User talk:Rua/Archive 2012

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


I somehow figured that -dus and -tus are suffixes so I created the categories, and like five seconds later asked them to be deleted. A book by Eesti Keele Instituut tells me that the suffix is simply "-us". — Jeraphine Gryphon 16:32, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

If the suffix is -us, then where does the -d- in some of the words come from? I think there are two suffixes, one is -dus and the other is -us. It's similar in Finnish, except Finnish has -uus and -us. —CodeCat 16:50, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
Here's what I understand from there: it calls -dus and -tus "liitevariant", a sort of variant of -us. (-dus is the most common of the variants, less often -tus or -sus.) The variants are used, basically, when simply -us would sound weird.
Also sometimes, not too often, the meaning of the word depends on which variant is used. There's words like vanadus (the state of being old) and vanus (age); also õigus and õigsus, peenus and peensus.
I first thought -tus was a (separate) suffix when editing the word armastus, but there the suffix -us is added to the stem armast- (from armasta/ma). — Jeraphine Gryphon 18:05, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
Could -sus just be -ne + -us? —CodeCat 18:57, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
It doesn't seem so. — Jeraphine Gryphon 19:24, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

-ndus is a separate suffix though. — Jeraphine Gryphon 19:27, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Your talk page needs archiving. :x Anywho, so we'll use separate categories for the different variants? Would it make sense to put the variant categories inside the -us category? — Jeraphine Gryphon 04:06, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm not actually sure how to do that. The templates we use for categories aren't made for cases where multiple suffixes might look identical... —CodeCat 12:57, 6 January 2012 (UTC)


The new template is linking entries to Category:nouns lacking gender, which does not exist and is an invalid category. --EncycloPetey 00:01, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Rhymes in -ing[edit]

Yeah sorry about the rhymes, I'm never touching them so that was likely to be screwed up. Regarding the IPA and all that stuff, have you seen any mistakes made by me, apart from that devoicing a half year ago? I'm checking everything 3x before I post, and Dutch phonology is not that complicated :)

-- 19:26, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm mostly concerned with the different pronunciation variations you've been adding, especially for diphthongs like au and ui. I don't actually know where all those variations would be used. —CodeCat 19:33, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
"Polder-Nederlands" surely ring a bell? :) Nobody actually cares to use it, instead people prefer to use standard Dutch IPA transcription which is used more in Belgium than in the Netherlands. Have you heard [œy], [ʌu] or [ɛi] in the north? Surely there can be dialects which have them but most people would use [ʌy], [au] and [æi]/[ai] nowadays. That's why there's standard pronunciation first, then the Polder one(s). There are some entries with Belgian [œː], and North [eɪ], so why not expand it? [ʌy] is used on French Wiktionary, [au] and [ai] is spoken about on Wikipedia (, [æi] well yes, that one is not used here, but I've seen it on some sites (say plus you can hear it a lot on the TV for example. Sure if it comes to English noone's going to post every single dialect, but those 5-6 pronunciations I think it's safe to say that cover most of the Dutch dialects. -- 19:52, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
I don't mind listing different pronunciations, but it would help if you added information about where they are used. Just 'NL' and 'BE' is too simplistic. For example I pronounce /ç/ and /ʝ/, but also a slight /eɪ/ and /oʊ/ at times, I pronounce w as /β̞/ (a voiced bilabial approximant) and my au is more like /ɑu̯/ or /ɒu̯/. —CodeCat 19:57, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Old High German diphthongs[edit]

Hello! I've got a question about Old High German pronunciation. The thing is, I'm not quite sure if digraphs ei, ie, eu were pronounced /ei/, /ie/, /eu/ or something like /ai/, /i:/, /oi/. I've searched many resources, but none of them seem to give a clear answer. -- LucasEasedUp 21:34, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure if there is a way to tell whether ei was /ei/ or /ai/, but since OHG generally uses a relatively phonetic spelling it was presumably /ei/. I don't know exactly what ie was but it was definitely not /i:/, because there already was an /i:/ and the two sounds didn't merge. It wasn't until late Middle High German that /i:/ diphthongised into /ei/, merging with the existing ei, so ie must have remained different in some way at least until that time (otherwise it would have become ei as well). I'm not sure what eu is, it didn't occur in OHG as far as I know but I think you meant iu. In OHG iu was initially pronounced /iu/ but it probably later became either /yu/ or /iy/, and in Middle High German it was /y:/, and it merged with the umlauted variety of /u:/. When /i:/ diphthongised into /ei/, /y:/ and /u:/ also diphthongised, becoming /øy/ and /ou/, then later the three became /ai/, /ɔy/ and /au/. I hope that helps? —CodeCat 22:59, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
Yes, thanks! That put some light. -- LucasEasedUp 17:55, 18 January 2012 (UTC)


Just wanted to check back what's your stance on this. The discussion died down a while ago but I still see a need to change something here, as the current situation isn't exaxtly optimal. -- Liliana 10:02, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

I would like {{langprefix}} and all templates that depend on it ({{languagex}}, {{lx}}, {{termx}} and so on) to be deleted as well, but deleting it will be harder because it's needed to make the distinction in where links should link to. —CodeCat 14:31, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
Indeed! As I said already, I think proto languages should just be in the main namespace but start in an asterisk. As for constructed languages, I was never a fan of the "one page per term" system that Daniel & co. advocated. All terms should be on one page, as it used to be before he appeared. -- Liliana 16:47, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
Putting all PG terms on one page seems crazy to me... there would be far too many! o.o I do like the idea of putting reconstructed entries in the main namespace, but like I mentioned before the asterisk in front of the name will break sorting. Personally, my view of an ideal Wiktionary would have each language on a separate page, instead of one term in every language together on the same page. I would like pages to be named like water/en, water/nl, *dagaz/gem-pro and so on. —CodeCat 16:53, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
That's still a long way off... but hey everyone can dream, right? First of all, it might make sense to tackle those constructed languages and more importantly the specialized dictionaries. Stuff like Appendix:Pokémon is, in my opinion, really embarassing to the whole project. -- Liliana 17:28, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
It does seem a bit silly... But I just realised another problem with the * in front. For languages that are always unattested it's less of a problem than with languages that just happen to have some unattested terms, such as Latin. How would the existing Latin templates handle such terms? —CodeCat 17:42, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
Oof, good point. Hadn't thought about that. I'll go in the corner and scratch my head a bit at that problem. -- Liliana 17:43, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

...on second thought, would it perhaps be possible to create a template {{Xyzyx}} with langscript support, which is only used by the few templates that actually need it? This would not fix the problem, but certainly help with the slowness issues caused by {{Xyzy}} going through langscript every time it's called. -- Liliana 10:09, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

We did agree to delete {{Xyzy}}, and {{langscript}} is probably not needed anymore for the same reason {{language}} isn't... —CodeCat 11:29, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
Did I just confuse langscript with langprefix? Oh I'm silly! But I agree that langscript can be orphaned and deleted just like language. -- Liliana 12:33, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your vandalism help[edit]

Thank you for your vandalism help over at the page santorum. Much appreciated! ;) Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 16:42, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Proto-Germanic word for "vixen"?[edit]

I was hoping to start an appendix based on the proto-word for vixen but so far I haven't been able to find any reliable source as to what the PGmc word would be, and was wondering if you could help. Perhaps you know of a source? (It is interesting that the word has v < original f) --Proto-Germanic Fan 11:06, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Vixen is from Old English fyxen, the initial v- is a dialectal feature already present in Old English (so in some areas the word would have been vyxen), and also appears in other words such as fat/vat (OE fæt). The word itself is made up of 'fox' with a feminine suffix added. I'm not quite sure what the form of the suffix is, but it appears in many languages, such as Dutch -in (Middle Dutch -inne), German -in, and I think in Old Norse it's -ynja and Gothic has -ini. Because of the ON form having -y-, I first thought that the suffix must have been -unjǭ, but now that I see the Gothic form, it rules that out, which means it must have been -injō. says that this suffix was formed by a resegmentation between the stem suffix -in- of n-stems and the regular feminine suffix -jō, so that stem-in-jō was reinterpreted as stem-injō. I'm not quite sure why Old Norse has an n-stem while Gothic has a jō-stem, though, but I noticed this happens with other ON words as well, so it is probably an innovation (especially considering Gothic is centuries older). —CodeCat 13:37, 26 January 2012 (UTC)


I mentioned you at Wiktionary:Tea_room#santorum. -- Cirt (talk) 16:15, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

And I mentioned you at WT:ID#allus. I've fixed that template, but am not sure what other similar edits of yours, if any, might need similar scrutiny.​—msh210 (talk) 21:50, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

You just added spaces? And that fixed it? o.o —CodeCat 21:52, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
I guess it was viewing {{{{ as 3+1 or 1+3 or something instead of 2+2. I don't know; but yes, it seems to have fixed the problem (at [[allus]] anyway).​—msh210 (talk) 22:17, 29 January 2012 (UTC)


Have you noticed how {{es-verb}}, {{pt-verb}} and now {{oc-verb}} use the parameters {{{1}}} and {{{2}}} the other way round. Could we swap them for Catalan too? For example on existir it's {{ca-verb|ir|exist}} while for Spanish it's {{es-verb|exist|ir}}, ditto for Portuguese and Occitan with their respective templates. Mglovesfun (talk) 14:16, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

I think it may be better to remove that part altogether, and let the conjugation template add those categories instead. So {{ca-verb|ar|cant}} would become: {{ca-verb|canto|cantat}}. Or maybe the imperfect could be added too: {{ca-verb|canto|cantava|cantat}}. —CodeCat 14:18, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
I disagree, I think it's a lovely bit of code, and the defaults can be overridden if needed. Mglovesfun (talk) 14:22, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
The main issue I have is that it's not always clear what the conjugation type is judging just from the ending and this may confuse people. servir and sentir are both regular -ir verbs but they have different forms, serveixo and sento. The current way of specifying the verbs like sentir, using 'ir2', it not very clear. What's even worse is that the two forms of most verbs in -re are unpredictable, so the defaults actually need to be overridden most of the time anyway. This becomes even worse if the imperfect is added (which I think it should) because there are three different kinds of imperfect form with verbs in -ure, and they're not predictable, the imperfect form is a principal part... —CodeCat 14:29, 4 February 2012 (UTC)


CodeCat, what part of speech is [[slechtstschrijvende]]? I want to create an entry for it (or you can beat me to it); I think it's just barely attested on Usenet despite all those consonants. - -sche (discuss) 22:11, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

It's an inflected form of slechtstschrijvend, which is an adjective (like its English equivalent 'worst-writing'). —CodeCat 22:13, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Inflection v Declension[edit]

I notice that your bot changed Category Greek adjective declension-table templates to Greek adjective inflection-table templates. Was this an error or part of an ongoing plan? Has there been policy on this? It is just that we now have two nomenclatures for these templates eg Wiktionary:Greek adjective declension-table templates. And what about the nouns!? — Saltmarshαπάντηση 19:37, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

No it's not an error, I've been renaming these categories after some discussion but mostly because I think the new names are clearer. Many languages have templates that display various inflected forms of nouns, but which aren't technically declension. And in some Celtic languages, prepositions are 'conjugated' for person but I doubt we'd want them grouped together with verb inflection templates. The new names are more general and group the templates by part of speech, which usually makes more sense practically because that's how different types of inflection are split too. There is no policy on the names either way, really. You could create Category:Greek noun inflection-table templates too if you wanted to. —CodeCat 19:39, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
I agree with using a common nomenclature throughout Wiktionary rather like the change from inflection- to headword-line, but the knock-ons are considerable. Modern Greek used to use the heading Inflection which was changed to Declension a few years ago. Logically these should be changed back? — Saltmarshαπάντηση 05:30, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
But on the other hand I'll try to put the inconsistency (in Greek) to the back of my mind! — Saltmarshαπάντηση 05:55, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
Personally I think that an 'inflection' header is more consistent than 'declension' and 'conjugation', but it doesn't really matter much if the headers have different names than the template categories. After all, the headers are intended for all of our users, whereas the template categories are only useful for editors. The main reason for changing the category names is to lower the 'confusion barrier' for new editors. —CodeCat 13:04, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Part(s) of speech[edit]

The template {{poscatboiler}} adds a category "XX part of speech" instead of "XX parts of speech". What is wrong? See for example: Category:Malagasy adverbs. Maro 17:05, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm making some changes to the templates and it will take some time, so while I'm still working on them, it will show them wrong. —CodeCat 17:06, 14 March 2012 (UTC)


Ik heb de nodige dingen bijgesteld. ;-)

Ik zag jouw bericht van de bronnen, en ik ben blij dat jij een sjabloon voor mij gemaakt heb. Eigenlijk begrijp ik nogsteeds niets van het aanmaken van die sjablonen, maar ik moet het waarschijnlijk lezen wanneer ik frisser ben.

Dyami Millarson|User talk:Dyami Millarson 23:38, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Iets leuks[edit]

De traditionele inwoners van Leeuwarden zeggen de ij als [iː], en de omwonenden zeggen de ij vaak als [i:ə], en bij het nadoen van de grootste tongval van Nederland zeggen de traditionele Leeuwardenaren vaak [l̪ɛik] voor [lək]. In het Noorden zijn meer varianten met de [i:], maar in het Leeuwardens heeft men de klank in het Nederlands, want Leeuwardens is eigenlijk een oudere variant van het Nederlands, waarschijnlijk voortgekomen uit het Fries. Altijd aan de schrijfwijze van iemand merk ik, of de mens een [i:] uitspreekt, en ik denk, dat ik het merk aan het woordgebruik, want de Leeuwardenaren zijn behoudender in hun woordkeuze, zoals vele andere Noordelijke Nederlanders, en ik spreek niet van de behoudendheid van het nieuwere Fries, maar van de talen van de noordelijke gewesten, want de jongere Friesen doen gewoon het Nederlands na, ook heeft het oudere Fries vele klankveranderingen ondergaan, zoals palatalisatie. Ik wou enkele waarnemingen aan jou zeggen, want ik weet dat jij Germaanse talen, en varianten, leuk vindt. —Dyami Millarson DM 11:20, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Volgens mij heet de taal die ze in Leeuwarden spreken het w:nl:Stadsfries. Dat is een soort mengtaal van Hollands en Fries. Maar inderdaad, zoals je al zegt zijn er gebieden in Nederland waar sommige klankveranderingen niet zijn opgetreden. Ik meen me te herinneren dat dat ook in het Limburgs nog zo behouden is. —CodeCat 12:11, 21 March 2012 (UTC)


Ik wil het woord hilmaz verwijderen, want het had helmaz moeten wezen, en helmaz is al toegevoegd. Hoe verwijdert men een bladzijde? —Dyami Millarson DM 23:58, 21 March 2012 (UTC).

Daarvoor moet je een administrator zijn, maar je kunt een pagina wel verplaatsen. Rechtsboven is een klein pijltje, en als je daar de muispijl over houdt dan verschijnt de optie. —CodeCat 23:05, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

*hilmaz. Het duurt zeker lang alvorens ik een adminstrator word, maar in de tussentijd kan jij het weghalen ;-). —Dyami Millarson DM 00:14, 22 March 2012 (UTC).

A {{links}} template - questions for you[edit]

I thought I'd follow up on your suggestion at Wiktionary:BEER#literal_translations_of_idioms regarding a {{links}} template to link all args to a specific language. I've got a simple version hacked out at User:Eirikr/Template_Tests/links. A couple questions for you:

  1. Any idea of a "for each" kind of construct? I couldn't find anything definitive, so I've just taken the brute-force approach to handling arguments, which is inelegant but gets the job done.
  2. Is there a list anywhere of which lang codes take spaces and which don't? Or even just of which lang codes take italics in {{term}}? Chinese and Japanese don't use any spacing, for instance, whereas most other languages that I can think of do, and I'm trying to cover those bases in the template code. I found WT:LANGTREAT, which contained a handy list of the codes for the various flavors of Chinese, but I'm not sure what other languages I might need to include.
  3. Is there any policy or performance reason not to use a subtemplate? I refactored the code to determine spacing into a separate template, but there's no reason it couldn't be included in the main template here if that would be preferred for some reason -- it just makes the code a bit uglier.  :)
  4. I'm currently using {{term}} internally to deal with italics or no italics and proper script handling on a lang-by-lang basis. Would it be preferable to use {{l}} for no italicization?

-- TIA, Eiríkr ÚtlendiTala við mig 16:24, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

There is no 'for each' so the brute force approach is the only one that will work. The same is done with other templates like {{also}}, {{head}} and such. Point 2 is quite a big problem and I hadn't really thought about it. It might make this idea infeasible. I think {{l}} would be preferable, so that the purpose of this template is clear: it creates links, it doesn't format them. Otherwise we'll start seeing {{linksl}}, {{linksterm}} and so on, which I think is not what we want... —CodeCat 16:45, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for that, I'd started to think that {{term}} might be the wrong way to go, and you've helpfully confirmed my suspicions. I've refactored to use {{l}} instead.
About Point 2, I've already built in support for Chinese and Japanese, and it'd be easy enough to update the template in future as template users discover other no-space languages that the template doesn't handle yet. Examples, substed so this doesn't change after future template edits:
  • English:
    • Source: {{User:Eirikr/Template_Tests/links|lang=en|this|is|English}}
    • Result: this is English
  • Japanese:
    • Source: {{User:Eirikr/Template_Tests/links|lang=ja|これ|は|日本語|の|例|です}}
    • Result: これ日本語です
  • Navajo:
Arrowred.png This doesn't do anything to change capitalization -- should it?
Arrowred.png This doesn't have any default value for {{{lang}}} -- should it? -- Cheers, Eiríkr ÚtlendiTala við mig 17:43, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
I don't know if the capitalisation is a problem, but I don't know of a good way to solve it either. I think a better place to store spacing would be as subpages of the language templates themselves. We already have {{en/script}} and {{en/family}}, so why not {{en/wordspacing}}? —CodeCat 18:32, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
Simple alternative: add a parameter to the {{links}} template like spaces=1 or nospaces=1. Slightly more effort-requiring alternative: distinguish |_| from |, like in {{context}}. - -sche (discuss) 18:52, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
Heya, -sche --
Not sure what you mean by "distinguish |_| from |"; I looked at the source for {{context}} but I couldn't make out what's going on. I'm a bit bogged down today so I don't have the time to parse my way through the code. (And, honestly, I should probably not be taking the time to post this right now...:)
Adding a spacing arg would certainly work, but it seems somehow inelegant.  :)
@CodeCat --
Creating a wordspacing page (basically an interesting way of creating an attribute, no?) would certainly be ideal, and this information would then be usable wiki-wide, but it's also a lot more work than I was intending to tackle at the moment.  :) Perhaps that's something to bring up at WT:BEER, or maybe WT:GREASE instead?
-- Cheers, Eiríkr ÚtlendiTala við mig 20:59, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
Whenever you have to time to read this: I mean: if you write {{context|foo|bar}}, it displays (foo, bar); if you write {{context|foo|_|bar}} it displays (foo bar). You could use a similar mechanism to have {{links|日|本|語}} display (日本語) while {{links|日|_|本|_|語}} displayed (日 本 語)... it's a possibility, though it's not as efficient as (and it's more work, every time someone adds the templae, than) a dedicated spacing arg or the other solutions you discuss. - -sche (discuss) 21:14, 23 March 2012 (UTC)


Ik heb het woord *karilaz toegevoegd. Ik heb nog onzekerheid over de wijze van toevoegen van de bronnen. Wil jij mij dit nog even aanwijzen, als ik verkeerd gedaan heb. —Dyami Millarson DM 22:22, 24 March 2012 (UTC).

Bronnen worden door de wiki zelf ondersteund. Een bronvermelding wordt toegevoegd op de plaats waar die naar verwijst, met de volgende code: <ref>(plaats hier de tekst van de bronvermelding, eventueel met links)</ref> . Er moet vervolgens nog een kopje worden aangemaakt en worden aangegeven dat daar de bronvermeldingen geplaatst moeten worden. Dat gaat zo:
Als je een bronsjabloon gebruikt, zoals EWN, dan kun je die in de ref-tag plaatsen: <ref>{{R:Philippa EWN 2009}}</ref> . Tenslotte kan het wel eens voorkomen dat je dezelfde bron meerdere keren op dezelfde pagina gebruikt. Je kunt een bron dan een naam geven, zoals bijvoorbeeld hier "ewn": <ref name="ewn">{{R:Philippa EWN 2009}}</ref> . Die bron hoef je dan slechts één keer toe te voegen. Op alle andere plaatsen waar een verwijzing naar dezelfde bron moet staan, schrijf je: <ref name="ewn"/> . —CodeCat 21:56, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
Het is mij gelukt om de bronnen weer te geven voor *karilaz. —Dyami Millarson DM 23:25, 24 March 2012 (UTC)..
Ik heb een kleine wijziging gemaakt. —CodeCat 22:39, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
Ik heb het gezien. Het toevoegen van bronnen ging nog enkele keren mis, maar nu is het weer goed. —Dyami Millarson DM 23:25, 24 March 2012 (UTC)


Ik denk, dat Wiktionary nog niet de categorie Elfdalisch heeft, want ik kon de taalcode niet vinden. Het is verstandig om het aan te maken, want het Elfdalisch is zeer bruikbaar voor het reconstrueren van het Oergermaans, want het Elfdalisch heeft zeer veel oude grammaticale kenmerken. Ik heb tot nu toe gemerkt, dat de Oergermaanse -ō- overgaat in de Elfdalische -uo-, en gelijkt hierdoor het Oudnederlands, ook geeft het Elfdalisch de -uo- weer, waar het Oudnoords de Oergermaanse -ō- niet meer weergeeft. Ik zal deze ontwikkeling in elk geval voor de Elfdalisch woorden in de gaten houden, want dit kan erop wijzen, dat het Elfdalisch zich onafhankelijk van het Oudnoords vanuit het Oernoords of Noord-Germaans ontwikkeld heeft. Terugkomend op de categorie Elfdalisch, ik neem aan, dat wij dit op Beer Parlour moeten aangeven. —Dyami Millarson DM 12:40, 25 March 2012 (UTC).

Ik denk inderdaad dat het een goed idee is om het te bespreken. Het Elfdaals is namelijk deel van een grotere groep talen die in Dalarna worden gesproken. —CodeCat 12:18, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
Goed. Ik zal mij even inlezen op Beer Parlour, en dan zal ik jou uitnodigen om deel te nemen aan het gesprek. —Dyami Millarson DM 15:03, 25 March 2012 (UTC).


Ik ben nu al een tijdje op zoek naar de Oostfriese afstammeling van het woord *karilaz. Misschien dat jij het kunt vinden, maar ik vond het in elk geval niet in Glossarium der Friesische Sprache. Ik verwacht, dat het woord bestaat, want het komt voor in vrijwel iedere Germaanse taal, of is reconstrueerbaar of overgeleverd door namen. —Dyami Millarson DM 12:46, 25 March 2012 (UTC).

Na enig zoekwerk heb ik het gevonden in het Wörterbuch der Ostfriesischen Sprache. —Dyami Millarson DM 13:43, 25 March 2012 (UTC).

Er is op het moment een discussie aan de gang op de Beer Parlour over de verschillende dialecten van het Nederduits. Ik zou daarom liever even wachten voordat je Nederduitse dialecten toevoegt. —CodeCat 12:20, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
Wil jij mij even de link naar dit gesprek geven? —Dyami Millarson DM 15:06, 25 March 2012 (UTC).
WT:BP#Status of Low German varietiesCodeCat 13:12, 25 March 2012 (UTC)