Wiktionary:Grease pit/2010/November

From Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This is an archive page that has been kept for historical purposes. The conversations on this page are no longer live.

November 2010

Sorting pages at Category:Wikisaurus

Apparently, all Wikisaurus pages are employing {{ws header}} to (among other functions) be categorized into Category:Wikisaurus.

These pages are naturally listed in alphabetical order on the category. However, their titles are currently read in a case-sensitive manner: pages that begin with a capital letter appear first, and are followed by pages that begin with a lowercase "a".

Here is, as an example, a small list of pages organized as how they appear on the category:

A

E

I

T

a

c

e

I disagree with this specific collation. So, let me once more suggest an improvement to Wikisaurus.

  • I hereby propose that all Wikisaurus pages be sorted on Category:Wikisaurus in a case-insensitive manner.

As a result, the emphasis on words that begin with capital letter would be deprecated. And, for example, the list above would be reorganized to:

A

C

E

I

T

--Daniel. 03:50, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Four context labels

I propose a change to {{countable}}, {{uncountable}}, {{transitive}} and {{intransitive}}. Right now countable and uncountable always categorize, while transitive and intransitive never do. What I'd like to see them do is only categorize when lang is given. This stops wrong categorization, whilst allowing categorization when an editor chooses to do so. I proposed this once, probably early this year, and got very little feedback, so I didn't do it. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:54, 5 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's an interesting idea, but the context templates form such a coherent group that it would probably be confusing for some to assume English while others do not. I'm glad you're raising this, BTW, because there's kind of an underlying problem: these templates are usually only used when some senses have the one property and some have the other; Category:English countable nouns generally only contains nouns that are sometimes uncountable. It may make sense to address both problems together. —RuakhTALK 18:12, 5 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The question is, do we want/need categories for them? I don't think so, really. —CodeCat 09:15, 6 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't oppose their deletion either. Basically every English verb can be transitive or intransitive - some can't, I'll admit, - but a massive majority can be. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:00, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

HTTPError: HTTP Error 500: Internal Server Error

SemperBlottoBot is repeatedly getting the above error message. Sometimes it adds a couple of words and falls over. On retry, it doesn't even get that far, always failing in a different place. Any ideas? SemperBlotto 16:09, 5 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm getting the same with MewBot. It will do about 10 and then crash. —CodeCat 17:52, 5 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Seems to be OK this morning. SemperBlotto 08:13, 6 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

{{citation gloss}}

I've created {{citation gloss}} and added it to Citations:Portuguese and Citations:Galicia, to consistently handle individual sections for multiple definitions. --Daniel. 19:03, 5 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Boo, hiss. This prevents section editing. What's wrong with ==...==?​—msh210℠ (talk) 19:10, 5 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Like I said, currently there is inconsistency: some people use italics within a L3 header, other people use quotation marks within a L3 header, and Wiktionary:Citations recommend L4 headers instead. By having a template, hopefully only one format would be chosen, and easily edited if necessary.
The main template {{citations}} also prevents section editing, elsewhere. Anyway, if you want to edit sections of citation glosses, the usage of the discussed template may be changed to ==={{citation gloss|proper noun|former Iberian kingdom}}===; or ==={{cg|proper noun|former Iberian kingdom}}===, which is shorter. --Daniel. 19:40, 5 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That would answer my main objection to the template ("prevents section editing"), but also ruin its stated purpose ("one format").​—msh210℠ (talk) 19:45, 5 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have reverted your additions of {{citation gloss}}. After you demonstrate consensus for its support, or at least some other people supporting you in this activity, it can be readded. --Dan Polansky 21:53, 5 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Javascript Errors

Today I got the following error in Firebug's error console: 

searchBox is null
http://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=User:Connel_MacKenzie/keypad.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript
Line 164

Helder 17:18, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Feedback section

Under IE, for a non-logged in user, when you click on one of the feedbacks (http://img525.imageshack.us/img525/8666/scrshots.png) you get a download window (http://img827.imageshack.us/img827/8484/scrshotd.png) --Tyw7  (Talk • Contributions)   Changing the world one edit at a time! 04:44, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:rfp-old

Just notifying of my creation of this template, like Template:rfp but for use in entries where the pronunciation is not recorded anywhere yet. — lexicógrafa | háblame — 01:42, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What's the advantage of {{rfp}}? NB I quite dislike pronunciations for dead languages. The pronunciations are by nature, unattest. So we don't allow unattested words/terms, but we do allow unattested pronunciations. Anyway, that would be a Beer Parlour issue. Mglovesfun (talk) 13:08, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Not for dead words in dead languages - those would require something else - but for dead words in living languages. — lexicógrafa | háblame — 13:20, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

not collapsing/hiding quotations

Someone invented a widget which collapses quotations under a "[quotations ▼]" button. This reduces clutter and makes it easier to find the definitions of word, so this widget represents a great improvement to Wiktionary. However, I am doing a lot of work with quotations, so I would like to not collapse quotations by default... is there somewhere in Prefs I can set that, just like I can set it not to show page content below diffs, etc? — Beobach972 03:28, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Click "Show quotations" on the left panel- this should persist when you leave the page. Nadando 03:55, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
But it would be great if someday someone took it to the next level and added this option to "My Preferences". -- Ghost of WikiPedant 04:30, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Any bots still working?

Now that Interwicket is down as well, Interwicket, Tbot and AutoFormat are all down, Conrad.Bot is also 'down' while Conrad.Irwin is absent. Mglovesfun (talk) 13:11, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User:MewBot is still up, and I believe User:KassadBot has taken over AutoFormat's tasks. —CodeCat 13:55, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
User:SemperBlottoBot still working. SemperBlotto 13:58, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I meant that with irony which didn't come across well over your computer screens(!) Interwicket in particular has an important job. Anyone got an interwiki bot that we can run - well - indefinitely. Nobody knows. Mglovesfun (talk) 14:11, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is that this bot needs to exist on every Wiktionary, as Interwicket edits cross-wiki. -- Prince Kassad 16:51, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, no. As far as enwikt cares, it only needs to edit here. Of course, if we want to be altruistic, that's another story.​—msh210℠ (talk) 17:01, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think the lesson we learn here is that each bot's task is only as reliable as its user... and users will always come and go. So maybe we should make a backup plan in case this happens again, so that vital wiki functions don't suffer from it. —CodeCat 17:26, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Totally agree. You can't have too many bots, as long as they're all working positively - that is, not breaking things or reverting each other. Mglovesfun (talk) 17:28, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That's why we have the rule that you must publish your source code. In case the bot disappears, someone else can use the code to start it again from a different account. -- Prince Kassad 21:24, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm running the pywikipedia software (LA2-bot) and the interwiki.py module has a -wiktionary mode. I decided to give this a try. However, it first visits every existing language of Wiktionary (by API, one at a time, which takes some time) to find out if the article exists there. Is this really an efficient way (and the only way) of doing things? The changes made was to remove interwiki links from given and brunnen which were redirects on the target wiki. Is that a correct action, or should those interwiki links have been kept? --LA2 19:18, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It was kindly pointed out to me on IRC that interwiki.py has long been denied according to Wiktionary:Bot_policy#Technical advice, in favor of Interwicket. --LA2 11:28, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
We do interwiki link to redirects, so these should have been kept. -- Prince Kassad 13:17, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Anyone care to update User:Conrad.Irwin/English nouns without categories? Mglovesfun (talk) 15:51, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to me that AutoFormat and Interwicket are as important to Wiktionary as are the wiki and database themselves. So should we ask WMF to run these bots with regular staff, instead of relying on volunteers for running bots? --LA2 21:06, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A reason we insist a user's displaying his bot's source code is so another can take it over if need be. PK is now running AF, for example. WMF staffers shouldn't be necessary.​—msh210℠ (talk) 20:15, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Announcement: MewBot is being upgraded for Catalan verbs

This is just a notice that I plan to include support for Catalan verb forms to User:MewBot sometime soon. I plan to use {{ca-verb form of}} (though after some adjustments) as the main form-of template. If anyone has any particular requests or comments on how it should work, please let me know. —CodeCat 14:00, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, "perfectly". Seriously, MewBot's proved reliable, I say go for it. Mglovesfun (talk) 14:14, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The upgrade is now finished, I've done some testing and it works nicely. There might still be a few bugs here and there, so if you encounter any problems/mistakes, please let me know. In any case, the doors are now open! —CodeCat 22:03, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Parameter naming for alternative forms

New Swedish entries are added all the time. Our new templates for declension/conjugation tables work fine. However, some words should have alternatives for one or two of the forms. For example the word kammare (“chamber”) in the definite singular form kammaren can also (somewhat dated, mostly in spoken and poetic use) be kammarn, leaving out the e (similar to English burned/burnt). Is there a standard way to design a template parameter that adds an alternative form? E.g. if the parameter is 2=kammaren should this be named alt2=kammarn? --LA2 18:07, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Filtering out translations on Watchlist and Recent changes

It must be possible to filter out all or, at least, assisted translations from Recent Changes and Watchlist. It would be easier for a simple basically monolingual contributor like me to patrol with lists that had a larger share of items within my scope. DCDuring TALK 19:07, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My only idea, and it may not be a good one, is to ask a developer for a new flag that applies to posts, like the 'minor' and 'bot' flags, which we can apply as we edit (by checking a box like the 'minor' box, but not to put the box on the editing window, so no one can set it manually unless he fiddles with the URL) which we then apply to the assisted-translation edits.​—msh210℠ (talk) 20:11, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

{{infl form}}

I have recently given this little-used template a bit of a revamp, and brought it in line with the existing {{infl}}. I think this template could be but to good use quite easily. Currently the only thing it does differently is that it categorises the entry in '(lang) (POS) forms' rather than '(lang) (POS)s', but it could do more specific form-of related things in the future. I think it is definitely preferable over putting the pagename in the entry 'raw'. Any thoughts? —CodeCat 15:43, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't get it. The only differences from {{infl}} — aside from the nicely formatted wikitext, which is nice — are (1) it doesn't support g=g and (2) it infers an additional _form in the POS field. For example, {{infl form|foo|bar}} is equivalent to {{infl|foo form|bar}}. (It just moves the _form from one field to the other. ;-)   ) The old version made much more sense to me: it already did the "more specific form-of related things" that you think you might someday add to this one. (Not that I was a fan of the old version, either. I think the form-of information belongs on the sense line, not the inflection line. But the new version makes even less sense IMHO.) —RuakhTALK 16:46, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, if you're able to make it more useful, then please do. I brought it up here because I wasn't... —CodeCat 16:48, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Per Ruakh, I dunno what purpose this serves. None, it appears. Mglovesfun (talk) 16:50, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, personally, my ideal form-of inflection line is (e.g.) this:
{{Hebr|יָבוֹא|lang=he}} (yavó) [[Category:Hebrew verb forms]]
and no more. So I have no need of a special {{infl form}}; for me, {{infl|he|verb form|head=יָבוֹא|tr=yavó}} is perfect (see [[יבוא]]). Now, some editors apparently prefer to put the form-of information in the inflection line itself; I could presumably make this template more useful for those editors by simply clicking the "rollback" link. I could easily imagine there being a third group that preferred something different yet; but to judge by the Catalan entries you're creating, your ideal form-of inflection line is actually the same as mine. So, again, I just don't get it. I'm not even particularly opposing your change, so much as I am just totally not understanding it.
—RuakhTALK 17:57, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I guess I hadn't considered being able to use 'verb form' as the POS of {{infl}}. But yes, I do think that the link back to the lemma form should not go in the inflection line. If we do that, it would either duplicate information or make the definition line useless. But... now that I've already created a ton of pages, do you think I should do a quick search-and-replace on them? It would take a while... —CodeCat 18:18, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Special:Contributions/Conversion script

After poking around Wiktionary for a little while, I discovered User:Conversion script, a script username used by Mediawiki software to convert entries into lowercase per the new Wiktionary standard. Unfortunately, it left behind a lot of unnecessary redirects when moving the pages. Could somebody take a look through them and delete those redirects? TeleComNasSprVen 20:34, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What exactly are they? A redirect from an entry to one that differs only in capitalisation? —CodeCat 20:35, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. There are too many to reasonably handle by hand, but RU had a script that deleted them slowly and automatically. Now he's (apparently) out of commission. Is his code available?​—msh210℠ (talk) 20:41, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It seems to be private. -- Prince Kassad 20:55, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I thought this mass conversion happened years ago...? — Beobach972 21:51, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It did, but finding them and deleting them isn't all that easy. I delete them as I find them, but I don't 'search' for them as such. Mglovesfun (talk) 22:28, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Most of those redirects have been deleted about one and a half years ago, except for the redirects with incoming links (deliberately ignored by RU's script). And except those with a title of three characters or less, I think. Many surviving "contributions" of Conversion_script have been replaced by proper articles, possibly even the majority of all remaining blue links at Special:Contributions/Conversion script. -- Gauss 22:40, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Re Martin's "finding them... isn't all that easy": I'd think it would be. You need to find any page whose history has but one edit, and that a move by Conversion script. Is it hard?​—msh210℠ (talk) 22:56, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps I should have said "my efforts to find them have been unfruitful". Mglovesfun (talk) 23:02, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
See Wiktionary:TODO#Remove_capital_letter_redirects. For the record I think we can nuke 'em all (where CS was the last editor). The important red-links ones will get fixed quickly. Better to have obvious errors that unobvious ones. --Bequw → τ 20:04, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Random italic definitions

Why are half the definitions on the site in italics, and can this be turned off? It's fairly annoying. — lexicógrafa | háblame — 16:57, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It should be far less than half. AFAIK, the only semi-sanctioned use of italics in definitions is for "non-gloss definitions", which are different in nature from "regular" definitions, which are, more or less, substitutable. A non-gloss definition is often required for grammaticized terms such prepositions, conjunctions, articles, determiners, pronouns, certain adverbs, and discourse regulators or all PoSes. See {{non-gloss definition}}. It should be possible for someone to allow registered users who don't want a typographical reminder of the distinction to suppress it. DCDuring TALK 17:17, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You should be able to turn it off by adding
.use-with-mention { font-style: normal }
to your stylesheet (usually [[special:mypage/vector.css]]).​—msh210℠ (talk) 17:24, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks both of you. — lexicógrafa | háblame — 20:39, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Delete", "Move", and "Protect"/"Unprotect" tabs

When a page loads, the "Delete", "Move", and "Protect"/"Unprotect" tabs not tabs at all but options in a drop-down list. About a second later, they become tabs. I can't figure out why. (I don't like it, as sometimes I mean to click "Edit" only to find that as I click it "Move" takes its place and got clicked instead.) Any ideas, please?​—msh210℠ (talk) 20:44, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, it seems that maybe it's due to MediaWiki:Gadget-vectorTabs.js. Can anyone confirm/correct that? but I still don't know what to do about it.​—msh210℠ (talk) 20:53, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Um, turn off the gadget? --Yair rand (talk) 21:56, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, yes. I was wondering if it's possible to load the gadget sooner (or something) so it doesn't change display after being shown.​—msh210℠ (talk) 01:35, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oh. Well, I guess the whole thing could be switched to MediaWiki:Gadget-vectorTabs.css (css loads right away, right?). The only difference that I can see is that this way the watch button is to the left of the delete button. --Yair rand (talk) 02:31, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, but others probably like it as is. Okay: I've turned off the gadget, as you've suggested, and copied its CSS to my .css, again (sort of) as you've suggested. Seems to work. Thanks!​—msh210℠ (talk) 08:29, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Blocking script execution on each page - IE8

Hi,

I hope it is the right place to ask this question / report this problem. Do not hesitate to move it to the right discussion and tell me.

I use the Wikitionary a lot as it is a good tool for translation...

For some time now every new page I open takes up to a minute to come to a message from Internet Explorer, read below, once I have the message, I click Ok and the page pops up instantly.

English translation:

Stop the execution of this script, a script present on this page slows your Web browser; If it continues, your computer might not answer any more

Or the original in French:

Arréter l'exécution de ce script? Un script present sur cette page ralentit votre navigateur Web, S’iI continue, votre ordinateur pourrait ne plus répondre.

For info, in case that in usefull,

  • I use Internet Explorer 8 on Windows 7.
  • I closed the campaing banner with no effects as it started about at the same time.
  • The compatibility mode (Affichage de compatibilité) makes no difference.
  • I have no problem with Wikipédia

Thanks in advance, --Cqui 13:24, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Here I've suggested that this code is causing the trouble:
===[[MediaWiki:Youhavenewmessages]] to display differently for non-newbies with JS than for others===
*/
if (wgUserGroups && wgUserGroups.join("").indexOf("autoconfirmed") > -1)
{
  addCSSRule(".msgfornewbies", "display: none");
}else{
    addCSSRule(".msgfornonnewbies", "display: none");
}
/*

Someone with the user rights and knowledge should look into this matteer ASAP as it is really impossible to use the site with IE when this stuff goes on. --Harald Khan Ճ 18:04, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I believe it is now fixed. I can't, however, redo the script so that it works the way it was intended, however that might be. Sorry for the delay. —Internoob (Disc•Cont) 03:47, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, here is my report: When I first arrived at the site today, the problem was still here. I pressed CTRL+F5 and the page loaded properly. Went to a different page, and the problem was still there. Pressed CTRL+F5 once more, and this page loaded fine as well. Moved to a yet a different page, and the problem is now apparently gone. Still gone when entering new pages. This might be it; though I do not know why I should have to press CTRL+F5 twice. --Harald Khan Ճ 11:02, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Seems to be working on my side too, thanks. --Cqui 18:52, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

{{unit-test-equals}}

Kind of a pain in the neck to use — MediaWiki was not designed for this! — but potentially useful anyway, at least in some cases. —RuakhTALK 20:40, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

{{phrasebook}}

Currently, this template supports only two subcategorisations, using the second and third numbered parameters. This is rather restrictive, so it really needs to be extended so that it can take a larger number of optional parameters. It should behave similar to w:Template:main, where all terms except the last are separated by commas, and the last by 'or'. I just can't figure out how to do it, so can someone else do this please? Thanks. —CodeCat 15:24, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've created a meta-template {{comma-conj-list}} to simplify such lists — up to seven list items — and changed {{phrasebook}} to use it. It should be clear how to add support for more items. —RuakhTALK 16:33, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Northern Sámi Inflection

Anyone have an idea of how to include Sámi vowel changes upon inflection into a template? For example, "oa" in "čoađgi" changes to "o" in the singular comitative and all plural cases except for the nominative. Pirkonka 23:03, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is a way to do it, yes, but it wouldn't be simple. We had to do something similar for consonant doubling in Hungarian templates. You'd have to encode parameters for the portions of the word before at after the vowel, as well as for the vowel. Then, the template can be set to recognize the vowel and necessary shift. Alternatively, you could encode two stems, one with the original vowel and one with the altered form. --EncycloPetey 23:23, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You can use a parameter like pluralstem=čođg and let the template add endings to that. Templates can add text to parameters, but not subtract or divide. --LA2 05:14, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Citation templates with a parameter for passages.

Multiple citation templates, including Template:quote-book, include this well-known piece of text: 

|passage=bla bla bla}}

It may generate weird effects if placed below indented definitions. (for an example of entry with indented definitions, see a fila anda)

In addition, it is much longer than this alternative: 

#*:bla bla bla

In short, the parameter "|passage=" is unnecessary, long and buggy. Is there any reason for its existence? --Daniel. 10:59, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Have you examined the use of the indent2 parameter? DCDuring TALK 12:34, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No, I don't know a parameter named indent2. Is it similar to {{{1}}}, {{{i}}} and {{{i2}}}, parameters of Template:quote-book whose function is making the indentation even more complicated? :p --Daniel. 13:16, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"indent2" appears in the first lines of {{quote-book}}, but its use is not in the documentation, AFAICT. DCDuring TALK 15:54, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have a particular case of weird effects? DCDuring TALK 15:56, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've been bold and eliminated all the indent2 and indent3 stuff from {{cite meta}}. (Don't worry, I tested this thoroughly before implementing.) Henceforth, the "passage" will always have one level of indentation relative to the "source" (metadata), and the "transliteration" and "translation" will always have one level of indentation relative to the "passage". This will fix any entries that should have been specifying indent2 and/or indent3 but weren't, as well as any entries that were specifying them wrongly; it won't have any effect on entries that were already correct. If anyone objects, feel free to revert (unless you're not an admin, in which case feel free to ask me to revert).
I actually think we should get rid of indent1 as well, but I haven't made that change, since it's conceivable that there could be some entries negatively affected. (I would consider such entries to be miscoded, but still.)
—RuakhTALK 16:55, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, I believe the passage is optional in all of these templates. At least, {{cite meta}} intelligently handles the case that it's absent. So even if you use these templates to format the metadata, you can put the passage separately. —RuakhTALK 01:34, 22 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sadness: there is one weird case where my change has an adverse effect. Specifically, 
# def
#* {{quote-news|year=year|passage=pass-
#*: age}}
(or the like) was previously equivalent to 
# def
#* {{quote-news|year=year}}
#*: pass-
#*: age
but is now equivalent to 
# def
#* {{quote-news|year=year}}
#*: pass-
#*:: age
. I find it a bit shocking that anyone was using such tortured syntax, but at least one entry had such a thing. I fixed it by moving the passage outside the template completely. I don't think that's a good reason to revert the change, especially since the effect is so minor, but it's good to be aware of it. With MediaWiki, no amount of thorough testing is sufficient . . . —RuakhTALK 16:19, 22 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Moving masculine/feminine forms inside Template:it-noun

I've been trying to think of a way to move masculine/feminine forms (that is, a masculine singular listed on the entry of an Italian feminine noun) inside {{it-noun}}. The formatting varies quite a lot, some of them use brackets (Masculine: foo) and some do the same thing with no brackets. Also some use bold and some don't, just about all of them list the masculine or feminine in Italics. BTW does anyone think this is not a good idea in the first place? Mglovesfun (talk) 11:31, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Context labels needing a language

I noticed that one of the rare things that AutoFormat has never done is add lang=foo to context labels that categorize, such as {{idiomatic}} (and a hundred more, at least). These are used outside English sections, or in lists of synonyms/antonyms quite a lot and therefore categorize wrongly. If someone wants to produce a list I don't particularly mind doing at least some, but given the number involved (a few thousand, maybe ten thousand) in the long term, having a bot to do it would be a massive advantage. I can't see how in computer science terms it's more challenging that add lang=foo to {{IPA}} or {{homophones}}. Mglovesfun (talk) 15:24, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't like the general tendency of templates to automatically assume English as a language if none is provided. I think it would be much more useful if this were flagged as an error and the entry be put in a maintenance category. It would make it a lot easier to catch such mistakes. —CodeCat 15:57, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think the aim is to be as user-friendly to monolingual English speakers as possible. In the same way that English goes before all other sections, apart from Translingual, notably because most translingual 'things' will be used in English. Mglovesfun (talk) 20:47, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I agree w/CodeCat. —RuakhTALK 15:37, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The French system is to only categorize when a language is given. This produces a separate problem; lots of templates that don't categorize, even when correctly used. Same would go also for {{prefix}}, {{suffix}} (etc.) Mglovesfun (talk) 16:38, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
CodeCat, I agree with you about many templates, but not the context templates. They're so commonly used, often in strings, taking up "real estate" on the definition line (in the edit window) before the definition, that adding |lang=en to each, taking up even more room, is not worth the minimal benefit if AF/PKbot adds non-English langs to context tags based on ==language== headers. (If it can't/wont so add, then I agree we should have lang=en, but I hope that that's not the case.)​—msh210℠ (talk) 16:56, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Could someone amend PK's version of AutoFormat to do this? --Bequw → τ 13:30, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That was what I was thinking, yes. Mglovesfun (talk) 15:12, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thirded. I thought AF did this, actually, and am surprised to read here that it didn't.​—msh210℠ (talk) 16:56, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
...also to add lang= to {{rfp}}?​—msh210℠ (talk) 16:18, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
...also to add lang= to {{rfdef}}?​—msh210℠ (talk) 08:08, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
bah, I need to hire a coder to do this for me. I have no idea how to do it myself! -- Prince Kassad 18:02, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

{{look}}

bevy : am afraid I didn't do the right things with {{ and [[

Hello, I mismanaged my entries into bevy, & the translat. boxes I tried to install rather look like russian baboushkas now. Would some skillfully doted one of you tidy it ? Thanks a lot beforehand ! Arapaima 09:22, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks +++ Semperblotto ! Have a good day (d'you get a lot of snow, as herearound ?)Arapaima 09:33, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Wiktionary:Grease_pit/2010/November&oldid=65119401"