Uiser collogue:Shahrooz061

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Frae Wikipedia, the free beuk o knawledge

Owersettins[eedit soorce]

Please gie soorces an evidence that the passages that yer pittin on Shayan Javadi is compatible wi Wikipaedia's license, that is CC BY-SA 3.0. There is nae wey that the Kay poem fir exemple wis compliant. Forby, the Aatashmag soorce is jist an airtin ti the hame page, an disna coont as a soorce. Seemlar, gie soorces gin yer gaunae be pittin in alternate names fur sciences siclik here. We've haed issues in the past wi fowk jist makin up "Scots" terms CiphriusKane (tauk) 19:11, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[Replie]

Again, please dinna pit the hale text up athoot giein evidence that it is copyricht compliant. Gin ye dae it again ye mey be blockit. Seicont, dae ye hae ony relationship wi Shayan Javadi? CiphriusKane (tauk) 02:13, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[Replie]

Merci fir yer tent. Aye, A think ye deletit five or six wirds, aw o thaim were neoligisms. A haed consultit wi Matthew Fitt aboot these wirds afore, but ye are richt. Until these wirds are usit i an offeecial source, it is better no tae be on wikipedia. A must pay attention thon the new wirds thon A use must have been usit i a source afore. Shahrooz061 (tauk) 15:20, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[Replie]

Scotchins[eedit soorce]

(en) Are you by chance using the Scots Online dictionary for your translations? Because that dictionary has a bad habit of presenting any Scots term without context, and overreliance on it has in the past actually been really problematic for us, in particular resulting in articles that just put in obscure, outdated and nonsensical Scots terms just to not be English CiphriusKane (tauk) 05:52, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[Replie]

Also if you're going to be translating articles from English Wikipedia, you must attribute them as such by providing a link to the article either on the talk page or in the edit summary CiphriusKane (tauk) 05:55, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[Replie]

Aye, A use this dictionary 30% o the time, but it is no ma anely source. Actually, gin we want tae use anely Inglis-Scots cognates, whit we have written will no be any different fra Scottish Inglis. A think thare shoud be a difference aetween Scottish Inglis an Scots, itherwise thare wad be na need fir a Scots wikipedia. A understand thon ye have problems wi this writin style, which mey be the result o bad experiences i the past. Sae A'll try tae write i Scots thon is closer tae Inglis fra nou on. Onyway, A understand yer concern aboot no usin a plastic tongue. Shahrooz061 (tauk) 15:21, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[Replie]

Kin ye please stap makin single sentence stubs an bein owerly reliant on ae fauty dictionar? Ye're jist repeatin the exact same crap aat's bin plaguin iss wiki fur a tenyeir, an yer hale thrapple anent it haein ti differ fae Inglis ti jeestify existin is ae crock (there's nae argiment bein makit fur Portuguese WP nae existin acause Spainish WP exists). A'v jist reairtit Bizzumbaw acause we'r nae needin mair law effort crap CiphriusKane (tauk) 23:42, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[Replie]

Bizzumbaw is a term usit bi the scots owersetter o Harry Potter fir Quidditch. A dinnae think yer last action has anythin tae dae wi Wikipedia's rules. Thare are mony interviews aboot it.

https://www.theguardian.com/books/shortcuts/2017/nov/21/harry-potter-philosophers-stone-better-in-scots-translation

Shahrooz061 (tauk) 00:13, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[Replie]