User talk:Daniel Carrero

Definition from Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Jump to: navigation, search
User:Daniel Carrero edit
User talk:Daniel.

2008 | 2009 | 2010
2011 | 2012 | 2013
2014 | 2015

Votes on EL[edit]

Hey. I think all of them need to be renamed to something more comprehensible. This one-word vote is an example. For future users ya know.--Giorgi Eufshi (talk) 11:33, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

I don't know, that could be a good idea. But only a few of those didn't start yet and I wouldn't want to rename them after they already started.
I chose the name "language" because it's the language policy. It's the explanation of "language" in all entries. A longer name could be "Entry layout: Language section", I think. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 12:15, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
I won't rename them unilaterally, but you can create a discussion at WT:RFM about that to see what others think. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 12:16, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Vote guy[edit]

Hey, vote guy. As you changed all the voting system, can you deal with putting Wiktionary:Votes/2016-01/Uncle G for de-sysop on the vote page, please? I'll add an extra beer to the invitation.--Stubborn Pen (talk) 00:21, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done --Daniel Carrero (talk) 00:34, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Template:sort:一/ja[edit]

Is Template:sort:一/ja a project that got anywhere? —suzukaze (tc) 05:21, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

No, I probably just created that one template, but I think it's obvious I had some kind of "auto-sorting of Japanese kanji" in mind. Which would be the work of a module nowadays. I took the liberty of deleting that template. The full contents of the template were: "一00". --Daniel Carrero (talk) 10:50, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Reordering L3 headers[edit]

(@-sche, as I believe this is of interest to you.) I think that a major long-running criticism of Wiktionary is how difficult it is to find the information one is looking for. A good way to deal with this would be colour-coding, which some other language Wiktionaries use to some degree, but I expect that'd get a poor reception among Wiktionarians here, so a less aggressive approach would be to push Alternative forms (and maybe Pronunciation) after the definitions except when sorted by multiple etymologies where those sections apply to all etymologies, or something along those lines. I'm not tied to any single approach, but I think that we could make great strides in user-friendliness by thinking about how to push the information people want most to the top. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 06:33, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Angr (IIRC) has pointed out that one difference between how we present etymologies vs how other dictionaries do is that ours have big headers that take up a lot of space. A reason for putting alternative forms at the top of entries is to confirm to people that they've reached the right word, when e.g. they spell it kinnikinnik but our main entry is kinnikinnick, or when there are UK vs NZ vs etc differences... but the "Alternative forms" header usually (not at kinnikinnick, but usually) takes up more space than the one or two alt forms themselves. There's wasted space to the right of all the headers. Other online dictionaries tend to fill that space, e.g. putting inflection info that we put on the headword line next to the POS declaration, or putting pronunciation info there. If we could do that, resulting in an appearence like this, it might be an improvement, separate from any re-arrangement of headers. It would require us to eschew ===This type of header=== for those sections, though. De.Wikt does eschew ===These=== for unimportant headers — though they leave all the empty whitespace to the right of the pseudo-headers — so we know it's doable and doesn't make entries too hard to edit.
We could also streamline pronunciation sections by making the IPA the link to the audio file. One entries that had only a few pronunciations, the pronunciation section could fit on a single line. This is how other online dictionaries do it.
I don't like the idea of colours, unless you mean only to colour all the POS headers with the same neutral colour like de.Wikt does. Using different colours for different sections would be an accessibility issue (for colourblind people), and colouring the entire section would be visually unpleasant / distracting (garish), in my view. - -sche (discuss) 07:14, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
I like how French Wiktionary formats their headings. —CodeCat 15:41, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Comparing between the POS header styles of dewikt and frwikt, I like the latter more. I'd probably support using that format here.
  • I support placing "Alternative forms" after the definitions. One reason is: "Alternative forms" are very similar to "Synonyms", to the extent that I've seen occasionally the same word linked in both headers in the same entry.
--Daniel Carrero (talk) 15:47, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Overall, the French style seems better than what we do, I agree. The reason I'm leaving this here is (as usual) laziness; I care about this issue, but I don't know how much effort in BP discussions or polling will be necessary until a vote on it can be created, so I am not especially eager to get the ball rolling on that myself, and I'm hoping one of you will do that soon. By the way, another idea that has been floated before is autocollapsed etymologies, but I'm not sold on that yet. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 16:13, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Vote templates[edit]

I hope you understand what I did in these three edits and why I did it. --WikiTiki89 16:31, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Sure, thanks! --Daniel Carrero (talk) 16:35, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

propose a vote to rename (1) {{i}} -> {{q}}; (2) {{italbrac}} -> {{qualifier}} or {{q}}; (3) {{qualifier}} -> {{q}}?[edit]

Hi, since you've been proposing lots of votes lately I wonder if you'd be willing to propose another one along the vein of the {{term}} -> {{m}} and {{cx}} -> {{lb}} change. This was originally suggested by User:CodeCat but I agree with the gist of it. Basically, {{i}} and the longer-form {{italbrac}} are synonyms for {{q}}/{{qual}}/{{qualifier}}, but have sub-optimal names because the names suggest a specific formatting convention (italics + paren) when they really are intended to have a sort of semantic function. So I'd suggest a 4-part vote:

  1. Vote to bot-substitute {{i}} -> {{q}}
  2. Vote to bot-substitute {{italbrac}} -> {{qualifier}} (or to {{q}} if part 3 passes)
  3. Vote to bot-substitute {{qualifier}} -> {{q}}
  4. Vote to bot-substitute {{qual}} -> {{q}}

I imagine (1) and (2) will pass easily; I'm not sure about (3) or (4) since some people have voiced objections to the shorter names and there are already bots that try to rename {{i}} to {{qualifier}}.

Benwing2 (talk) 06:55, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Sure, I don't mind creating the vote page for this. Should we create a BP (or maybe a GP) discussion right now to get feedback from other people? Are there any other discussions about this move? If the answer is yes, then I should link to the discussions from the vote.
I'd like to get one thing out of the way: I don't know if other people would rather use RFM than a vote. IMO, a vote would be the better option in this case, because this change involves a major template. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 14:41, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
User:CodeCat posted recently suggesting something like this: See Wiktionary:Requests for deletion/Others near the bottom (don't know how to link to a section containing brackets in it). I also just posted to the bottom of Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/February about not having bots make changes like this until we get consensus. Benwing2 (talk) 18:36, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Wikisaurus and link parameter[edit]

Years ago, you wanted {{ws}} and {{ws header}} use link= parameter while I insisted on hyperlink= parameter. Given recent trends in short template names supported by a supermajority in Wiktionary:Votes/2015-11/term → m; context → label; usex → ux, and given how easy to understand link= seems to be:

Switching {{ws}} and {{ws header}} to link= (while keeping hyperlink= for compatibility with old page revisions) seems to be in order.

What do you think? Would you change the templates to support the short link= form? --Dan Polansky (talk) 11:49, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Redlinks categories[edit]

What's the point with this, apparently new category: [1]? It is empty, although there must be thousands of Finnish-to-Finnish and English-to-Finnish redlinks. --Hekaheka (talk) 10:00, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Now the page lists läheltä although I see no redlinks in the entry. --Hekaheka (talk) 06:03, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
It seems that parempaan is on the list because "parempi" is put last in the template line, i.e. like this:
{{fi-form of|case=illative|pl=singular|parempi}}
If one changes the line to this format:
{{fi-form of|parempi|case=illative|pl=singular}},
the word parempaan will disappear from the redlinks list. This is an unnecessary and probably unintentional feature. --Hekaheka (talk) 04:19, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

I don't see why Abyssinian is listed. No Finnish redlink there. --Hekaheka (talk) 04:22, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Likewise with aardvark and viitisenkymmentä. --Hekaheka (talk) 04:24, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
@Hekaheka:
  • When you saw any category like Category:Finnish redlinks with terms appearing or disappearing, it was because I was testing Module:redlink category and Template:redlink category to see if it was possible to populate all redlinks categories at once.
  • I checked the code of {{fi-form of}} and I don't think the order of parameters should change whether an entry is categorized in Category:Finnish redlinks. That template uses {{m}} to link to your example word "parempi" and that always makes the redlink to be categorized if "parempi" is a redlink. Probably the entries just appeared and disappeared when you checked because I was coincidentally fiddling with the redlink template/module at the time.
  • At some point I made a mistake that caused entries like Abyssinian, aardvark and viitisenkymmentä to be categorized too, but that was quickly fixed.
  • Turns out if I populate the categories for all languages, it causes module errors in about 200 entries (as far as I know) with many links, like language, water and eye. Apparently I can populate a few categories without generating any errors, so I populated only Category:Portuguese redlinks, Category:Italian redlinks and Category:Russian redlinks. I deleted all other categories.
  • Do you think you would use Category:Finnish redlinks? I should probably be able to populate it too, but I'd prefer doing it only for languages that I suspect someone will use the categories. :)
--Daniel Carrero (talk) 14:38, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
If you want to populate or empty any redlink category, just add/remove the language code from Template:redlink category. But for any language code you add, I'd check for any errors afterwards in CAT:E. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 14:55, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
I'm trying populating Category:Finnish redlinks. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 14:55, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I would probably use the Finnish redlinks category. --Hekaheka (talk) 06:22, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

OK, I'm glad to know. I already populated Category:Finnish redlinks and it didn't cause any module errors. Feel free to use it and its subcategories. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 06:29, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
Could you please limit this to mainspace entries (or at least exclude the Appendix namespace)? It seems like a waste of resources to do this for Swadesh lists. Chuck Entz (talk) 22:24, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
@Chuck Entz: It's limited to mainspace entries already. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 23:30, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
I was mistaken about the module being invoked, but still: if you view the html source for Appendix:Slavic Swadesh lists you find this:
Transclusion expansion time report (%,ms,calls,template)
100.00% 10871.175 1 - -total
94.64% 10288.668 3402 - Template:l
14.74% 1602.139 3402 - Template:redlink_category
6.77% 735.935 327 - Template:isValidPageName
1.96% 212.786 1 - Template:Swadesh_list_family
1.47% 159.633 3 - Template:Swadesh_list_family/langs
0.40% 43.932 1 - Template:Swadesh_list_family/fams
0.20% 21.733 301 - Template:l/sh/Latn
0.20% 21.658 301 - Template:l/sh/Cyrl
0.13% 14.661 1 - Template:wikipedia
Note that {{isValidPageName}} is called 327 times, which is, coincidentally, the number of instances of {{l|ru}} in the wikitext. Given that this is the wrong namespace, that should be zero. The namespace test should be before the language code test and the isValidPageName test, since it's much simpler, uses less resources, and failing it means everything else is irrelevant. I'm sure that, if you did that, the 14.74% of execution time figure for {{redlink_category}} would drop dramatically. Given that the figures for the {{l}} and {{redlink_category}} overlap, that should mean the 94.64% for {{l}} should drop, too. Chuck Entz (talk) 08:33, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
You're right. I fixed {{redlink_category}} to make the namespace test go before the language code test and the isValiePageName test as you said. Now the transclusion expansion time report of Appendix:Slavic Swadesh lists is this, after a null edit:
Transclusion expansion time report (%,ms,calls,template)
100.00% 12223.118 1 - -total
94.57% 11559.225 3398 - Template:l
6.74% 823.886 3398 - Template:redlink_category
1.71% 208.948 1 - Template:Swadesh_list_family
1.28% 155.908 3 - Template:Swadesh_list_family/langs
0.33% 40.731 1 - Template:Swadesh_list_family/fams
0.22% 26.701 301 - Template:l/sh/Latn
0.22% 26.536 301 - Template:l/sh/Cyrl
0.20% 24.241 1 - Template:wikipedia
0.14% 16.508 1 - Template:lang
--Daniel Carrero (talk) 08:45, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Vote timeline[edit]

Hi Daniel, don't forget to do this. This, that and the other (talk) 01:53, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Oops, I forgot completely! Ok, thanks! --Daniel Carrero (talk) 02:16, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

traduções[edit]

Como diz‐se egg roll? --Romanophile (contributions) 09:52, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

I'm not really sure, I don't recall hearing that food name often in conversation or reading it in written Portuguese. Most likely, people here in Brazil would just use "egg roll" or sometimes translate it like this: "rolo de ovos". Some Google searches seem to confirm this. None of these two are citable from Google Books, but you would make yourself understood using them nonetheless. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 10:18, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
Não comem‐se no Brasil? Achava que muitos asiáticos emigravam aí. --Romanophile (contributions) 10:25, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
Ah, there's, this one: spring roll = rolinho primavera (mind the diminutive) (no doubts about it; also, it's citable on Google Books)
Next time I go to Liberdade (district of São Paulo), I can check out if they use any other name for egg rolls that I didn't mention out of ignorance. Probably next week or so. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 10:35, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
w:Egg rolls are a Chinese-American invention. I'm not sure they know about them in Asia. Chuck Entz (talk) 12:04, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
@Chuck Entz: When did Brazil move to Asia? --WikiTiki89 14:59, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
It hasn't, but Asians have moved to Brazil (in Beginning Mandarin at UCLA 3 decades ago, I sat next to a Chinese girl from South America, so it's not a new phenomenon). Romanophile expressed surprise that egg rolls apparently aren't eaten in Brazil, since they have a significant Asian community there. My point was that Asians might not be familiar with egg rolls, unless they're familiar with US cuisine. Not that long ago, a restaurant opened in China that was the first to serve American-style Chinese food, and it was quite a revelation to the Chinese. Some of the foods we associate most with Chinese food in the US like chop suey, egg rolls and fortune cookies are American inventions. Chuck Entz (talk) 01:58, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

affix vs prefix/suffix[edit]

Hi ! I notice that you've been using the affix temp over prefix/suffix...is there any particular reason for it ? Leasnam (talk) 01:52, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

In my opinion, {{affix}} is better than the other two because:
  1. It uses the actual entry name with the hyphen at all times (like bi- instead of bi for the prefix).
  2. It does everything {{prefix}} and {{suffix}} do, plus it accepts interfixes like -i-.
  3. If I want to just say "-er" without specifying the previous parameter, I can choose between {{suffix|en||er}} and {{affix|en|-er}}. The latter is simpler, because I don't have to use the 1st parameter as an empty parameter. I can simply use "-er" as the 1st parameter and the template recognizes that it is a suffix because of the hyphen.
  4. Apart from {{prefix}} and {{suffix}}, don't get me started on {{confix}} and {{infix}}. Using a single template, I don't have to remember the differences between all of those or have to choose among them. (that said, {{affix}} can't be used as a replacement for {{circumfix}})
  5. {{prefix}} and {{suffix}} allow "lang=en" and {{affix}} does not. I like to remove the "lang=en" from affixes, so I'm glad to go all the way and replace them by {{affix}} in the process.
--Daniel Carrero (talk) 02:07, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
Okay, Thank you ! Leasnam (talk) 15:48, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Entries like /* */[edit]

Hi. These are not in human languages so I don't think we can include them. The APL symbols I added were deleted, for instance, and we don't include programming keywords unless used in English. Equinox 09:19, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

(I fixed your title.) That's okay I guess. I saw some older entries like -- (decrement operator) and $ (a bunch of random programming stuff) so I guessed it would be nice to create more entries like these. For reference, all related entries should be at: Category:mul:Programming and Category:mul:Computing. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 09:24, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
Some programming language operators have made their way at least minimally into human language. The ones that have not should be deleted, in my opinion. It's quite possible that some people humorously use comment notation in written human communication, but it has to be attested before we can include it. --WikiTiki89 17:35, 19 April 2016 (UTC)