This, that and the other

Welcome!

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wiktionary. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• Wiktionary Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to start a page
• Our layout policy (nicknamed "ELE")
• Criteria for inclusion (nicknamed "CFI")
• Wiktionary Sandbox (a safe place for testing syntax)
• What Wiktionary is not
• FAQ

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wiktionarian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk (discussion) and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~, which automatically produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to one of the discussion rooms or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome!

—Ruakh_TALK 17:02, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

eh

I was just wondering, on your addition to eh, was the language you were adding w:Ainu? Just trying to sort it out. Many thanks. -Atelaes λάλει ἐμοί 18:39, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

It was. Sorry for the confusion; I forgot the French (where I got the entry from) change the spelling of their words to suit their pronunciation system. This, that and the other 08:56, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Excellent. Thanks. -Atelaes λάλει ἐμοί 15:39, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

spelunk

I have corrected the ety (it was only slightly off, as the correct etymon is an alternative spelling of what was put). It appears that shpellë exists and already has an etymology. Further back than that, and I would suggest asking User:Ivan Štambuk. -Atelaes λάλει ἐμοί 06:23, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Template:fr-conj-ger

What were you trying to do with Template:fr-conj-ger?diff=6436457?

—Ruakh_TALK 16:25, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Sorry. I was trying to use it on Appendix:French verbs, and I obviously didn't want that intro there. On reflection, the text needs to be switched off by a named parameter or something. See my contribs for other fr-conjes I did it to. (Sorry, busy at the moment.) This, that and the other 08:06, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Appendix:French verb tables

Hi, I noticed that page added. May I ask, how is any different to Appendix:French verbs or Category:French conjugation templates. Do you I merge them? --Rising Sun talk? 23:34, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

The page is intended as a concise listing of irregular French verbs. However, it is no use in its current, half-completed state. I have userfied it, to User:This, that and the other/French verb tables. Thanks for asking, it was a forgotten project of mine. This, that and the other (talk) 10:18, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

It could possibly become Appendix:French verbs/irregular, as the French verb appendix is already rather long. :Mglovesfun (talk) 10:27, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Good idea. I'll knuckle down and try to flesh it out this weekend, or when I get a spare moment. You're still welcome to edit it in my userspace, if you like. This, that and the other (talk) 22:08, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

6@Chin from water, diff

The etymology at 6@Chin says that it comes from the "W" of the English word water. Do you think that this is incorrect? Or do you think that this does not mean that it's a descendant of the word? --Yair rand (talk) 11:07, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Seems that I was mistaken. Feel free to revert it. This, that and the other (talk) 05:28, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

doctorare

However, surely it's just a typo because the r and t are next to each other on a QWERTY keyboard. Typos aren't words in their own right, they're just mistakes. 12:21, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

According to Help:Misspellings#Common, misspelling entries can be sent to RFV, so I was going to do it (as it looked like a pretty unlikely and inconsequential misspelling). But this one had plenty of Usenet hits. This, that and the other (talk) 12:23, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

It’s Latin, a form of doctoro. It is not a typo. —Stephen ^(Talk) 09:31, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

The discussion was apparently with reference to the English entry present in the history. However, it was more than a year ago and I really don't recall what was going on. This, that and the other (talk) 09:33, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

"no redlinked alt forms, please"

Hi. Red links are an important way to allow the dictionary to grow. Perhaps somebody knows an alt form but doesn't have time to create the entry. Don't remove them indiscriminately! Equinox ◑ 02:07, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

If you insist. They're just a really ugly thing to have at the top of an entry. I'm sure many of those redlinked alternative forms would fail RFV even if they were created! This, that and the other (talk) 02:09, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Heh, actually, one of my pet hates is when people stick an alt form that's obviously obsolete (like "nowadayes") without flagging it as such. I can imagine a foreign learner coming and thinking "oh, I can spell it with an E if I want!". Equinox ◑ 02:12, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

(Since I'm back here: at least we have changed the entry structure now so that alt forms usually go below the main entry content. Good.) Equinox ◑ 05:42, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

interwebs

Added follow up comment on interweb -- ryper ^(Talk) 19:30 19 Mar 2015 (UTC)

So you translate French…

Hello This, that and the other. I note from your user page that you “can read French, which means [you] can read frwiktionary stuff and move it here” and that you are “more active on the English Wikipedia”. I wonder: Would you be up for creating English-Wikipedia articles, however stubby, for w:Félix Gaffiot and/or w:Dictionnaire Illustré Latin-Français from their extant French equivalents at fr:w:Félix Gaffiot and fr:w:Gaffiot? I requested the articles in the English Wikipedia's requests lists ages ago, but seemingly nothing has come of that. They're needed for linking from {{R:Gaffiot}}, you see. Just a thought; it's no sweat if you have no interest in doing so. Thanks. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 03:51, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi I.S.M.E.T.A.! Thanks for the message. I actually did a French-to-English translation course late last year, so I ought to dust off my skills and give it a go! I can't make any promises, but if I end up getting it done, I'll let you know. This, that and the other (talk) 12:45, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you so much! Much appreciated. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 12:50, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

If you want to try it, here is a translation tool that you might like: Special:ContentTranslation:Félix Gaffiot. —Stephen ^(Talk) 13:52, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

@Stephen G. Brown: “No such special page”… :-(  — I.S.M.E.T.A. 15:25, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

What do you see there? Don’t you see a button that reads "Start translation"? If you don’t see anything, maybe you have to start it from the beginning. Try w:Special:ContentTranslation. —Stephen ^(Talk) 18:13, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

@Stephen G. Brown: Both those pages you linked to look like this:

No such special page

You have requested a special page that is not recognized by Wikipedia. A list of all recognized special pages may be found at Special:Specialpages.

Return to Main Page.

I see no “Start translation” link. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 21:23, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Weird. Then go to w:Special:SpecialPages and search for "Content Translation statistics". Click on that and select "New translation", and then click "Start a new translation". —Stephen ^(Talk) 22:18, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

I think you have to turn on Content Translation in your w:Special:BetaFeatures. This, that and the other (talk) 00:39, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

@Stephen G. Brown, This, that and the other: Turning on the Content Translation beta feature worked. I've just finished translating fr:w:Félix Gaffiot. Would you guys mind looking over my translation to correct any mistakes I've made, please? Thanks in advance. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 21:08, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for tweaking en:w:Félix Gaffiot, This, that and the other. Now that I've translated the dictionary's article, too, would you and/or Stephen mind giving en:w:Dictionnaire Illustré Latin-Français a quick once over? Thanks again. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 20:30, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

@Stephen G. Brown: Thanks for that. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 02:49, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

m: prefix

Technically, Wiktionary:Votes/2015-11/Namespace abbreviations did not start yet. I forgot the problem of "m:". That could be changed to "mod:" before the vote starts. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 22:33, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

apologizing...

Thank you @This, that and the other for your correction (diff) and all your corrections. Sorry to bother you here, at your Talk page, after 2015. The only thing i know about editing, is copy-paste, and I made this weird thing:

## τὰ '''Γέννα''' • (Génnā) <FONT COLOR="#000000">{{comment-link|Appendix:Glossary#neuter|neuter|n}}</FONT> <FONT COLOR="#000000">{{comment-link|Appendix:Glossary#plural|plural|only pl}}</FONT> ''(genitive'' {{l|grc|Γέννων}}; ''[[Appendix:Ancient Greek second declension|second declension]]'' (6th century [[Appendix:Glossary#CE|CE]]))

because i needed a pseudo-headword line which would NOT put the page γέννα at Ancient Greek categories neuter nouns & neuter 2nd decl. This is a Medieval-only word (unlike feminine γέννα), but I am not allowed to create a separate section for it. So, i mimic a headword line.

• I had tried {gkm-noun, (gkm=Medieval) It does not exist, and it is not allowed
• I had tried |nocat=1 but it doesn't work
• I do not know how to make links black colour, not blue (for abbreviations n, pl).
• You spotted this edit! Are you a bot? Then, if these patterns remain, maybe in the future, there WILL be a Medieval section, and then, they can be traced and redone?

You do not need to answer, I am just apologizing for this messy edit of mine... I shall not do it again, I will avoid mediaeval words. sarri.greek (talk) 01:01, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi Sarri! No need to apologise; I am correcting invalid HTML and wiki syntax, and you should not feel bad about adding invalid syntax to pages - lots of people do it all the time, because the rules are complicated and not all written down. Normally at this wiki we do not link abbrevations like "f" and "pl". As for your other questions, I feel that we should ask at one of the discussion pages, perhaps WT:TR or Wiktionary talk:About Ancient Greek, for some advice. This, that and the other (talk) 06:45, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Xingjiang Etymology

Hello! Are there any specifics on the etymology of this term? Could you provide example usages? Since the term does not appear in GEOnet, I believe the term is likely to be a common misspelling. Also, I am not sure if this would be an alternate form of Xinjiang or a synonym. If we keep this page, I would like to include a link to it on the Xinjiang page with a qualifier saying it is a mistake (if it is a mistake). Geographyinitiative (talk) 05:59, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

@Geographyinitiative I'd say it is a common misspelling. Easily citable from searching Google Books for "Xingjiang province" (in quotes). This, that and the other (talk) 06:22, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

I'm sorry if I have come off the wrong way. I have never done a page about a word I personally considered to be a clear misspelling, and I actually don't know how misspellings are documented in Wiktionary. Sorry for bothering you. Geographyinitiative (talk) 06:52, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

No worries! You didn't come off the wrong way at all. Thanks for helping to improve my bad old entries! This, that and the other (talk) 07:36, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

Rhathymia, and "Doing it properly"

In your 07:41, 27 November 2021‎ edit on the page rhathymia, you included the comment "at least do it properly", presumably referencing the modifications you made to my own immediately preceding edit. Could you point me in the direction of some good resources on how to do it properly, specifically for adding the morphemes? I added them mainly because I noticed that the word did not appear in "Category:English words suffixed with -thymia", and tried to use the same formatting as other pages. However, if I did so incorrectly here, that means I likely also did it incorrectly in several other places - and I need to know what exactly to do to correct them. Pinball larry (talk) 21:42, 5 January 2022 (UTC)Pinball_larry

Hi @Pinball larry, and welcome to Wiktionary! Thanks for your contributions so far.

I'm sorry if I came across a bit brusque with that comment. Your edit was valuable in that it included a morphological breakdown of the word in the etymology section. There are a couple of ways it could have been improved:

• The confix template was awkwardly placed at the start of the etymology with no logical connection to the rest of the info there. This is still the case at, say, cacothymia. While we don't currently have a settled, standard way of indicating this kind of synchronic morphological analysis alongside the traditional etymology, it's normally included as part of a sentence. Some editors write "Synchronically analysable as ...", while others (including me) write "Surface analysis ...".
• Although I left it in the entry in deference to your edit, I don't believe rha- is a real prefix. To my knowledge, no other English words incorporate this element. In that sense, it may have been better to avoid the confix template and manually include the article in the relevant category: [[Category:English words suffixed with -thymia]] Or alternatively, place something like "(see -thymia)" after the relevant etymon.

I hope this makes sense. Let me know if you have any questions. This, that and the other (talk) 00:15, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip

Hello, thank you for informing/reminding me of this template: [1]. I will try to remember in the future. 70.172.194.25 04:37, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Chronic bee paralysis virus

As I start typing I don't know the following:

1. Whether we should have it with initial capitals
2. Whether it should be italicized
3. Whether it should Translingual or English
4. Whether it is used in works written in languages other than English

I do know that:

1. It is not part of current ICTV taxonomy.
2. ICTV has it as an unclassifed virus
3. NCBI has an entry for it.
4. WP and Wikispecies have articles for it.
5. It is in use with this capitalization, more frequently than with title caps but less frequently than no caps.
6. I in ICTV means international and ICTV leadership is not
7. It does seem to be used by authors for whom English is not their native language.
8. It was isolated in 2010.
9. It is mentioned in only 5 "articles" on ICTV site
10. It does not appear on the ICTV site in italics or in this orthography; items in the taxonomy appear in italics with initial capitals on the ICTV site, items not in the taxonomy do not.

1. means to me that there is no presumption that it is Translingual. 2. means we should have this orthography 3. and 4. don't mean much 5. means that it might be best treated as an alternative capitalization of the all-lower-case form.

I net this out that the entry in question is:

1. an alt form of the lower-case form, which should have all the external links, the fullest definition, etc.
2. in the absence of evidence of usage in other languages, it is an English term.
3. a proper noun, as is the main entry and other alt forms.
4. not to be italicized.

Thanks for making me think this through. DCDuring (talk) 16:25, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

adessint

Sorry - copy and paste botch job when I was tired. It's an archaic form of adsint and I clearly wasn't paying enough attention. Theknightwho (talk) 06:29, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

@Theknightwho yeah the template could do a better job of warning you when your headword diverges too sharply from the entry title! This, that and the other (talk) 06:44, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

That's a good idea, actually - might implement it. My inclination is that it should present a warning unless a specific flag is set (e.g. override=1). Theknightwho (talk) 06:47, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

I would initially implement a categorisation, and see if it turns up false positives; if not, just make it an {{error}} I'd say. This, that and the other (talk) 06:50, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Yes - one of those things to ease in gently! Theknightwho (talk) 16:04, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

oligarch

Can you help me to understand the purpose behind the edit of this page?

We give definitions of words as they are used, not how certain people may think they should be used. This, combined with the anecdotal evidence of anyone who has been paying attention to world news in recent decades, should be convincing enough for anyone. This, that and the other (talk) 07:01, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

The examples of the term oligarch being used to describe people in several countries are numerous. Using current geopolitical sentiment to derive a proper usage of a word seems to be the wrong way to go about this. Sebastian-Hady (talk) 07:10, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

Did you actually read the article you cited before citing it? "While not labeling its own wealthy and powerful elites as “oligarchs,” US corporate media do, as noted, occasionally acknowledge that the United States itself is an oligarchy. ... What a strange country the US is—an oligarchy without any oligarchs." Sebastian-Hady (talk) 07:35, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

Yes, that last sentence contains an example of the word "oligarch" being used to refer to (putative) American oligarchs. I have no doubt you can find numerous "examples of the term oligarch being used to describe people in several countries" as you claim; my point is that examples referring to Russian/Ukrainian oligarchs are significantly more numerous and that this has been the situation for at least 20 years. It's hard for either of us to prove the point either way; you can start a discussion at WT:TR if you like. This, that and the other (talk) 07:44, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

unhealing

Haha, I just noticed your reversion there, from the "flog" error. Thanks. This was not deliberate trolling. I nearly always use flog as my copy-paste source for verb forms. Equinox ◑ 05:40, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

It was a light-hearted "accusation" :) This, that and the other (talk) 07:50, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

inconcessus

Hi! I'm trying to categorize all Latin words starting with in- according to which of the homophonous prefixes they contain (i.e. empty out Category:Latin_words_prefixed_with_in- by sorting all contents into its subcategories), and I'm confused by and curious about the etymology given for inconcessus: "Apparently from in- +‎ concessus (perfect passive participle of concēdō), but more properly an adjectivisation of in- +‎ concessus, -ūs (noun)." Why is it more proper to say that it is from the noun concessus? From what I know, it's quite typical for Latin adjectives starting with the negative prefix in- "un-" to be formed from participles, and not usual for them to be formed with fourth-declension nouns as their base. The meaning seems to fit with derivation from the participle: "unallowed". Hoping you could shed some light on this.--Urszag (talk) 01:38, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Urszag! I've noticed your efforts here in categorising the in- entries I created. In many cases the categorisation was obvious and I just got lazy (sorry!), but in many cases it is not obvious. I find that in- is often used as an intensifier without any kind of spatial or temporal sense of "in, within, inside" as defined at our entry in-, and I always felt a bit uneasy about putting those words into id1=in. It just didn't feel like the right fit. Perhaps we need a fourth sense of in-.

As for inconcessus, I really have no idea why I wrote that. I've looked at my usual resources and none of them support this. So feel free to restore it to the more logical derivation. This, that and the other (talk) 01:47, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the quick response! I was also wondering a little about whether the different semantic meanings of prepositional in- "in" should be categorized together, but ultimately, I do think that's the best way to handle it. It is a case of one preposition/prepositional prefix having multiple meanings; probably, the best thing to do is to add additional definitions at the entry for in-. E.g. I'd say English "up" is the same word/particle whether it's used with a literal physical sense or with an abstract sense as in "hold up", "buddy up", "act up". More practically, it's usually straightforward to categorize the negative and prepositional prefixes separately, but I think it would be messy to try to distinguish subsenses of the Latin prepositional prefixes. Urszag (talk) 01:56, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

That's a great suggestion. I'd support the expansion of the relevant part of the in- entry. The analogy with up is very logical. This, that and the other (talk) 02:08, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

Weegie, Weedgie

...are also English words found in English texts. Not only in Scots texts. Please restore. Equinox ◑ 12:06, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

@Equinox our entry Weegie has always been Scots. Anyone who creates the plural of an English term without creating the singular lemma is just being annoying, imho. Anyway, I'll put it back. This, that and the other (talk) 12:09, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

@Equinox while I have you, I think you might have deleted grucched in error. I evidently forgot to change the header to Middle English when I changed the language code of the templates, but it is a legitimate ME form that we should have (an apparent use by Chaucer turns up in GBooks). This, that and the other (talk) 12:26, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

Yes by all means restore that piece of crap. I may have made a mistake while enjoying the Aprylle showers by the roote. Equinox ◑ 02:38, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

@Equinox I'm not an admin. Anyway, I'll just recreate it. This, that and the other (talk) 02:53, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

The entries look fine now. Please don't delete a word just because it looks like a form of a missing word. Even if it's annoying. The existence of quirkafleegs (let's say that's an English plural) implies the existence of quirkafleeg singular. Yes, the Right Thing to Do would be to create quirkafleeg with citations and rfdef template, but if it's a word it should stand. The point of this project is to define words, essentially. Not to fulfil your idea of cleanliness. Equinox ◑ 02:36, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

Yep, understood. I haven't been deleting redlinked form-ofs unless I really think they're wrong, and in this case I was mistaken. This, that and the other (talk) 02:52, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

Forms of "convalo"

Do the participles of "convalo" and their forms need to be deleted? I'm referring to convaliturus, convalitus, convalendus, and convalens. I see that the latter goes with convaleo, but I'm not sure if it needs tweaking. Ultimateria (talk) 18:56, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

@Ultimateria Thanks for pointing this out. I'll have to check whether these forms exist. (Also thanks for noticing that the inflected forms had to be deleted! Most admins who patrol CAT:CSD don't seem to be too careful to do this.) This, that and the other (talk) 22:55, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

convalitus and convalendus can be deleted. convaliturus is attested and seems to belong to convalesco. I fixed convalens. This, that and the other (talk) 02:01, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

 Done. Ultimateria (talk) 19:38, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

Language Codes in Template:inh-lite

re: this edit: apparently {{inh-lite}} saves memory by using a list of pre-defined language-code/language-name pairs hard-coded into the template. While changing fy to frr in that context is perfectly correct, it causes an error unless the language code is in that list. It might be better to forgo using AWB for that template unless you're sure that the code in question is in that list. Chuck Entz (talk) 15:14, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

@Chuck Entz Thanks for pointing that out. Seeing as I created inh-lite myself, I should know! I'll leave the -lite templates alone in my auto-editing for now. This, that and the other (talk) 22:54, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Linting..

https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=sirotan&oldid=prev&diff=67399085&markasread=27427726&markasreadwiki=enwiktionary

Opps!.. Thanks for being sharp-eyed :) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:04, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

The reappearance of long-deleted {{rft}} was what baffled me... This, that and the other (talk) 10:05, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

"Clerical edit to match..."

[2] You realise that the old text supported future changes to RFV, but your new text does not, and any RFV changes must now be copied there. Are you convinced that is a good change? Equinox ◑ 10:56, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

@Equinox the text "three citations of figurative use that fulfill attestation requirements" is already in CFI in two places, so it can't make things worse to put it in a third place. On the other hand, CFI doesn't mention the term "RFV" anywhere. We should try and keep our policies easy for newbies to understand.

Anyway, that vote will struggle to pass, won't it? This, that and the other (talk) 11:14, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

The problem is that some day RFV might change so that we need FOUR or FIVE votes, and the previous text was fine, but now, you need to update your text to change the number. Do you commit and swear that you will always do this forever? Equinox ◑ 11:19, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

Absolutely. Even after I'm dead. This, that and the other (talk) 11:21, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

based Equinox ◑ 11:27, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

"the text 'three citations of figurative use that fulfill attestation requirements' is already in CFI in two places, so it can't make things worse to put it in a third place." And how did I miss this?! I've killed two girls so I might as well go for the triple! Anyway, I'm sure you know what you're doing. I am just clearing up my horrible list of 15 ignored "bell" icons. we cool? cool. yes. Equinox ◑ 06:30, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Someone took that wording out before the vote started. I know you're disappointed. And it looks like the vote will fail after all, who would have thought? This, that and the other (talk) 06:45, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

User:This, that and the other/broken interwiki links

This is obviously a good page, but it needs more Wikisource Dunderdool (talk) 11:24, 9 July 2022 (UTC)

@Dunderdool you out of fresh username ideas there? Anyway it's easy enough to generate one if you want it. This, that and the other (talk) 11:37, 9 July 2022 (UTC)

• The Project wants it Dunderdool (talk) 11:44, 9 July 2022 (UTC)

  @Dunderdool okay the one I just generated has a bug, it seems to ignore the language param. I'll try again in a few minutes. This, that and the other (talk) 12:11, 9 July 2022 (UTC)

  • Nice list! It turns out that most of the errors were from Wonderfool's sloppy editing. Luckily, we have an army of dedicated users to clean up Dunderdool (talk) 18:17, 9 July 2022 (UTC)

• And we might as well get the complete set: Wikinews, Wikiquote, Wikispecies, Wikiversity, Wikivoyage, Wikibooks, Meta-Wiki, MediaWiki. I doubt there'll be a big number Dunderdool (talk) 18:21, 9 July 2022 (UTC)

  I'll do it if I can be bothered. It's kind of tedious though. Plus, there are <1000 links to each of these wikis (other than Wikispecies) so there won't be too many broken ones. No idea why we are even linking to Wikiversity or Wikinews... This, that and the other (talk) 02:49, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

• Fair enough. BTW, User:This, that and the other/broken interwiki links/2022-07-01/wikisource is pretty much completed now Dunderdool (talk) 09:57, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

  @Dunderdool great work. Here is your Wikiquote list:

  • say links to The_Hebrew_Melodies/They_say_that_Hope_is_happiness
  • main links to It_was_a'_for_our_Rightful_King
  • partir links to Wikiquote:Sourced_and_Unsourced_sections (this exists, but no idea why our entry is linking to it)
  • endowment links to Robert_Clarkson_Clothier
  • spotlesse links to The_Parliament_of_Roses_to_Julia

  This, that and the other (talk) 10:23, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

  Nice short list. Done Dunderdool (talk) 10:41, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

  @Dunderdool Didn't find any for Wikinews, although I have no idea why we are even linking to that site at all. Here's Wikiversity:

  • linguistics links to Linguistics
  • balance links to balance
  • eukaryote links to Eukaryote
  • geology links to Geology
  • electromagnetism links to electromagnetism
  • geophysics links to Geophysics
  • oceanography links to Oceanography
  • genealogy links to Genealogy
  • astrogeology links to Astrogeology
  • genetics links to Genetics
  • geomorphology links to Geomorphology
  • conditions links to Draft:Conditions (should we be linking to their drafts?)
  • sea ice links to Sea_ice
  • cytokinesis links to Cytokinesis
  • mammalogy links to Mammalogy
  • genomics links to Genomics
  • Sermon on the Mount links to God_and_Enlightenment
  • Krav Maga links to Krav_Maga
  • insider trading links to Insider_trading
  • control group links to Control_group
  • electrospheres links to Electrospheres This, that and the other (talk) 10:42, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

• I decided they all suck and deleted them. Dunderdool (talk) 12:07, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

  Yep, I'm with you on that. There was only one for Wikivoyage (Tok Pisin) which I fixed myself. Wikibooks is the last one I'm going to do: User:This, that and the other/broken interwiki links/2022-07-01/wikibooks. This, that and the other (talk) 12:12, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

  @Dunderdool This, that and the other (talk) 12:12, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

• That was easy. Just a half dozen things to fix. We can probably ignore this project for the next ten years or so Dunderdool (talk) 13:02, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

  Let me know if you ever want some updated lists, if you're after something to keep you off the streets. I'll keep regenerating the WP and WS ones until done. This, that and the other (talk) 13:08, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

more lists

Hi. How about regenerating User:DTLHS/eswikipedia? There has been a lot of progress on it over the last 2 years Dunderdool (talk) 14:11, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

@Dunderdool What is it? This, that and the other (talk) 23:01, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

A list of all words in es.wikipedia that don't have a Spanish entry in en.wiktionary. A good way to a) find tyops in es.wikipedia and b) find missing Spanish words. Dunderdool (talk) 23:03, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

@Dunderdool tell you what, I'll look into it tonight on condition that WT:RFVN#orixe is resolved. Or more precisely, RFV-passed, since these hits look pretty Asturian to me... This, that and the other (talk) 23:09, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

Done. I'm not gonna cite it tho Dunderdool (talk) 23:36, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

For the record, this is harder than it looked to me earlier and I will not be able to do it in one sitting. But I'll uphold my end of the bargain before too long. This, that and the other (talk) 10:33, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

@Dunderdool I finally got around to doing this: User:This, that and the other/eswikipedia-missing-words/2022-08-01/page 1, User:This, that and the other/eswikipedia-missing-words/2022-08-01/page 2. It's full of false positives (particularly species names) but hopefully it is still of some use. If you think it looks good, I can post the complete list (267803 words used 6 or more times on eswiki that lack Spanish entries on this project). This, that and the other (talk) 10:44, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

• Hmmm, these aren't great. Having a quick skim through, I reckon there's about 1% of that stuff that is actually Spanish worth including here. We'd want to filter out anything with punctuation marks, anything in italics, anything classed as a quotation/reference/external link. Dunderdool (talk) 09:44, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

  @Dunderdool now I look more closely, I see what you're talking about. Let me see if I can do better... This, that and the other (talk) 10:36, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

  @Dunderdool I tried to remove all italic text, references, and external links, although it's still a pretty scrappy effort. Page 1 is still almost completely full of crap, but lower down the list (say at page 14) we start to get some more interesting things. What do you think? Any suggestions on how to improve it further? This, that and the other (talk) 12:12, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

  Yeah, it is getting better. We also want to filter out anything inside a template, anything with punctuation (brackets/hyphens/slashes/numbers/apostrophes/pipes/asterisks/quotation marks etc.), non-Spanish symbols like ʔ or ī (but obviously keeping ñ and the vowels with acute accents). I reckon with that the list will be pretty usable. Dunderdool (talk) 17:44, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Another list

Another useful thing would be to regenerate Wiktionary:Todo/phrases not linked to from components. 13 years ago it was made, it was very useful and is being RFD'd at the moment because it is so obsolete. Dunderdool (talk) 15:19, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

@Dunderdool this one's easier than the Spanish thing. Here's the first 2000 entries in a newly generated list: Wiktionary:Todo/phrases not linked to from components/2022-07/page 1. Let me know if it needs adjustments in the way it's generated. If not, I'll make the rest of the list. This, that and the other (talk) 12:11, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! The list looks good, but it'd be slightly more useful to change the comma to a | before the terms, showing bogey: bogey man|triple bogey instead of bogey: bogey man, triple bogey Dunderdool (talk) 20:30, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Oh, and you could put the terms in alphabetical order on the same line, if it's not too much trouble. Dunderdool (talk) 20:37, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Hmm I don't know if I want to make the lazy copy-paste into {{der4}} too tempting for you... for instance, the list for "ace" needs to be split over various etymologies/POSs. Can I trust you to be reasonable?

And they are already in alphabetical order (although for some reason caps got sorted before lowercase).

For terms with one etymology/POS I might even be able to automate the addition of the derived terms sections... This, that and the other (talk) 06:02, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, automated stuff would be great too! Dunderdool (talk) 12:31, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

• Hey again. Congrats on the perfect vote! I look forward to one day getting blocked by you! Would you be able to generate the rest of Wiktionary:Todo/phrases not linked to from components/2022-07/page 1? I suspect there'll be about 15 pages...enough to keep me out of trouble until 2026. Almostonurmind (talk) 23:44, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

  @Almostonurmind heh thanks for nominating me! I'd rather use the carrot (maintenance lists) than the stick. And besides, it looks like Eq is keeping you on the straight and narrow for now.

  If you can wait a few days I'll generate the lists off the 1 September dump so they are deliciously fresh. This, that and the other (talk) 02:46, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Admin time

Hi. I want to nominate you for admin. Give me the word and I'll set up a vote Dunderdool (talk) 14:32, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

@Dunderdool A WF admin nomination? Truly the highest honour of Wiktionary. I would have said it's a trap, but you seem to have a good hit rate. Also I practically behave like an admin already, so it's probably about time. Let's do this. This, that and the other (talk) 05:25, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

You're smart enough to suspect it is a trap (it's actually not, I just love you). accept here and I look forward to the result. Dunderdool (talk) 12:29, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

{{trans-mid}}

Regarding this news, how does it work? I removed {{trans-mid}} from withdraw, but the translation tables do not automatically arrange themselves into two columns. — Sgconlaw (talk) 17:52, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

@Sgconlaw unfortunately a bug was discovered and the change had to be reverted. See WT:Grease pit/2022/August#Translation tables are gone haywire. Essentially I had not properly tested the effects of blanking {{trans-mid}}. However, I have identified a solution to the problem; hopefully @Ruakh will have some time (and courage!) to implement it again with the proposed fix. Sorry for the confusion! This, that and the other (talk) 23:42, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Ah, OK. Thanks. Hope you can figure it out. — Sgconlaw (talk) 04:51, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Phrases not linked to from components: duplication

Hi, I notice there is a lot of duplication between Wiktionary:Todo/phrases not linked to from components/2022-07/page 1 and Wiktionary:Todo/phrases not linked to from components/2022-09/page 1. I'm guessing this is just because any terms that were not processed (i.e. did not have derived terms added to them) between the two dumps ended up in both lists. If this is the case, which page would it make sense to keep the duplicated terms on, and which one should they be removed from? Thanks, - excarnateSojourner (talk | contrib) 07:17, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

@Flackofnubs can I delete the July one? This, that and the other (talk) 11:16, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

As FON's secretary, yes, you may delete it GreyishWorm (talk) 20:56, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

User:This, that and the other/broken interwiki links

Can we add Wikispecies here? There are plenty of entries that use {{taxlink}}, linking to non-existant pages there. GreyishWorm (talk) 12:48, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

@GreyishWorm I'm not sure if it is worth it. There are more than 10,000 entries with broken links to Wikispecies, and to my untrained eye, most of them look to represent a lacuna on Wikispecies' side, not an error on ours. Here's a sample for your persual:

1. moose links to Alces americanus americanus, Alces americanus andersoni, Alces americanus gigas, Alces americanus shirasi
2. primrose links to Jussiaea, Primula forbesii, Primula minima
3. web-footed gecko links to Palmatogecko rangei
4. mustard links to Brassica besseriana, Brassica juncea subsp. crispifolia, Brassica peroiridis
5. grape links to Cissus capensis, Vitis baileyana, Vitis labrusca var. lincecumii, Vitis lambrusca, Vitis munsoniana
6. cinnamon links to Cinnamomum burmanni, Cinnamomum tamale
7. squid links to Hetrololigo bleekeri, Uroteuthis etheridgei
8. Rhizocrinus links to Democrinus
9. Aspergillum links to Dianadema, Foegia, Humpreya, Nipponoclava
10. Scyphidium links to Rossellinae, Scyphidium septentrionale
11. Sertularia links to Sertularia cupressina, Sertularioidea
12. Campanularia links to Orthopyxis, Rhizocaulus, Silicularia
13. mimic octopus links to Thaumoctopus mimica ⇒ species:Thaumoctopus mimicus
14. carbinette links to Menticirrhus littoralis
15. cardoncillo links to Wilcoxia papillosa
16. caroa links to Neoglaziovia variegata
17. عبب links to Physalis somnifera
18. chilte links to Jatropha tepiquensis
19. chinafish links to Ophicephalidae
20. chlamydobacterium links to Chlamydobacteriaceae

What percentage of these are fixable errors on our end and what percentage are actually WS's fault? I suspect @DCDuring might have some thoughts on this topic too. This, that and the other (talk) 03:30, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

Wikispecies has long had trouble keeping up. WP has better coverage, though their coverage of organisms is split between entries under taxonomic names and vernacular names. WP also has better prioritization of contributor effort in the sense that they waste less on obscure lower-rank taxa. Commons has systematically deleted categories for underpopulated sub- and super- type taxonomic names, even when such names could be populated based on the low-level taxa than would be included.

{{taxlink}} serves two purposes, other than providing a link to Wikispecies: categorizing and providing a count of taxonomic names that have no en.Wiktionary entry. In cases where Wikispecies has no entry, a user on the no-entry page there can truncate the entry to find something relevant, eg, often find a genus name from a species, subspecies, or variety name (thence sometimes discovering a error in the specific epithet gender or a spelling error), sometimes find a different-level taxon name by eliminating rank-indicating suffixes, etc. This has seemed better than nothing to me. I would be interested to hear any suggestions as to alternative Wikispecies link targets when the current name is missing as Wikispecies. DCDuring (talk) 16:30, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

alternative spelling

I think its not an alternative form bcs alternative forms are just like turkish suffixes that can change with rules, like -di/dı/du/dü, thats just a different spelling of one word that I decided to mention due to the various dialects of Salar. I think form and spelling are not the same. -raq has a form but gölek has an alternative spelling (bcs there is no an official one). BurakD53 (talk) 12:37, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

@BurakD53 We don't use the "Alternative spellings" heading here at English Wiktionary. "Alternative forms" is used in all cases. See WT:EL#Alternative forms. This, that and the other (talk) 12:41, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

OK, thank you. I'll keep it in my mind. BurakD53 (talk) 12:43, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

@BurakD53 no problem, and thanks for your contributions! This, that and the other (talk) 12:44, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

User:This, that and the other/Broken Webster 1913 links

Hey. Can you rerun it at the next dump please? Flackofnubs (talk) 03:05, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

@This, that and the other Equinox ◑ 04:05, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

@Flackofnubs no worries, will do.

@Equinox no need to ping me on my own talk page 😛

Happy Christmas to you both! This, that and the other (talk) 06:47, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

@Equinox @Flackofnubs done. If you want this to be run on a regular basis, please let me know; currently I am doing it manually using Excel lookup formulas, but I can write a proper script. This, that and the other (talk) 01:42, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

I don't really care when you run it, but in the OPEN-SOURCE SPIRIT of the wiki, I would urge you to publish your code. Even if it's some awful LibreOffice formula. Thank you. Remember the bus factor! Equinox ◑ 06:10, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

@Equinox Nah, it's a sequence of regex find/replaces and manual spreadsheet lookups that I repeat from scratch every time. Not something that can be published short of writing a full-on instructional how-to (or writing a proper Python script to do it all from end to end). Sorry. This, that and the other (talk) 06:44, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Yes that's how most banks work. OK I'M GONE. Equinox ◑ 07:25, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

• Hi. Can we get this made again, please? We're down to the last scraps... JJ72 Bassist (talk) 14:15, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

  @JJ72 Bassist sure thing. I'll do it from the next dump. Remind me after 22 Feb if I forget to do it on 21 Feb. This, that and the other (talk) 20:24, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Ping ping OpenForceage (talk) 18:45, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

@OpenForceage Done This, that and the other (talk) 04:27, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. Those remaining were mostly due to WF sloppiness. I think I fixed them all now. OpenForceage (talk) 11:03, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

• Hey. Firstly, thanks for helping out with the Webster monster. You reckon we'll get it down to zero in this decade? Secondly, how about generating the list one last time? In theorie it'll be emptie, but perhapse a fewe have thensince intrickl'd It is probably (talk) 16:35, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

  @It is probably I'm pleased to report that, apart from a few stragglers which I fixed myself, they all appear to be done! Exciting stuff. As for the monster, some people keep creating more work for themselves... This, that and the other (talk) 03:02, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

  • Yeah, glad that Flackofnubs got blocked, she was a menace It is probably (talk) 07:20, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

linking to Wiktionary:Grease pit/2022/August#{{trans-mid}}, again: a slower approach

I think I saw a comment from you somewhere that you weren't sure how to link to Wiktionary:Grease pit/2022/August#{{trans-mid}}, again: a slower approach?

You can escape { and } by using the "numeric character references" &#x7B; and &#x7D;, respectively.

For example, this wikitext:

[[Wiktionary:Grease pit/2022/August#{{trans-mid}}, again: a slower approach]]

produces this output:

Wiktionary:Grease pit/2022/August#{{trans-mid}}, again: a slower approach

In the future, though, I'll try to remember not to use { and } in section headers. They didn't use to cause this problem, because MediaWiki automatically escaped them to .7B and .7D in the URL fragment, which worked just fine with copying-and-pasting into wikitext. (In fact, Wiktionary:Grease pit/2022/August#.7B.7Btrans-mid.7D.7D.2C again: a slower approach still works, but it's no longer easily discoverable.) —Ruakh_TALK 10:09, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Redlinks

Hi, you deleted the pages Norwegian Bokmål redlinks which I had created, since they were all empty. Could you instead please let me know how I fill these pages? When I looked at Redlinks for other languages, they only consisted of the auto cat template, so I don't understand why mine were empty. Thanks! Supevan (talk) 10:06, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

@Supevan please see WT:RFDO#Template:redlink category. This category system is very inefficient from a technical standpoint, and I am going to enact community consensus by closing that RFD as delete in a few days if no-one else comments. For an alternative, you might consider User:Jberkel/lists/wanted, for example, User:Jberkel/lists/wanted/20230101/nb. This, that and the other (talk) 10:22, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

lagobolon

Hello, This, that and the other, since you have been editing on this page, I was wondering if you know whom I could contact to talk about adding images to the words. For example 363-362 BC - silver stater depicting Pan holding a lagobolon in his right hand could illustrate the meaning of the word. Thank you so much for your time. Cheers. Lotje (talk) 04:30, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

@Lotje Easily done - I just added it myself: [3]. In future, feel free to go ahead and add images where you see fit, especially where the entry does not already have an image. The lack of images in the vast majority of our entries is possibly one of Wiktionary's greatest weaknesses, or at least, a source of unrealised potential. This, that and the other (talk) 05:07, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks this that and the other. As you rightly say: a source of unrealised potential. Lotje (talk) 07:14, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

more broken interwiki links plz

User:This, that and the other/broken interwiki links/2023-01-20/wikipedia is pretty much done, except for a Chinese link that I couldn't find Wonderfool69 (talk) 19:05, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

@Wonderfool69 see User:This, that and the other/broken interwiki links/2023-05-20/wikipedia. Seems like this is a never-ending task... This, that and the other (talk) 06:16, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

WP pages get created/renamed/deleted, people make spelling mitsakes, you know. The list is smaller this time though Wonderfool69 (talk) 20:20, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

Need your input on a policy impacting gadgets and UserJS

Dear interface administrator,

This is Samuel from the Security team and I hope my message finds you well.

There is an ongoing discussion on a proposed policy governing the use of external resources in gadgets and UserJS. The proposed Third-party resources policy aims at making the UserJS and Gadgets landscape a bit safer by encouraging best practices around external resources. After an initial non-public conversation with a small number of interface admins and staff, we've launched a much larger, public consultation to get a wider pool of feedback for improving the policy proposal. Based on the ideas received so far, the proposed policy now includes some of the risks related to user scripts and gadgets loading third-party resources, best practices for gadgets and UserJS developers, and exemptions requirements such as code transparency and inspectability.

As an interface administrator, your feedback and suggestions are warmly welcome until July 17, 2023 on the policy talk page.

Have a great day!

Samuel (WMF), on behalf of the Foundation's Security team 23:02, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

Maybe you can take a look at the policy and comment. I'm concerned that they may be going overboard here but I don't know enough about the details of some of the gadgets used on Wiktionary to know whether and by how much we'll be affected. Benwing2 (talk) 23:14, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

@Benwing2 thanks for the message. The only thing that comes to mind that would affected by this is WT:QQ, which relies on Google Books APIs.

The "alternative search engines" feature on Special:Search would probably be safe, but the proposed policy isn't clear on what is meant by "loading".

I'll post a response on Meta. This, that and the other (talk) 01:59, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

Middle Polish uncertain definitions

Part of the issue is that Mączyński wrote very unclearly and segmentally, so it's hard to know exactly which meaning he meant, among other issues. This is also how it's handled on SXVI! I find it a bit odd, as well, but there's a certain logic to it. Vininn126 (talk) 12:46, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

It just seems odd to me that you wouldn't at least suggest that the word means a certain thing that it clearly wants to mean. Sometimes lexicography requires certain leaps of faith. Anyway, like I said, I trust you to know what you are doing, especially since I know nothing about Middle Polish or the sources involved! This, that and the other (talk) 12:49, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Gadgets on mobile

For your comment on MediaWiki:Gadgets-definition, see Wiktionary:Wikimedia Tech News/2023#Tech News: 2023-26 and phab:T328610. Now they are enabled by default on mobile, and targets parameter is deprecated. Vriullop (talk) 16:27, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

User:This, that and the other/broken interwiki links/2023-05-20/wikipedia

Hey TTO. Can you regen User:This, that and the other/broken interwiki links/2023-05-20/wikipedia? Probably a few more to clean up Overthesnowmelt (talk) 21:44, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

Support Here you go: User:This, that and the other/broken interwiki links/2023-07-20/wikipedia @Overthesnowmelt This, that and the other (talk) 02:25, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Wonderfool's user page

Hi. A few months ago, Koavf (talk • contribs) deleted Wonderfool's user page, which had loads of useful links for him. WF then made a back-up page, which was probably also deleted by Koavf. Anyway, WF, as a now-not-banned user, would like their userpage back - they think it is the one deleted on 29 May. Could you put it back to User:Wonderfool? KLFThe Moomoo (talk) 19:07, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

 Done and the former page moved to Wiktionary:Wonderfool sockpuppets. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:13, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

Ah, K! Thanks so much! It means a lot that it is you who did it. Let's try to get on well :) KLFThe Moomoo (talk) 19:18, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

As a side note, there's no way WF is ever using Wonderfool (talk • contribs)'s account again, as the password has been scrambled. So it's probably not useful to pursue anything on the global unblock front KLFThe Moomoo (talk) 19:21, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

Well, a password reset might be possible. (Might require access to the original e-mail address.) Equinox ◑ 19:23, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

Wiktionary:Todo/English Chaucer

Hey. Can you re-re-regen Wiktionary:Todo/English Chaucer please? Plenty of fixes done, and probably a few breakages too. Jewle V (talk) 22:52, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

@Jewle V The scripte hathe beene runne. Have fun. This, that and the other (talk) 01:13, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

Readding stuff?

Hi. In this edit, you appear to have readded some sections P. Sovjunk (talk) 12:29, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

Fixed! Thanks. This, that and the other (talk) 22:09, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

Reading stuff?

So you actually read my message. That's cool. Equinox never reads his talk page. P. Sovjunk (talk) 09:43, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

@P. Sovjunk you know I always read your messages, unlike Eq who doesn't love you anymore. This, that and the other (talk) 09:49, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

Stuff Reading

Speaking of Equinox, he mentions Reading, UK, a lot. Stuff him and his stupid town. P. Sovjunk (talk) 09:44, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

Read stuffing

This edit produced an error, which only you can fix. P. Sovjunk (talk) 09:49, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

@P. Sovjunk nah, you can manage to stuff a language code in there, I reckon This, that and the other (talk) 09:58, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

User:This, that and the other/Broken Webster 1913 links anewe

Can you redo this? I came across a few spelled with ae or oe ligatures that are dead-linked P. Sovjunk (talk) 20:50, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

The nature of the Webster 1913 dataset makes it difficult to detect broken links that contain non-ASCII characters, so I just manually removed these from the old list as there were too many false positives. I'll see what I can do... This, that and the other (talk) 23:36, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

@P. Sovjunk okay, I've recreated the page with a current list. Hopefully not too many false positives in there. This, that and the other (talk) 04:44, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Great, cleaned them up before my coffee even cooled down P. Sovjunk (talk) 09:50, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Wiktionary:Todo/phrases not linked to from components anew

Hi again. I've nearly finished all the linking that you gave me (less than 500 entries to go!). It'll be useful to get a regen of the page. To be more efficient, can the new list exclude anything appearing on the 2022-09 lists (because it means I checked it and decided not to link to it, although there may be a few accidentally missed out)? Also, any alternative forms that only differ by punctuation can be omitted (like wood-wool as wood wool is the main form) P. Sovjunk (talk) 20:58, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

I'll see what I can do here as well! This may take a bit longer, the scripting involved is rather complex. This, that and the other (talk) 23:37, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

@P. Sovjunk check it out! This won't keep you busy for 14 months I reckon, but I'm sure it will be just as exhilarating a ride for you. I couldn't remove the alt forms like you asked... sorry about that. This, that and the other (talk) 07:33, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

3 questions about thesaurus entries

Hello,
I have 3 questions about thesaurus entries:

1. Wiktionary:Thesaurus#Multilingualism says that there are three title conventions: A (No language code, native headword), B (Language code, native headword) and C (Language code, English headword). I have seen that you renamed several pages with the comment "move to unprefixed title" (for instance Thesaurus:fr:chat to Thesaurus:chat). Do you plan to simplify Wiktionary:Thesaurus#Multilingualism? There are still 1 page using convention B in Category:Old Irish thesaurus entries, 3 pages using convention B in Category:Old Norse thesaurus entries, 14 pages using convention C in Category:Arabic thesaurus entries, and 7 pages using convention B or C in Category:Danish thesaurus entries.
2. Do you know why Wiktionary:Thesaurus#Multilingualism says nothing about thesaurus entries containing several languages? For instance: Thesaurus:droga recreativa (2 languages), Thesaurus:idiota (2 languages), Thesaurus:vagina (5 languages). It could be interesting; it seems that the English wiktionary is the only wiktionary where some thesaurus entries contain several languages.
3. I have seen this edit where you wrote the annotation "needs diffusion by sense into distinct Thesaurus pages with Finnish-language titles, this kind of page is not found anywhere else in the Thesaurus". Do you think that Thesaurus:café needs the same annotation?

Regards NicoScribe (talk) 17:51, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

@NicoScribe thanks for your message! Let me respond in turn:

1. The convention that by far predominates is convention A, which is the same convention we use in the main namespace for regular dictionary entries. As you point out, there were only a handful of entries that use convention B and C, and I am in the process of standardising at convention A. I'm not saying it's the best convention, just that it is the status quo in the Thesaurus namespace.
2. I will update WT:WS soon to reflect the status quo. Think of Thesaurus entries just like normal Wiktionary entries - multiple language sections for the same orthography.
3. The problem with WS:sound/fi was that it seemed to include Finnish "synonyms" for all senses of the English word sound. This is rather confusing, so I requested that it be diffused to appropriate Finnish-language titles. Surjection has moved it to the appropriate Finnish verb title and removed the noun synonyms, resolving the issue. On the other hand, there is nothing wrong with WS:café; it follows convention A as described above.

I hope this makes sense? This, that and the other (talk) 22:58, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

OK, it's great, thank you very much. And your recent update of Wiktionary:Thesaurus#Multilingualism is great too.
Remark: in the French wiktionary, the title convention is "French headword, language" (for instance Thésaurus:fruit/anglais); for the content, the convention is "1 entry = 1 sense in 1 language"; there are also the pages centralizing the thesaurus entries in different languages for the same headword (for instance Thésaurus:fruit is just a list with Thésaurus:fruit/anglais, Thésaurus:fruit/français, etc.).
I am just sad that Wiktionary entries containing multiple languages can not benefit from interlanguage linking via Wikidata. You know this disadvantage (you described it in Wiktionary:Thesaurus#Multilingualism). There is no solution, I am not requesting a change here, I am not trying to convince you, I want nothing, but here is an illustration, the report of the most complete case:

Thesaurus entry in English wiktionary	Equivalent entry in other wiktionaries, via Wikidata	Remarks
Thesaurus:penis	impossible	Impossible because the English wiktionary entry contains en + da languages. Sad because fr:Thésaurus:pénis/anglais and sr:Тезаурус:penis exist.
Thesaurus:pénis	impossible	Impossible because the English wiktionary entry contains fr + pt languages. Sad because fr:Thésaurus:pénis/français and fr:Thésaurus:pénis/portugais exist.
Thesaurus:Penis	fr:Thésaurus:pénis/allemand	OK as long as the English wiktionary entry contains only the current unique language.
Thesaurus:শিশ্ন	bn:থিসরাস:শিশ্ন
Thesaurus:pene	es:Wikcionario:pene/Tesauro fr:Thésaurus:pénis/espagnol
Thesaurus:陰茎	fr:Thésaurus:pénis/japonais
Thesaurus:prącie	fr:Thésaurus:pénis/polonais
Thesaurus:пенис	fr:Thésaurus:pénis/russe
Thesaurus:erkeklik organı	fr:Thésaurus:pénis/turc

--NicoScribe (talk) 13:24, 8 November 2023 (UTC) + 22:47, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

I am tempted to discuss this at the Beer Parlour. Personally I would prefer a similar approach for us, but putting the language name first to match what we do in the Appendix and Reconstruction namespaces: Thesaurus:English/beautiful, Thesaurus:French/beau, ... This, that and the other (talk) 21:52, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Remark: in the French wiktionary, the convention "French headword, language name", with the language name at the end, allows an easy display of the list in the pages centralizing the thesaurus entries in different languages for the same headword. For instance, Thésaurus:fruit calls (through one template) the special page {{Special:Prefixindex}} to display the list. In the English wiktionary, I don't know whether there is a desire or a solution for this centralization (filling the first column in the table above was difficult for me).

Instead of Thesaurus:French/beau, you could use Thesaurus:fr:beau (convention B) to match the prefix of the mainspace topical categories. You could also keep convention A for English entries (Thesaurus:beautiful) and use another convention for foreign entries.

I have checked several wiktionaries, and it seems that:

• several wiktionaries use convention A, but they have only native language entries: Bengali (10 entries), Catalan (8), Welsh (2), Icelandic (3), Malay (2), Portuguese (86), Thai (125)
• Chinese wiktionary uses convention A, they have 582 native language entries and 10 foreign entries
• Serbian wiktionary uses convention A, they have 6 native language entries (with English wiktionary content?) and 50 foreign entries
• Mon wiktionary uses convention A, they have 0 native language entries and 3 foreign entries
• Spanish wiktionary uses convention A for 94 Spanish entries, and "reversed convention B" (native headword, language code) for 9 foreign entries (except two entries: 1 and 2).

So: most wiktionaries use only convention A. But it doesn't prove that it's the best convention. I think these projects are keeping the convention A because they have not yet experienced title conflicts (because they have not many foreign entries).

I have not found entries containing multiple languages: now I am almost sure that the English wiktionary is the only wiktionary where some thesaurus entries contain several languages. --NicoScribe (talk) 22:47, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

Fyxen

Hey there! May I ask why you made this edit? Multiple books that I've worked from have contained fyxen as a word for female fox, so I'm not clear on why you removed the information. Vergencescattered (talk) 23:17, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

@Vergencescattered the Old English word fyxen was subject to a Request for Verification, and no verification, in the form of a citation in an Old English text, was provided. See WT:RFVN#fyxen, which will be archived at Talk:fyxen at some point. You're welcome to undo my edit and re-add the word if you can provide appropriate evidence from at least one of the books you mention.

Note that Old English refers to English texts written before the year 1066. If you find the word fyxen in modern English (post-1500) books, we would need three citations to accept the word. See WT:CFI for more info.

I hope this helps to clarify! This, that and the other (talk) 23:25, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

That makes perfect sense, thank you for explaining! I'll do some research to see if I can find anything but if no one else could I doubt I will. Have a good day! Vergencescattered (talk) 23:28, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

So, the word "fyxan" is used in Chartae Anglosaxonicae. Bosworth-Toller lists the lemma as fyxe, which seems to be an assumption. Regardless, neither form suggests that fyxen exists, so doesn't seem like it would be good to restore the page. The books I had been working from before were secondary sources, so they must have gotten the word from some later, ahistorical source. Vergencescattered (talk) 23:51, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

@Theknightwho see this comment above, where it is stated that the form fyxan doesn't imply the lemma fyxen. This, that and the other (talk) 01:24, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

@This, that and the other Fair point - shall we move it to fyxan? Theknightwho (talk) 01:26, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

@Theknightwho I know nothing about OE declensions, sorry! @Vergencescattered can you assist? This, that and the other (talk) 01:27, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

The form implies a lemma of fyxe, which would make fyxan the acc/gen/dat singular and nom/acc plural. However, it seems as if only the form fyxan is attested. Hope that helps! Vergencescattered (talk) 02:45, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

@Vergencescattered {{ang-decl-noun-n-f}} I take it. @Theknightwho please see this reply. This, that and the other (talk) 03:10, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, that's the right template. Sorry I didn't link it above. Vergencescattered (talk) 04:24, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

New cleanup list

Hi! Can you make a list of all pages that contain Template:Webster 1913 and have a corresponding Wikipedia page? Stuff like hake and hardy would be listed, as w:hake and w:hardy exist, but not histrion as w:histrion doesn't exist anymore. I think we should allow redirects too, possibly in a subsection, allowing hexade as w:hexade redirects to w:hexad. User:This, that and the other/Websterpedia is the least lame title I can think for it. Denazz (talk) 22:35, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

@Denazz how's this? I didn't do anything about redirects, but if this is an issue I can look into it further. It's worth noting that the vast majority of the Wikipedia pages appear to be redirects. This, that and the other (talk) 03:22, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Lovely! Denazz (talk) 06:54, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

• I went through all of this, modernifying and RFVing a big bunch. Can you regen it as before? Phacromallus (talk) 00:38, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

  @Phacromallus done. Sorry it took a bit - I've been down with sickness This, that and the other (talk) 09:42, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Reply to your edit in the entry ãade

I don't know where else to reply so I'll do it here. Thank you for adding ãade to cat:roa-opt:birds. For me it's fine, I suggested a category specifically for ducks because galinha has it's own (cat:roa-opt:chickens). However, would it be ok with you if I changed the category ãade is in to cat:roa-opt-poultry? I think it fits it better and I can try doing it by just mimicking what you added and changing birds to poultry. Amanyn (talk) 11:32, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

@Amanyn Sure thing. You can even change it to roa-opt|ducks if you like! Such a category is valid; the category tree Cat:Ducks exists, and if you create Cat:roa-opt:Ducks with the code {{auto cat}}, it would no longer be red. However, I question the utility of having single-member categories as we currently do with Cat:roa-opt:Chickens. This, that and the other (talk) 00:26, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

@This, that and the other Alright then. I'll change it to cat:roa-opt:poultry. For now I don't think we need a category specifically for ducks, maybe if I find a synonym or someone requests it. Thank you for your time! Amanyn (talk) 11:18, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Wiktionary:Todo/Lists/Uncategorised pages (all namespaces)

That is a truly depressing list, but I spent an hour weeding out some crap. Worst New Years Day ever. Denazz (talk) 00:09, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

@Denazz happy New Year! I'm glad you had a fun time. It would be great if you can put {{citations|en}} when you make a citations page so the list doesn't keep expanding. The bot will be updating the list weekly, to make sure you've been behaving. This, that and the other (talk) 05:04, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

"Correct language code in, or usage of, etymology template(s) using AWB"

See diff at brunne. I vaguely recall fixing another of these in the past week or so. I don't have AWB, but I'm sure it's pretty easy to get into the zone and end up rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. Chuck Entz (talk) 15:42, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

@Chuck Entz sorry about this. The script I use with AWB doesn't warn you when you are about to do this. Most of the time I manually notice and fix them in AWB before saving, but as you say, it's easy to miss when in the zone. I might see if I can recode my script so it changes inh to der in situations where no chain of inheritance exists. It'll be a bit of work, but it will save you from having to clean up after me whenever I run it! This, that and the other (talk) 21:15, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

etymology question

Greetings!

Any idea of the etymology of dandarabilla?

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/dandarabilla Mynewfiles (talk) 23:30, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

@Mynewfiles post on WT:ES, please. This, that and the other (talk) 23:54, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Inline header gadget

Thanks for indulging me on this. The gadget behaves funny in a couple of ways. As it is supposed to save vertical screen space, the more annoying problem occurs at the top of many pages. Eg, at short-tailed chinchilla, the inflection line does not appear next to the heading, but rather at the top of the entry, where it is followed by a lot of white space. This seems to have something to do with interaction with the right hand side ToC gadget as the white space ends exactly where the ToC ends. Commenting out enough sections to eliminate the ToC eliminates the space problem. The behavior seems to occur on other entries. I will continue to use the gadget for a while to see whether there are any other problems, but I'll probably abandon it if the problem isn't eventually fixed. If it is too hard to fix or not worth fixing (eg, because I'm the only user), I'll understand if you remove it. DCDuring (talk) 17:07, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

I use Vector legacy. I'll try Monobook. DCDuring (talk) 17:09, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

It occurs in Monobook too. DCDuring (talk) 17:10, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

Windows 10, FF 121.0.1. DCDuring (talk) 17:11, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

More puzzling is nutcracker. DCDuring (talk) 20:43, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

@DCDuring the problem is indeed caused by things "floating" down the right side of the page. This could be images (as in the case of nutcracker) or the right floating TOC. I don't see an obvious way to fix this, and I would go so far as to say it could be impossible to fix it properly. This, that and the other (talk) 23:05, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

Oh, well. DCDuring (talk) 01:38, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

@DCDuring I think I will take the gadget away. Sorry for the false promise! This, that and the other (talk) 02:49, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Wiktionary:Todo/phrases not linked to from components final? time

Hi. Getting close to the end of Wiktionary:Todo/phrases not linked to from components/2023-11 (will have taken roughly 2.5 months). A new batch would be great (which should be sorted after 2 weeks) Demonicallt (talk) 14:23, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

@Demonicallt I'll look into this. Once you're done with this, I can make you "compound words {{com}}, {{pre}}, {{af}} etc not linked to from components" e.g. bloodstone not linked from stone This, that and the other (talk) 22:56, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

To be clear, I'll do it after the 20 January dump comes out. This, that and the other (talk) 23:13, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, the compounds are a good idea tooDenazz (talk) 10:42, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

@Phacromallus I made Wiktionary:Todo/compounds not linked to from components. What do you think? Worth doing all 8 pages? This, that and the other (talk) 10:51, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Yep, 8 pages pls. There's some weird shit like grc:-λογία at Wiktionary:Todo/compounds not linked to from components/2024-01/page 3, which might be a bug or ignorable, but this is useful still. Ideally, we'll have a tool, like the Rhyme one, where one click can add the DTs automatically... Phacromallus (talk) 11:21, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

@Phacromallus yeah, a bug. Ignore the grc: stuff. I guess there's fr:, la: crap too. Also the sort order is a little fruity, but I'm sure you'll cope. Anyway I did the other pages. It's all up now. Good luck! This, that and the other (talk) 02:54, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

It's good, except lots of things listed at Wiktionary:Todo/compounds not linked to from components are actually derived from suffixes, but are bundled together. Not cool, IMHO Phacromallus (talk) 08:36, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

@Phacromallus what do you mean? I reckon it makes sense to list homelander as a derived term of homeland. Or are you talking about something else? This, that and the other (talk) 09:34, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

I meant things like vibrable listed at able when it's actually from suffix -able. Phacromallus (talk) 10:35, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

@Phacromallus my script apparently got confused by the piped link in the suf template at vibrable. Sorry. Hopefully there aren't too many of these :( This, that and the other (talk) 10:39, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

No worries. Something to fix for next time. Phacromallus (talk) 10:43, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

• Yep, Wiktionary:Todo/phrases not linked to from components/2024-01 is practically done. 3 weeks, not 2 weeks to do. The problem is that so much new content is being made! Demonicallt (talk) 18:37, 14 February 2024 (UTC) Just a few days should be all it takes. Demonicallt (talk) 18:37, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

  @Demonicallt I can do another one after the next dump. This, that and the other (talk) 23:27, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

  @Demonicallt done. I should maybe automate this - it's still a semi-manual process. This, that and the other (talk) 05:02, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

• Weirdly, stuff with numbers and commas keep on popping up, like 2-methyl-1,3-butadiene, which have already been listed and linked. Denazz (talk) 21:12, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

  Gross. I'll try to fix it for next time. This, that and the other (talk) 00:22, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

• I totally nailed that new one P. Sovjunk (talk) 22:46, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

• Go on, gimme it again P. Sovjunk (talk) 20:41, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

  @P. Sovjunk done. The issue with commas is still there, I'll fix it next time around. This, that and the other (talk) 01:21, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

• Yep, just 9 days to complete this time. Gimme the new one P. Sovjunk (talk) 07:35, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Categories with incorrect language header

Hi - I really disagree with your decision to merge these: one of the main motivations for making this was to catch problematic editing patterns in certain languages (e.g. the wrong apostrophes being continually used), and smashing them all together like this just makes it harder to work it out.

Ultimately, these are maintenance categories, and they can just sit there doing nothing if they're not needed - but from the numbers I've seen while they've been populating there are clearly quite a few entries which have been affected. Theknightwho (talk) 06:22, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

@Theknightwho fair enough. I do worry about the proliferation of maintenance categories in general - it makes it difficult to find actually problematic entries that need solving, especially in smaller languages. But I suppose that's a separate discussion to be hand. In any event, Ioaxxere reverted the change as it broke stuff for some reason. This, that and the other (talk) 06:25, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

I don't think this change would reduce the number of categories unless multiple languages were affected, though. Plus, if there's no language subdivision, then how would we know where the problem is in the first place? It would make solving the issue on a page like a effectively impossible. Theknightwho (talk) 06:27, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

When I was talking about reducing the number of categories, I was thinking from the point of view of browsing the categories themselves, rather than the set of categories at the bottom of entries. Either way, you do make a good point about entries like a. This, that and the other (talk) 06:35, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Idea for another list you can generate

Every instance when an entry links to a thesaurus page, but the thesaurus page doesn't include that entry. Also maybe the reverse, for when a thesaurus page includes an entry but the entry doesn't link to that thesaurus page. Ioaxxere (talk) 07:01, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

@Ioaxxere great idea, I'll work on it. The second list would be extra large, but I agree it's a backlog that should definitely be tackled over time. This, that and the other (talk) 10:00, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Just FYI

The IP that created the QuickPath entry geolocates to Richmond, CA and the one that's trying to get it undeleted is a proxy. Both of them are interested in Wicca, LGB (mostly G), Spanish, and dabbling in American Indian languages. Everything points in screaming neon mile-high letters to this being GTroy, aka Luciferwildcat, aka Baymiwuk aka Ndołkah. They now seem to be dabbling in Chinese folk religion, which fits the pattern perfectly. They tend to be rather dense, clueless, and overly impressed with their competence. Chuck Entz (talk) 01:25, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

pirig̃

Hi! I’m not sure I understand your comment. What module are you referring to? I only know what’s in About Sumerian. — Sartma ^{【𒁾𒁉 ● 𒊭 𒌑𒊑𒀉𒁲】} 23:59, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

@Sartma I assumed the transliterations were done automatically by a Lua module. It seems I was mistaken; they are manually entered using the |tr= parameter. In any event, it seems to be putting the cart before the horse to request deletion of the pirig̃ entry before updating the transliteration at 𒊊 itself. I'm happy to delete any transliteration entries that are wrong, but in this case I got a bit confused and wasn't confident to delete. This, that and the other (talk) 01:43, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

@Sartma oh, I see that transliteration and romanisation are different when it comes to Sumerian. This is incredibly confusing, and seems needless (our search box fills in diacritics for you if you don't type them). I take it that the convention is not to create entries for transliterations but for romanisations? This, that and the other (talk) 01:49, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

The principle is pretty much the same as having ma1 for mā in Chinese romanization. — Sartma ^{【𒁾𒁉 ● 𒊭 𒌑𒊑𒀉𒁲】} 10:47, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

r/woooosh

Did I not provide three (albeit poor quality) citations? Also, if you could recreate it I can add attests for it. Sorry for not doing so earlier; as an interjection, most of the attests for the word are just the word itself sent on its own as a reply to other people's posts, hence why it was difficult for me to find good attests to use. It is definitely a valid and pretty unique word IMO that I think should be included on Wiktionary; I never used Reddit when I first started seeing this pop up quite frequently on Discord messages and in YouTube comment sections (although neither of these services are cite-able unfortunately), so it is definitely more widespread outside of Reddit, or was for me at least. Also, I have now found many useable attests for it on Twitter that I will add if the page is re-created. Hope this is good enough! Thanks, LunaEatsTuna (talk) 18:50, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

@LunaEatsTuna Thanks for your contribution. I've restored the entry; please add your cites within the entry, following the model of, say, radtwt. Personally I would say it is not necessary for a citation to consist of a single tweet; it could consist of a sequence of tweets - but I don't know how one would format that. It would be uncharted waters. This, that and the other (talk) 00:21, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you so much!! I have added them now. LunaEatsTuna (talk) 01:14, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

'nother list

This time, one of all entries in User:HippieBot/Entries in Encarta online not in Wiktionary and subpages without an English entry here, but that have a Wikipedia entry. Could you include all those starting with a capital letter separately, as they are of less interest to me. 10K would not be listed, as it exists only here, nor would abandonment option as it's WP-less. But abernethy would be listed, as w:abernethy exists. You get me? Denazz (talk) 19:49, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

@Denazz How's User:HippieBot/Entries in Encarta online not in Wiktionary/all/missing English entry but on WP? This, that and the other (talk) 02:32, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

I put the (talk) links there so it's easy to see if the page has been RFV/RFD'd, but if you don't want those links I can kill them. This, that and the other (talk) 02:33, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Cool! Could you kill any Translingual entries, please? Father of minus 2 (talk) 10:27, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks again. I split the list into subpages, now found at User:HippieBot/Entries in Encarta online not in Wiktionary. I removed some stuff we blatantly don't want, like Exmoor National Park & Neagh, Lough. We can delete the old lists now. Father of minus 2 (talk) 12:56, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

@Father of minus 2 it's too hard for me to remove Translingual entries now that it's been split into subpages. But surely there aren't that many of these anyway. You'll live. This, that and the other (talk) 00:20, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

foreskin envy

Why did you delete "foreskin envy"?? That is a real condition, and has been cited numerous times since the late 1990s. I included several citations that I will now have to research it all over again.

At least you could have warned me ahead of time that you were going to perform this action. newfiles (talk) 22:38, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

@Mynewfiles The entry was deleted after a discussion at requests for deletion (RFD), where it was decided that the term did not meet WT:CFI for reasons other than lack of attestation. You can read the archived discussion on the entry's talk page: Talk:foreskin envy.

Because the problem with the entry was not attestation-related, the number of citations is not relevant. If an entry has been deleted at RFD, and you believe the community got it wrong, you should not unilaterally override the community's voice by recreating the entry. Instead, start a new discussion at WT:RFDE stating why you think the entry should be undeleted. (In my view, since we have other "... envy" entries as stated by Equinox in the RFD discussion, there is a convincing argument in favour of undeletion.)

In future, before recreating entries that have previously been deleted, I encourage you to read the entry's talk page ("discussion" tab).

I hope this helps to explain the situation. This, that and the other (talk) 22:47, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Reminder to vote now to select members of the first U4C

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to your language

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because you previously participated in the UCoC process.

This is a reminder that the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) ends on May 9, 2024. Read the information on the voting page on Meta-wiki to learn more about voting and voter eligibility.

The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members were invited to submit their applications for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please review the U4C Charter.

Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well.

On behalf of the UCoC project team,

RamzyM (WMF) 23:10, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

Wiktionary:Todo/English Chaucer 2024

NEedeth regenninge P. Sovjunk (talk) 22:29, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

@P. Sovjunk sorry WF, I promise I haven't been ignoring you, I'm just quite busy at the moment. I'll get to the phrases list soon. The Chaucer one I will start running now. This, that and the other (talk) 22:46, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

Wiktionary:Todo/Lists/Template language code does not match header filtering

Morphological derivation templates like {{affix}}, {{compound}}, {{prefix}}, {{suffix}}, etc. are generally okay once |nocat= is added (I use |nocat=1, but I've seen |nocat=y). The sections for those templates are more cluttered with false positives with each run.

Also, an argument could be made for category templates being excludable in some cases: they apply to the page as a whole, and tend to get added at the bottom of the page. I believe there are still bots running that move them to the right section from time to time.

That said, they often get moved to entries without changing the language codes and it's entirely possible to have a category that matches the definition of the intended language but not the definition of the language that matches the code even if there's an entry for it on the page: for pie, Category:en:Desserts and Category:es:Anatomy are correct, but Category:es:Desserts and Category:en:Anatomy would be wrong- no matter where they were on the page. Chuck Entz (talk) 15:52, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

@Chuck Entz thanks for bringing this up. The script is supposed to ignore templates with nocat=:

            # Skip etymology templates with "nocat=" specified
            if 'nocat=' in templateParams:
                continue

Can you give a page where a template with |nocat= was incorrectly included in the list? I spot-checked three examples and they had all been cleaned up by you or WF after the list was generated.

As for category templates, I feel it is still valuable to include them in the list for the reason you mention. If there is a bot that automatically moves these to the "right" section (putting {{c|en|Anatomy}} under the English section of pie for example), it risks making these errors impossible to track down. This cleanup task unfortunately seems like yet another manual job – AWB is useful too, but needs to be run with great care, which is why I don't share my AWB script publicly (although I'd be happy to share it with you or other trusted users privately). This, that and the other (talk) 22:54, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

How about Latin Alexander, English Alexandra, Translingual Caenorhabditis, English Chichester, Latin Christophorus, English Methodius, French Philibert from Wiktionary:Todo/Lists/Template language code does not match header#{{af}}? One thing I've been noticing is that a lot of these have nesting of the template in question in other templates or vice versa, e.g. {{af|grc|ἀλέξω|t1=I defend|ἀνδρός|pos2=genitive of {{m|grc|ἀνήρ|t=man}}|nocat=1}}. Perhaps your code is looking at the parameters of the wrong template. Chuck Entz (talk) 00:12, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

@Chuck Entz ah yes, sorry, I see. The script doesn't handle nested templates. If the |nocat= falls after the nested template, it will not be noticed. I will have to spend some time rewriting this script. This, that and the other (talk) 03:17, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

@Chuck Entz I believe this issue should now be solved. The latest version of the list should correctly eliminate entries with |nocat=1. Please let me know if there are any further issues with the output. This, that and the other (talk) 10:51, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Wiktionary:Todo/phrases not linked to from components May 2024

Can we get it remade? P. Sovjunk (talk) 20:54, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

@P. Sovjunk sorry for the delay. A new computer was foisted on me and I have been focusing on setting up the critical tools for my work, and my Wiktionary scripts are not yet ready. I know, my priorities are wrong etc. But by the time I am able to set it up it will almost be time for the next dump, so I think I will wait until early next week.

Maybe I can even look into automating this! How exciting would that be. This, that and the other (talk) 03:04, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

No rush, Thissy! P. Sovjunk (talk) 10:56, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

@P. Sovjunk done. Hopefully the shit with commas is gone now. Let me know if you see any other junk or issues. This, that and the other (talk) 09:10, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

• Thanks! Denazz (talk) 08:41, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
  • Yeah, comma shit is resolved. But new shit surfaced - the listing of things at Arctic which were already there. This seems to occur with terms "double-linked", like {{l|en|}} inside the {{col-auto}} templates. Granted, most of that was sloppy Wonderfool editing... Perhaps something to fix for next time. Denazz (talk) 09:12, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
    • And there's some hyphen-shit. Argus-eyed was already listed at Argus. Denazz (talk) 09:14, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
      • And some other shit that I can't even give a name to. Arkansas City and Arkansas County already listed at Arkansas. Denazz (talk) 09:16, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
        • Yeah, the pattern appears to be pages not containing {{col-auto}}, especially capitalized entries Denazz (talk) 09:29, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

• Actually, there's too much shit there for it to be useful. I'd say it's better to start from scratch Denazz (talk) 09:38, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

  @Denazz Yeah I noticed it seemed larger than it should have been. Sorry to disappoint. I'll investigate and fix. This, that and the other (talk) 12:43, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

TTObot

Congrats on your vote passing! Can you update the User:TTObot page to look more like a normal bot page (cf. User:WingerBot)? No need to add specifics on what the bot does, but at least it should have the standard bot header box. Benwing2 (talk) 05:46, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

@Benwing2 will do. I'm actually a little annoyed about TTObot having the bot flag, as it means that the bot's edits no longer show up on my watchlist, which is an important way for me to monitor what it's doing and keep an eye on the lists itself. I'm pretty sure I set pywikibot to not mark the edits as bot-flagged, but they still doesn't show up irrespective of that. Do you have any experience with this? This, that and the other (talk) 10:35, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

Also that {{user bot}} box looks like something someone copied straight off WP... This, that and the other (talk) 10:36, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

@This, that and the other I'm not sure it's possible to turn off the bot flagging and it definitely doesn't seem like a good idea. Instead, you can tell the Watchlist to include bot edits. And feel free to edit the {{user bot}} template :) ... you're probably right that it hasn't been changed in ages. Benwing2 (talk) 19:23, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

• You mention you're annoyed about your bot's bot status. There's a way around it, of course, creating a new account and using that as a bot, but lying that it's not a bot. I did that for a while, and got caught out eventually and blocked, which is an occupational hazard for me. P. Sovjunk (talk) 19:28, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

  @P. Sovjunk okay, good idea, I'll call it User:Blundertool This, that and the other (talk) 07:02, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Achilles tendon reflex time

Greetings,

Would you please explain why you nominated this entry for deletion? I've added three cites, and this term is used widely in medicine/endocrinology. It is certainly not SOP. newfiles (talk) 05:33, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

@Mynewfiles it's important to recognise that the term has been brought to RFD, which does not deal with questions of attestation. So the inclusion of three cites is great, but ultimately orthogonal to the issue at hand.

The reason I sent it to RFD is that it seems that it is trivially analysable as Achilles tendon + reflex + time, the time of the reflex of the Achilles tendon. There's no additional meaning inherent in the phrase that can't be deduced from the individual constituent parts. Kiwima and I may well be wrong, hence why I didn't just speedy delete it. But if you think the term is not SOP then make your case at RFD. This, that and the other (talk) 07:09, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

@Mynewfiles to add to this, the reason I didn't respond to your points at RFDE was because I didn't feel you responded to the point at hand, which was that the word was SOP. We'll have a better time discussing things if we respond directly to each other's points. This, that and the other (talk) 07:12, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

It is not SoP as I explained before, and has a specific and unique meaning and edifying use in the field of medicine. Kiwima deleted it originally because the first author contributed an unclear and ambiguous definition of the term. newfiles (talk) 07:18, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

@Mynewfiles I still think this is SOP. Does reflex time occur on its own in reference to other parts of the body with a specialized meaning? If so you'd be better off creating that term. Benwing2 (talk) 17:40, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

This is an actual test used in endocrinology, and the term, cannot in theory, be split into different parts. I'm confused as to why you think it is SOP. newfiles (talk) 01:35, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

@Mynewfiles I think you're misunderstanding what SOP means. The existence of a concept doesn't mean the term for it isn't SOP, and what's SOP can vary from language to language, e.g. the classic example of SOP tennis player (kept only as a translation hub) vs. Polish tenisista. Benwing2 (talk) 01:46, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

I am new and trying to understand Wiktionary's SOP / inclusion rules so have been doing some reading up. Interestingly @Benwing2 there is WT:TENNIS which takes the contrary view: tennis player was not kept only as a translation hub, though it would have been kept for that purpose anyway. The actual reason it was kept, judging from the deletion discussion and as far as I can see accurately summarised at WT:TENNIS, is that it was deemed to refer primarily (and perhaps surprisingly, so not "sum of parts") to a profession. That is, there's a difference between introducing someone as "this is my friend Roger — he plays tennis" and "this is my friend Roger — he's a tennis player". LeadingTheLifeOfRiley (talk) 00:26, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

Well, I don't think that makes it non-SOP. All professions work that way. "My friend Roger is a Spanish (Navajo, Polabian, Toki Pona, etc.) teacher" leads to the implication that it's done professionally; but they are still SOP. Benwing2 (talk) 00:30, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure about that example. "He teaches Spanish" and "He's a Spanish teacher" to my ear both indicate someone teaching professionally? Whereas one of the arguments made in those deletion discussions was "Master P plays basketball, but failed to become a basketball player" is a commonly understood distinction that a non-native speaker could not have made out from the meanings of the individual words. For, say, "He's a solitaire player" versus "He plays solitaire" there's no such difference. Look, as a newbie, I am finding the whole sum of parts business infuriatingly difficult to get my head around. And I can see why you thought your example was a particularly clever and instructive one, with the English vs Polish comparison. But it is a plain matter of fact that your explanation to @Mynewfiles of tennis player being "kept only as a translation hub" is incorrect - even if the decision to keep "tennis player" was wrongly decided, it wasn't for that that reason. On the other hand, judging from the multiple discussions at Talk:tennis player you wouldn't be the only person to claim it was SOP, even if that opinion did not carry the day, so I'm not going to tell you that you're wrong on that point. What I would say is that calling this the "classic" example of SOP is unhelpful for us confused newbies, since whether it is SOP turns out to have been rather contentious, and WT:IDIOM even lists the "tennis player test" by which "tennis player" is deemed genuinely idiomatic (in line with its deletion discussions, but contrary to your quite reasonable arguments that it's SOP). So overall this example has left me more confused than before, rather than enlightened. Perhaps for future instances of newbie instruction you would do better to pick something uncontentiously SOP from the failed items list at WT:IDIOM? LeadingTheLifeOfRiley (talk) 01:18, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

@LeadingTheLifeOfRiley You should join the WT:Discord server for questions like this; IMO it's much easier to carry on discussions about issues like what SOP means. Benwing2 (talk) 01:22, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for that, I wasn't aware of it! I'm not asking for a tutorial right now, I think on balance I'd rather steer clear of the whole SOP business for the time being, just wanted to point out why previous disputes over "tennis player" make it a poor example for explaining SOP, particularly since the most recent consensus is that it is idiomatic despite arguments to the contrary, and that it was a factual error to state it was kept only as a translation hub - I suspect you have to explain SOP to newbies regularly, and I felt some sympathy for newfiles when you were saying one thing and WT:IDIOM (and the associated deleted discussions) would be saying another. LeadingTheLifeOfRiley (talk) 01:47, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

1989 Miami Hotline, 20000 Leagues Under the Seas, et. al.

Why did you delete these entries? They are officially registered as actual colors, and each of them has a designated hex color code. newfiles (talk) 18:12, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

@Mynewfiles have you actually read WT:CFI? I'm becoming increasingly convinced you haven't, because being "officially registered as actual colors" has nothing to do with whether Wiktionary includes a term or not. Find three good uses of these colours names – ideally in running text, not just in auto-generated lists – and I'll undelete. This, that and the other (talk) 02:07, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the reply. newfiles (talk) 04:07, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Wiktionary:Criteria for inclusion

Hello, I have a question about Wikitionary's regulations: according to the criteria for creating articles on Wiktionary, is the organization's own name allowed to have articles here? P. ĐĂNG (talk) 14:29, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

@P. ĐĂNG Only if it is used figuratively or in a sense that doesn't directly refer to the company itself (e.g. Google and Facebook are both verbs). See WT:COMPANY. Is there a specific company name you're concerned about? This, that and the other (talk) 22:36, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Yes, that is the name of Buddhist organizations such as Cheng Beng Buddhist Society, Vietnam Buddhist Sangha and Miao Xin Vihara. These titles are all Wikipedia articles. Could these titles be considered notable enough to be included in Wiktionary? P. ĐĂNG (talk) 16:53, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

@P. ĐĂNG I would say they are not eligible for inclusion. The criterion is not "notability" like it is on Wikipedia. It is actually a much stricter and narrower criterion. Some editors even felt that United Nations should be deleted (although it was eventually kept). This, that and the other (talk) 23:13, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

Special Orphaned pages has been rendered useless by universal self-transclusion

I've referred to this at GP. The undifferentiated list was never very useful for me, but I would really like a list of Translingual L2s that are not linked to from principal namespace and not merely by self-transclusion. There are various problems that might become thereby identifiable: headword misspellings/alternative spellings, poor prioritization, missing {{taxfmt}}, etc..

I asked @User:JeffDoozan about this on his talk page and he referred me to you.

Would it be possible for you to generate such a list? Would it be easy? When might you be able to get to it? DCDuring (talk) 16:33, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

@DCDuring I had an initial go at this, and I got a list with around 5,300 results. Here are the 10 newest and 10 oldest* entries in the list (* edit - the creation log only began on 27 June 2018, there are actually ~2000 more entries in the list that predate this)

• Pulchellia (created 2024-06-09)
• Myrmecocephalus (created 2024-06-08)
• Nematolepis (created 2024-06-08)
• Hesperhodos (created 2024-06-08)
• Adelobotrys (created 2024-06-08)
• Carex nemurensis (created 2024-06-08)
• 🚀🌕 (created 2024-06-08)
• Dasygaster (created 2024-06-07)
• Cordulecerus (created 2024-06-07)
• Caelorrhina (created 2024-06-07)
• Schizonemertea (created 2018-06-29)
• Megapodidae (created 2018-06-30)
• Gorgonops (created 2018-07-01)
• Thecacera (created 2018-07-06)
• Mormops (created 2018-07-07)
• Scolecophagus (created 2018-07-07)
• Rhabdostyla (created 2018-07-07)
• Abrictosaurus (created 2018-07-09)
• Abydosaurus (created 2018-07-09)
• 𝕌 (created 2018-07-17)

If you would find this list useful, I can add this to WT:Todo/Lists so it gets updated once a week by my automated script. This, that and the other (talk) 03:51, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick response. Rather than work from a category like Translingual lemmas, Translingual proper nouns would be better, or better yet entries that use {{taxon}}. I don't have the skills, interest, or energy to deal with characters, emojis, etc. It would also be handy, but not essential, to have immediately available as part of the run the first parameter of {{taxon}} (the "rank" of the taxon).

I would not need it weekly!!! I would find it very useful less frequently, possibly quarterly. And it is possible that I could find it useful in ways I can't imagine now. I do not intend to simply add links to reduce the size of the list, but rather come to some personal policy about entries that are arguably not worth working on. I might advocate that those who add certain kinds of taxonomic entries are wasting their time or that they should think about links into the entry when they create it and support my argument with data from this or similiar lists.

@DCDuring Okay, I've done a one-off list at User:This, that and the other/orphaned Translingual proper nouns. Let me know if it meets your needs. Happy to regenerate as needed. This, that and the other (talk) 07:39, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

Excellent! Quick! Responsive in specifics! Thanks a lot. DCDuring (talk) 14:13, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

phrase fun

Hey! How 'bout Wiktionary:Todo/phrases not linked to from components July 2024? It's gonna be the best cleanup list yet! P. Sovjunk (talk) 21:26, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

@P. Sovjunk excitingly the MediaWiki dump format has changed since I last ran the script! Coding time! This, that and the other (talk) 13:34, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

@P. Sovjunk done! Looks pleasingly crap-free this time: Wiktionary:Todo/phrases not linked to from components/2024-07. This, that and the other (talk) 14:08, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! It's all done, so Wiktionary:Todo/phrases not linked to from components/2024-09 could be made for any new unlinked terms. Denazz (talk) 09:30, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

@Denazz made. This, that and the other (talk) 03:37, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Wiktionary:Todo/Lists/Template language code does not match header (sorted by language) aka Prakrit entries with templates.

I don't know if you noticed, but the change in the language code for Prakrit happened at just the wrong time, so every Prakrit language code in the dumps was flagged as incorrect. That wasted a lot of space in Wiktionary:Todo/Lists/Template language code does not match header, but it completely obliterated all useful content in the language-sorted version. Any chance you could run them again with Prakrit filtered out? There's a similar and older issue with codes for language varieties being allowed in many templates, but that will require more care in sorting things out- this one is a no-brainer. Chuck Entz (talk) 22:07, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

@Chuck Entz I did notice this. As you say, it is just down to bad timing: the dump process uses data from the 1st day of the month, but my script downloads WT:LOL at the time the actual dump file is generated, which is a few days later. Changes to WT:LOL during that interval will create exactly this problem.

I'll see if I can regenerate the list for you with Prakrit excluded, noting that it will still be using data from the same dump, so anything fixed since then will still show up on the list.

As for the variations issues, does this relate to Persian? I did notice some funny stuff there - it looked like etymology-only languages being used in unusual places, but I didn't look into it. Can you help me understand what's going on? This, that and the other (talk) 22:46, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

@Benwing2 can explain it better than I can. Dari is one of the official languages of Aghanistan, but linguistically it's more of a Persian dialect, and Classical Persian also shows up in lots of etymologies. Apparently these can be used in templates that couldn't use them before. After years of being lectured by Bosnians, Serbs and Croats about "Serbo-Croatian" not existing, I guess we can stop reverting a lot of their POV-based language-code changes. Now if we could get Indonesians to stop randomly mixing id and ms (not to mention jv and kaw), and people from India to stop mixing up Assamese/Bengali, Pashto/Urdu Hindi/everything, things will quiet down.

The other thing that needs attention is that Chinese lects are ending up there when they shouldn't. Perhaps we should just consider "Mandarin", "Cantonese", "Hakka", etc. as valid matches for "Chinese" and vice versa. Then there are the weird transclusion tricks of templates like {{ja-see}} and {{zh-see}}, which means that headers and language codes in the secondary entry itself don't always have to be complete for the entry to work. Chuck Entz (talk) 23:43, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

@Chuck Entz I've started a new run of the "sorted by language" list. Should be done in 8 hours or so. When it finishes, I'll look at the situation regarding Chinese - there is code to treat all Sinitic languages as the same language for the purposes of this list, but perhaps it is not working in some situations. This, that and the other (talk) 23:57, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

@This, that and the other I think what @Chuck Entz is referring to is that etymology-only languages (for which there is a plan to rename them to "language varieties") can be used in many places that formerly allowed only full languages. In general I have expanded the places that allow etymology-only languages as much as possible, because sometimes (as for Classical Persian and Dari vs. plain "Persian") they have different properties (in particular transliteration schemes). This just means when checking for cases of "language code does not match header" you need to normalize any occurrences of etym-only languages to their full-language parent (since headers in particular must always be full languages). Benwing2 (talk) 00:23, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

@Benwing2 Thanks for the explanation. More coding for me, then!

@Chuck Entz I secrewed up the invocation of the script, so had to start it again. Look for it in another 5 hours. This, that and the other (talk) 11:26, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

@Chuck Entz sorry, this happened again. Will resolve. This, that and the other (talk) 07:41, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

Wiktionary:Todo/phrases not linked to from components/2024-10

Hey. Phrase me up when September ends. Denazz (talk) 09:23, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

Or in the middle of October. I've no idea when new dumps come on. Thanks again4hard work Denazz (talk) 08:11, 10 October 2024 (UTC)

@Denazz ¡La lista está lista! This, that and the other (talk) 05:16, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Taxonomic name list

Did you generate it by counting {{taxlink}} instances for a given name-rank combination or pages with such 'taxlinked' combinations? It looks like you did. If so and it isn't too much trouble for you, I would stop running mine, which I do only every few months. I don't think we really need it for every dump run. Having it outside user space might make more folks realize that it is a shared task. I seem to be the only person who adds taxon L2s based on their "wants", though there are many who add taxonomic entries, often instant durable orphans. DCDuring (talk) 14:52, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

@DCDuring It counts instances of {{taxlink}}, {{taxlink2}} and {{taxfmt}} (without distinguishing between these templates). I'm glad you find it useful - in that case I will keep running it. It's no trouble to run it against every dump - the system is fully automated, and all the dump-based todo lists are generated off a single pass through the dump, so adding an extra one has no noticeable impact on the overall process.

The two problems I am aware of are:

• it counts individual links rather than entries (hence we see "English spurge, English spurge, English spurge, English spurge, English spurge") - I want to change it to count entries rather than links
• it treats synonyms (like Potentilla anserina) as if they don't exist - I guess these should not be treated as nonexistent taxa

I will try to fix these. This, that and the other (talk) 05:14, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

I am not certain who (and how many) would use such a list besides me. Do you know who is using taxonomic names list that you generate? I know that no one is making use of mine, besides me. I know that all the blue links now at the top of your list are for entries that I have added from my lists.

I view counting individual links as a feature not a bug. (OTOH, listing them in the way they are now doesn't seem as desirable, though certainly not deal-breaking.) The more times a term appears, whether in a vernacular name shared over several related languages, etymologies, derived terms, descendants, or image captions, the more 'important' it is, IMO. To me the same thing would apply to any redlink of a term in any language, however difficult it might be to capture them.

The runs that would serve best to improve taxon entries have been changing.

1. I will need a separate run on {{taxfmt}} instances to find mistaken uses, ie, redlinks, and to find which taxonomic entries are "important", so that such entries are as 'complete' as possible (images, hypernyms, hyponyms, actual definitions, translation sections [including {{t-needed}} for languages spoken where the organisms can be found], and references to external databases). (quarterly?)
2. I need to include {{taxlink2}} in my runs, if I continue them. (all missing-entry runs)
3. I want to find all instances of taxonomic names that are not enclosed in templates 'taxlink', 'taxfmt', and 'taxlink2', starting with those formatted with {{l}}, proceeding to those wikiformatted as "''[[YOUR TAXON HERE]]''" (starting with taxa that have spaces, ie, sub-generic names). (annual or less frequent)
4. At some point I will need to spell-check all taxonomic names, wherever they appear, probably against a database like Catalogue of Life, supplemented by Wikispecies for taxa at ranks like subtribe or 'clades'. (annual or less frequent)
5. I have, in my efforts, downgraded taxonomic synonyms and extinct taxa, not always taking the time to enclose them in {{taxlink}} or even mark them with †. That should be remedied at some point, with such items being included in the normal workflow. (one time, but uncertain how to do completely)

These needs/wants are obviously specialized. I would be happy to do all these runs myself, but my programming skills are very limited. In particular, I am not very good at anticipating problems in making fully automated changes to Wiktionary. I can do the simple programming for 1, probably 2, possibly 3, doubtfully 4 and 5.

I use the search box to find entries that have specific problems and like to prioritize my efforts by number of 'wants'. It is a shame that we can't rely on using "&sort=incoming_links_desc" to generate useful lists from the search box, due to the large number of links from user space. Such links might be useful indications of 'wants', were they not repeated multiple times, eg, Berkel's lists. I have commented out repeats of my "missing taxa" lists, reactivating them only when I am actively using them. DCDuring (talk) 16:48, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

• Wonderfool sometimes uses the lists, and makes very basic stubs from them. Just DCD, you do it sooo much better! Denazz (talk) 20:48, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

Italics

I undid your bot's edit. Italics can be ignored on that paage Denazz (talk) 21:00, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

@Denazz I hate to break it to you, but the italic links were actually there in the previous edit too, it just wasn't as obvious because they appeared in the various language sections. There's a long and technical explanation for why they showed up under "unknown language" this time. You're right that they don't need to be fixed! Next week's update should do away with them entirely. This, that and the other (talk) 22:14, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

Wiktionary:Todo/Lists/Broken links to Wikipedia

I would suggest excluding {{zh-pron}} and {{zh-dial}} from future runs, since they get their Wikipedia links from data modules and the useful information is massively diluted by being repeated on thousands of pages. For instance, the link to w:Neipu_District comes from Line 30 at Module:hak-pron, but takes up 3,761 items in the list before the 5,000 limit is reached. A search on "Miaoli and Neipu" returns 12,952 results, probably all from {{zh-pron}} and all accompanied by the bad link.

Perhaps you might separately compile lists specific to the data modules for these templates, but you would want to avoid going through the literally thousands of term-specific data sub-modules, which have no actual links in them. Fortunately those sub-module names follow universal patterns, so that shouldn't be hard. Chuck Entz (talk) 22:53, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

@Chuck Entz Yes, there is certainly a problem with individual templates flooding the list. The problem isn't as bad as it might look though; I think I have managed to eliminate all the bad Chinese dialect links that were causing problems. My plan is to only exclude particular templates from the list if they cause recurrent flooding problems over time - we'll have to see how it goes.

Compiling lists of Wikipedia links from modules is very much non-trivial. Instead, I want to add a third column to the todo list that names the template that was responsible for the bad link. In some cases this will be {{w}} or {{quote-book}} or something that needs fixing in the entry itself, but in other cases, it should help to identify the templates (and, indirectly, modules) which need repair.

The 5000-result limit works rather unusually in this list. It's complicated to explain, but suffice it to say that, once the list settles down and we manage to get below 5000 results, everything should start to make more sense.

I am also thinking of excluding links that end in languages, as seen in family categories, from the list. What do you think? This, that and the other (talk) 02:20, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

run of luck and run of bad luck

Greetings TTATO,

Both of these terms have entries in OED and The Free Dictionary. Should we recreate them, and also since they're very citable? mynewfiles (talk) 05:17, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

@Mysteryroom these entries failed RFD. See talk:run of luck. If you believe you have a strong argument why the conclusion of that RFD discussion was wrong, you need to raise that at an undeletion discussion at WT:RFDE. This, that and the other (talk) 05:57, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Thank you kindly for the prompt response. mynewfiles (talk) 06:11, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Wiktionary:Todo/phrases not linked to from components/2024-11

When it's available, whip me up a November list, please P. Sovjunk (talk) 23:58, 1 November 2024 (UTC)