When I tried to add a Kazakh translation WITHOUT transliteration to how_much#Translations, I was getting a "script error" in red. Other languages worked fine, Kazakh also worked WITH transliteration. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 00:33, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
"Page name" seems to be ignored in the preview mode. When adding Kazakh and Slovene translations to how much does it cost the "?" wasn't visible in the preview. After saving I saw it was fine, though, Kazakh result (with "alt"): бұл қанша тұрады? (bul qanşa turadı?). The script error above persists. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 00:57, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
What's going to happen with Category:Translations which need romanization? --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 03:14, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
Needing transliteration does not depend on what language the text is in, but the script. --Z 07:29, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
In functional#Translations "функционировать" is the lemma but the translation should display the participle "функционирующий", the value for alt, same with действовать/действующий:
--Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 00:12, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
What do you think of having the module automatically strip ¿ ¡ ? ! ？！‽ from translations (exclamation and question marks, ditto upside down, ditto fullwidth encoding, and interrobang)? There are so many mistaken uses of these characters in translations... although perhaps this should go in Module:links as well, I don't know. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 20:45, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
t adds an extra space at the end when no gender is given:
{{t|en|word}}, > word,
(It had been fixed after this) --Z 20:39, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
BTW, I think the module should return script error when lang is en. --Z 20:44, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
The second parameter (term) is currently required. We have translations like this Manchu one, that are just transliterations. I think we should keep these translations, and instead make the second parameter optional, but specifying "tr" should be required in that case. So: the first parameter (language code), as well as either the second parameter or "tr" should always be specified. --Z 15:25, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
Keφr 11:39, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
Is there any reason the cmn, nan, nb, rup and kmr conversions aren't also handled here? - TheDaveRoss 17:09, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
@Benwing2, @Justinrleung, @Rua, @Erutuon like {{synonyms}}, it would be helpful if {{t}} could generate links to thesaurus. something like ''see ]'' or ''see also ]'' (in case a few synonyms ar e given before then see also; a parameter |also=1 would be ok for this). eg in page morning i would like to give Thesaurus:प्रभात as the sanskrit translation; one can see the thesaurus page for transliterations & genders — Svārtava • 15:02, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
{{t}} will affect an awful lot of pages and potentially lead to memory errors. Benwing2 (talk) 01:23, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
|to= and |as=@Benwing2, Atitarev, DCDuring: Following up on User_talk:Atitarev#Phrasebook_gender: Per Wiktionary:Votes/2022-01/New_phrasebook_regulations, the following is now official policy: "If a translation of a phrase depends on the natural gender of one person, the corresponding gender must be denoted using the designated argument of {{t}}." Using the usual gender parameter for this purpose is an abuse thereof, an abuse of notation, but continuing to use {{q|male speaker}}/{{q|to a male}} etc. is also untenable in my opinion: 1. It's not reliably parseable 2. it's not stylized consistently ({{q}} occurs sometimes before, sometimes after a translations, contains varying wordings etc.) 3. it's more to type. Therefore, I propose adding |to= and |as= as new parameters, and I further propose that {{t|ro|ești căsătorit?|to=m}} be displayed as "ești căsătorit? (to a male)" or "ești căsătorit? (to m)" and {{t|ro|sunt căsătorit|as=m}} as "sunt căsătorit (as a male)", "sunt căsătorit (male speaker)", or "ești căsătorit? (as m)". I'm not married (heh) to any of these displaying styles, I just strongly believe that this whole thing should be documented as parameters, not as non-standardized qualifiers. — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 11:52, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
{{g}} is not necessarily involved. Rather than create a solution limited to translations, wouldn't it be better to do something that was at least somewhat consistent across entry sections, templates, etc.? For example, we could use "to=" and "as=" in {{lb}} to standardize presentation in definitions. This is not a discussion to be conducted on this page. It is at least a BP discussion. Whether a vote is required would be indicated by the nature of the discussion. I hope not. Simply applying the standardized approach where definitions or translation sections contain {{g}} or phrase like "to a male|female", "by|from|as a male|female" (which can be identified by reqex (insource) searches would be straightforward, although not a quaranteed-complete solution. Simply searching for those phrases (8 variations) would provide a count, possibly be language, and might identify locations of occurrence other than definitions and translations, eg, usage notes, etymologies. DCDuring (talk) 15:46, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
{{t+}} with multiple alt forms using //@theknightwho would you mind fixing the issue? This has been a problem for quite some time now. This should be trivial to implement by adding additional checks for the link target in line 61.– Wpi (talk) 15:50, 18 June 2023 (UTC)