UtilaĵojEdit

Va (🖋️) Provejo

Special:MyPage/global.js - por globala instalado

Special:MyPage/common.js - por loka instalado

Special:MyPage/EditCounterOptIn.js - loke, por statistiko

Special:TranslatorSignup



Via planita RFC / Your planned RFCEdit

Vi kompreneble povas publikigi vian RFC:on. Mi ne estas maskla do la pronomo "li" ne ĝustas ("La pozicio de Taylor kaj liaj pruvoj"). Vi povas respekti tion aŭ ne. / Feel free to publish your RFC. I am not male thus the pronoun "li" is not correct ("La pozicio de Taylor kaj liaj pruvoj"). You can respect this or not. Taylor 49 (talk) 21:24, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

La Peto pro Komento estas publikigita kiel ( ) Requests_for_comment/I_need_to_solve_the_problem_that_I_consider_important_in_the_eo.wiktionary.org_project, pri kio mi informis vin per persona retpoŝta mesaĝo. ( )
Iuj ajn demando pri via memidentigo ne koncernas la demandon, kiun mi anoncis per RfC. Kaj tute ne interesas min persone. ( ) Va (🖋️) 10:00, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Civility and respect for other contributorsEdit

Hello Vami. After reviewing this section of the RfC, it is clear that your conduct relating to this has been less than civil, including refusing to use Taylor's preferred pronouns. I recommend you review WM:CIV and the UCoC prior to continuing in discussions. When engaging in a dispute with another editor, please comment on the topic at hand without engaging in insults, aspersions, or legal threats. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask. Regards, Vermont (talk) 21:52, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

@Vermont: Hello.
Please note that you have studied only one section of the RFC, that the entire RFC is devoted to the problem of technical violations and the destruction of the project, and not to personal relationships. And that I pointed out at the very beginning that all these problems occur against the background of personal conflict.
I've tried to keep the discussion strictly within the technical discussion. But you read exactly that section that deals with personal conflict.
As for a personal conflict, I also have something to write, and my claims will be enough for a separate RFC. But even if we look at the section that you read carefully, the question arises: did you really read it carefully to argue that my behavior is "less than civil"?
Let's take a close look at least the given evidence regarding the "nazi" - "antinazi" case. This is just a favorite topic of my opponent and this case is given as an example many times. Please pay special attention to the wording "Template:...nazi...".
This event is related to the ban that my opponent made to me as an administrator. This protocol is https://eo.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Speciala%C4%B5o:Protokolo&logid=105296
There are links in the proof of this ban:
  • use of the word "idioto", the link - Iu ajn tolero havas limon Note that this article is titled "All patience has limits" in the discussion. This is not just an article for the sake of insult, but this is already the fourth or fifth article, and all the articles dealt with the removal of information and, moreover, the removal in violation of technical norms of the entire WikiMedia project, and not just eowikt separately.
Here are some earlier discussions:
betulo - in connection with the removal of an absolutely legal article, which in the remote edition did not coincide with anything at all
Klarigu_sencon - due to mass deletion of articles
which means "recreated without theft" - stealing member contributions, details in WP:RVDL
Forigo
And you can also add a discussion
My last favor to you - the only time when my stolen contribution was returned, but insults and accusations without proof remained both in the discussion and in the history of the editorial board
It was the pointlessness of further discussion personally and within the framework of the eowikt project that led to my RFC, where not me, but independent persons with extensive experience and administering all projects indicated that the deletions that took place over the past two years violate the technical regulations.
On this point, proving the ban against me is sheer falsehood. Highlighted only one word from the entire discussion throughout the month.
  • link to article "you must visit school" - You should visit school - this is about the changes my opponent made to the article I created. These changes are contrary to elementary school knowledge. I do not understand what is the problem in my advice to restore knowledge, if for some reason they have been forgotten?
But there is a very important point - a link to this article is present in more than half of all articles of the project, this is a key article on grammar, and its content should be as accurate and comprehensive as possible. The school mistakes in an article like this are a shame for the entire project. And this article did not exist at all until I created it in September of this year, when I came to this project. This point is also a lie.
  • the third point of the ban proof is simply marked with the word "nazi", although there is a link to the diff - in template - where there is simply no such word! Quote from this diff "-> | <! - o -> antinazi <! - o -> = <! - then ->". Do you see the difference between the words "nazi" and "antinazi"? I see. This is a direct substitution of words. If you think so, then you can blame all universities for the fact that names like "Physical Faculty" are a direct insult in the form "... fac * ...".
Moreover, Antinazi is the proper name of the worldwide movement and organizations, this word is applied everywhere and there are no claims to this word, moreover, for this word there is an article on Wikipedia - w:en:Antinazi. This point is not just a lie, but deception and manipulation.
  • fourth point, "you are stupid" - there is a link to the discussion - [1]
This is also not one replica, but a chain of correspondence that begins with this diff - [2] - here I have commented out the use of the template "livs" as not applicable for this language or for this case. Moreover, I analyzed the template itself and the module, and the documentation for it, written in a wild mixture of different languages, and came to the conclusion that this tool is not ready for mass use, in many cases it is not applicable at all, and therefore I called this template stupid...
Attention! I called the template stupid. Not a specific person in personal correspondence, but a template.
It was this comment that my opponent took as an appeal to himself personally, and wrote a demand to apologize for a personal insult. There was no personal insult. And it was my opponent who started using the word "stupid" in relation to himself.
The use of the word "stupid" in itself is neither a curse nor an insult. If someone decided to ban the word stupid, then the article w:en:KISS_principle should be deleted, and everyone who edited this article should be banned as they banned me.
Please note that after I pointed out in the same RFC that I can provide evidence of the falsehood of the accusations for all the accusations of my opponent, my opponent wrote the following message, where my opponent directly admits the facts that there was no word "nazi" but there was a word "antinazi" and is justified. And to justify my opponent writes another lie.
Where is the evidence that I "refuse to accept the need for deletion of pirated material"? Please check out the entire history of my revisions since joining the project in September! Wherever I edited the "definitions" section, I either entered my author's text in full, or replaced the questionable text with a licensed one.
This is my reasoning on only one point from the section that you read. In the same way, I can answer on all points. Should I open an RFC for insults, lies against me and harassment by Taylor 49? For comparison, look at the words my opponent uses on the member discussion pages - [3]
I am accused of using incorrect pronouns when the words "and f**k off" of my opponent are considered completely acceptable. Really?
PS: this is an automatically translated text - I am not responsible for the inconsistency of pronouns used by the automatic system. But I can apologize in advance for the automatic system if it was wrong somewhere.
. Va (🖋️) 09:04, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
To clarify, by no means am I saying that Taylor's arguments are correct. Nor am I saying that they are completely in the right on the personal dispute side, either. My point is that your comments have been uncivil, and it would not take much to fix that. Also, as you are using machine translations, please check for pronouns before you paste it. You are responsible for the edits you make, even when using tools to make them. Best, Vermont (talk) 02:33, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
Ok, i understand your position. Moreover, i completely agree with it. The need for polite communication is generally an obvious condition for the existence of any society.
It remains only to understand:
  • Where exactly i was not polite and what polite words i should replace words and expressions "strange", "you interfere with work", "i do not have time for ...", "you unjustifiably deleted information", etc.? In order to fix something, i must understand what to fix. ( )
  • What pronouns should i use, and i would like to see this list for all working languages ​​that have already been used in the communication process both here and within our subproject, namely English, Esperanto, Swedish, Russian; which pronouns should correspond to the cases of application in relation to the terms "user", "account", "person" and others? ( )
  • If i "am responsible" and "have to" check pronouns as a result of machine translation, the grammar of which i do not know enough to correct the peculiarities of the use of pronouns regarding the difference in perception of "user" and "person", then it may make sense then not to copy the results of translation, but write in the original language with quick access to automatic translation tools? I support equality and against discrimination on the basis of language. I support progress, and we are no longer in the 19th or 20th century, but in the twenties of the 21st century, and automatic translation tools are well developed and accessible to all - progress has already been made and we must support that progress. ( )
  • Having considered "my terrible mistakes in the use of pronouns", can we move on to simpler questions, such as "unjustified deletion of all information" or "mass substitution of the content of my personal messages on users' discussion pages"?
You may not have noticed, but we are talking about the RFC, where we have already exchanged a few remarks, where i asked you to restore several articles as examples for analysis, and you replied that such a restoration is too time consuming. I once again quote my answer to you: "Outside of this RFC - does it make sense to notify technical service about this security issue? If a situation arises not with 150, but with a large number of pages. The action is easy to automate, and upon obtaining some rights, even with a set timeout for robots of 5 seconds between operations, this makes it possible to destroy more than 4000 pages in 12 hours".
You can explain to me that this quote may be "conduct relating to this has been less than civil" or may not correspond to WM:CIV and the UCoC. And moreover, to be "2021-11-21 [28] absurd accusations of malicious faith by automated bot-powered mass destruction (only 8'000 pages per day)", as my opponent claims?
When we talked, you did not consider my answer "absurd accusations", but when you "reviewed this section of the RfC", it turns out that you changed your mind. You do not have the feeling that you have been subjected to simple manipulation - you were shown a large list, with which you agreed in general, without looking at all the items for authenticity ...
I may be wrong in my conclusions, but i see the situation as follows: there is an attempt to replace the conversation about the "need for justification and evidence" and the "conversation about technical violations" with a "conversation about the use of pronouns". In order to justify and avoid responsibility for their actions and shift the blame to another.
. Va (🖋️) 07:10, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
The documentation for the template "livs" is written in Esperanto, not "a wild mixture of different languages". And " antinazi " is NOT an acceptable langugage code. I do not have time to analyze and answer to all the other lies and false accusations above.
Pronouns for the word "user" -- 3rd person
Role en English sv Swedish eo Esperanto id Indonesian
subject ey hen ri dia
nonsubject/accusative em (non-sub) henom (non-sub) rin (acc) dia
possessive eir hens ria dia
This is still about harassment, incivility, and copyright infringements, not about pronouns. And there is evidence of harassment & incivility (by "Vami"), and there is evidence of copyright infringements (committed by Pablo, defended by "Vami"). Taylor 49 (talk) 19:08, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
https://translate.google.com/?sl=en&tl=fr&text=pronouns%20em%20and%20ey&op=translate
https://translate.google.com/?sl=en&tl=de&text=pronouns%20em%20and%20ey&op=translate
https://translate.google.com/?sl=en&tl=eo&text=pronouns%20em%20and%20ey&op=translate
https://translate.google.com/?sl=en&tl=es&text=pronouns%20em%20and%20ey&op=translate
The words have not changed during translation, which means it is just a set of untranslatable letters. Are you kidding me. There are no such pronouns.
As for Esperanto, I can speak accurately and without dictionaries. "Ri" is a slang word, proposed sometime in 1970 for the case of "unknown person", has nothing to do with gender and its use as gender violates the grammar of the language.
Suggest real and accepted words, enshrined in dictionaries, whose authority we can trust. I can’t use words that I don’t even know exist.
Put these real common words on your personal pages. And only then put forward your claims.
. Va (🖋️) 20:37, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
There's a difference between having a linguistic argument about neopronouns and refusing to use someone's preferred pronouns. When it comes to gender-affirming language, please understand that neopronouns are quite new and most dictionaries don't specifically recognize any. It's mostly for this reason that I prefer they/them/theirs pronouns, but other people have different preferences. Considering that Esperanto is literally a constructed language, it surprises me that you are being so harsh on neopronouns. This is mentioned in the UCOC, which I had linked previously. Regards, Vermont (talk) 22:47, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
There is a big difference between "refusing to use someone's preferred pronouns" and not knowing what to use. Not only I was deceived, but also many other people who tried to communicate with this person. I've seen several different options for getting out of this hopeless situation. Right in front of my eyes, in some messages, other correspondents made several corrections in a row "he" -> "she" -> "they".
Show me one line where I personally state that I am "refusing to use someone's preferred pronouns"?
The problem is that instead of the language described in the dictionaries, this person invites me to use some of his own inventions. And I don't even mind, because I don't care and this topic is completely indifferent to me. But after all, this person did not even write on any of this person pages a list of pronouns that this person wants to see.
If a list of pronouns were specified, then if I used a fictitious word that any of my correspondents would not understand as well as I, then I did not look like a complete idiot - I could just link to the personal page where it is indicated list these new words and forward all questions about that jargon to the author.
Please note that this list is now announced for the first time, while I started communicating with this person in September. And I opened the RFC on the issue of mass destruction of articles on October 20. Throughout this time, this person accuses everyone of insults, because this person is not satisfied with everything that other people write. This person is not satisfied with ordinary dictionaries, is not satisfied with the automatic translators Google and Yandex.
For at least a month now, one of Meta's administrators pointed out to this person that the jargon that this person wants to see must be indicated on pages of this person.
We have in its purest form an example of deliberate gender harassment and deception, the purpose of which is to replace the discussion of important questions with the question of pronouns.
PS: About Esperanto. In the 1920s, a movement of language reformers emerged, resulting in the Ido language. It was the reformers' movement that split the general movement, slowed down the spread of the Esperanto language for at least 20 years, and in terms of the amount of harm it was comparable to the Second World War. Yes, I have a very negative attitude towards the destroyers of the Esperanto language.
Moreover, there is a decision of the 1905 Congress in Boulogne-sur-Mer, where a resolution signed by more than a thousand deputies from different countries of the world stipulates that the Esperanto Academy is being created to control the use of the language. www.akademio-de-esperanto.org. This organization still exists, and it is this organization that is responsible for the impossibility of destroying the language through reformation. As soon as the corresponding decision of the Academy appears, I will use it officially, because I will be sure that I will be guaranteed to be understood.
Do not assume that using the Esperanto language is a game for teenagers, where everyone does what he wants, regardless of the established norms.

. Va (🖋️) 05:50, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
[4] Anything non-male is fine, and there are hints on my user page. And now enough about pronouns. The eowikt is full of piracy (copyringht infringement) and this is the real problem that must be resolved. BTW, you are wrong about the "Ido" languge. It was proclaimed year 1907. In the 1920s the language "Novial" emerged. And YES this split did almost ruin Esperanto. Are you aware that this huge piracy issue is a very bad advertizig for the language? Taylor 49 (talk) 23:53, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
Any claim about piracy (copyright infringement) must be supported by evidence. The PIV Dictionary uses a huge amount of public intellectual property. And the editors of this dictionary have the right to do so. The PIV dictionary can be viewed as a unique collection and a complete work of authorship. Which does not make the individual components unique and protected by copyright. And Wiktionary does not copy the structure and the entire collection. Your coincidence claims are unsubstantiated accusations. Va (🖋️) 04:25, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

Traduksciigo: Education/Newsletter/January 2022/HeadlinesEdit

Saluton Vami,

vi ricevas tiun ĉi mesaĝon, ĉar vi registriĝis kiel tradukisto de la lingvoj Esperanto kaj rusa ĉe Meta. La paĝo Education/Newsletter/January 2022/Headlines estas tradukpreta. Vi povas traduki ĝin ĉe:

La prioritato de tiu ĉi paĝo estas alta. La limdato por traduko de tiu ĉi paĝo estas 2022-01-24.

Ni valoregas vian helpon. Tradukistoj kiel vi helpas al Meta funkcii kiel vere multlingva komunumo.

Dankon!

Traduk-kunordigantoj de Meta‎, 17:25, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

Traduksciigo: Leadership Development Task Force/Call for Feedback AnnouncementEdit

Saluton Vami,

vi ricevas tiun ĉi mesaĝon, ĉar vi registriĝis kiel tradukisto de la lingvoj Esperanto kaj rusa ĉe Meta. La paĝo Leadership Development Task Force/Call for Feedback Announcement estas tradukpreta. Vi povas traduki ĝin ĉe:


La limdato por traduko de tiu ĉi paĝo estas 2022-02-07.

Good day to you from Movement Strategy and Governance! The coming weeks see a Call for Feedback concerning the creation of a movementwide Leadership_Development_Task_Force. We are announcing it by a short message of only 60 words to be distributed globally on Tuesday. Global distribution asks for native language support, so we kindly ask for your help to have as many translations as possible available. It should be a few minutes of work only. Thank you very much for your help, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:12, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

Ni valoregas vian helpon. Tradukistoj kiel vi helpas al Meta funkcii kiel vere multlingva komunumo.

Dankon!

Traduk-kunordigantoj de Meta‎, 10:12, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

Traduksciigo: ContribuLing 2022Edit

Saluton Vami,

vi ricevas tiun ĉi mesaĝon, ĉar vi registriĝis kiel tradukisto de la lingvoj Esperanto kaj rusa ĉe Meta. La paĝo ContribuLing 2022 estas tradukpreta. Vi povas traduki ĝin ĉe:

La prioritato de tiu ĉi paĝo estas meza.


Ni valoregas vian helpon. Tradukistoj kiel vi helpas al Meta funkcii kiel vere multlingva komunumo.

Dankon!

Traduk-kunordigantoj de Meta‎, 12:04, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

Traduksciigo: Universal Code of Conduct/Enforcement guidelinesEdit

Saluton Vami,

vi ricevas tiun ĉi mesaĝon, ĉar vi registriĝis kiel tradukisto de la lingvoj Esperanto kaj rusa ĉe Meta. La paĝo Universal Code of Conduct/Enforcement guidelines estas tradukpreta. Vi povas traduki ĝin ĉe:



Ni valoregas vian helpon. Tradukistoj kiel vi helpas al Meta funkcii kiel vere multlingva komunumo.

Dankon!

Traduk-kunordigantoj de Meta‎, 15:18, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Traduksciigo: ContribuLing 2022/ProgramEdit

Saluton Vami,

vi ricevas tiun ĉi mesaĝon, ĉar vi registriĝis kiel tradukisto de la lingvo Esperanto ĉe Meta. La paĝo ContribuLing 2022/Program estas tradukpreta. Vi povas traduki ĝin ĉe:

La prioritato de tiu ĉi paĝo estas meza. La limdato por traduko de tiu ĉi paĝo estas 2022-03-31.

Ni valoregas vian helpon. Tradukistoj kiel vi helpas al Meta funkcii kiel vere multlingva komunumo.

Dankon!

Traduk-kunordigantoj de Meta‎, 15:49, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

Traduksciigo: GLAM School/QuestionsEdit

Saluton Vami,

vi ricevas tiun ĉi mesaĝon, ĉar vi registriĝis kiel tradukisto de la lingvo Esperanto ĉe Meta. La paĝo GLAM School/Questions estas tradukpreta. Vi povas traduki ĝin ĉe:


La limdato por traduko de tiu ĉi paĝo estas 2022-12-31.

Thank you for the wonderful work you are doing!

I have made a couple of small modifications to the existing text and added one new section. I hope you would be willing to have a look at those.

Thank you again!

Cheers, Susanna

Ni valoregas vian helpon. Tradukistoj kiel vi helpas al Meta funkcii kiel vere multlingva komunumo.

Dankon!

Traduk-kunordigantoj de Meta‎, 07:06, 29 April 2022 (UTC)