Module talk:labels

(Redirected from Module talk:labels/data)
Latest comment: 1 month ago by Sgconlaw in topic “Figurative” and “figuratively”

Reflexive verbs edit

We could easily fill Category:Reflexive verbs by language by adding this category through the existing templates (eg: parlarsi). JackPotte (talk) 20:23, 29 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That's assuming we want to fill all those categories. —CodeCat 20:27, 29 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This debate has already been closed, we can't let the numerous people who have gathered these 570 pages finishing manually the majority of these forms, even more when a template is already filled into the articles. JackPotte (talk) 21:17, 29 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
For your information, the other on-line dictionaries ([1], [2]...) publish them, and as a native French speaker I can assure that it's fundamental at least in my language. JackPotte (talk) 21:29, 29 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That debate was about French specifically, but changing the categories in this module would change it for every language on Wiktionary. It was also 5 years ago, so that can hardly be assumed to be current consensus. That's why I said, it's assuming we actually want all of those categories. Also, it appears that not all the verbs in the category are actually reflexive, only some of them are. Why is that? —CodeCat 21:43, 29 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Because the template is misused for a derived term. For example we should move it from chamailler to it's redirection se chamailler. Autocategorizing will help to accomplish this maintenance. JackPotte (talk) 21:51, 29 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Exactly. The practice is very different for some other languages. For Dutch for example, the label is treated as a sense-level context label (like it should!) and a verb can have reflexive and non-reflexive senses. So if you added a category to the labels, then none of the verbs in "Dutch reflexive verbs" would actually be reflexive. They would only have one or more reflexive senses. —CodeCat 22:03, 29 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
One solution would be to send a bot scanning what links to {{context}} and add some categories according to the languages. JackPotte (talk) 22:38, 29 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
How do you mean exactly? Which categories should it add? —CodeCat 22:44, 29 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
At least French, Italian, Spanish and Portuguese.
But I'm still convinced that the module is the better way to categorize, it should detect if the category exists and if yes, just fill it (so you could protect Category:Dutch reflexive verbs‎ in red and it would stay empty). JackPotte (talk) 06:34, 30 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Language-specific links edit

Are they possible, or we are supposed to have language-specific context labels (like uds. for Spanish)? I'd like to have e.g. reflexive or Croatia with lang=sh link to Serbo-Croatian appendix (which there isn't one yet, but if this is possible I'd create it) where such terms are explained in more details. Also it would be useful to have support for this (links and categorization) in Module:headword, because often such labels are not meaning-specific (e.g. Ijekavian/Ekavian), but form-specific. --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 10:45, 3 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No, that's not possible currently. —CodeCat 12:00, 3 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

New labels request edit

I'd like to request new labels - "honorific" and "humble" for languages such as Japanese and Korean, which have these linguistic feature. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 22:23, 21 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Are you not able to edit Module:labels/data? —CodeCat 22:27, 21 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for the advice. If I knew what to do and how, I wouldn't ask. :) --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 22:47, 21 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well... it does say so on the documentation page of this module... —CodeCat 22:48, 21 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I admit I haven't tried hard enough. I've added the labels now but will probably improve it later and add other languages. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 22:59, 21 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorting edit

I didn't notice that the list was segregated into "qualifier labels", etc, so I have just been adding labels without regard to that segregation. It may be necessary to check that each label is in the right "section" of the module, or just abandon the segregation and sort all the labels alphabetically. - -sche (discuss) 00:37, 27 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Old Latin data edit

Hello. Could someone change the text for Old Latin in Module:labels/data from:

labels["Old Latin"] = {
	display = "[[w:Old Latin|Old Latin]]",
	plain_categories = {"Latin archaic terms"} }


labels["Old Latin"] = {
	display = "[[w:Old Latin|Old Latin]]",
	plain_categories = {"Old Latin"} }
aliases["ante-Classical Latin"] = "Old Latin"
aliases["Archaic Latin"] = "Old Latin"
aliases["Early Latin"] = "Old Latin"

please? — I.S.M.E.T.A. 15:44, 3 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I wonder if we should treat Old Latin as a separate language. We do that with all other "Old" languages already. —CodeCat 15:45, 3 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'd considered that, too; there are many striking differences between it and Classical Latin, and there's a respectable corpus to draw on. Currently, however, it's treated as just a chronolect of Latin, along with Classical Latin, Late Latin, Medieval Latin, etc. Whilst the chronolectical treatment persists, could the context label be changed as I suggest above, please? — I.S.M.E.T.A. 15:50, 3 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ok, it's done. If you want to treat Old Latin as a language, will you start a discussion somewhere? —CodeCat 16:31, 3 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you. Yes, I'll do that soon; hopefully later today. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 16:43, 3 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Now done; see Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/February#A proposal to treat Old Latin as a separate language from the other chronolects of Latin. I'm sorry that it took me a few days to get round to it. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 19:28, 7 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Headword labels edit

I think it would be best if we split the currently listed categorisation into two. pos_categories would become sense_pos_categories and term_pos_categories. That way we can categorise differently depending on what template is being used. We'd then also be able to decide that one of the two should not categorise at all, if we wanted to. —CodeCat 19:03, 28 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You can already specify pos_categories = {}; or pos_categories_head = {}; for that. Keφr 19:06, 28 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Can that be changed, then? —CodeCat 19:08, 28 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes. Would that not lead to a lot of duplication, though? Keφr 19:34, 28 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I suppose. But I prefer to keep things symmetrical. So maybe we could make it so the old names are the default for both, but if you want them to be different you have to use the separated names with "sense" and "term". We also probably don't want to use topical labels term-wide, because topics are inherently sense-specific generally. —CodeCat 19:44, 28 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please add to Module:labels/data edit

1. Please add "Northeastern Mandarin":

labels["Northeastern Mandarin"] = {
	display = "[[w:Northeastern Mandarin|Northeastern Mandarin]]",
	regional_categories = {"Northeastern Mandarin"} }
aliases["Northeast Mandarin"] = "Northeastern Mandarin"

2. Please add display for labels["Beijing"]:

	display = "[[w:Beijing dialect|Beijing dialect]]",

Thanks. Wyang (talk) 06:35, 1 May 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Why not use regional_categories for the former? Keφr 07:56, 1 May 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, we might as well create labels for "northeastern", "northern", and other directions. They are commonly used. —CodeCat 12:15, 1 May 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, sorry, should be "regional_categories". Corrected. Wyang (talk) 12:26, 1 May 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Beginning, Intermediate, Advanced Mandarin edit

They should categorise to "Beginning Mandarin", not "Beginning Chinese", even though the code used is 'zh'. Wyang (talk) 03:47, 8 May 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

OK, I'll do it a bit later, using "plain_categories". It's same as "Cantonese" and we need to add some more categories, e.g. "Min Nan Chinese", "Wu Chinese":
In Module:labels/data:
labels["Beginning Mandarin"] = {
	plain_categories = {"Beginning Mandarin"} }
etc. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 04:06, 8 May 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Combining plain/regional labels edit

What's the best way to label e.g. "Min Dong, dialectal Wu" (context|Min Dong|dialectal Wu), so that terms get categorised as both Min Dong Chinese and Wu Chinese (both are plain categories? --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 04:24, 22 May 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

{{label|zh|Min Dong|dialectal|_|Wu}}? Keφr 04:54, 22 May 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Great, thank you. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 05:03, 22 May 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That's not the same as cx|Min Dong|dialectal Wu|. That's equivalent to cx|dialectal|Min Dong|Wu. We should either keep those labels, or create another label "dial." which is defined as "{omit_postComma = true}". Wyang (talk) 05:14, 22 May 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you. "dialectal" actually belongs here to the language - "zh", in this case, so if "dialectal" cat exists, then it will be added to dialectal Chinese categories, which is okey. The visual effect is also achieved, it's Min Dong but dialectal Wu, is it right? --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 05:20, 22 May 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Visually it is the same, but it loses information about the association between "dialectal" and "Wu" and instead treats them as equal in level. If entries like 横顺 are created, they would be categorised as "Sichuanese Mandarin" < "Dialectal Mandarin", and this categorisation would not be possible. Wyang (talk) 05:29, 22 May 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hmm... I can see advantages to distinguishing things that are found "in the Wu and Gan dialects" from things that are found "in dialectal Wu". High German, the Low German varieties and English could also make distinctions of that nature. I'm not convinced that it's necessary to make such distinctions, but if we do, the best way would IMO be to have dedicated "dialectal Wu" and "dialectal Gan" labels in addition to the "dialectal" and "Wu" labels which are already present. I don't think a "dial." label would be used correctly vis-à-vis "dialectal" in practice; as DCDuring observed some few years ago, "a system [of multiple ostensibly distinct but very similar things] that is too complicated will not be implemented correctly by anyone other than the developer of the system and perhaps an acolyte or two". (I'm not even convinced that people would correctly distinguish "dialectal Wu" from "dialectal: Wu" in practice, but meh.) - -sche (discuss) 07:27, 22 May 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I am undecided now. If it's OK with others, please re-add "dialectal Wu", etc. In any case, the data modules are for keeping data, even if it's large. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 07:50, 22 May 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Vietnamese dialects edit

Please add:


 – Minh Nguyễn 💬 09:40, 13 December 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@-sche, could you add these labels to Module:labels/data/regional? Thanks! – Minh Nguyễn 💬 22:44, 30 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  Done [3]. :) - -sche (discuss) 23:10, 30 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category for postpositive modifyers edit

A while back I created Category:English adjectives commonly used as postmodifiers. But would it make more sense to add those words to categories using Template:label? If I understand the code, we would need Module:labels/data to include:

labels["postpositive"] = {
 display = "postpositive",
 pos_categories = {"postpositive modifiers"} }

--Arctic.gnome (talk) 23:13, 8 July 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That would create lots of conflicts with existing entries that use the label "postpositive" already. We can't assume that all of them mean "postpositive modifier", not even in English. This is also one reason why I think we should actually move away from using labels to categorise things, rather than adding more categories to them. —CodeCat 23:29, 8 July 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Topic categories edit

Would it be possible or desirable to make labels like "animal" or "color" automatically include words in a language's Colors or Animals category (for instance, grc:Colors or grc:Animals)? There would be one benefit: you wouldn't have to specify the category in the headword template or at the bottom of the page. — Eru·tuon 21:19, 10 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Is "animal" a context? —CodeCat 21:22, 10 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I suppose not. So perhaps a silly idea. I do wish there were a simpler way to categorize, though. — Eru·tuon 21:56, 10 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Simpler than what? —CodeCat 21:57, 10 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Than specifying categories in the headword or at the bottom of the page: in Ζεύς (Zeús), {{grc-proper noun| ... |cat1=Greek mythology|cat2=Greek deities}}; in ἐρυθρός (eruthrós), [[:Category:grc:Colors]]. — Eru·tuon 22:20, 10 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
We have the template {{C}}: {{C|grc|Colors|Animals}} would put the page in both Category:grc:Colors and Category:grc:Animals. --WikiTiki89 22:25, 10 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oh, just what I was looking for. Thanks. Now this post is superfluous. — Eru·tuon 22:44, 10 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Epic and Homeric Greek epithets edit

I've been using {{label}} for tagging Ancient Greek words that are used in formulaic poetic descriptions (epithets) in the Iliad and Odyssey: for instance, the fairly famous οἶνοψ (oînops) in the phrase "wine-dark sea". For these cases, the following labels would be useful:

labels['Homeric epithet'] = {
  display = "[[Homeric Greek|Homeric]] [[w:Homeric epithets|epithet]]",
  omit_postComma = true }

The commas before and after would be omitted because "epithet" should only occur in phrases such as "Homeric epithet of the sea and cattle".

This request assumes that the label "epithet" will only be used in Ancient Greek entries. If that's not correct, then I can offer a different version of the labels. — Eru·tuon 23:18, 10 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think it would be confusing for a general word like "epithet" to link in a language-specific way. A few (not many) entries refer to things as epithets, but often in the definition rather than (currently) the context; other entries use labels which are sometimes (partially) synonymous, like "slur". - -sche (discuss) 02:39, 11 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
In that case, here's a modified form. Would this work? (It might be nice to have Greek dialect labels, but not sure if it's actually necessary at the moment...) — Eru·tuon 07:01, 12 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Added since the module stopped being admin-only. — Eru·tuon 00:14, 23 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Labels for subvarieties edit

It seems that {{label}} and {{term-label}} don't recognize the labels in Module:labels/data/subvarieties. This is a problem for me, since I'm labeling Ancient Greek words by what dialect they belong to. For instance, I'd like {{term-label|grc|Epic}} to reference the label Epic in the subvarieties module. Could the code be modified to do this, or is there a reason why it doesn't allow it? — Eru·tuon 00:14, 23 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Actually, now the parameter |from= in {{alt form of}} doesn't work either. It used to generate a link and categorize. Maybe the result of this edit by @kc_kennylau? — Eru·tuon 00:23, 23 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Module:labels/data is protected with the "cascading" option turned on: Wiktionary:Main Page edit

The 3 April 2014‎ the labels list had been protected for the autoconfirmed users only. However, today a cascading protection blocks any non-admin account.

So, in order to work efficiently, that is to say without any redundancy into the articles and uncategorizing labels hazardous researches, I had to ask for some consensual and obvious modifications (because the categories already existed and were far from empty):

  1. The 6 December 2015 I asked for Java programming language.
  2. The 13 February 2016 for Object-oriented programming.
  3. The 19 April 2016 for email.

But no admin took care of it.

As a result, this maintenance inertia has slowed and prevented my projects here, and unfortunately might have provoked discouragement or frictions between contributors. That's why I propose to avoid {{lb}} into the main page, once for all. JackPotte (talk) 22:55, 19 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm sorry for the inaction of me and other admins with regard to your requests. I think {{label}} and {{context}} are supposed to be and historically were converted to (''text'') before being plugged into the Word-of-the-Day templates, precisely to avoid cascading protection falling onto the labels. Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/April#Cascading_protection_of_the_main_page. - -sche (discuss) 00:52, 20 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've now added the Java and object-oriented labels. - -sche (discuss) 01:01, 20 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
What I did was continue working as if my desired labels were there and then add them when it's a day where neither the WOTD nor the FWOTD contain a transclusion. It's kind of like an MMORPG. Nibiko (talk) 14:52, 9 May 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
As a computer scientist I consider as an error to repeat the labels in the categories.
By the way, as it's still protected today, I would need to add the label "clothing" for Category:en:Clothing please. JackPotte (talk) 19:08, 21 May 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That label already exists. See Category:Clothing. —CodeCat 19:16, 21 May 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@CodeCat: this category doesn't refer to any label with this name. Actually I had checked that:
  1. It's absent from Module:labels/data.
  2. It doesn't work into locker loop.
So it's missing. JackPotte (talk) 19:39, 21 May 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I meant that I ignored the categorisation for the time that the label wasn't recognised, but I suppose that this doesn't work as well for busier pages like English entries, but I went fine with it with Japanese entries. The good days for the remainder of this month are the 25th, the 28th, the 29th, and the 30th, provided that the uncreated FWOTDs, when created, don't contain any transclusion (and they usually don't), but, for the other days, you can edit inactive WOTDs and FWOTDs to replace the transclusions, as they're allowed to be edited if they themselves are not transcluded in the main page. Nibiko (talk) 11:37, 22 May 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That's funny so I want to try one time: I've planned it for tomorrow. JackPotte (talk) 13:15, 22 May 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  Done JackPotte (talk) 20:29, 23 May 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ideally, Words of the Day should not invoke {{label}}, but should use plain formatting like (''this'') or something equivalent instead, to avoid this issue. - -sche (discuss) 21:04, 23 May 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

and edit

@Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV I think you accidentally messed up the true for "and". Could you fix it? — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 07:26, 30 June 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry. If have no idea how that happened, but I’ve fixed it now. — Ungoliant (falai) 15:12, 30 June 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Polite terms edit

Excuse me. In polite section, I would like to add

pos_categories = {"polite terms"} }

and delete

display = "[[Appendix:Glossary#polite|polite]]"}


I'm working on the Javanese language and I find a category of polite terms (Javanese: tembung krama) is necessary for any lemma with the polite label. This is similar to categories of honorific terms (Javanese: tembung krama inggil) and humble terms (Javanese: tembung krama madya) that Javanese can have here. In every Javanese dictionary, those three categories always follow every lemma and knowing which category a lemma belongs is important.

I don't think the link to Glossary is needed since the term polite is not found there.

Please ping me for any reply to this particular discussion. Thank you in advance. Cahyo Ramadhani (talk) 09:46, 6 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No one responded this so I edited it myself. Cahyo Ramadhani (talk) 01:23, 17 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Extra spaces in some categories edit

I'm currently extracting categories from the dump files. I've noticed that some categories have two spaces in them:

  • English terms with obsolete senses
  • English terms with archaic senses
  • English terms with rare senses
  • English terms with historical senses
  • English given names

I just checked the code and in line 24 there's indeed an extra space getting inserted:

for i, cat in ipairs(data.sense_categories or {}) do
  cat = (term_mode and (cat .. " terms") or (" terms with " .. cat .. " senses"))
  table.insert(categories, lang:getCanonicalName() .. " " .. cat)		

Can this be fixed please? Also, why is it showing up correctly on the interface? – Jberkel (talk) 21:10, 15 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Fixed, though it seems to be a minor issue. —CodeCat 21:23, 15 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks! Minor issue maybe, but probably just because there's some data cleaning/workaround deployed at *some* level in the stack. – Jberkel (talk) 22:27, 15 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

label for units of measure edit

I'm going to add a label for Category:Units of measure, if nobody objects, maybe just shortened to "unit", or is this to ambiguous? – Jberkel (talk) 11:22, 24 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Are there terms whose usage context is restricted to when units of measure are being discussed? I doubt it. So a label should not be used. If you want to categorize, simply add a category (as in [[acre-foot]]), either by spelling it out or by using {{C}}. - -sche (discuss) 22:36, 24 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Isn't a label's purpose also to categorize? Maybe I misunderstood then. I find labels very helpful to get a quick idea of the scope. Categories are hidden at the bottom of the page and it's often not clear to which sense they belong. – Jberkel (talk) 00:46, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That's a secondary effect, but not the primary purpose. The primary purpose is to indicate per-sense grammatical information, and to indicate the context within which a sense is primarily used. Something like kilometer is not used primarily within a certain context, it's used generally and understood without context. As a rule, context-indicating labels are used with senses that exist along other, more general senses as well. —CodeCat 00:59, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
OK. So for example in the case of Morgen or barrel a context label would be appropriate, since there are a few other senses? – Jberkel (talk) 02:40, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Unprotect edit

@JohnC5 Can you unprotect this module? I need to make some changes. —CodeCat 19:07, 1 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@CodeCat: I've unprotected it for 1 day. Will that suffice? —JohnC5 19:25, 1 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I don't think it works that way. I think it'll just be unprotected altogether after a day. —CodeCat 19:31, 1 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Whatever, just tell me when you're done and I'll change it back. :)JohnC5 19:46, 1 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Semicolon edit

Is it possible to remove the space before a semicolon, like at 魚蛋鱼蛋 (yúdàn)? — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 16:39, 20 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

We could add that as a feature. --WikiTiki89 17:52, 20 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  Done. --WikiTiki89 18:12, 20 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The semicolon only shows up once, e.g. 家婆 (jiāpó), 魚蛋鱼蛋 (yúdàn). — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 06:50, 13 December 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Justinrleung: Fixed. Thanks for the message at User talk:Erutuon § hypocretin. — Eru·tuon 07:26, 13 December 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Erutuon: Thanks! — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 07:27, 13 December 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

mnemonic edit

  Done d1g (talk)

labels can be empty edit

<span class="ib-brac">(</span><span class="ib-brac">)</span> can be seen here: на первый взгляд. d1g (talk) 17:36, 26 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@D1gggg: That's because the display field is empty. It should either have content or not be given at all. However, I can make it so the module ignores an empty display field. — Eru·tuon 19:58, 26 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
regarding "remove empty display" - I was asked at my user page not to display such specific label.
is it possible to implement with LUA or should I change lb at all pages? d1g (talk) 20:20, 26 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No, you are misunderstanding me. I am referring to the code display = '' that you added to Module:labels/data. The stuff between the quotes is the display. It should not be empty. Between the quotes, add a link to a page that explains what a "hedge" is. — Eru·tuon 20:35, 26 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

labels["plural only"] = {pos_categories = { "pluralia tantum" }, edit

Then what do I do with Greenlandic verbs that do not take singular subject, and affixes producing such verbs?__Gamren (talk) 16:38, 5 October 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I would suggest adding a label called "plural only verb", with whatever display text ("plural only"?) and categorization is desired, to use in those entries. If verbs and affixes need different categorization, a "plural only affix" label may also be needed. - -sche (discuss) 20:02, 6 October 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Add maritime to topical? edit

As alias to sailing?--So9q (talk) 13:32, 26 October 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

RFC discussion: January 2020 edit


The following discussion has been moved from Wiktionary:Requests for cleanup (permalink).

This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.

"{{lb|de|obsolete|outside|dialects}}" produces "(obsolete outside dialectal)". --B-Fahrer (talk) 11:52, 5 January 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

{{lb|de|obsolete|_|other than|_|dialects}}?  --Lambiam 13:51, 11 January 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
We should probably make "dialects" display "dialects", while still categorizing the same way, because this comes up in a number of places. Although, another way of doing this would be "dialectal, otherwise obsolete". - -sche (discuss) 22:20, 11 January 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I have re-separated the label "dialects" (which was the historical state of affairs, until it was changed recently by someone who meant well but didn't think the consequences all the way through) so that it categorizes the same as "dialectal" but displays "dialects" to address this not-infrequent situation. I will flip through entries using the label with AWB in a bit to check that they are still displaying sensibly. - -sche (discuss) 21:02, 14 January 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"social media" label edit

I think we should have a "social media" label. "Internet" seems to get used as catch-all for all sorts of things happening on the internet. Or maybe the internet has become so dominated by social media that it's now treated synonymously? – Jberkel 07:57, 25 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Module:labels/data/regional and {{lb|en|South Korea}} edit

[4] didn't work for the entry retort food. Am I doing something wrong? @ErutuonSuzukaze-c (talk) 08:21, 14 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Suzukaze-c: That would be the right module to put that sort of label, but what happened is that the label in Module:labels/data/subvarieties overrode it. Maybe what we'd need is for {{lb|en|South Korea}} to behave differently from {{lb|ko|South Korea}}, but at the moment the structure doesn't allow that; one or the other of the two labels would need a different key (South Korean something or other versus just plain South Korean). In a past discussion User:Rua suggested what I think was something like labels["South Korea"] = { en = { ... }, ko = { ... } }. I've come to agree that's the best way to solve this sort of problem properly, but it'd require changing Module:labels to accept a new label data structure in addition to the current one. — Eru·tuon 21:45, 14 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Code for categorizing into "Category:English obsolete forms" edit

At present, adding {{lb|en|obsolete}} categorizes an entry into "Category:English terms with obsolete senses". Is there a code that would categorize it into "Category:English obsolete forms" instead, for example, for an obsolete spelling? (I'm aware of {{obsolete form of}} and {{obsolete spelling of}}, but see ischæmiæ where {{en-irregular plural of}} is already being used.)— SGconlaw (talk) 14:55, 16 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

“Figurative” and “figuratively” edit

@Benwing2: mmmm, is this a good idea? What is the difference between “figurative” and “figuratively” that justifies two separate labels? — Sgconlaw (talk) 10:49, 20 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Sgconlaw The issue is that e.g. sometimes I want to write something like {{lb|it|transitive|often|figurative|or|jocular}} and it comes out 'figuratively', which reads wrong. Originally 'figuratively' mapped to 'figurative' which would have made this read correctly, but then people who put 'literally' by the first sense of a term complained that they wrote 'figuratively' by the second sense and it came out 'figurative', which looked wrong, so they reversed the mapping. Although 'figurative' and 'figuratively' mean the same thing (and link to the same glossary entry), sometimes you want the adverbial form to display and sometimes the adjectival form, and we shouldn't force it one way or the other. It's similar to labels 'Tuscan' vs. 'Tuscany'; they mean the same thing but sometimes you want one to display, sometimes the other. Benwing2 (talk) 20:27, 20 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
To me, "often figuratively or jocular" seems fine ... Actually I don't know why we didn't just shift entirely to the adjectival form. "Literal" and "figurative" also seem fine to me. — Sgconlaw (talk) 20:33, 20 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Sgconlaw I am also fine with 'literal' in place of 'literally' but apparently some people aren't ... Benwing2 (talk) 21:43, 20 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Benwing2: it just seems to me it would be better to standardize on adjectives. After all we don’t say “formally”, “humorously”, etc., in our labels. — Sgconlaw (talk) 01:47, 21 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Theknightwho I noticed you changed the label to figurative in all entries. Perhaps it would've been good to have a BP discussion about the display of these labels as they are used in thousands of entries. I don't have a strong opinion, but slightly prefer the adverbs over the adjectives as the default labels. In case we stick with the adjectival form, certain entries need to be corrected: "used figurative" (and perhaps others). (@Benwing2, Sgconlaw) Einstein2 (talk) 00:44, 1 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Einstein2 You make a good point - I hadn’t realised it was used with “used figuratively” et al in labels. I was merely changing it to match many of the other aliases we already have. Theknightwho (talk) 01:05, 1 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Should we switch entirely over to adjectives? I don't have a strong feeling one way or another, but note that we have "attributively" and (until recently) "figuratively" which are adverbs, and then many adjectives which seem to predominate: "formal", "humorous", "poetic", and so on. ("Used figuratively" could just be replaced by "figurative" or "figuratively", in my view.) — Sgconlaw (talk) 10:22, 1 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Theknightwho It sounds like you undid my change to split 'figurative' and 'figuratively'. The whole reason I did this was for reasons like pointed out by User:Einstein2, sometimes one makes more sense and sometimes the other in particular label configurations. It is similar IMO to 'Tuscan' vs. 'Tuscany'; merging the two led to all sorts of solecisms so I split them. I would suggest a BP discussion to make sure we have consensus before going and changing/cleaning everything to a particular person's preferred standard. Benwing2 (talk) 19:36, 1 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I changed "figurative" back to "figuratively" in order to bring it into line with "literally". If you would like to make further modifications with the display of the labels, please start a BP discussion. Einstein2 (talk) 18:43, 23 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've started a Beer Parlour discussion as all this toing and froing is undesirable. — Sgconlaw (talk) 20:12, 23 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Return to "labels" page.