User talk:Jberkel
Add topic Archives |
|---|
Dernier numéro de 2025, qui se termine comme à l’accoutumée par une sélection des mots de l’année, venus de différents médias mais aussi ceux sélectionnés par la communauté du Wiktionnaire ! En plus de cet instantané lexical de l’année, et aux côtés des sempiternelles brèves et annonces de parution de nouveaux dictionnaires (arabe, irlandais, bosnien-perse, baloutche), une présentation par Lyokoï des dictionnaires de prénoms.
Découvrez le numéro 129 de décembre 2025 !
Brouillon du prochain — Anciens numéros — Abonnement-désabonnement
Cantons-de-l'Est (talk) 19:01, 1 January 2026 (UTC)
The mammoth page and wanted entries
[edit]Hey Jberkel, first of all thank you for taking the time to make a Wiktionary dump on a holiday. Happy New Year!
Last month, a {{mammoth page}} system was introduced for a, where, due to its size (and to do away with its constant module errors), it's been split between a, a/languages A to L and a/languages M to Z. Now, attempting to link to a language's section in "a" (for most languages) makes the template link to the corresponding section in one of the two other pages.
It seems this has somewhat broken the tracker in pages like this one, where the page will show up in the wanted list as if the entry didn't exist... even though it does. This happens for other languages too and it's been happening since the previous dump (dated December 17th).
I hadn't mentioned it before because I thought it had to do with how the dump had been made while the mammoth page system was still being set up and all, but now that the issue's appeared again in today's dump, I realize that that wasn't the case.
Would it be possible to do something about it? MedK1 (talk) 03:04, 2 January 2026 (UTC)
- This is a problem with the HTML snapshot's overeager caching, see phab:T305407#11210512. Something similar happened when Ancient Greek linking was changed recently. The problem should go away as/when the pages are updated. However, given all the problems with the current HTML dumps I'm going to work on a wholesale replacement, as the WMF doesn't seem to be willing to commit any resources to fix them. Jberkel 11:33, 2 January 2026 (UTC)
need assessment for German declension implementation
[edit]Hi! I work on es.wikt and want to unify all declension templates in a similar way like it works {{de-ndecl}}, {{de-adecl}} here. Can I ask you a question about implementation? Tmagc (talk) 19:26, 22 January 2026 (UTC)
- Hi! The best person to ask is User:Benwing2 who wrote most of the module code. Jberkel 19:59, 22 January 2026 (UTC)
- @Jberkel My dilema is'nt about the code itself because I don't like much to import code from other wikis raw, but instead to write it from scratch with my own imprint. The question is about the language. So I'll go ahead.
- As I see, there are 8 different forms considering the four cases * (singular + plural). Now , there are a lot of nouns where the forms are repeated. From the documentation I see Präsident has only Präsident and Präsidenten, so I could specify only nominative and genitive and let the reader (who it is assumed to be wise enough) to "infer" the remaining forms. Herr, only Herr, Herren (nom pl) and Herrn (gen sg). Certainly there are nouns like Diakon with 6 different cells.
- Why I care so much about this? Since we work with the philosophy of "avoid to repeat information", the templates should go either as a head (one line after the L4 title, before the definitions) or as an expandable table with its own section title, but not both. The first makes sense if there's a clear majority of the nouns where I can specify few forms (say at much 4 or 5 different forms) and let the reader to infer the remaining. Now, if there's a significant number of nouns where the 8 forms need to be specified, I'd rather go with a table. So, what would be your recommendation? Tmagc (talk) 20:34, 22 January 2026 (UTC)
- Ok, thanks for not being able to take five minutes to give an opinion. Wish you a poor year and the worst for your future. And welcome to my blacklist. Good bye. Tmagc (talk) 03:48, 25 January 2026 (UTC)
On parle entre autres des listes Swadesh et de la terminologie scientifique empruntant au latin. Noé discute des qualités d'un « beau dictionnaire ». Vers la fin du numéro, les wiktionaristes sont invités à dresser un portrait chinois de leur personne.
Découvrez le numéro 130 de janvier 2026 !
Brouillon du prochain — Anciens numéros — Abonnement-désabonnement
Cantons-de-l'Est (talk) 16:59, 3 February 2026 (UTC)
Des brèves, des statistiques, des vers marins, des vidéos, des nouvelles des données lexicographiques de Wikidata et surtout la bonne surprise de la consécration du Wiktionnaire par l’ATILF qui en propose une consultation conjointe à celle du TLFi sur son nouveau site !
Découvrez le numéro 131 de février 2026 !
Brouillon du prochain — Anciens numéros — Abonnement-désabonnement
Cantons-de-l'Est (talk) 01:33, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
Le Wiktionnaire a fêté ses 22 ans et une vingtaine de personnes se sont retrouvées à Lyon fin mars, un mois fort chargé ! La revue de presse montre que c’était dynamique aussi ailleurs dans le monde des dictionnaires. Lepticed7 propose un petit point sur les illustrations et puisque c’est le numéro publié le premier avril, Noé vous propose des dictionnaires humoristiques !
Découvrez le numéro 132 de mars 2026 !
Brouillon du prochain — Anciens numéros — Abonnement-désabonnement
Cantons-de-l'Est (talk) 12:36, 1 April 2026 (UTC)
Complete absence of reasoning in edit summaries
[edit]Manual revert Orientalism: Special:Diff/90207404, deletion orientalism: Special:Diff/90207420
This is violating being helpful: Help:Interacting_with_other_users#Experienced_users
When I edited Orientalism and orientalism (the current page which contains a lie, Edward Said deliberately popularized the uppercase version, and only incidentally popularized the lowercase version), my edit summaries were "Redoing this one as the standard" and "Redoing this one as containing the alternative definition" respectively. The basis of this, possible to determine from the content that I was using, was sourced from Wikipedia, where "orientalism" redirects to "Orientalism". Ignoring the reams of evidence which it took to change the Wikipedia page, our sister project, for choosing the latter standard form, is a violation of w:wp:DUE and hence violates Wiktionary NPOV. Lumbering in thought (talk) 08:47, 18 April 2026 (UTC)
- Sorry if this wasn't a helpful revert, I should have explained. It wasn't clear from your summaries what your overall goal was, either. In any case you've left the entries in a worse state (lots of duplicated senses, etymologies), so I reverted them. Wikipedia is not a good source for motivating changes here, we use citations as evidence for the uses of a term.
- The English Wikipedia also doesn't make a distinction between lowercase and uppercase: all lowercase entries redirect to uppercase. It's true that the spelling "Orientalism" is now more common (perhaps due to Said, becoming more common after the 1978 publication), but both lower- and uppercase spellings have been used for a long time. The normal practice here is to avoid swapping alt forms, unless the spelling of the lemma is absolutely uncommon. It's enough to point out that the postcolonial studies sense is usually capitalized. I've made those changes now. Orientalism has been around for a long time, not just since Said popularized it. Our entry should reflect this. Jberkel 11:33, 18 April 2026 (UTC)
I've made those changes now
- What should have happened is stop editing until consensus was achieved on the talk page. w:wp:TALKDONTREVERT But frankly, I don't care as long as it's the same user who made the revert meddling.
lots of duplicated senses, etymologies
- Don't take my charitability as "duplicating content". Your refusal to grapple with the evidence as I'll get to shows why there was not a valence-identical etymology or even a single, fully-same labeled same-place duplication of a sense's definition. However I would be fine with using "alternative form" more often, keeping the different labels, like I did in this one case. firetruck has a different label, US, than the labels in fire truck
The English Wikipedia also doesn't make a distinction between lowercase and uppercase: all lowercase entries redirect to uppercase. [...] The normal practice here is to avoid swapping alt forms
- This I will admit had slipped my mind that uppercase first letter is the standard format of Wikipedia. But the article does not do blah blah, also [X] as bLAh bLAh, w:Neapolitan_ice_cream and keeps the standard (or common per Wikt) form except in a quote actively trying to genericize the term. The evidence to swap the alt forms is as follows:
- oriental → Oriental (this is similar logic to black → Black) w:Orient.
- That you have listed yet another reason to make it uppercase only adds to my case.
- That it was a degenericized "critical concept" w:Orientalism_(book)
- Here is a nice Wikipedia page with proper degenericized concepts. w:Futurism
- Lumbering in thought (talk) 20:27, 18 April 2026 (UTC)
- What's a degenericized critical concept? And what does Neapolitan ice cream have to do with this? Your argumentation is very strange, and seems to boil down to "it's written in uppercase on Wikipedia so it needs to be the same here". Wiktionary is not Wikipedia. There are many entries where the spelling on Wikipedia doesn't correspond to the form used on Wiktionary (e.g. futurism you mentioned). If it's typically only capitalized for a specific sense this can be indicated with usage notes or labels (as done in black–nobody went around and made Black the main form). The only valid reason for making Orientalism the main form I see is frequency. But if you do this, then don't leave both pages in a confusing, duplicated mess (why is that "charitability"?), with a separate pseudo-etymology for the capitalized version. Jberkel 00:12, 19 April 2026 (UTC)
- What may have led to a lot of confusion was me forgetting to do what I did for Orientalist to Orientalism. It is just "The tendency to represent eastern subjects, to assume stylistical characteristics original of the East.", and not something more akin to Oriental studies. I was just reading the bottom of w:Orient#History_of_the_term. But according to Edward Said, there are three definitions of Orientalism, ranging from neutral academic, to Manichean, to his most famous. I may reply to your other points. Lumbering in thought (talk) 01:05, 19 April 2026 (UTC)
- What's a degenericized critical concept? And what does Neapolitan ice cream have to do with this? Your argumentation is very strange, and seems to boil down to "it's written in uppercase on Wikipedia so it needs to be the same here". Wiktionary is not Wikipedia. There are many entries where the spelling on Wikipedia doesn't correspond to the form used on Wiktionary (e.g. futurism you mentioned). If it's typically only capitalized for a specific sense this can be indicated with usage notes or labels (as done in black–nobody went around and made Black the main form). The only valid reason for making Orientalism the main form I see is frequency. But if you do this, then don't leave both pages in a confusing, duplicated mess (why is that "charitability"?), with a separate pseudo-etymology for the capitalized version. Jberkel 00:12, 19 April 2026 (UTC)
Dans ces Actualités d’avril : un dictionnaire de hiéroglyphes présenté par Taousert, un article sur l’antimatière par Basnormand, des réflexions sur la présentation de l’information par Bananax47 et une grille de mots croisés à partir des nouvelles entrées d’avril par Gouglov !
Découvrez le numéro 133 de avril 2026 !
Brouillon du prochain — Anciens numéros — Abonnement-désabonnement