Template talk:de-noun

Definition from Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Jump to: navigation, search

Diminutive[edit]

(Note to self or anyone who feels like doing this before I get to it because I'm lazy) must add option of "dim=?" to hide diminutive form stuff if unsure (like how en-noun has pl=?) — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 01:27, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Only categorize entries, not other pages.[edit]

This template needs to be changed so that it only adds entries, not other kinds of pages, to {{de-noun}}. While I'm making that change, is there anything else that needs changing? —RuakhTALK 12:26, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

gen+gen2 doesn't work[edit]

I tried to use both parameters "gen" and "gen2" in an entry today, and it shows only the first genitive. Using "genitive" and "genitive2" works. --Zeitlupe 07:30, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

In the case where there are two genitives, you should probably use gen1 and gen2. If you just write gen, the template assumes there's only one genitive, and refuses to display the other. -- Prince Kassad 08:20, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
But why? There's no need for that to be the case. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:19, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
Sofixit — [ R·I·C ] Laurent — 13:31, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
Has nobody fixed it yet? (there's too many curly brackets for my brain to take) SemperBlotto (talk) 17:17, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
I will try to fix it but I was hoping to simplify the template further (discussion below), so it may take a while. —CodeCat 17:36, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Target pages (genitives and plurals)[edit]

Hey, please edit the template in a way that it links to the German section of the target page. I know, this is a somewhat rare occurrence cos German nouns are capitalized, but anyway, better be safe as houses and make this dictionary flawless. :) -- Frous (talk) 03:53, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Fixing and rewriting the template[edit]

(taken from User talk:Mglovesfun) I've added line breaks and indenting to the template code just so it's a little easier to understand. And wow... it's a really big mess! If no one else minds I can try to rewrite and simplify the code a little without breaking any existing entries (hopefully)? —CodeCat 16:23, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Quite the opposite! Zeitlupe pointed out the problem in 2010 on the talk page. I merely tried to fix it, since nobody else had in the previous two years! Mglovesfun (talk) 16:24, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
Well, the code in this template is similar to how {{nl-noun}} was before I completely rewrote it. I removed most of the duplicate parameters so that there was only one way to specify each parameter, which simplified the code a lot. More recently I also made the gender a numbered parameter, following the principle that 'numbered parameters are required, named parameters are optional' which seems to make sense in many cases (though not all). —CodeCat 16:32, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
It'll need to support gen and gen1, of course. Mglovesfun (talk) 16:34, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
Could they not be numbered parameters too? —CodeCat 16:53, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
After my question in 2010 was answered, I always used gen if there is only one genitive form and gen1+gen2 if there are two. As long as it is documented, I don't see a problem with that. --Zeitlupe (talk) 06:55, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
I imagine the new template to work either like this {{de-noun|gender|genitive|plural|diminutive}} or like this {{de-noun|g=gender|genitive|plural|diminutive}}. If there is more than one possibility for each of those, they will use g2=, gen2=, pl2=, dim2= and so on, while the 'first' still uses the parameters I mentioned (in other words, adding a second possibility doesn't change how you specify the first). Is that ok? —CodeCat 11:20, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
@Zeitlupe, it contradicts other templates of the same nature, also the template contradicts itself as it doesn't (or didn't) have a pl1 parameter, only a pl parameter! So the parameters were gen or gen1 and gen2 but pl or pl and pl2, not pl1. Furthermore, documentation is good of course, but if ideally the template is simple enough that users can work out how to use it without documentation, it's better no? Mglovesfun (talk) 20:43, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
I've made the changes now, and a script is currently running to update all old usages. I've added documentation as well. —CodeCat 16:57, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
OK, when the genitive singular is the same as the nominative (e.g. with feminines), no link is created and the word appears in bold instead. But when the plural is the same as the singular (e.g. Penner), the plural is a clickable link to the exact same section. Can that please be fixed? —Angr 22:40, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
I've changed that now. —CodeCat 23:03, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
Dank je wel! —Angr 23:26, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Third diminutive[edit]

Is it needed? One user clearly thinks so. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 18:18, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

If genitive is not given and gender is f, do not display genitive form.[edit]

In such a case, showing the genitive does not convey any additional information. 217.44.157.36 04:08, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

It does convey information. It conveys that the genitive is the same as the nominative. —CodeCat 10:54, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Missing plurals[edit]

Could someone add this code to the template, which should categorise all the German nouns with red links. --Type56op9 (talk) 20:52, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

<includeonly>{{#if:{{NAMESPACE}}||{{#ifexist:{{{plural|{{{2|{{PAGENAME}}}}}}}}||[[Category:Missing German plurals]]}}}}</includeonly>
Where should it be added? Anywhere?
Btw, there's a known issue where the auto-generated inflected forms of many feminine nouns are wrong due to human error (people added the wrong declension templates and/or set the wrong parameters to the declension or headword templates). So, accelerated creation of missing inflected forms would need to proceed cautiously. Most masculine and neuter nouns are OK, as far as I know. - -sche (discuss) 01:05, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
I don't know where to add it, or even if it is the correct code! But the plan to include something which categorises missing plurals is cool. --Type56op9 (talk) 13:45, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

About some pluralia tantum[edit]

@Zeitlupe, Jberkel, CodeCat Something ought to be done about the argument "pl" for pluralia tantum so that the plural parameter is not needed. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 08:44, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Well, I think that it is possible to write the code such that in the case "pl" does not exist, the last parametre is used. But before making changes to such a template that is used more than 1000 times, it is best to make a decision what and how to do it.--Sae1962 (talk) 05:38, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
Also, something ought to be done about the way {{de-decl-noun-pl}} deals with the dative form so that the "n" part can be left out with a parameter. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 12:10, 18 April 2015 (UTC)