Template talk:de-noun

Diminutive

(Note to self or anyone who feels like doing this before I get to it because I'm lazy) must add option of "dim=?" to hide diminutive form stuff if unsure (like how en-noun has pl=?) — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 01:27, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Only categorize entries, not other pages.

This template needs to be changed so that it only adds entries, not other kinds of pages, to {{de-noun}}. While I'm making that change, is there anything else that needs changing? —Ruakh_TALK 12:26, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

gen+gen2 doesn't work

I tried to use both parameters "gen" and "gen2" in an entry today, and it shows only the first genitive. Using "genitive" and "genitive2" works. --Zeitlupe 07:30, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

In the case where there are two genitives, you should probably use gen1 and gen2. If you just write gen, the template assumes there's only one genitive, and refuses to display the other. -- Prince Kassad 08:20, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

But why? There's no need for that to be the case. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:19, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Sofixit — [ R·I·C ] Laurent — 13:31, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Has nobody fixed it yet? (there's too many curly brackets for my brain to take) SemperBlotto (talk) 17:17, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

I will try to fix it but I was hoping to simplify the template further (discussion below), so it may take a while. —CodeCat 17:36, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Target pages (genitives and plurals)

Hey, please edit the template in a way that it links to the German section of the target page. I know, this is a somewhat rare occurrence cos German nouns are capitalized, but anyway, better be safe as houses and make this dictionary flawless. :) -- Frous (talk) 03:53, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Fixing and rewriting the template

(taken from User talk:Mglovesfun) I've added line breaks and indenting to the template code just so it's a little easier to understand. And wow... it's a really big mess! If no one else minds I can try to rewrite and simplify the code a little without breaking any existing entries (hopefully)? —CodeCat 16:23, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Quite the opposite! Zeitlupe pointed out the problem in 2010 on the talk page. I merely tried to fix it, since nobody else had in the previous two years! Mglovesfun (talk) 16:24, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Well, the code in this template is similar to how {{nl-noun}} was before I completely rewrote it. I removed most of the duplicate parameters so that there was only one way to specify each parameter, which simplified the code a lot. More recently I also made the gender a numbered parameter, following the principle that 'numbered parameters are required, named parameters are optional' which seems to make sense in many cases (though not all). —CodeCat 16:32, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

It'll need to support gen and gen1, of course. Mglovesfun (talk) 16:34, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Could they not be numbered parameters too? —CodeCat 16:53, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

After my question in 2010 was answered, I always used gen if there is only one genitive form and gen1+gen2 if there are two. As long as it is documented, I don't see a problem with that. --Zeitlupe (talk) 06:55, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

I imagine the new template to work either like this {{de-noun|gender|genitive|plural|diminutive}} or like this {{de-noun|g=gender|genitive|plural|diminutive}}. If there is more than one possibility for each of those, they will use g2=, gen2=, pl2=, dim2= and so on, while the 'first' still uses the parameters I mentioned (in other words, adding a second possibility doesn't change how you specify the first). Is that ok? —CodeCat 11:20, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

@Zeitlupe, it contradicts other templates of the same nature, also the template contradicts itself as it doesn't (or didn't) have a pl1 parameter, only a pl parameter! So the parameters were gen or gen1 and gen2 but pl or pl and pl2, not pl1. Furthermore, documentation is good of course, but if ideally the template is simple enough that users can work out how to use it without documentation, it's better no? Mglovesfun (talk) 20:43, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

I've made the changes now, and a script is currently running to update all old usages. I've added documentation as well. —CodeCat 16:57, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

OK, when the genitive singular is the same as the nominative (e.g. with feminines), no link is created and the word appears in bold instead. But when the plural is the same as the singular (e.g. Penner), the plural is a clickable link to the exact same section. Can that please be fixed? —Angr 22:40, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

I've changed that now. —CodeCat 23:03, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Dank je wel! —Angr 23:26, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Third diminutive

Is it needed? One user clearly thinks so. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 18:18, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

If genitive is not given and gender is f, do not display genitive form.

In such a case, showing the genitive does not convey any additional information. 217.44.157.36 04:08, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

It does convey information. It conveys that the genitive is the same as the nominative. —CodeCat 10:54, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Missing plurals

Could someone add this code to the template, which should categorise all the German nouns with red links. --Type56op9 (talk) 20:52, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

<includeonly>{{#if:{{NAMESPACE}}||{{#ifexist:{{{plural|{{{2|{{PAGENAME}}}}}}}}||[[Category:Missing German plurals]]}}}}</includeonly>

Where should it be added? Anywhere?

Btw, there's a known issue where the auto-generated inflected forms of many feminine nouns are wrong due to human error (people added the wrong declension templates and/or set the wrong parameters to the declension or headword templates). So, accelerated creation of missing inflected forms would need to proceed cautiously. Most masculine and neuter nouns are OK, as far as I know. - -sche (discuss) 01:05, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

I don't know where to add it, or even if it is the correct code! But the plan to include something which categorises missing plurals is cool. --Type56op9 (talk) 13:45, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

About some pluralia tantum

@Zeitlupe, Jberkel, CodeCat Something ought to be done about the argument "pl" for pluralia tantum so that the plural parameter is not needed. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 08:44, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Well, I think that it is possible to write the code such that in the case "pl" does not exist, the last parametre is used. But before making changes to such a template that is used more than 1000 times, it is best to make a decision what and how to do it.--Sae1962 (talk) 05:38, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Also, something ought to be done about the way {{de-decl-noun-pl}} deals with the dative form so that the "n" part can be left out with a parameter. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 12:10, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

RFC discussion: November 2016

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.

---

German Duftanhänger and most likely many many more entries...

Most likely someone recently changed some template which now adds incorrect forms. {{de-noun}} without parameters now gives

de-noun ? (genitive de-noun, plural de-nounen)

Unchanged genitive and plural in -en is often incorrect. So many entries in which no genitive or plural was entered (e.g. Duftanhänger) now mention incorrect forms. Thus all German entries which now mention incorrect forms have to be cleaned up. ... -84.161.6.20 06:30, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

New parameter

Please add an optional parameter for compound forms, so we can display that 'Forum' in a compound becomes 'Foren-', 'Hund' becomes 'Hunde-', 'Satan' becomes 'Satans-' and 'Haus' stays 'Haus-' etc. pp. This has been mused for Norwegian too. Korn [kʰũːɘ̃n] (talk) 13:17, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

Template reboot

Thanks @Benwing2 very much for updating this rather cumbersome template! I have a few requests for the documentation page, though. Could you explain the significance of the exclamation point in {{de-noun|m|f=!weiblicher Geschäftspartner,in}}? Also, since "weiblicher Geschäftspartner" would be SOP and should never be an entry, can you edit the module so that {{de-noun|m|f=![[weiblich]]er Geschäftspartner,in}} links weiblich separately? (Clearly there would be no need to link to Geschäftspartner when you're on the page Geschäftspartner. Thanks! —Mahāgaja · talk 12:05, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

@Mahagaja Yup, I am planning on adding support for embedded links like this. The significance of the exclamation point is to indicate that the term in question is the full form of the term rather than an ending. The module recognizes this automatically if the form begins with a capital letter, but if it begins with a lowercase letter, it assumes it's an ending unless told otherwise. There might be a smarter way of distinguishing them, but I don't want to do something that's hacky. Benwing2 (talk) 03:14, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

@Mahagaja: I really don't think we should list "weiblicher Geschäftspartner" or other SOPs in the headword. Any person noun (of unspecified gender; the "default" form) can be preceded with männlich or weiblich, just like one can say "male driver" or "female driver", but of course we don't mention "female driver" in the article driver. Furthermore, what's meant with "feminine" (by my understanding) is the grammatically feminine form (-in) (which sometimes doesn't refer to entities of female natural gender (there was an annoying dispute not too long ago...)). — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 15:25, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

I'm not wild about listing "weiblicher Geschäftspartner" in the headword line either, but the template ought to be flexible enough for it to be possible. —Mahāgaja · talk 16:13, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

|n=+

@Benwing2 I've noticed that the template now supports |f=+ which is a phenomenal idea and simplifies a lot of work for German editors! Can we perhaps also get support for |n=+? The semantics are: der Erwachsene = the adult human (male or unspecified sex), die Erwachsene = the female adult human, das Erwachsene = the adult/mature thing (e.g. a personality, a deed, an aspect ...). See e.g.:

• 2018 June 11, Julianna Baggott, Harriet Wolfs siebtes Buch der Wunder: Roman‎^[1], btb Verlag, →ISBN, →OCLC:

  […] liebte diese Tätigkeit, die Effizienz, das Erwachsene daran.

  (please add an English translation of this quotation)

— Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 08:54, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

@Fytcha Yup, I will add this. I am also adding various features to better support proper nouns, including surnames (which need their own table format that displays both masculine and feminine forms, which differ in the genitive), toponyms (mostly neuter) and terms that are normally used with the article. Next is to figure out how to properly handle given names. Benwing2 (talk) 05:36, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

@Fytcha I have added support for |n=+. Benwing2 (talk) 05:49, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

@Benwing2: I've added support for neuter acceleration to Module:accel/de but I couldn't quite figure out where to put it in Module:de-noun. Could you please help me there? Furthermore, I've tried to add it to {{l-de-nom}} but that doesn't seem to work. — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 09:16, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

@Benwing2: In Invalider, I had to use f=+,Invalidin instead of the (expected) f=+:Invalidin. What do you think about offering both syntaxes? The colon is consistent with the rest of the template, the comma not so much. — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 23:21, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Category:German terms with redundant head parameter

@Benwing2 This template (or the module it uses) seems to be putting everything in Category:German terms with redundant head parameter. Any idea why? —Mahāgaja · talk 13:08, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

missing accel links in headword line

@Benwing2 The headword line does not generate any acceleration parameters for the genitive and plural forms. They are present in the declension table though. Looking at the code, it seems it's missing the accel_form parameter, line 473-474

do_noun_form("gen_s", "genitive", true)

do_noun_form("nom_p", "plural", not proper)

But I noticed that they don't get passed anywhere else, is this on purpose? Jberkel 19:52, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

@Jberkel This is intentional because I think it won't properly pick up and include other cases that are syncretic with the cases in question unless I do significant hacking on the code. It works if you click on the corresponding terms in the declension table. Benwing2 (talk) 20:05, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

Ok, I don't actually need it for acceleration, I'm revisiting some parsing code I wrote a while ago which extracts the forms from the headword line (from the generated HTML), and I just noticed that it stopped working. I guess I could just change it to get the forms from the table instead. Jberkel 20:15, 17 September 2023 (UTC)