Wiktionary talk:Namespace

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


The Pseudo namespaces here do not, as far as I can see, align with the idea of pseduonamespaces in Wikipedia.

I have renamed them prefix-pseudo-namespaces.

I'm prepared to be corrected--Richardb 12:49, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Requesting a new (formal) namespace[edit]

If you want a new namespace, request it at Bugzilla, and/or talk to a developer on the #mediawiki channel. I found out the hard way that most of the pages that collect requests on meta don't generally get watched. (BTW, this wouldn't be the first wiktionary asking for an additional namespace. bg: also requested one at bugzilla:1902, though it doesn't seem to have it yet.) —Muke Tever 16:19, 8 May 2005 (UTC)


Are we changing from "Wiktionary Appendix:" (e.g. Wiktionary Appendix:Surnames) to "Appendix:", then? I have no objection to the change off the top of my head. I'm just checking that this is an intentional change, and not a mistake. Uncle G 23:03, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

  • In the six months I've been around here, I've heard Eclecticology complain about them clogging the Wiktionary namespace twice I think. I just threw that in there, not trying to pull a fast one, but rather thinking it is correct, without double checking. That said, perhaps it should go to WS:BP? I know I have an awful time finding stuff in the Wiktionary namespace, and it is compounded by not being able to efficiently use Special:Allpages there. --Connel MacKenzie 23:53, 8 May 2005 (UTC)
    • Hey waitasec. I didn't add "Appendix:" with that wording, did I? That was there when you pointed me to this page, I think. Also, of greater concern (and magnitude) is "Index:" getting yanked out of the Wiktionary: namespace. --Connel MacKenzie 23:56, 8 May 2005 (UTC)
      • I mis-read the diff, and I certainly wasn't implying that anyone was pulling a fast one. "Appendix:" and "Index:" were in the 2004 version. The question thus becomes should we go with those and rename the pages, or change this to read "Wiktionary Appendix:"? This is a question for the Beer Parlour. Uncle G 00:38, 9 May 2005 (UTC)

New namespaces[edit]

Devs were asking for a list of pseudo namespaces last night before they signed off (after I did.) The list of the ones currently in use is at Wiktionary:Namespace#Pseudo-prefix-namespaces (and sections after that.)

The proposed list of new namespaces then becomes:

  • Appendix:
  • Citations:
  • Concordance:
  • Index:
  • Transwiki:
  • Usage:
  • WikiSaurus:
  • WS:

--Connel MacKenzie 30 June 2005 12:23 (UTC)

I agree with Appendix:, Concordance: and Index: as new namespaces, but I would have questions about some of the others. I see no need for a Citations:. Generally I don't see the need for separate citations page, but, putting that objection aside, they all relate to a specific word or term and should be treated as sub-pages of that word in the format word/Citations. Eclecticology June 30, 2005 16:21 (UTC)
I think the /Citations approach was chosen as a proof of concept (I don't know, nor care. Just trying to make a helpful observation.)
I also question the capitalization of "WikiSaurus".
Transwiki has been in use for a very long time; I don't see much advantage nor disadvantage for that one.
WS should have only redirects, therefore the talk pages for those pages themselves should never be a problem either...therefore no namespace is needed there.
Usage: is another great proof of concept that I'd like to see advance.
I guess the primary reason for making them namespaces is now gone (auto-capitalization of the first character after the colon.) The secondary reason of having the Discussion/Talk page be in the correct place is actually kind of dubious; Namespace "WS talk:" should never have anything in it... --Connel MacKenzie 1 July 2005 02:28 (UTC)
WikiSaurus is a made up word anyway. I never use it so it's not going to bother me if your revise the capitalization. I can't say how others will feel about that. The possible of /Citations and /Usage sub-pages is that they are available as consistent break-aways if a page gets too long. With the three where we have agreement, I'm not going to be in a hurry to implement these until after we have made substantial progress with the capitalization adjustments; there are just too many loose ends for now. Eclecticology July 1, 2005 07:41 (UTC)
Um, right - I am in no rush for these either. The question came up on IRC from Brion while I was offline/logging, so I figured I'd mention Wiktionary:Namespace here. (BTW, "Usage:" is meant to be multi-page linked, therefore a sub-page approach probably won't work well for that.) --Connel MacKenzie 1 July 2005 12:28 (UTC)
BTW, making WikiSaurus a namespace means that nobody will ever have to remember its silly CamelCase again: WikiSaurus:nose will work, as will wikisaurus:nose, WiKiSaUruS:nose, Wikisaurus:nose, etc., just like you can point to WikTionary:Tea room. (In the case that it does become a namespace, I would suggest the default capitalization be "Wikisaurus", for the same reason that we aren't WikTionary.) —Muke Tever July 3, 2005 00:54 (UTC)

Big changes[edit]

I've converted all the lists of namspaces on this page to tables and started to rewrite some of the descriptions, as well. Didn't get very far, so I just decided to dump what I had back on the page so others can (maybe) help with the rewriting/polishing. - dcljr 10:05, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Please direct me! LANGUAGES![edit]

I'd like to type a wikilink in en.wikt to ru.wikt. I can remember I once saw a page with prefixes. Please help me: where is such a list? Josh L. 15:34, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Do you mean a list of language codes, or do you just need a link to a word in ru.wikt? We have a number of pages containing language codes, and I don’t know which one you want. But you can make a link to ru.wikt like this: ru:слово. —Stephen (Talk) 15:40, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
Thanks, Steve! I did tried "ru:слово", but I don't know why the links remained red; now I tried "ru:слово" (with an initial colon!) — thus it WORKS!:)
Thanks, Steve. I must say I messed namespaces with interwiki. Pfooh, it's a toil to learn wikiing:D Josh L. 16:12, 28 June 2011 (UTC) PS. Having previewed here over and over again, I now can see that I don't know why there it didn't work here it's working. Thanks; I'm now starting to doubt if I did something wrong then. Josh L.
On a talk-page, you can just do [[ru:слово]] to create a link, because talk-pages don't have interwiki-links in the sidebar. On other pages, you have to do [[:ru:слово]] to create a link, because otherwise the software thinks it's an interwiki-link to put in the sidebar. —RuakhTALK 17:44, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
«...because otherwise the software thinks it's an interwiki-link to put in the sidebar.» Would you explain what "the sidebar" and why? (I've made your examples "nowiki" so that people could see them without editing, if you don't mind.) Josh L. Thanks. 07:09, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
Re: the "nowiki"-s: Thanks, I don't know what I was thinking!   Re: the sidebar: the sidebar is the gray column on the left side of each page, starting with the logo in the upper-left-hand corner. If you visit a page such as [[the]], and look in the sidebar, you'll see a section labeled "In other languages". (It may be collapsed, in which case you can click on the "In other languages" label in order to expand it.) That section contains links to all the other Wiktionaries that have entries for the word the (or for an identically-spelled word in a different language). If you visit the?action=edit and scroll to the very bottom of the edit-box, you'll see how those links are generated. —RuakhTALK 11:04, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
Re: [[the]]
Sort of "wikiscenarios", erm?
By the way, what exactly the quadruple brackets do? Josh L. (talk) 07:11, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Needs updating[edit]

@Daniel Carrero, this is probably something to get to at some point. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 05:03, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

@Metaknowledge That seems to be true. In this diff from 2010, I did some work and said "Reviewed entirely, checked information and cleaned up.". Still, the page is understandably lacking explanations for Module:, Reconstruction: and the shortcuts RC:, T:, etc. that are going to be introduced in the future. And probably other things need cleanup here, too. Sure, I have some other Wiktionary projects that probably have higher priority over this, but at some point I should get to this page. :) (I added "Update WT:NS." to a list of Wiktionary tasks I have on my PC.) --Daniel Carrero (talk) 15:28, 26 January 2016 (UTC)