User talk:CodeCat

Definition from Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Jump to: navigation, search
Archives: 2009-2010 · 2011 · 2012
Start a new discussion


Thread titleRepliesLast modified
Relation: roof строп120:51, 5 May 2016
Glyph origin --> Etymology1800:11, 5 May 2016
Etymtree deletions422:22, 4 May 2016
PIE Adj tables214:32, 2 May 2016
Help 218:04, 30 April 2016
Inappropriate use of mul for vernacular names in Translingual entries313:02, 30 April 2016
topic cat406:05, 30 April 2016
PH diphthongs803:58, 29 April 2016
CSS for mobile - declension and other tables521:06, 28 April 2016
Templating links to wikisyntax characters608:46, 26 April 2016
Reverting of edits to "ɗi"?314:57, 25 April 2016
Appendix links113:59, 25 April 2016
Inflection600:54, 25 April 2016
Is declension too speculative.214:52, 20 April 2016
Edit on WT:Glossary023:18, 13 April 2016
Daniel's block012:53, 13 April 2016
So?500:00, 11 April 2016
Edit tools521:18, 9 April 2016
kittens117:47, 9 April 2016
CC-reduplication221:43, 7 April 2016
First page
First page
Previous page
Previous page
Last page
Last page

Relation: roof строп

You mean PS *stropъ < PIE *ḱrapo- is not possible? Or English roof simply from another root? In entry *hrōfą are listed *krāpo-, *ḱrapo-. And ESSJa mentions English roof for Proto-Slavic *stropъ: "упомянутые герм. слова связываются со слав. *stropъ из и.-е. *ḱrapo-".

Игорь Тълкачь (talk)20:43, 5 May 2016

I think I see now. I hadn't considered the possibility of a palatovelar. However, the -a- is suspect.

CodeCat20:51, 5 May 2016

Glyph origin --> Etymology

Hi, I noticed that MewBot is converting Glyph origin to Etymology. I don't think this is right since glyph origins for Chinese characters now go under the Chinese header, which would mean there will be two etymology sections under Chinese for some entries.

— justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› }21:41, 4 May 2016

Well, the "Glyph origin" header hasn't been agreed upon, so it should be discussed before using it.

CodeCat21:44, 4 May 2016

But I still don't think it should be converted to Etymology yet, since there are a few entries that would result in having two etymology headers under Chinese, but not really due to different etymologies but different uses of the word etymology.

— justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› }21:48, 4 May 2016

Is that such an issue? We have multiple etymology sections in lots of entries.

CodeCat21:49, 4 May 2016

Multiple etymology sections are only appropriate if they have different definitions/pronunciations for them, but glyph origin is for the symbol. See , where it looks completely out of place.

— justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› }21:54, 4 May 2016

They're not the same concept; glyph origin describes why the character looks the way it does and etymology represents the sound associated with the character.

suzukaze (tc)21:55, 4 May 2016

The point is still that new headers must be discussed and have consensus, you can't just use anything you like. And we use "Etymology" for characters in other scripts already, so using it for Chinese too was the option that agreed most with existing practice.

CodeCat21:57, 4 May 2016

Etymtree deletions

I notice that you recently mass-removed {{etymtree}} uses from pages, and then deleted ten {{etymtree}} pages. Some of these were replaced with {{desctree}}, which may or may not be completely unsustainable. I have not found any discussion or consensus for any of this. Or RFDOs for the template subpages, for that matter.

Care to explain?

Yair rand (talk)20:36, 1 May 2016

...Is that a "No"?

Yair rand (talk)19:11, 2 May 2016

I'm not sure what you're asking me to explain.

CodeCat19:13, 2 May 2016

I would like you to explain what you hoped to achieve by removing {{etymtree}}, and why you deleted the pages, and further why you did this all without any discussion (if that is indeed the case).

Yair rand (talk)22:20, 4 May 2016

The etymtree is horrible and unworkable. When I watch pages, I don't want to have to check for the presence of an etymtree template and watch it, just so I can keep track of edits to descendants. The new system I made doesn't have that issue. Why do you think {{etymtree}} is better?

CodeCat22:22, 4 May 2016

PIE Adj tables

Are these in the works? I'd love to work more on *h₂yuh₁en-.

JohnC504:29, 2 May 2016

Not at the moment, but I will do it eventually.

CodeCat14:27, 2 May 2016

:) Thanks! And if there is anything I can do to help, just let me know.

JohnC514:32, 2 May 2016

Quite a while ago I made some changes to this page. Which were revert and then I was informed that wiktionary wasn't like wikipedia in that I can't just change the page but have to talk about it first? I don't know how I should go about suggesting/doing the changes that I believe should be on the page. Any help would be appreciated.

Blackash (talk)12:33, 30 April 2016

Can you show me where you were told that?

CodeCat13:01, 30 April 2016

It looks to me like it was the content of the edits that was too much like Wikipedia, not the way they were made. Wiktionary is focused on succinctly describing the way language is used, not on explaining the facts that language is used to explain. We don't use references to authoritative sources to verify that our definitions are correct, and if people use terms with meanings that don't match what authoritative sources say, we go with the usage, not the authoritative sources.

Chuck Entz (talk)18:04, 30 April 2016

Inappropriate use of mul for vernacular names in Translingual entries

Vernacular names can be in any language, though usually they are English. They are never "mul".

DCDuring TALK12:48, 29 April 2016

What do you mean?

CodeCat16:16, 29 April 2016

What I said, though I'm not surprised that you are not aware of the consequences of Mewbot actions. Mewbot inappropriately imposes {{l|mul}} on vernacular names in Translingual L2 sections. It is tedious to have to review and selectively revert Mewbot actions. Please stop.

DCDuring TALK12:45, 30 April 2016

Please give an example.

CodeCat13:02, 30 April 2016

Autodetection parameters of topic cat, which I copied from this project earlier, is going to work at Thai Wiktionary. Why did you remove the cool function here?

Octahedron80 (talk)00:17, 29 April 2016

It wasn't removed, just moved to {{auto cat}}.

CodeCat00:23, 29 April 2016

...More spaghetti, though. 😢

Octahedron80 (talk)00:26, 29 April 2016


CodeCat02:40, 29 April 2016

PH diphthongs

Thanks for the fix on *yéwgos. I was unclear about whether *eu was a diphthong in PH because WT:AGRK-PRO does not list them. Should they be there?

JohnC517:22, 28 April 2016

Probably yes.

CodeCat17:45, 28 April 2016

Which ones in particular? *au, *āu, *eu, *ēu, *ou, *ōu?

JohnC517:59, 28 April 2016

Did Hellenic have long diphthongs?

CodeCat18:04, 28 April 2016

I have no idea. This seems like a question for Sihler, but I'm not near my Sihler at the moment. We currently list *āi, *ēi, *ōi?

JohnC518:44, 28 April 2016

I wonder what PIE sources there are for these. As far as I know, Osthoff's law applied to Greek too.

CodeCat18:59, 28 April 2016

CSS for mobile - declension and other tables

I've recently started studying Hungarian, and just by luck of the draw, most of the time I'm looking things up on Wiktionary using my phone. The declension and conjugation tables are nigh unusable via mobile, as the width appears to be hard-coded at 40% (as in Module:hu-nominals) -- and on a tiny screen, that might be one table-column wide.

Would it be possible to rework how these tables are styled?

‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig04:22, 27 April 2016

This is an issue with the most common way we make tables collapsible: by wrapping them in a div. The div doesn't scale based on the contents of the table, so you have to either set it to a fixed width (which may be too small) or a percentage width (which may also be too small, or too big). There is a newer system that I've been using that doesn't have this issue as much. It's used for Finnish and Dutch, and for Latin verbs. Do those look better to your phone?

CodeCat14:06, 27 April 2016

Interesting, thank you. Latin and Dutch seem to display just fine on mobile. I also realized that the problem is not with Hungarian conjugation tables, which seem to have no width defined; this is limited to Hungarian declension tables (for both nouns and adjectives), which hard-code the width at 40%.

Is there a particular reason for limiting the width of collapsible divs? I note that {{der-top}}, for instance, implements a collapsible div with no defined width, as at ‎(sakura, cherry tree; cherry blossom). Likewise for the collapsible conjugation table on Hungarian entries like lát ‎(to see). If there is a concern about such divs displaying all the way across widescreen monitors, and the div content becoming unnecessarily stretched out, perhaps we could use max-width and a pixel count, instead of width and a percentage? Poking around in my browser's "inspect" mode on the látás ‎(sight, vision) entry, I find that changing width: 40%; to max-width: 400px; does the trick quite well -- the table does not stretch across the whole width of my widescreen monitor, and if I shrink the window down to emulate mobile as close as I can, the table displays in a more usable fashion.

... And I just realized what you might have meant -- the table at verdedigen is probably a good example? The table at verb specio, for instance, doesn't have any length limitation at all, but verdedigen has some fun show / hide behavior. That would be preferable for Hungarian, over the current hard limit. Though I find that the show / hide behavior only works on a PC -- on mobile, everything is always showing, which makes it a bit confusing as to why the top portion of the header shows the infinitive twice.

Anyway, thank you for looking into this.

‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig19:15, 27 April 2016

It's strange that it shows both parts of the table at all times. I would appreciate it if you could report this at the Grease Pit with any information on which tables it happens with. Currently, at least Dutch verbs and adjectives, Finnish nominals and verbs, Veps nominals and verbs, Northern Sami nominals and verbs, Proto-Indo-European nominals and verbs, Latin verbs, Proto-Italic verbs use the new system. There may be more I forgot about.

In case you're good with JavaScript, the file MediaWiki:Gadget-legacy.js, line 645 onwards.

CodeCat19:34, 27 April 2016

Oh, and provide screenshots too if you can!

CodeCat19:47, 27 April 2016

Done and posted to Wiktionary:Grease_pit/2016/April#Problems_with_mobile_site_when_rendering_tables_with_show.2Fhide_functionality. I had a quick look at the JS file, but it seems like JS isn't even being loaded in the mobile version of the site...

‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig21:06, 28 April 2016

Templating links to wikisyntax characters

I just reverted some edits to symbol entries where MewBot tried to convert [[=]] to use {{l}}, with predictably awful results. You might want to tighten MewBot's code a bit so that doesn't happen again. Thanks!

Chuck Entz (talk)00:51, 25 April 2016

What do you suggest?

CodeCat01:10, 25 April 2016

Leave any plain link containing template syntax characters alone. I would also suggest leaving large Chinese entries alone for the time being: there have been problems lately with Chinese modules using too much memory, and adding templates on an entry that uses 48 MB will push it over the 50 MB limit (as has happened with a few MewBot edits, already).

Chuck Entz (talk)01:31, 25 April 2016

The script now skips links that have = in them. But we should have a more durable solution for such links.

CodeCat01:35, 25 April 2016

(I assume that this is part of this thread) Αύγουστος has had {{l}} added to a link in its "See also" section. There are quite a few of these in words in families (months, numbers …). Can these be reverted by a bot?

  — Saltmarshσυζήτηση-talk04:45, 25 April 2016

Thank you -sche

  — Saltmarshσυζήτηση-talk04:53, 26 April 2016

Hey Code Cat, we don't know each other well, but you seem like a very tech-savvy cat! I just thought I'd ask your advice. I see that you just had a question on "history." I was reading some interesting material related to biology, etc. in a Wiki page, and I followed a link there to some photos. when I tried to go back, I could not find it, and since my "history" automatically erases, I have not been able to get back to it! I had been reading other boring stuff about typing... I don't want to have to go back to reading about THAT! Thanks,

Gar LE Mond, 26 April 2016

Reverting of edits to "ɗi"?

Greetings, Why did you revert edits to ɗi? It is a lemma with several functions in Fula. It is one of twenty some such words in Fula used for specific classes of nouns (this is one of the plural classes).

A12n (talk)11:39, 25 April 2016

See the edit history.

CodeCat13:57, 25 April 2016

Thx. I often use the relevant ISO 639 code(s) when adding a language entry to an existing page as a shorthand, though sometimes prefixed with "+". Can avoid this on en.wiktionary. Probably not common enough a practice to configure bots to crosscheck for this on edit line with edits made?

A12n (talk)14:52, 25 April 2016

It wasn't a bot, it was me myself. I saw "ff" and assumed it was vandalism because it's similar to the random repeated characters that vandals might insert in entries and use as edit summaries. Once I noticed the mistake I reverted myself.

CodeCat14:57, 25 April 2016

Appendix links

MewBot is converting Appendix links to Template:l, for instance, in δέκα. Could this be prevented (and perhaps undone)?

Eru·tuon02:39, 25 April 2016

Ok, it'll skip those in the future.

CodeCat13:59, 25 April 2016


We now use Inflection over Conjugation ?

Leasnam (talk)22:37, 23 April 2016

I do, I don't know about anyone else.

CodeCat22:54, 23 April 2016

For JA entries, we use ====Inflection==== for adjectives, and ====Conjugation==== for adjectives (which, in Japanese, function grammatically as a kind of stative verb).

‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig18:28, 24 April 2016

The reason I've gone to using inflection is because the difference between declension and conjugation doesn't apply to every language or situation, while the term "inflection" is broad enough to fit. It's mostly an Indo-European centric distinction, and we're generally taught that declension applies to nominals and conjugation applies to verbs. That in itself is a silly distinction, since they are grammatically the same process, only the part of speech and the grammatical categories differ. But in Irish and Dutch, there are inflected prepositions; those don't fit into the declension-conjugation dichotomy.

CodeCat18:34, 24 April 2016

We should follow what the existing entries do. Russian uses "Conjugation" for verbs and "Declension" for nouns and adjectives. IMO this distinction isn't silly; nor is using "Inflection" for both but we have to be consistent, otherwise the dictionary looks stupid and amateur (or more so than it already looks).

Benwing2 (talk)19:23, 24 April 2016

Will there subsequently be an update to the documentation on entry layout ? I feel a little iffy making/changing pages knowing that EL still advises use of Conjugation :) Leasnam (talk) 20:33, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Leasnam (talk)20:33, 24 April 2016

Different languages have different conventions. I think each language's editor community should establish and follow its own consensus (within reasonable bounds, naturally).

‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig00:54, 25 April 2016

Is declension too speculative.

I just made *ǵʰḗr, but the accentual pattern is a guess. Any thoughts?

JohnC503:48, 20 April 2016

I'm not sure if the Greek accent alone is enough evidence. Different ablaut grades would also be valuable. It's striking that both languages only have a long grade, that seems to indicate that something else is going on. Otherwise, they would have to extend the nominative singular grade to the entire paradigm, which is possible I suppose, but quite a change.

CodeCat14:20, 20 April 2016

So, you'd add a Narten grade and what else? I'm not sure I see any options for the long oblique stems besides leveling, substratum borrowing, or a sneaky *h₁ in the stem. The oblique oxytones from monosyllabic nouns in AG are somewhat uncommon, as evinced by Newt having to add a parameter obloxy= to an early version of {{grc-decl}} to deal with πούς and θήρ. Speaking of *ǵʰwer- and θήρ, which would act as a fair comparison for this situation, what do we think there? I will need to look at my reference material later to see what Beekes and De Vaan say about them.

JohnC514:52, 20 April 2016

Edit on WT:Glossary

Hey, I noticed you reverted my removal of WEAE on WT:Glossary. As far as I know that page is for terms that are actually in use in the Wiktionary community, whereas WEAE doesn't seem to be. It has 13 hits on google when searching for "Well-Enunciated American English". Rathersilly (talk) 23:18, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Rathersilly (talk)23:18, 13 April 2016

Daniel's block

If you want to see the reason, look at his deleted contributions

Chuck Entz (talk)12:53, 13 April 2016

So? try to explain what Chuck could not manage to do. --

The Horde Is Back (talk)15:03, 10 April 2016

I trust Chuck, so I figure if he is reverting you, he must have a good reason. That said, your name identifies you as a potential pan-Turkicist or pan-Altaicist, which rings alarm bells right away. I'll let Chuck do the explaining.

CodeCat15:04, 10 April 2016

Ok, do so please. But I think I will report you for insulting me with unfounded racist comments. --

The Horde Is Back (talk)15:10, 10 April 2016

Please do.

CodeCat15:26, 10 April 2016

I reverted you at Марий Эл because your "etymology" of a Mari term consisted of telling what some source said was its translation- three sources to back up basically nothing.

At Ural, you randomly interspersed a bunch of different bits of information into the etymology, referenced with: a reference to a blank page that required a non-functioning link to Google Books and a link to Cambridge University Press to document it, several references to an on-line survival encyclopedia, links to Wikipedia articles, including one that doesn't exist, a reference to some newspaper I've never heard of, and a link to a Books so that readers can verify that the referenced sentence is a plagiarism and a copyright violation. The end result is a mangled mess that includes two copies of the original etymology, doesn't make sense as a whole, and doesn't begin to meet Wiktionary's formatting requirements.

As for Tibet, please see my query at the Etymology scriptorium.

On the whole, you keep adding the same substandard, semi-random crap to etymologies and assume that it's being reverted only because we can't handle the truth. It's true that I have serious doubts about your content, but mostly I don't want to see you making an unreadable mess out of our etymologies.

Chuck Entz (talk)23:25, 10 April 2016

"But I think I will report you for insulting me with unfounded racist comments"

"Pan-Turkicist" and "Pan-Altaicist" are not races, so your comment is itself insulting and unfounded. I have no problems with the etymologies added by a number of Turkish editors here, and I see clearly non-Turkish names on some of the fringe literature that's been posted by Pan-Turkists.
Chuck Entz (talk)00:00, 11 April 2016

Edit tools

Also curious: do you have a better Javascript function for modifying EditTools than Conrad.Irwin's? I'm finding his quite irritating, since it creates a second drop-down menu and messes up the first, and I happened upon your IPA edittools page while searching to see if there was an improved version available.

Eru·tuon21:49, 7 April 2016

I don't have anything better, sorry.

CodeCat21:54, 7 April 2016

That's annoyed me for a while now, but I thought it was just me. Time allowing, I'll take a look at the code -- I suspect something in MediaWiki has changed in the years since the EditTools code was written, resulting in the aberrant behavior.

‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig23:15, 7 April 2016

I'd be delighted if you found how to fix it. (I can't view the source myself, not being an admin.) I think one thing that changed was they added edittools- to the id of various menu elements.

Eru·tuon22:32, 8 April 2016

Due to changes in the Wiktionary infrastructure, Conrad's old script has essentially gotten out of sync with the rest of the site. It turns out that Conrad's script wasn't adding the edittools- prefix, but instead was failing to remove it.

Try pointing to instead -- I copied Conrad's code and tweaked the copy. It seems to be working for me.

Question: This currently just puts the user's custom sections at the top of the menu, but it doesn't change the names of these sections at all. This could be confusing, if a user section has the same title as an existing default MediaWiki edittools section. Should we add a prefix to the user sections?

‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig08:49, 9 April 2016

Your code works for me too.

I like to be able to choose a section by clicking the menu and typing a letter or two letters. Adding a prefix would make this harder (for instance, I couldn't type "i" to select an custom IPA menu). So I would prefer not having a prefix. Perhaps a suffix, if the menu has the same name.

I wonder if the Wiktionary version of the edit tools could be modified to be more like Wikipedia. Wikipedia uses and MediaWiki:Gadget-charinsert-core.js (or MediaWiki:Edittools for users without Javascript) and MediaWiki:Gadget-charinsert.js, which make the syntax for customization (added to common.js) much simpler. Customization can either add more characters to the end of the default menus, or create new menus.

However, I do like the fact that Wiktionary lets you insert lang= and class= to make the characters in the menu display better. Not sure if that functionality could be added to the Wikipedia code, and it's essential on Wiktionary.

Eru·tuon21:18, 9 April 2016


Regarding putative laryngeal-consonant reduplication in ἤγαγον ‎(ḗgagon), I had encountered a mention of it in Roland Pooth's article on PIE verbal morphology, on pp. 22-28 where he discusses reduplication. However, it seems he was only discussing reduplication of *h₁s- (= *ʔ_s- in his notation), not *h₂C-. However, he describes *CeC- reduplication, which could apply to *h₂eǵ-. But not sure if the formation he describes would yield *e-h₂(e)ǵ-h₂(e)ǵ-om = ἤγαγον ‎(ḗgagon) with the appropriate meaning.

Eru·tuon20:52, 7 April 2016

The normal kind of reduplication only copies the first consonant. The consonant is s, the next consonant is also copied. This wouldn't give the Greek form, no, but I don't know what does.

CodeCat21:06, 7 April 2016

Note that he also mentions *CeC- reduplication. That looks more like ἤγαγον ‎(ḗgagon), but may not be quite identical in details of form or meaning. I'm going to see if I can find a description of the verb in Sihler, which I got ahold of finally.

Eru·tuon21:43, 7 April 2016
First page
First page
Previous page
Previous page
Last page
Last page