Perbincangan:Laman Utama/Arkib01

Daripada Wiktionary
Pergi ke pandu arah Pergi ke carian
Wikikamus Bahasa Melayu ini (atau boleh dikenali sebagai Kamus Wiki atau hanya dengan sebutan dua patah kata sahaja, Wiki-kamus) disusun atas kesedaran bahawa:
"...memandang kepada perlunya sebuah kamus yang dapat memenuhi kehendak masyarakat masa ini, manakala Bahasa Kebangsaan kita telah meningkat ke peringkat kemajuannya amat pesat..." --- Tun Syed Nasir bin Ismail (1968AD).
"...betapa perlunya bahasa Melayu mempunyai sebuah kamus moden, lengkap dan yang dapat dipertanggungjawabkan dari segi ilmiah, untuk menampung keperluan-keperluan yang lahir dari proses pemodenan bahasa Melayu itu." --- Datuk Haji Hassan bin Ahmad (1970AD).
"...usaha pembinaan bahasa umumnya dan penyusunan kamus khususnya harus terus-menerus berlangsung agar kata dan istilah baru, konsep dan idea mutakhir terakam untuk tatapan khalayak yang kian prihatin terhadap bahasa dan kebangsaan." --- Dato' Haji A. Aziz bin Deraman (1994AD).


Apa? Hanya 43 perkataan Melayu sahaja? Dahsyatnya!!! Sangat kesian!!![sunting]

(Perhatian: Percakapan saya selalu adalah dalam Bahasa Inggeris. Harap maaf jikalau kepada sesiapa yang tidak berapa faham dalam bahasa tersebut dengan apa saya sedang terangkan dan maksudkan di sini. Bantuan amat diperlukan untuk penterjemahan amanat di sini kepada Bahasa Melayu. Harap maklum, terima kasih!)

I'm so surprise, stunned, and appalled that the Malay Wiktionary's vocabulary is far to little! How can this be? Being as a Malaysian myself, I was wondering whether anyone could help contribute this site by adding more substantial Malay words into it immediately so as to make it a more accessible Malay dictionary and appealing to many other readers worldwide (particularly to the Malays or the Malaysian readers) as well in order to be in par with other great Wiktionaries' standards like the English Wiktionary. How are we going to achieve the status of "Vision 2020" in our Malaysian country into a developed one (by the year 2020AD) if we don't dare to do so (i.e. by making it the best Malay Language dictionary ever since now the actual number of Malay words has increased into 82,900 Malay words as confirmed or stated by the Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka's Fourth Edition of KAMUS DEWAN year 2005AD)?? ~ON·W·HEE·Z·IER·P·L·OT~ 06:21, 6 Julai 2006 (UTC)Reply[balas]

Jangan harapkan orang lain sahaja membantu. Mulakanlah dahulu. Anda mampu mengubahnya. ...Aurora... 15:37, 11 Julai 2006 (UTC)Reply[balas]
Saudara Aurora, What is wrong with that? Do you expect me that I have to do it all by myself in this Malay Wiktionary alone without the help of others? Does this mean that this big stint-work is only assigned to me first and not toward anybody else? Surely this is absolutely absurd and completely ridiculous!!! Besides, it would be far too slow to take up for just one mortal to do this kind of enormous stuff! Needless to say, please consider that NOT everyone around here (including me, of course) is/can able to manage such tasks or to have a totally occupied full-time non-stop around-the-clock editing cyberspace-task in front of their computer screens all day as there are other practical things which are more important to do or to deal with in life as well! Wouldn't it be much better to have others more to co-operate or at least to lend their helping hands jointly with us in this field?
By having more substantial or considerable workforce incorporated in this likely huge lexicographing project in this way, the work progress or development in this Malay Wiki-dictionary will begin to burgeon rapidly or will increase in its momentum or will speed up! (In a nutshell or in other words, it would be done or finished in a much faster rate or pace than scheduled!) Do you agree and comprehend of what I am trying to mention here? It is really urgent and a dire need for more Malaysian editors, Malaysian-cum-Wikipedians, or anyone else who possess with great, vast or advance knowledge of the Malay vocabulary required into this dictionary, not just directly to mere one person or only to oneself! (In addition, getting more Wiki-Malaysians into this "job" here will also mean less burdensome work not only to me, but to anyone else who might felt the same way too.) Please remember that! ~ON·W·HEE·Z·IER·P·L·OT~ 21:37, 19 Julai 2006 (UTC)Reply[balas]
Saya setuju bahawa Wiktionary ini tidak mampu dibangunkan oleh satu orang sahaja. Apa yang saya tidak setuju ialah sikap tunggu orang lain. Itulah yang saya hendak anda ubah. Jika sekadar memberi komen dan tidak membantu, tiada gunanya. ...Aurora... 07:25, 20 Julai 2006 (UTC)Reply[balas]
Warning sign

Dear Aurora, please "Comment on content, not on the Contributor".[1] This will be the BOTTOM LINE from me for you. Thank You.

Once again dear Aurora, you seem to be misunderstood or misapprehend almost completely about/by what I was doing recently up until right now ever since I started this whole discussing stuff! I do agree that it is wrong to wait for other people (I mean, Wiki-editors or Wikipedians, especially our local ones from Malaysia) to come or arrive here to help us out. However, based on what you have mentioned from your second post or statement above in this discussion here, what I do NOT agree is that you are putting the blame on me for not initiating myself properly into this word-compiling work! Besides, you even mentioned that I have this "symptom" of waiting-for-other-people attitude, in which I also find it totally UNTRUE and really redundant to deal with and it is definitely wrong to mete out such unpleasant remarks (well, almost) on other peoples’ profession since you never even inquire into them carefully of what they are actually doing! Then how could you "say" or "command" like that to me about what I should behave instead of focusing on this Malay Wiktionary about what it should be done? "Sigh!"
Firstly, let me emphasize or clarify you this very clearly: Branding or accusing me or other people (typically when it is directed towards Wiki-editors like me) that I have this type of bad attitude of waiting or looking forward to other people is absolutely inexcusable and unacceptable in the Wikipedian community, because of that judgement which you gave it on me it would still never be helpful enough. There was once an old wise saying by Scudder N. Parker that stresses such similar unwanted incidents back from his lifetime, he says that:
People have a way of becoming what you encourage them to be --- not what you nag them to be.
Here's another one taken from a Chinese proverb:
Deal with the faults of others as gently as with your own.
In addition to that, in the manner of what you have alluded previously even including ones as childish and unimportant as ("...Apa yang saya tidak setuju ialah sikap tunggu orang lain...") are all equal in the eyes of Wikipedia (more towards this Wiktionary); there is nothing that you can say that will bother me in reality. For this reason, please try to familiarize yourself by reading, understanding, and reviewing attentively or thoroughly about what WP: Civil is highlighting in there that we have found/taken from the English Wikipedia where such guidelines is applicable and obligatory to all or to each and every Wikipedian a.k.a. Wiki-editors in this entire Wikimedia Foundation (although that Wiki-webpage is written entirely in English, do take your time to revise them). (I am quite sure that this ruling applies or goes the same way as well with the Malay Wikipedia, isn’t it?) Instead, what you should do to is to reply it rightfully in an appropriate polite tones, which means that you must also assume good faith while you are working, co-operating, or even interacting with your fellow editors and when telling/informing them about what they should do by explaining it out etiquettely or in terms of goodwill to them based on your own neutral point of view, and NOT by judging or disapproving others based on your own way of thinking or from your own mental attitude! It is like you thinking that this is all only for you/yourself for your own advantage based on your own behavioural governing code or your own ruling system of demeanours (without accepting or sharing it with others)! Certainly this is totally wrong and really going out of place!!! Finally and ultimately (now this is the most crucial and the most precise one for the second mistakable statement that you have made before), please also remember that this is the Wiki-Dictionary: You must only "COMMENT ON CONTENT, NOT ON THE CONTRIBUTOR", for it is also NOT for a place to simply point fingers directly at people's character and personality!!!
Secondly speaking about my first post/message into this discussion, all I ever did for that message was just giving out an announcement-like expression about this Malay Wiktionary that it truly, truly, and truly needs more room/space for substantial improvement to fill in as far as the remaining number of Malay words is concern (rather than just doing nothing about it of course), that's all and nothing else! Suppose/if I were NOT to put that announcement into this page, then how much more will they ever be ready to RESPOND IMMEDIATELY into this “yet-poor” site? Again if not for me, then who else?? Isn’t that of what I did (a few weeks back) indeed accurately explains HELP (i.e. by calling/summoning other people to come forward into this project to do something about it)??? Does that really mean that at that moment of time I was really waiting for other people in inaction? For your correct information, honestly I am/did NOT really waiting idly for them with giddy anticipation to come by here and help out only for themselves! Do you even go on and think that I will not ever come here again to contribute into this Wiktionary at all in the coming future, not even a single Malay word? Where is your (sense of) patience?
The real truth or as a matter a fact is that at those moments I was genuinely, undeniably, and busily dealing and industriously handling or manoeuvring with other important-cum-indispensable websites (especially major in the English Wikipedia) back then because many of those sites needs more of my sufficient updating coupled with dozens of Wikipedians over there that still needs my help to resolve those issues back there! That is the reason why I could not have/afford much time for this in order to avoid/prevent undesired hassle and pressure over the Internet! Please be realistic sensibly enough and try to be thoughtful and be considerate (BM: "bertimbang rasa") and do spare a thought or two of what I am trying to elucidate or point out here about my plight of doing with my hectic schedule coupled with my heavy task performance as well as my unrelenting interaction with other peoples' business and their affairs! The admonishment that you have inflicted/subjected upon me should be abolished as soon as possible! Otherwise the worst part you will get eventually is that you might end up in getting a block into your user page for violating the editors' rights of discussion for taking them too seriously without dealing into them comprehensively, agreeably, and mutually along with them.
Moreover, writing (erm... I mean editing) my messages or my posts here does NOT mean or does not constitute or indicate delaying or lingering indolently for other people. Please also understand carefully that I normally follow my own timing or my self-regular-routine and I do have my own plans and priorities as well! Plus, please remember not to make any personal remarks anymore particularly on me or on anyone else and please stop judging other's personal conduct (not least of me from this talk page) because all they would only make is to cause a lot of trouble, especially into unwelcomed dissensions and conflicts, even if it is a minor one. Besides, administering or giving out such false charges or unproven "prosecution" is as analogous as giving a piece of erroneous information/account onto any Wiki-article, and that was a really gigantic and terribly a very bad idea! In the end of this whole stuff, do not take my word for it, other editors would feel the same way. ~ON·W·HEE·Z·IER·P·L·OT~ 22:21, 28 Julai 2006 (UTC)Reply[balas]


Ini adalah Wiktionary Bahasa Melayu, mengapa tidak dinamakan WikiKamus secara rasmi? Dictionary bukanlah dari bahasa Melayu. Saya boleh argue yang Wikipedia adalah dari gabungan Wiki dan Ensiklopedia. Kita boleh kekalkan sbg alamat web, tetapi nama wiktionary ini harus ditekankan sebagai WikiKamus. Even Wiktionary Jerman dipanggil Wikiwörterbuch, iaitu Wiki-dictionary di dalam bahasa Jerman.. Tidak pula dipanggil Wiktionary Deutsch. Apa kata anda? Zack2007 12:54, 19 November 2006 (UTC)Reply[balas]

Hi saudara baru Zack2007! :) Saya betul-betul bersetuju dengan pendapat anda mengenai kepentingannya nama "WikiKamus" tersebut untuk dijadikan sebagai nama gunaan harian di dalam kamus-dalam-talian ini! Dengan tulus hati saya, sememangnya saya juga hampir berfikiran macam itu dahulu sama seperti dengan apa saudara sedang bertanya-tanya baru-baru ini semenjak semasa saya pada masa pertama sekali didaftarkan sebagai seorang ahli penyunting Kamus Wiki baru di sini sendiri. Sebenarnya sehingga hari ini sejak dari mulanya semasa Wiktionari Bahasa Melayu ini dilahirkan/ditubuhkan, kemungkinan belum lagi adanya perkataan tersebut yang pernah didengar, disebut (contohnya, di depan khalayak orang ramai), atau disenaraikan ke dalam perbendaharaan kata Melayu secara sah ataupun tidak, bahkan ketidaksedaran yang agak ketara oleh orang ramai secara umum untuk merealisasikan pada masa itu dari segi kewujudannya perkataan "WikiKamus" atau harus juga yang amat jarang digunakan. Saya rasa sebab begitulah yang mungkin melambatkan/melemahkan semangat dan kebolehan mereka untuk mencetuskan idea yang menarik malah kuasa-kerja para-para penyunting Wiktionari di sini yang agak kurang untuk mencapai sebarang matlamat bagi menciptakan/memasukkan perkataan-perkataan Melayu baru apabila masa melalu terus-menerus.
Akan tetapi, setakat ini pada waktu sekarang perkataan yang anda disebutkan tadi (iaitu "WikiKamus") hanya boleh diambil, dikira, atau dikenalpasti sebagai nama julukan, nama timangan, atau perkataan yang masih di tahap bawah biasa sahaja. Baguslah jikalau anda tahu tentang isu/hal nama bagi kamus ini! :) Setakat ini sahajalah yang boleh saya meluangkan masa anda tentang sebab nama itu dipaparkan di sini. Alangkah lebih baiknya jikalau anda dapat mengemukakan topik perbincangan tersebut dengan apa-apa soalan ataupun sebarang pertanyaan dengan maklumat lanjut di Wiktionary:Kedai kopi atau kepada para penyelia WikiKamus di sini terutamanya Aurora di mana dia-lah "sysop" yang (boleh dianggap/dikatakan) paling aktif pada masa kini. Selain daripada yang telah dibincangkan di atas mesej anda tadi, akhir kata saya harap-lah anda boleh meluangkan masa depan anda lagi di tempat laman web yang sama di sini untuk membantu memajukan, menyumbangkan, atau melebihkan barang apa pun perkataan-perkataan bahasa Melayu di Kamus Wiki ini kelak kerana jasa dan sumbangan setiap ahli Wiktionari di Kamus Wiki adalah amat dan sangat dihargai! Terima kasih! :) ~ON·W·HEE·Z·IER·P·L·OT~ 19:47, 19 November 2006 (UTC)Reply[balas]
bukan jolokan ker? ada perbezaan ker antara jolokan dan julukan? terima kasih Zack2007 03:29, 22 November 2006 (UTC)Reply[balas]
"Eleh!" Hang ni memang kelakar-lah! ('~') "Aduhai!" Sebenarnya, saya sering-sering merujuk, mengikuti, atau berdasarkan kamus Melayu saya i.e. Kamus Dewan Edisi yang Keempat terbitan tahun 2005, di mana dalam adanya mengandungi dua jenis kata masukan yang berasingan antara satu sama lain; iaitu terdapat perkataan "jolokan" dan juga perkataan "julukan" masing-masing ditempatkan pada entri yang tersendiri atau tercatat pada muka surat yang berlainan. Malahan maksud/erti dua perkataan tersebut pun berbeza juga! Secara perincian kata menurut kamus itu, satu takrifan sahaja diberikan kepada perkataan "jolokan" di mana ia hanya merujuk kepada "perbuatan yang menjolok (memancing-mancing keterangan dan lain-lain, menduga hati orang dan sebagainya)."[muka surat 636] Sementara itu, perkataan "julukan" pula (seerti dengan gatra yang tepat = "nama julukan") hanya merujuk kepada "nama yang diberi sebagai ejekan dan sebagainya."[muka surat 642] Jadi, sebab itulah saya berhasrat, bersungguh-sungguh, dan berniat hendak nak tukarkan atau "kemaskinikan" perkataan tersebut (iaitu "jolokan" ditukarkan kepada "julukan") mengikut konteks Melayu yang boleh dianggap betul, serasi (dengan masa sekarang), dan yang paling sesuai supaya saya harap tiada tanda/peristiwa yang berkemungkinan akan berlaku ataupun menyebabkan sebarang kecuaian atau kekeliruan kepada sesetengah para pembaca mahupun sedikit sekali. Selain itu, saya betul-betul hairanlah kenapa sayang sekali saya tidak sangka/percaya awak akan dapat memperhatikan perbuatan yang sekecil pun masih boleh dicam oleh awak berkenaan dengan apa yang telah dibuat oleh saya semalam seperti dengan apa engkau telah dimaksudkan tadi. "Aduhai!" Tak apa-lah! Barang apa pun, sekian terima kasih! ~ON·W·HEE·Z·IER·P·L·OT~ 19:07, 22 November 2006 (UTC)Reply[balas]
jangan la awak ambil hati. saya tak kecamlah. saya hanya nak tahu, bukan mengecam. Janganlah salah sangka. Saya sekadar nak tahu apa perbezaannya, sebab saya memamg betul2 tak tahu mereka ada perbezaan dari segi maksud. Terima kasih kerana menerangkan dengan panjang lebar. Minta maaf kalau saya menyinggung perasaan awak. Sorry Zack2007 02:29, 23 November 2006 (UTC)Reply[balas]
Oopppss.....! Alamak! Maafkan saya! =:-p Ermmm.....maksud perkataan saya yang sebetulnya ialah "dicam", bukan "dikecam" (saya sudah membetulkannya dari mesej/pos saya sebelum ini). Awak janganlah salah faham sangat, kesilapan/kecuaian yang tanpa disedari dengan segera sejak dulu lagi dari segi penyuntingan ejaan bahasa Melayu saya tadi itu adalah amat dikesali. Dengan keikhlasannya pada masa itu, saya ingat apabila bertemu dengan kata-kata seperti perkataan "cam" di mana ia terdiri daripada satu suku kata mesti ditambahkan dengan imbuhan "ke-" hampir/bagaikan macam imbuhan "menge-" di depan perkataan tersebut. "Sigh!" Haraplah saya boleh minta maaf jika ini juga benar-benar boleh menyinggung perasaan awak lagi. Tambahan pula, saya telah faham maksud awak semuanya mengenai apa yang engkau sedang sampaikan dari beberapa mesej awak di atas. Sekali lagi (ini adalah mesej saya yang ketiga-lor!) berserta dengan akhir kata saya yang ringkas: Sekian, terima kasih!!! :) ~ON·W·HEE·Z·IER·P·L·OT~ 17:22, 24 November 2006 (UTC)Reply[balas]
OK OK. hanya kadangkala saya tak berapa faham apa yang awak cuba sampaikan, and hence', salah faham. Maaf yer. Zack2007 05:31, 25 November 2006 (UTC)Reply[balas]


Laman Utama[sunting]

Saya telah bahagikan kod Laman Utama kepada beberapa sub-laman, seperti yang dilakukan kebanyakan Wiktionary/Wikipedia lain. Ini memudahkan pencarian dan penukaran unsur2 di dalamnya (contoh: perkataan baru), dan mengelakkan gangguan kepada kod yang tidak berkenaan secara tidak sengaja. Selain itu, saya juga telah melindungi Laman Utama dan sub-lamannya daripada suntingan pengguna tanpa nama. ...Aurora... 16:08, 28 Mac 2007 (UTC)Reply[balas]


Apa itu "Lema"?[sunting]

Lema? - Whjayg 14:59, 20 Januari 2008 (UTC)Reply[balas]

Dalam linguistik, lema merujuk kepada masukan dalam kamus. ...Aurora... 13:12, 21 Januari 2008 (UTC)Reply[balas]

Flood editing[sunting]

Wow.. On Wheezier Plot perlu 15 editing untuk betulkan sesuatu yang kecil? This is major "flooding"! Kepada On Wheezier Plot, saya hanya perlu 1 edit untuk undokan semua yang anda buat dalam 2 lema saya, dan saya akan teruskan sampai bila-bila. Saya cadangkan agar anda tumpukan lebih masa untuk menulis dan membantu daripada meng"edit" semua benda termasuk perbualan orang lain. Saya tersenyum bila anda edit jawapan ...Aurora... mengenai "lema". - Whjayg 09:33, 22 Januari 2008 (UTC)Reply[balas]

Saya dah pernah nasihati dia mengenai perkara ini (membanjiri perubahan terkini), malangnya bagai mencurah air ke daun keladi. ...Aurora... 11:23, 22 Januari 2008 (UTC)Reply[balas]
Biarlah dia cuba membantu. Maybe dia rasa itu necessary. Saya sekarang dah malas nak mengedit di wikitionary dan wikipedia. Wikibooks pun sy tak tau nak buat apa sebab pada fikiran saya, artikel yang saya ingin buat sudah ada di wikipedia. Saya pun belum pasti adakah ia ensiklopedik atau konsep wikibooks.Putera Luqman Tunku Andre 11:51, 22 Januari 2008 (UTC)Reply[balas]
Membantu memang bagus tetapi seperti yang telah banyak kali diberitahu kepada beliau “Sila tekan butang PREVIEW atau PRATONTON” sebelum SIMPAN. Dan juga, beliau kena belajar "cara percakapan" yang sesuai apabila meletakkan alasan kepada suntingan beliau dan juga jikalau tidak pasti, beliau perlu berbincang. Jikalau saya ialah pengguna baru, terus terang saya katakan yang saya tidak akan menyumbang lagi dengan kata-kata menarik beliau dan lain-lain lagi. Inilah yang kita patut elakkan - Whjayg 12:37, 22 Januari 2008 (UTC)Reply[balas]

Sahutan saya mengenai "Flood editing"[sunting]

To all Malay Wiktionarians here, I may like to take this opportunity to offer my clarification as well as to dismiss some misstatements made up about me by Whajyg, also known by everyone online as "Jay" in short with reference to the so-called cliché "flooding edits", or "flood editing" whichever you like to dub it.

To begin with, a few mysterious questions am I eager to enquire which no one seem to broach willingly concerning flooding edits is this: Can anyone please explain to me one very good reason on why user Kulim from our eldest sister counterpart, the Malay Wikipedia who also inundate his contributions almost entirely on this article: Penterjemahan Al-Quran, which is currently the king for the most-edited article with 495 edit counts (wherefrom Kulim has 394 flooded edits onto that article so far) in that Wikipedia and is presently ranked the second most-revised of any page of all time after its Main Page?? What about another article called Touch 'n Go? It is now the runner-up in favour of its most-edited article title-holder too with 479 edit counts and in third place at this time around for the same record of whatever page from that aforementioned Wikisite being engulfed by Yamahaboy81 with his 461 flooded edits up till this hour!!

What about "Jay"? From what I have discovered from the English Wikipedia every now and then, until today he has made a wanton of 225 edits or revisions on an article about Plácido Domingo!! Guess what, his highest flooding of edit changes onto that same article in a single day (id est 7th of October, 2007AD) ever was not even fifteen edits, but 26 edits up to 33 edits accumulated consecutively!! How is that, since he asked me to do some research? Still want to “teach” or warn others not to flood one’s edit counts?

Finding from all these baffling figures presented above, both you all guys (which are, Whjayg and Aurora) who live in completely-enclosed glass houses should learn how not to throw stones!!! Do not ever approach me in trying to rationalize the fact that all those of his twenty-six (or thirty-three) small edits recorded over there cannot be possibly done within no more than just one edit for a page on that day as your sole lame excuse for such case. Just imagine how harrowing for me to realize this truth and I really feel ashamed of you sceptics to be fantastically oblivious to such occurrences and yet you all claim yourselves to be experienced contributors!? So much for you pots calling me as the only kettle black! "My glorious goodness!"

To Whjayg, if he have had consider my fourth talk from Aurora’s first archive talk page, he would not have said those stuffs above, since they (that is, referring from the link to her talkpage archive) are my answers already to his shallow statements he has posted up here within this talk section. As to what I have earlier informed her id est Aurora I will inform him in a serious manner, whether or not he will listen attentively or pay heed to what I am trying to express with my actions I do not care. Once again in honesty and in full sincerity, I always did press the "show preview" function button every time I check my edit change. It is just that I am trying to be steady in what I choose to do with it and it is also helpful to prevent me from encountering too many edit conflicts just in case it might happen anytime unexpectedly in the future, not to mention that I also dislike making drastic changes in my edits to the extent that it affects the not only the page itself however having the impression of not detecting obscured errors being left behind, make myself clear here?

Secondly, why does he have to be so particular-cum-fussy with how and what I should suppose to say? Weird. Only me can be me and I am what I am, nothing else. I believe each and every one of us are born to be different from each other in order that a difference can be made out of it if everybody could cooperate or work together in unity with one another, without holding grudges. Musicwise, he cannot count upon someone who cannot sing to sing! I state like that because I am like that and there is none Whjayg himself or anybody else can do against it, even if I were to be banned, blocked, rebuked, inflicted, whatever you name them. I will remain as myself and no one is perfect in his or her own unique ways (Malay = mempunyai cara tersendiri). If one user like me were to be an exact copy of another "exemplary good" person, that user can never make a difference in his or her world into this world with others. Savvy?

Thirdly, at the latest of his arguments above, he stresses us (or rather me, I assume) to spend more time focusing on writing and helping more than from editing all things including one’s talk page is considered pretty unreasonable given the fact that it is through editing, one can write and help. If I do not edit, I write what? If I want to help out by fixing a page without editing, how to help then? Suppose I were not to edit one’s talk page, then how can I discuss with that user plus who is going to pay the responsibility for not complying the Wiki’s users' talkpage guidelines if such talk page (most preferably the layout) is in a big chaos? Again he detests my help (or bantu in Malay), then what is the point of him mentioning ".....tumpukan lebih masa untuk menulis dan membantu daripada menyunting....." out loud?

Fourthly, there is nothing "menarik" whatsoever from my comments and discussions. I find it totally ironic that he senses how "attractive" the style I converse in English since that is how the language is conveyed either spoken or written at an advance level, when all I did was attempting to keep things as relevant as possible with what I have to explain, indicate, and describe. As a matter a fact, my most pressing concern about this Wiktionary is her content, NOT somebody else’s contribution. It is one thing to maintain conservative values upon oneself, and another to judge every other editor not of one’s own on the basis of fear and what we derive indirectly or superficially from secondhand speculation, at least.

Furthermore, the demeanour whereby he emits or hurls out his personal attacks from his first message onto my talk reminds me of cyber bullying. Imagine how perturbing I would have gravely felt regarding the situation to what if there could be the existence of impressionable or vulnerable Wiki-contributors as young as seven or eight years old being faced with such stern treatment, let alone Wiki-newbies? According to the Malaysian Communication and Multimedia Act, Section 223: "Any comment, request, suggestion or any other communication which sounds obscene, indecent, is false, menacing or offensive in character with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten or harass another person, commits an offence". Hence in truth, he should also be the one who must learn what it means to be considerate and respect others via assuming good faith, not only me. Remember what happened to the real tragic story of Megan Taylor Meier, her fate of life ended worse than death.

Finally, it is not fair for a handful of young contributors like me to constantly live in intimidation towards such contemptuous lecture or some scraggly reproach of his imperceptible mind every time we want to contribute something or whenever we wanna try to make it better. I am confident to say that while I have done my best in giving all that I can for the goodness of lexical knowledge into this free online dictionary project so far and at times have come to know many benign Wiki-editors from various nations in my time beginning as a newbie, and from what I can tell they are like many of the world’s other races, proud and confident about themselves to make this globe a better place to learn and live. If I were him, I would do well to stop taking everyone at face value and recognise that for sure, they may not be what we are, and yes, I can be quite rough at times, but then no two people are the same. To end this message in a nutshell: As a Christian commited to what he was made for, Whjayg should understand the implication of steoreotyping highly active users. Because of what he had said of who he is onto my talk page, the glowering impression left on other users would feel the same way. ~ON·W·HEE·Z·IER·P·L·OT~ 07:46, 28 Februari 2008 (UTC)Reply[balas]

Maksudnya, anda tahu anda salah, tapi anda tetap nak menegakkan benang basah, begitu? Satu lagi, anda memfitnah saya sama seperti anda, macam mana orang nak percaya anda lagi. ...Aurora... 11:14, 28 Februari 2008 (UTC)Reply[balas]
Maksudnya, anda tidak tahu anda langsung juga nyah berdosakah? Salah satu daripada anda semua perlukan saya untuk membincangkan tentang isu ini, jadi saya telah jelaskan. Nak apa pula? Satu lagi, anda juga pernah menuduh kesalahan saya sama seperti anda, macam mana saya nak percayakan anda lagi? Jikalau anda betul-betul berkata bagaimana orang seperti anda nak mempercayakan saya lagi, buat apa hal pula dan kenapa anda masih hendak membalaskan mesej saya yang atas itu? ~ON·W·HEE·Z·IER·P·L·OT~ 01:03, 29 Februari 2008 (UTC)Reply[balas]
Nak putar kata2 saya kah? Kalau anda menjual, saya akan membeli. ...Aurora... 10:40, 29 Februari 2008 (UTC)Reply[balas]
Sudahlah, saya sndiri rasa naik meluat akan pergaduhan anda berdua. Kamu berdua lebih tua daripada saya tetapi saya pula menasihati kamu berdua. Biarkanlah floor editing yang dibuat Peter. Ini kerana wiktionary hak semua. Bukan milik kita untuk menasihat. Dan pada Peter, dah tahu jikalau orang tak suka kamu buat flood editing, cubalah elakkan, sebaliknya kamu tetap berkeras. Putera Luqman Tunku Andre 15:21, 1 Mac 2008 (UTC)Reply[balas]
Apa saya boleh buat? Saya dah beberapa kali berkata, saya cuma hendak menambahkan nilai atas nama Kamus Wiki ini dengan hanya menjalankan tugas saya. Sebaliknya dan malangnya, mereka masih mengesyaki saya sebagai penyumbang jahat, yang mana sebenarnya semua tuduhan itu tipu, sehinggalah saya tiada pilihan yang lain untuk dibuat bagi menghadapi rungutan-rungutan mereka yang amat sangat. Seperti di mana-mana Wiki, kamus ini adalah hasil kerja usaha sama, bukan dipergunakan demi kepuasan diri sendiri dan tidak juga dibataskan kepada kumpulan kecil saja yang mempunyai kedudukan hak kelebihan. Jadi, saya bimbang mereka mungkin akan terus menyerang saya pada bila-bila masa dari sekarang tanpa berhenti. Begitulah betapa sedihnya masa depanku di Wiktionary ini! "Sigh!" Tambahan pula, yang paling mengecewakan saya, mereka seolah-olahnya mengutamakan tabiat atau sifat sumbangan seseorang serta sejarah laman lebih daripada apa yang patut diperbaiki dalam sesuatu laman misalnya format mengikut polisi dan garis panduan yang telah dipiagamkan di Wikimedia. Macam itukah mereka menguruskan tapak web tersebut? Memang hairan bin dahsyatnya betul! Tanpa melupakan satu perkara, bagaimana nak mengelakkan suntingan banjir kalau diberikan situasi serius di mana ada banyak perkataan yang perlu diciptakan malah belum diwujudkan lagi di sini? ~ON·W·HEE·Z·IER·P·L·OT~ 09:59, 30 Oktober 2008 (UTC)Reply[balas]