My mistake, then. @Ruakh Fair enough, then. Tharthan (talk) 17:53, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

An important message about renaming users
Dear Ruakh,

I am cross-posting this message to many places to make sure everyone who is a Wikimedia Foundation project bureaucrat receives a copy. If you are a bureaucrat on more than one wiki, you will receive this message on each wiki where you are a bureaucrat.

As you may have seen, work to perform the Wikimedia cluster-wide single-user login finalisation (SUL finalisation) is taking place. This may potentially effect your work as a local bureaucrat, so please read this message carefully.

Why is this happening? As currently stated at the global rename policy, a global account is a name linked to a single user across all Wikimedia wikis, with local accounts unified into a global collection. Previously, the only way to rename a unified user was to individually rename every local account. This was an extremely difficult and time-consuming task, both for stewards and for the users who had to initiate discussions with local bureaucrats (who perform local renames to date) on every wiki with available bureaucrats. The process took a very long time, since it's difficult to coordinate crosswiki renames among the projects and bureaucrats involved in individual projects.

The SUL finalisation will be taking place in stages, and one of the first stages will be to turn off Special:RenameUser locally. This needs to be done as soon as possible, on advice and input from Stewards and engineers for the project, so that no more accounts that are unified globally are broken by a local rename to usurp the global account name. Once this is done, the process of global name unification can begin. The date that has been chosen to turn off local renaming and shift over to entirely global renaming is 15 September 2014, or three weeks time from now. In place of local renames is a new tool, hosted on Meta, that allows for global renames on all wikis where the name is not registered will be deployed.

Your help is greatly needed during this process and going forward in the future if, as a bureaucrat, renaming users is something that you do or have an interest in participating in. The Wikimedia Stewards have set up, and are in charge of, a new community usergroup on Meta in order to share knowledge and work together on renaming accounts globally, called Global renamers. Stewards are in the process of creating documentation to help global renamers to get used to and learn more about global accounts and tools and Meta in general as well as the application format. As transparency is a valuable thing in our movement, the Stewards would like to have at least a brief public application period. If you are an experienced renamer as a local bureaucrat, the process of becoming a part of this group could take as little as 24 hours to complete. You, as a bureaucrat, should be able to apply for the global renamer right on Meta by the requests for global permissions page on 1 September, a week from now.

In the meantime please update your local page where users request renames to reflect this move to global renaming, and if there is a rename request and the user has edited more than one wiki with the name, please send them to the request page for a global rename.

Stewards greatly appreciate the trust local communities have in you and want to make this transition as easy as possible so that the two groups can start working together to ensure everyone has a unique login identity across Wikimedia projects. Completing this project will allow for long-desired universal tools like a global watchlist, global notifications and many, many more features to make work easier.

If you have any questions, comments or concerns about the SUL finalisation, read over the Help:Unified login page on Meta and leave a note on the talk page there, or on the talk page for global renamers. You can also contact me on my talk page on meta if you would like. I'm working as a bridge between Wikimedia Foundation Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Stewards, and you to assure that SUL finalisation goes as smoothly as possible; this is a community-driven process and I encourage you to work with the Stewards for our communities.

Thank you for your time. -- Keegan (WMF) talk 18:24, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

--This message was sent using MassMessage. Was there an error? Report it!

= November 2014 =

Why remove interwiki links?
Hi, there. Just wondering, was there a new policy coming in? I just saw this edit, and don't quite understand what's going on. Please tell me abou it. Thank you! --- SzMithrandir (talk) 22:09, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
 * sorry, just saw that zh:挂面 actually doesn't exist .. no wonder :P

 * No worries. :-)  —Ruakh 19:28, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Category:Hebrew feminine nouns with plurals ending in ־ים
Are you sure we should be grouping -áyim together with -ím? The dual form does not depend on gender, it is always -áyim. --WikiTiki89 15:41, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

 * Well, I admit, a major consideration was that I found it difficult to name the category in a way that would capture the one without the other. That said, I do actually think it makes some sense to include these nouns, for the following reasons:
 * They are plurals, not duals. I'm pretty sure it's connected with the dual form (either by etymology or by contamination, or both), but they're freely used for more than two (as in the árba eináyim of a one-on-one meeting), and even when there are exactly two, it's perfectly normal to make that explicit (e.g. hekhzík bishtéi yadáyim), whereas *shtéi pa'amáyim is ungrammatical (hence the Haggadah's shtéi f'amím). And heck, teeth don't even usually come in pairs, at least in humans, so why do we speak of shináyim?
 * I've checked every example I've thought of — meaning all the ones in the category — and they all have plural construct forms ending in -éi- (as in oz'néi-hamán, na'aléi-spórt, etc.). I'm really not sure what to make of this, but I think it suggests some connection between -áyim and -ím. (Our entry for yád tries to claim that the -éi- form is a "dual construct", as distinct from the "plural construct" found in other senses, but I really don't think there's any basis for calling it that.)
 * My general attitude toward categories is that it's better to be inclusive, and let browsers judge for themselves whether a given word is relevant to their need, than to try to curate them too perfectly.
 * What are your thoughts?
 * —Ruakh 04:23, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

 * So I guess when I say "dual", I mean the etymologically-dual ending. As for your second point, the plural construct -éi was originally the dual construct but replaced the original plural construct, which had been -í (since the unvocalized spelling didn't change, it's hard to say when this happened). As for what to do, I think we should have a separate category for nouns that use the dual in place of the plural, like (and possibly another category for nouns that use the dual as an actual dual, like  and ). And we also might want a category for masculine nouns that use the feminine plural ending, like . We might also want an independent set of categories for feminine nouns that do not end in -á and for masculine nouns that do end in -á. Essentially, my point is that the usage of the dual, whether as an actual dual or in place of the plural, does not depend on gender at all. --WikiTiki89 00:46, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

 * Re: "So I guess when I say 'dual', I mean the etymologically-dual ending" and "Essentially, my point is that the usage of the dual, whether as an actual dual or in place of the plural, does not depend on gender at all": I think this conversation will get lost if you keep using the word "dual" to refer to plural forms. How about "ayim forms"?
 * Re: "As for your second point, the plural construct -éi was originally the dual construct but replaced the original plural construct, which had been -í (since the unvocalized spelling didn't change, it's hard to say when this happened)": That is really interesting, thanks. How did that happen? How do we know that it happened? Do we have any evidence that it actually happened in Hebrew (as opposed to an ancestor of Hebrew)?
 * I agree with all of your statements about other categories we should have. I waited with this one until I had thought of enough examples (of the -ím type) that I could start the category off respectably; for the same reason, I didn't want to create all the categories at once and have them all languish.
 * —Ruakh 18:14, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

 * Let me rephrase: Essentially, my point is that the usage of the -ayim form, whether as an actual dual or in place of the plural, does not depend on gender at all.
 * As for the origin of the plural construct, I don't remember where I read this, but will explain the evidence as I see it. I'm going to simplify this a bit to avoid talking about irrelevant issues. Hebrew only preserves one case (cognate with the genitive case in Arabic) out of the two or three Proto-Semitic cases, so I'm going to pretend that the other cases didn't exist. The masculine plural morpheme in Proto-Semitic was *-ī and the dual morpheme was *-ay. Proto-Semitic also had a suffix *-n or *-m. The function that this suffix had originally is debatable, but long story short, it became attached to the *-ī and *-ay suffixes in the non-construct states. Thus, there were now four suffixes: *-īm and *-aym in the non-construct states and *-ī and *-ay in the construct states. Following the regular sound changes in Hebrew, keeping in mind that the construct state is phonologically equivalent to a pre-tonic syllable: *-īm > -īm, *-aym > -áyim; *-ī > *-ī, *-ay > -ē. Clearly the only thing that doesn't fit is the fact that *-ī does not exist in Hebrew, so it must have been replaced with -ē sometime between Proto-Semitic and the time of the Masoretes (I don't know whether there is evidence from the Septuagint or Origen's Hexapla). Furthermore (this is something I forgot about when I previously said "since the unvocalized spelling didn't change, it's hard to say when this happened"), in the feminine plural possessed forms, there is an extra -ē-, which is even found in the consonantal text as an extra yud. Following regular derivation from Proto-Semitic, possessive suffixes should have attached to the feminine plural the same way as for regular singular nouns. For example, "your daughters" should have been rather than . This extra yud is consistently used in all books of the Bible, as far as I know. I think this could indicate that the these forms were borrowed from the feminine dual possessed forms (see this table of the forms of שָׂפָה), which would mean that at least for the feminine this change occurred in pre-Biblical times, but it could also be argued that they were formed by analogy to the masculine plural possessed forms, which may not have changed yet at that point. The situation is similar in Aramaic for the construct states, but I know very little about the Aramaic plural possessed forms. For reference, here is an example of the declension of the (somewhat) regular Arabic noun, equivalent to Hebrew  (see especially the construct states of the dual and plural):

 * Regarding the categories, just to clarify, are you saying that you agree that words like should be removed from Category:Hebrew feminine nouns with plurals ending in ־ים and placed into a new category for -áyin forms?
 * --WikiTiki89 20:38, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

 * Thanks for that explanation!
 * Re: "are you saying that you agree that words like should be removed from Category:Hebrew feminine nouns with plurals ending in ־ים and placed into a new category for -áyin forms?": No, I was only saying that I agreed that they should be put into a new category for words with plurals in -áyim. (The two categories are not mutually exclusive.) I'm not sure yet whether I agree that they should be removed from Category:Hebrew feminine nouns with plurals ending in ־ים; you make a good case, but I'll have to think about it a bit.
 * —Ruakh 03:47, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

 * So, I think you're right. What should we name these categories? —Ruakh 03:21, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

 * Maybe Category:Hebrew nouns with plurals ending in ־יים for words like and Category:Hebrew nouns with duals for words like ? --WikiTiki89 03:40, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

 * Would we keep the name Category:Hebrew feminine nouns with plurals ending in ־ים, but just not have it include words like ? (By the way — do we actually need a category for nouns with duals, or would it be enough to link to the form-of category for dual indefinite forms?) —Ruakh 04:34, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes there is no reason to change the name. Theoretically, the form-of category for dual indefinite forms would do the same thing, but in practice the form-of entry for the dual might not exist. --WikiTiki89 05:37, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

= December 2014 =

Redirects in interwikis
(Commenting here so I don't stop the bot again). No problem, thanks for the reply. Smurrayinchester (talk) 22:17, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

title: User talk:Ruakh/2014


text:
womance

Etymology
.

Noun

 * 1)  A close but non-sexual relationship between women.

title: womance


text:
dancescape

Noun

 * 1) A figurative landscape of dancing or dance trends.

title: dancescape


text: dancescapes

title: dancescapes


text: gets wet

title: gets wet


text: implantatet

title: implantatet


text: almahtig

title: almahtig


text: getting wet

title: getting wet


text:
alaefni

Etymology
From.

Adjective

 * 1) very plain
 * 2) quite flat

title: alaefni


text: got wet

title: got wet


text:
Reconstruction:Proto-Germanic/smaugijaną

Etymology
From.

Verb

 * 1) to make slip, cause to get down
 * 2) to ponder, investigate, scrutinize


text:
benenwagen

Etymology
From, as if the legs were a "vehicle".

Noun

 * 1)  shanks' pony; the feet or legs as a form of transport

title: benenwagen


text:
ungiefnod

Etymology
Negative form of the past participle of. Cognate with Dutch ongeëffend, German ungeebnet.

Adjective

 * 1) uneven

title: ungiefnod


text: Category:Old Saxon terms prefixed with un-


text: implantater

title: implantater


text: oðar

title: oðar


text: Template:R:yai:Andreev

title: Template:R:yai:Andreev


text:
Citations:Londonphile

Noun: "one who is fond of the city of London"

 * 1976, European Community, Issues 192-198, page 38:
 * A Londonphile returning to live here after more than six years away in Moscow and Rome is struck at almost every turning by the ways, mostly subtle, she has changed.
 * 2000, Rafe Mair, Rants, Raves, & Recollections, Whitecap Books (2000), ISBN 1552851451, page 82:
 * I am, unashamedly an Anglophile and, if there is such a word, a Londonphile. My first trip to London did not come until February 1964.
 * 2012, Brian L. Evans, Pursuing China: Memoir of a Beaver Liaison Officer, The University of Alberta Press (2012), ISBN 9780888646002, page 49:
 * I quickly became a Londonphile and did not regret choosing the University of London over Cambridge

Noun: "a fan of the American author Jack London (1876-1916) and his work"

 * 1983, Jack London Echoes, Volume 3, page 39:
 * I cannot claim to be a Londonphile, though I enjoy reading Jack London and have absorbed much about the author from many conversations with Russ and Winnie over the years.
 * 2004, Richard Hanner, "Jack London's life revealed at Glen Ellen state park", Lodi-News Sentinel, 9 April 2004:
 * Explore the museum, a magnet for Londonphiles eager to learn more about the writer of such classics as "Call of the Wild."

title: Citations:Londonphile


text: implantaterne

title: implantaterne


text: Category:Yagnobi reference templates

title: Category:Yagnobi reference templates


text: Category:Yagnobi templates

title: Category:Yagnobi templates


text:
Londonphile

Noun

 * 1) One who is fond of the city of London.

title: Londonphile


text: Londonphiles

title: Londonphiles


text: implantata

title: implantata


text:
léif

Etymology
From (attested as ), northern variant of, from. Cognate with 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬.

Adjective

 * 1) nice, lovely, kind, sweet
 * 2) dear, beloved

title: léif


text: implantatene

title: implantatene


text:
bingefully

Adverb

 * 1) In a bingeful manner.

title: bingefully


text:
рах

Etymology
Compare 🇨🇬 loanword.

Noun

 * 1) mouth; muzzle; opening

title: рах


text:
Talk:рах

Cyrillic spelling was verified here. --Vahag (talk) 21:33, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

title: Talk:рах


text: Category:yai:Anatomy

title: Category:yai:Anatomy


text: Category:yai:Biology

title: Category:yai:Biology


text: Category:yai:Medicine

title: Category:yai:Medicine


text: Category:yai:List of related-to categories


text: Category:yai:Sciences

title: Category:yai:Sciences


text: Category:yai:All topics

title: Category:yai:All topics


text:
Rhymes:Luxembourgish/ɜɪf

One syllable

 * Bréif
 * déif
 * Déif
 * dréif
 * Gréif
 * léif
 * Léiw
 * Méiw
 * Schléif
 * Spréif
 * Zéif

title: Rhymes:Luxembourgish/ɜɪf


text:
alahwit

Etymology
From.

Adjective

 * 1) all white
 * 2) completely white

title: alahwit


text:
alowaldo

Etymology 1
From. Cognate with Old English eallwealda.

Adjective

 * 1) ruling, almighty

Etymology 2
Same as the adjective.

Noun

 * 1) ruler

title: alowaldo


text:
tiền thưởng

Etymology
.

Noun

 * 1)  tip, extra money given in appreciation for a rendered service

title: tiền thưởng


text: Template:R:sog:Gharib

title: Template:R:sog:Gharib


text:
bingeful

Adjective

 * 1) Exhibiting or characteristic of bingeing.

title: bingeful


text: Category:Sogdian reference templates

title: Category:Sogdian reference templates


text: Category:Sogdian templates

title: Category:Sogdian templates


text:
Schléif

Etymology
From, from. Cognate with 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬.

Noun

 * 1) sloe

title: Schléif


text:
alowaldand

Etymology
From. Cognate with 🇨🇬.

Adjective

 * 1) ruling, almighty

Noun

 * 1) ruler

title: alowaldand


text: User:ATS

title: User:ATS


text: User talk:ATS

title: User talk:ATS


text:
𐽀𐼲𐼰𐼳

Etymology
. Cognate with 🇨🇬, and the Iranian loanword 🇨🇬.

Noun

 * 1) mouth

title: 𐽀𐼲𐼰𐼳


text: Category:Sogdian nouns

title: Category:Sogdian nouns


text:
teabaggy

Adjective

 * 1)  Of, related to, or characteristic of the.

title: teabaggy


text: unterhält

title: unterhält


text: hält fest

title: hält fest


text: vergilt

title: vergilt


text: behält vor

title: behält vor


text: Morgende

title: Morgende


text:
dentality

Noun

 * 1)  The quality of being dental.

title: dentality


text:
Schulgebrauch

Noun

 * 1) school use

title: Schulgebrauch


text:
kummastus

Noun

 * 1) astonishment, stupefaction

title: kummastus


text:
ռեխ

Etymology
Borrowed from an New  language. , which see for more.

Noun

 * 1) mouth of an animal, jaws
 * 2)  mouth of a human, piehole, trap, cakehole
 * 1)  mouth of a human, piehole, trap, cakehole

title: ռեխ


text:
Seltenerdmagnet

Noun

 * 1) rare earth magnet

title: Seltenerdmagnet


text:
Seltenerde

Noun

 * 1)  rare earth

title: Seltenerde


text:
Seltenerdmetall

Noun

 * 1) rare earth metal

title: Seltenerdmetall


text: Seltenerdmetallen

title: Seltenerdmetallen