Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2022/April

discussion rooms: Tea room • Etym. scr. • Info desk • Beer parlour • Grease pit ← March 2022 · April 2022 · May 2022 → · (current)

---

Spelling of German

I do not habitually use diacritics in my writing, so when I wanted to look up German verdr[a-umlaut]t I spelled it, in the widely accepted alternative way, verdraengt. Wiktionary did not seem to recognise this spelling,which seems to me a limitation that could be avoided.

I'm sorry if this is the wrong place, or an over-Frequently Asked Question, but it's a bit hard to find one's way around the relevant areas. — This unsigned comment was added by 202.56.55.90 (talk).

The word "verdrät" doesn't exist and brings no hits in Wiktionary. If you want to search for a German word spelled with an Umlaut, you can type the word without diacritics, e.g. "Madchen" and linger, the word Mädchen will show at the top list. You can simply click on search and you will find similar results.

"Maedchen" (replacing "ä" with "ae" is a telegraph style) doesn't necessarily bring you the wanted result, unless someone makes a redirect page.--Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 05:52, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

By adding {{misspelling|Maedchen}} somewhere on the page for Mädchen, the latter will show up in a search for the former. (For example, search for naxalone.) For use for alternative spellings, the name of the template is a misnomer.  --Lambiam 19:30, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

@Lambiam: That spelling is conventional and not a misspelling by any means, just very unusual. It would be preferable if the digraphs were recognized as equivalent, but the equivalence will not generalize. Confining such substitution to German results is technicly not feasable as far as I can tell. I have no experience with Elastic search, so I could be wrong. ApisAzuli (talk) 07:55, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

I realised that you were searching for verdrängt (you missed "ng" in your example - "verdr[a-umlaut]t"). Same method will work. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 05:54, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

Should we list such attestable^[1] archaic spellings, which are even found with the ⟨æ⟩ ligature^[2][3] as {{alternative form of}}?  --Lambiam 19:18, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

We have such “telegraph” spellings for Esperanto (both x system and h system), why not for German? MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 00:35, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure that options like adding alternative spellings in a bot run have been discussed before and have, apparently, not lead anywhere. ApisAzuli (talk) 07:59, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

A bot cannot verify that such a specific spelling is attested.  --Lambiam 10:41, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

Spellings do not need attestation. The difference between ä and ae in German is almost equivalent to a mere change in font. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 03:21, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

I don't see why not. Vininn126 (talk) 10:51, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

Open access book on Rusyn

FYI: https://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/myl/rysyn2017-final.pdf —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:32, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

Categorization for shibboleths

Someone added a category at паляниця as a Ukrainian shibboleth. I removed it as we don't have this scheme and it wasn't prefixed by a language code, but I wonder if others in the community think it's worthwhile to add this to a module and have a scheme for them. I think it is but I don't feel strongly enough to start adding it to lollapalooza and other such entries. Thoughts? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:52, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

We've got Appendix:Shibboleths - I think that probably covers it? (especially as there aren't that many in the list). I've added a link to this on паляниця#See also. Voltaigne (talk) 15:55, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

The so-called “usage example” needs to go, though. That sentence is completely unilluminating. — Sgconlaw (talk) 11:32, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

How dictionaries define us

https://lareviewofbooks.org/article/how-dictionaries-define-us-margaret-boyle-and-ilan-stavans-in-conversation/ —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:36, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

Interesting, thanks for sharing. "[COVID-19] only took a month from when it was first uttered to its appearance on the company’s [M-W] website." –Jberkel 19:34, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

@Jberkel: Similarly, see here and here. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:16, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Proto-Cariban

Anyone have any objections if I add a language code for Proto-Cariban (sai-car-pro)? It’s popping up in a good deal of etymologies and seems fairly secure/reconstructible. — Vorziblix (talk · contribs) 16:24, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

Well, it’s done. Next work is to add some widely-recognized subfamilies within Cariban, following the scheme in the right-hand column at User:Vorziblix/sandbox/Carib and using various exceptional sai- codes. (I’ve tried to be relatively conservative in what groupings to accept.) I’ll keep on working unless/until anyone objects. — Vorziblix (talk · contribs) 02:45, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

Changing jocular to humorous in categories

It seems odd that despite both the labels giving "humorous" as the display output, we have Category:Jocular terms by language. I think it would be more consistent if it is changed to Category:Humorous terms by language to match the label; thoughts? —Svārtava (t/u) • 14:22, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

Support. I'd also oppose changing the label to jocular because it's pretty dated these days. Theknightwho (talk) 14:26, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

Support. I was actually confused a few days ago with the current category title. AG202 (talk) 18:03, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

Support. "Humorous" is better than "jocular" IMO. Equinox ◑ 18:14, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

I have no strong feelings one way or the other. I can't really imagine a language having a distinction (I could be wrong). I never felt like jocular was all that dated, but right now the split seems off, unless there's some language out there with this bizarre distinction. Vininn126 (talk) 19:09, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

Support. Binarystep (talk) 00:11, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

Support. User: The Ice Mage ^{talk to meh} 13:41, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

Support: I've often wondered why this is, too. — Sgconlaw (talk) 17:20, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

Support. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 10:10, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

Support. Imetsia (talk) 20:32, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

Support. Sartma (talk) 09:50, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Support merging into "humorous". 03:16, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Why is "UK" gloss adding a "Northern Irish English" category?

See e.g. 'Obby 'Oss. Although Northern Ireland is part of the UK, this category is misleading because it now looks as though this traditional (from Cornwall, England) is somehow specific to Ireland! Equinox ◑ 20:18, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

It's because of Module:labels/data/regional#L-3828. 98.170.164.88 20:21, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. So, we should remove that category, or is there disagreement here? Equinox ◑ 20:24, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

@Equinox, I've removed it for now. AG202 (talk) 02:16, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

@AG202 I added this when I was very new to Wiktionary. I do think Northern Irish English needs to be handled better (but I'm unsure of the best way to do it). "Britain" and "UK" are not the same thing, after all. Theknightwho (talk) 09:14, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

The labels “Britain” and “UK” should not be adding entries to categories of regional varieties of English. — Sgconlaw (talk) 11:36, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

Results from the Universal Code of Conduct Enforcement guidelines ratification vote published

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki.

More languages • Please help translate to your language

The Trust and Safety Policy team published the results of the Universal Code of Conduct Enforcement guidelines ratification vote. The vote ended 21 March 2022. See the results and read more on Meta-wiki.
--Mervat (WMF) (talk) 22:03, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

Category:en:Nature conservation

While editing the article Earth Overshoot Day, I found it linked to Category:en:Ecology. This category, however, seems to be populated with entries pertaining to the field of science and not nature conservation. I tried searching but could not find a more fitting place for the term. Does one exists? Should one be created? brittletheories (talk) 14:24, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

<languages/>

Movement Strategy and Governance News – Issue 6

Movement Strategy and Governance News
Issue 6, April 2022Read the full newsletter

---

Welcome to the sixth issue of Movement Strategy and Governance News! This revamped newsletter distributes relevant news and events about the Movement Charter, Universal Code of Conduct, Movement Strategy Implementation grants, Board of trustees elections and other relevant MSG topics.

This Newsletter will be distributed quarterly, while the more frequent Updates will also be delivered weekly. Please remember to subscribe here if you would like to receive future issues of this newsletter.

• Leadership Development - A Working Group is Forming! - The application to join the Leadership Development Working Group closed on April 10th, 2022, and up to 12 community members will be selected to participate in the working group. (continue reading)
• Universal Code of Conduct Ratification Results are out! - The global decision process on the enforcement of the UCoC via SecurePoll was held from 7 to 21 March. Over 2,300 eligible voters from at least 128 different home projects submitted their opinions and comments. (continue reading)
• Movement Discussions on Hubs - The Global Conversation event on Regional and Thematic Hubs was held on Saturday, March 12, and was attended by 84 diverse Wikimedians from across the movement. (continue reading)
• Movement Strategy Grants Remain Open! - Since the start of the year, six proposals with a total value of about $80,000 USD have been approved. Do you have a movement strategy project idea? Reachout to us! (continue reading)
• The Movement Charter Drafting Committee is All Set! - The Committee of fifteen members which was elected in October 2021, has agreed on the essential values and methods for its work, and has started to create the outline of the Movement Charter draft. (continue reading)
• Introducing Movement Strategy Weekly - Contribute and Subscribe! - The MSG team have just launched the updates portal, which is connected to the various Movement Strategy pages on Meta-wiki. Subscriber to get up-to-date news about the various ongoing projects. (continue reading)
• Diff Blogs - Check out the most recent publications about the UCoC on Wikimedia Diff. (continue reading)

--Mervat (WMF) (talk) 21:18, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Sanskrit source references

Currently, a lot of Sanskrit entries are formatted like दन्त (danta), with abbreviated references to works that use the word included on each definition line. I think it would be more useful to readers to convert these to quotations. 70.172.194.25 13:37, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

That's because they're basically Monier-Williams dictionary entries converted to wikitext. As I've said before, this is really bad from a usability standpoint. The problem is that there's a lifetime of work that went into gathering all that data, and it will take another lifetime of work to find all of those quotes and copy them into the entries. So, yes, it would definitely be more useful to readers to convert them to quotations, just as it would be nice to end poverty, war and injustice- but how? Chuck Entz (talk) 14:10, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Hungarian open/closed e distinction

This doesn't seem to be reflected on Wiktionary, for example ember doesn't show the fact that the two vowels are different. The exact pronunciation is different by dialect, but at least some indication should be present. There are minimal pairs which are only distinguished by this difference, for example "mentek" can have 3 different meanings depending on which e is open vs closed (and even the fourth combination can be understood although it's not in common use). — This unsigned comment was added by Gyorokpeter (talk • contribs) at 07:58, 14 April 2022 (UTC).

So how are you going to solve this? Fay Freak (talk) 18:46, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

DAFN where no entry exists

I've noticed that there are a lot of English surname entries having {{R:en:DAFN}}, but without any corresponding entry. Example: Julliard. This is perplexing, especially because ancestry.com's interface makes it trivial to check whether the entry exists or not (even if the formatting of the text itself sometimes leaves something to be desired). Is there a reason why this template has been used in this way? I don't know of any other reference template used so willy-nilly. Perhaps the argument is that it doesn't hurt, and can be useful in the cases where the entry does exist, but I think it can cause confusion. See e.g. Template talk:R:en:DAFN where an experienced user came across such an example, assumed there was just a paywall to access it, and made an account on ancestry.com just to find out that the reference wasn't there at all. 70.172.194.25 17:30, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

It does cause confusion. I have asked @Samubert96 not to use the template when DAFN has no corresponding entry. If the idea is linking ancestry.com which has interesting content in addition to DAFN, then a separate template should be made specifically for ancestry.com. Vahag (talk) 18:37, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

Or say explicitly in brackets or after a comma that no entry was discerned at the time of the accessdate. The links are also for comparison. (“Pree, we are better!”) Fay Freak (talk) 18:44, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

But the template is for an actual existing book printed in 2003. If the entry is not in it, the accessdate to a website later does not matter. Vahag (talk) 18:49, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

Ah, ok, then it would be also confusing to mention the accessdate as such, and one may do it otherwise. (Sometimes it is intransparent if a web resource based on a dead-tree book gets updated.) Fay Freak (talk) 19:06, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

I personally use DAFN also to access the profiles of historical people with a specific surname, because it can be helpful in finding the origin of a particular surname that has changed over time. For example, if you scroll down the DAFN page related to Julliard you can find a list of persons with this surname and discover that the surname is of French origin, even if there is no specific entry about the surname itself. If there are no entries and no historical profiles, then of course it's useless to insert the DAFN template Samubert96 (talk) 19:33, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

That content is not from DAFN, but from Ancestry.com which has licensed DAFN and presents DAFN content in addition to its own content. You can create a separate {{R:Ancestry.com}} template for Ancestry.com, using {{cite-web}}. Vahag (talk) 19:46, 14 April 2022 (UTC)