User talk:Bequw/archive2010

Template:io

Hi there Bequw. Since the number of Ido translations and entries are going up, I see no reason why it should be hyperlinked any longer. Esperanto is not hyperlinked any longer, and Ido is very similar to Esperanto, so I see no reason why it should remain hyperlinked. Razorflame 14:30, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

You may bring the issue of default linking up at Wiktionary:Translations/Wikification. The current number of entries, however, has no bearing on our use of linking. The main reason I reverted you was because your edit was incorrect, see {{es}} for the format of a template that is unlinked by default. --Bequw → ¢ • τ 17:04, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Obsolete Dutch Adjective Templates

Hi Bequw, just to let you know that both {{nl-adj-table}} and {{infl|nl|adjective}} have now been superceded by {{nl-adj}}. If you see an entry tagged with {{nl-adj-table}}, please replace it with the newer template. The new template reduces clutter and conveys the exact same information. An example of this is uitzonderlijk. Please find the template documentation here. Thanks for all the effort you've put into this. Jamesjiao 10:13, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Looks good. --Bequw → ¢ • τ 23:19, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Letters, etc.

Hi, Bequw. I'm going to resume the project of cleaning up entries of letters, among other characters. Since you are involved with it and presented ideas and concerns, beforehand I'd like to know, or reaffirm, some of your thoughts on this project. Firstly, you objected the Braille definitions which described the appearance instead of a meaning, for instance "the dots 1, 2 and 4 raised". Do you also disagree with this definition scheme for Latin letters, such as "The letter a with a tilde." in ã? --Daniel. 21:35, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Wonderful. For ã, the key part that makes it a definition and not just a visual description of the glyph is saying that it's a "letter" which indicates that it can combine with others to make words. I would just keep in mind the other things that I mentioned on your talk page. Thanks. --Bequw → ¢ • τ 23:15, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Of course, I'm keeping in mind what you've mentioned in both my talk page and in the template talk pages I saw. So, Braille characters also have similar generic characteristics: We could describe ⠿ as being "A Braille character" (that is, it can be combined with other Braille characters to form words and sentences). Though, Wiktionary editors value individual language sections sufficiently to not want a Translingual section where a character is used in only one language. I'd like to know if there's a particular reason to keep Translingual sections when two or more languages share the same character. If I may differentiate Portuguese ã from Vietnamese ã, (with their different purposes in each language, different sounds and perhaps usage notes containing some ortographic rules and words as examples) I think that a generic description saying that it's a "letter" isn't useful in any way. --Daniel. 12:39, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Braille is not a language, just an encoding. Definition have to be language-specific and therefore detail what language-specific term (letter, punctuation, word) the character stands for.

As for keeping Translingual section when a letter is used in two or more languages, I was more trying to cleanup (and put some rationale behind) current practices when I brought it up in the BP. I think that Translingual is an option not a requirement in many cases. There could be strong reasons to have/not-have a Translingual entry at a letter. For a it's a good idea, but I'm not sure about entries such as ã. BTW, many Translingual entries should have pronunciation sections that distinguish language-differences (there is pronunciation variation in all of the multi-character Translingual terms), so the reasons for separating entries at a letter should be more than just differing pronunciation (possibly orthographic or etymological differences). --Bequw → ¢ • τ 15:10, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

I did not state that Braille was a language; I agree, it is not. The entry a is defined as, among other things, an IPA symbol and an SI prefix; so it merits a Translingual section. In my opinion, if the entry ã says in Translingual section "High breaking-rising tone in Kashubian and nasal central unrounded vowel in Portuguese.", such section should be splitted into Kashubian and Portuguese. --Daniel. 15:30, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

By the way, when I started this project in major scale (that is, roughly when I was placing lists of Latin characters outside See also sections), there were often Translingual sections described in this manner:

1. The third letter of the Esperanto alphabet.
2. The fifth letter of the Romanian alphabet.
3. The third letter of the Slovene alphabet.

Such language-specific definitions and related information were moved to language-specific sections on sight except (1) pronunciation, simply because I was not sure how to deal with it, (2) Braille, as it was hugely incomplete and could wait the major subproject of creating a Braille entry for each Japanese character, for example and (3) generic definitions such as "a with tilde" and "Braille with dot 5 raised" because that's how Unicode describes them and how people recognize them regardless of language. These are not issues anymore as Unicode information is at separate boxes, I know pronunciation and intend to place appearance in Etymology sections where suitable. If you say that are trying to put rationale in Translingual sections whose purpose is to show pronunciations, I almost feel guilty for not separating them too before; If you don't object, I'd like to continue transferring information from Translingual sections and subsequently delete them. --Daniel. 16:21, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Could you give me examples entries that you'd like where you'd like to move all information into language specific sections and remove the Translingual header. --Bequw → ¢ • τ 21:20, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

ü is one example, as there are different pronunciations and usage notes of this letter between various languages. Perhaps you'll see practical examples after a related BP discusson is concluded. Possible see also sections as seen at ice blue would make my work on letters easier and more convenient. --Daniel. 00:19, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Try it out. --Bequw → τ 03:13, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

鏡花水月

I don't think 鏡花水月 is an English idiom — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 15:50, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I made it just a textual context-label. There's already an idiom category. --Bequw → ¢ • τ 18:58, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Moves

The pages that you are moving page are those that were moved there after discussion at User talk:Mglovesfun. Maybe you should ask Mglovesfun first before moving them back? Razorflame 03:04, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

You can see from the content that they weren't actually a Project. I will, however, drop him a note. --Bequw → ¢ • τ 03:10, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Yep. No problems. Cheers, Razorflame 03:11, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Mandarin nouns in pinyin

Hi Bequw

I can see that you have changed the chinese categories and it looks good. I was just thinking that it might be a good idea to also have the category Mandarin nouns in pinyin. It would be easy to make and it would be logical to have it. Kinamand 09:17, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

The Pinyin-only categories weren't used under the old system so I didn't use them in the new one. They're easy to add, though, using the templates. So sure, I'll do it. --Bequw → ¢ • τ 15:11, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

APL operators

Probably didn't really belong in a dictionary. I just get the feeling that people might look up any character in Unicode (even though it includes plenty of meaningless graphics). Anyway, thanks for your care in preserving them in the appendix! Perhaps it will be useful to somebody. Equinox ◑ 23:11, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

No problem. --Bequw → ¢ • τ 23:30, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Slow down

Hi there. Can you please slow down the rate at which you edit using AWB please? Thanks, Razorflame 23:27, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, got caught up. --Bequw → ¢ • τ 23:28, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

It's no problem :) I, too, get caught up in it at times ;). Cheers, Razorflame 23:29, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

ISO 639-3 codes

As I stated on WT:TODO, why can't templates like {{deu}} and {{eng}} be redirects to the two-letter forms? That's what the French Wiktionary does. I'm struggling to find a downside to it. Mglovesfun (talk) 12:16, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

See Wiktionary:Beer parlour archive/2008/August#Duplicate Language Codes and User talk:Robert Ullmann/2008b#Multiple languages codes. RU seemed to think their existence was harmful but never clarified. He'd probably have a better idea. --Bequw → ¢ • τ 14:06, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

I don't see anything about redirects being a bad idea, or at least why they are a bad idea. I will do some test. Mglovesfun (talk) 14:18, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

See this edit, pointed out, etyl and context both use lang= and just copy out whatever the user puts, so even put fra when it is a redirect to fr doesn't matter. However this is not a disadvantage, it is just an advantage either. However using {{etyl|fra|es}} does work and gives es:French derivations, as it should. Mglovesfun (talk) 14:28, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

I believe the thought is that if the duplicate codes exist, newbie editors will be more like to use them when it's inappropriate, such as in topical category prefixes (either explicitly or via template). Redirects will still face this problem. Maybe AF can be taught to fix these. I don't think it's a huge problem though. --Bequw → ¢ • τ 19:15, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

I've posted a comment at Wiktionary talk:Language codes#duplicate code redirects. I'd say if no one has a problem we should do it. We can also then create the rest of the missing duplicate codes this way. --Bequw → ¢ • τ 22:45, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Done. --Bequw → ¢ • τ 20:23, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Index:All languages

To answer your question about ELE: It is (was) the sole style guide for English until last February when Wonderfool converted Wiktionary:About English into a style guide. Prior to that, it simply covered abbreviations, acronyms, and the like. That's why ELE was listed in the index to all languages. --EncycloPetey 04:21, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

OK, thanks. --Bequw → ¢ • τ 04:39, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

We should probably make that page a table (with the columns being the types of pages: index, category, etc.). That would make it more manageable. --Bequw → ¢ • τ 17:27, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Polytonic todo

Re Wiktionary:Todo/polytonic_ety_usage: isn't it better to avoid "sc=polytonic" and rely on "lang=grc" instead? --Dan Polansky 13:43, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, you're right. I was thinking pre-{{Xyzy}}. --Bequw → ¢ • τ 14:28, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Czech entries needing cleanup

I've seen you've generated some nice cleanup lists, possibly using a bot or other magic. Could you generate for me a list of Czech entries needing formatting? It would be the entries with at least one definition line that matches the regexp "^#.*(''.*'')", where the brackets are literal, not magic. You could place it to "User:Dan Polansky/Czech old-gloss entries". --Dan Polansky 17:00, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

There you go. Let me know if you want to modify the search a bit (I had it not check when the line started with "#:" or "#*" to ignore quotes). I if you want to play around yourself, it was easy to do in WT:AWB. --Bequw → ¢ • τ 20:57, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you; the result looks good. --Dan Polansky 06:59, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

AWB

I am probably not registered in Wiktionary as an AWB user. Could you register me as one?

If I am registered AWB user, and I want to generate a list of Czech entries matching "^#.*{{i|.*}}", how do I so that? Or can I easily discover it myself by playing around with AWB? --Dan Polansky 16:58, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

I've added you. Although you technically only need this for editing with AWB (not for just making cleanup lists)

The easiest way is to download a dump of en.wiktionary at http://download.wikimedia.org/backup-index.html. Then in AWB, for the "Source" choose "Database dump". Press "Make list" and wait for the new window. In the dump tab select your downloaded dump file, on the namespace tab choose "Content" (the lower one), and on the text tab put in the regular expression you want to find (checking "Regex"). For your pattern this regex should work (the trick part with the hyphens it to make sure the latter match is still in the same entry as the Czech L2) "Czech ?==([^-]|-[^-])+^#.*\{\{i\|.*\}\}" (w/o quotes and with "Multiline" checked).

If you want help with regex's so that AWB will help you convert those gloss formattings, let me know. Cheers. --Bequw → ¢ • τ 22:55, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! Following your instructions, I have generated a list of Czech entries that use the i template instead of the gloss template. --Dan Polansky 12:59, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Category:nan-cn:Literary

Where should this redirect to, or is the title already correct? I may have wrongly replaced this, if so, please correct, ty! Mglovesfun (talk) 14:32, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Correct. --Bequw → ¢ • τ 19:02, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Fictional vs. constructed languages

You replaced Category:Fictional languages appendices with Category:Constructed languages appendices. I am not sure I understand the reasoning. It seems that this new category would also include Category:Esperanto appendices. Is this intentional, should Esperanto be added to the category? Rl 08:22, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

No, this was a bad idea. User:Daniel. and I were doing some reorganizing. I'm going to revert. --Bequw → ¢ • τ 15:25, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Template:spa

Is this right? I'd have though it was Template:esp per español. Mglovesfun (talk) 20:44, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

http://www.sil.org/iso639-3/documentation.asp?id=spa. --Bequw → ¢ • τ 20:50, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Note

Just letting you know that I responded to your request on my new vote. Razorflame 16:06, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Wiktionary:Todo/Incomplete etyl-fr

Could you update this, as every entry I click on seems to be already done. Mglovesfun (talk) 22:14, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

It was only kept around for EP. I'll move it to his space. I'm waiting for the new wiktionary dump that should come out tomorrow and will then publish new lists. Thanks for the cleanup work. --Bequw → τ 22:18, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Wiktionary:Todo/etyl problems has been updated. --Bequw → τ 02:51, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

importExternalScript

diff Is this not used in people's monobook.js? I'd think it may well be.​—msh210℠ 15:49, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

As of recently: Conrad.Irwin 15:54, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

MediaWiki:Common.js:===importExternalScript===
MediaWiki:Common.js: * importExternalScript inserts a javascript page 
MediaWiki:Common.js: *    from anywhere including your local hard drive: importExternalScript('file:///C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/Andrew/My%20Documents/apitest.js');
MediaWiki:Common.js:function importExternalScript(url) {
User:Hippietrail/nearbypages.js:      importExternalScript(
User:Hippietrail/perlanguage.js:            importExternalScript(
User:Hippietrail/perlanguage.js:            importExternalScript(
User:Hippietrail/nearbypages-alpha.js:      importExternalScript(
User:Hippietrail/perlanguage-alpha.js:            importExternalScript(
User:Hippietrail/perlanguage-alpha.js:            importExternalScript(
User:Karelklic/monobook.js://importExternalScript('http://localhost/editor.js');
User:Polyglot/monobook.js:  importExternalScript ('http://en.wikipedia.org/w/api.php?format=json&titles='+encodeURIComponent (wgPageName)+'&action=query&callback=replyFromWikipedia')

Thanks for the grep, Conrad. I've rolled back Common.js for now, erring if at all on the side of not breaking things. Feel free to revert me if it is, in fact, reasonable to do so.​—msh210℠ 17:06, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Why didn't a Search "Everything" pick those other up? --Bequw → τ 17:49, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

I have no idea. A lot of "magic" goes into our search engine. This data was from the dumps that hippietrail provides to avoid such problems. (watch out when extracting the archive it's a tar bomb) Conrad.Irwin 19:51, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

edit problems

Hi Eequv. I don't know if this is related to your changes in MediaWiki js-files, but lately there has been an increasing number of javascript related problems. The editform has problems with the cursor jumping back while typing and empty lines disappearing (unless I use shift-enter). Edittools doesn'work for me and just now accellerate WT:ACCEL stopped substituting.--Leo Laursen – (talk · contribs) 10:19, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Hmm, I wouldn't think so, but maybe. Wikimedia just updated the editform on all the main wikis and I've noticed these changes. To see if it's these things you could go to Special:Preferences, "Editing" and turn off the 3 "Experimental features". If that's not it, what's your setup (browser version, OS, skin, and way you're including WT:ACCEL)? --Bequw → τ 15:50, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Good call. Turning of experimental features seems to fix editing, edittools and WT:ACCEL. Thanks.--Leo Laursen – (talk · contribs) 16:26, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

a#Translingual

I was thinking about the RFV or jv and all that, and came up with this

1. The first letter of the basic modern Latin alphabet.

How often is this used rather than mentioned? I don't see any way of citing this, therefore it would obligatorily fails, as would the other 25 letters and the GreK, Cyrl, Arab (etc.) alphabet. That's the downside of RFVing symbols rather than words. Mglovesfun (talk) 13:17, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

I understand your concern, but most symbols are easy to verify. The most common use of a letter is when it is present in a word. So an attestation of "A" would be "Abigail". See the definitions of letter and alphabet. Similarly a use of a non-letter symbol such as the period ( . ) would be at the end of this sentence. There still maybe symbols in Wiktionary that would be hard to attest, but most are easy. Does this make sense? --Bequw → τ 14:58, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

That was the best I could come up with too. However, it doesn't show that it's the first letter, so there's no real reason to accept it. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:44, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

To be that specific in attestation I think one would need to restructure the letter definitions along the lines of MW (see Wiktionary:BP#Letter as Part of Speech) and separate the letter, the glyph, and the speech counterpart. For the sake of utility of our readers we merge all into one definition. --Bequw → τ 14:36, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Well, I feel the same way about ISO 639 codes since they're so widely used on her (pretty much every language-specific template). I'm not getting at you or anything, I'm trying to explain my point using analogies. Mglovesfun (talk) 14:38, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

I know, but the issues are still quite different. With letters the issue is having 3 subsenses vs 1 macrosense. With ISO 693 the issue is basic inclusion. If the codes were included, then we could talk about the utility of phrasing/structuring the definitions certain ways. --Bequw → τ 14:44, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

AWB (2)

Well, I made some sort of start with AWB. Mglovesfun (talk) 18:13, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Looked good. --Bequw → τ 20:58, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Am I right in thinking I can set it to make one edit every x seconds? Obviously there's a downside to that, but when it comes to replacing {{cmn-question}} with {{question|cmn}} there's not really much to check. Mglovesfun (talk) 22:20, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

I haven't gotten that to work. Maybe because I wasn't running it with a bot flag. --Bequw → τ 22:33, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes, setting it to do an edit every x seconds requires the bot flag. -- Prince Kassad 23:09, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Restructure Category:Phrasebook

I think this does need a vote, however on hindsight a week for just a minor policy change would have been enough. I dislike acting unilaterally (however, I still do it, lol). Mglovesfun (talk) 15:18, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Caution rarely hurts. --Bequw → τ 22:42, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

User:Mglovesfun/To do

I could do with some input on the steroids templates. I'll be on IRC a little bit tonight, but probably not that much. Mglovesfun (talk) 19:59, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm not on IRC really, and I have nothing insightful about the steroid context templates. Hopefully you can bounce ideas off someone else on IRC, though. --Bequw → τ 23:07, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Wiktionary:BP#Finally_I.27m_gonna_propose_a_CFI_change

I've not had a single comment. Granted, you seem a bit busy right now, but it was you that gave me this idea. Mglovesfun (talk) 00:13, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, on a semi-break. Looks OK. Would've clicked on it earlier if there was a "teaser" in the BP snippet. --Bequw → τ 01:36, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

HotCat

Where can i find out more about using "HotCat" as you did recently. ? Mutante 11:38, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

See my importScript line User:Bequw/vector.js and for documentation see w:Wikipedia:HotCat. It makes category cleanup much easier. --Bequw → τ 00:08, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Welcome back

I promise not to inflict any translations on you.

Anyway, have you given any thoughts to an approval percentage for votes? AFAICT right now, whoever closes the vote just does as they see fit. Most of the time that's fine, but in close votes, it's somewhat problematic.

And yes, you should be on IRC more. Mglovesfun (talk) 19:06, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I asked the same question about vote passing percentages at WT:Beer parlour archive/2010/January#Category:Emoticons. I agree it adds a bit of subjectivity and uncertainty to the process, but since the wiki processes aren't as rigorously defined as other organizations' a bit of flexibility is good for a few reasons.

• (Common argument) Controversial decisions drive editors away, so when applicable we should err a bit towards no consensus.
• (My argument) We have universal suffrage but undoubtedly some perspectives are more important. If unheard-of users vote nefariously then I think the closer can discount their weight a bit.

--Bequw → τ 21:42, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Please slow down

Hi there. Please slow down on the edits you make. Thanks, Razorflame 16:49, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, thought I was slow enough. Will do.--Bequw → τ 16:51, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

I dispute that you can "fix broken things too quickly". There's the option to hide patrolled and/or logged in users in RecentChanges. Anyway. Do like me and get a bot flag. Mglovesfun (talk) 16:54, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

comparative superlative

I am unfamiliar with Spanish and entered the above with trepidation - because I was dealing with the Greek relative superlative. I would be grateful if you could confirm! thanks —Saltmarsh^{απάντηση} 15:48, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Looks correct. I think it's used in other Romance languages as well. --Bequw → τ 23:36, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Skin usage

Not very accurate but here's a list of the number of users that have created their own skin files (either .css or .js) as of 3/April/2010.

Skin	Chick	Classic	Cologne Blue	Modern	Monobook	MySkin	Nostalgia	Simple	Vector
Users	2	10	2	5	400	4	0	3	17

I think many of the monobook files were created because of insufficient customization mechanisms (WT:PREFS or WT:Gadgets). --Bequw → τ 18:32, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Wiktionary:Todo/proto problems

Could I have this as a text file for AWB? Despite my best efforts, I can get rid of all the superfluous stuff in order to do so. Mglovesfun (talk) 16:11, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

I usually select the table and paste it into Excel. Then I select the left column and can copy it into AWB. User:Mglovesfun/protolist. --Bequw → τ 03:27, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

That's what I tried in order to do it. It seems to work on Firefox, but not IE. Firefox won't work on this computer (I'm giving my laptop the week off, so far). Mglovesfun (talk) 09:23, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Wiktionary:Votes/2010-06/Setting lang attribute for transliterations

Hi, you voted in support of this proposal, but new information has come up (see the vote page, in the "Oppose" section) that might make you want to reconsider.​—msh210℠ (talk) 15:34, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

proto

You may want to see WT:RFFF.​—msh210℠ (talk) 20:13, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Probably. I tried to do it slowly though. Sorry about the slow response, but since you edited the header of this LiquidThreads page I didn't get notified. I just saw it in my Watchlist. Do you not like LQT? --Bequw → τ 20:37, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Nah.​—msh210℠ (talk) 15:04, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

I'm surprised you did't see the "you have new messages" thing, though, on editing any page.​—msh210℠ (talk) 15:37, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

By the way, on another topic, what happened with your WT:RFFF plan? The flag was approved by two other admins, and you said you were waiting on a dump: are you still? (I don't know much about dump frequency.)​—msh210℠ (talk) 15:37, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

It requires some coding that I haven't gotten around to doing. Hopefully sometime soon. --Bequw → τ 20:19, 27 August 2010 (UTC)