User talk:Conrad.Irwin/1

I archive my talk page when it gets to ~75 topics by moving the first 50 to a new subpage. Please do not edit the archive pages, if you want to talk about something again - copy it back to my current talk page or just start a new topic there and link back.

• User_talk:Conrad.Irwin/1 Jan 07 → Feb 08
• User_talk:Conrad.Irwin/i Feb 08 → Apr 08
• User_talk:Conrad.Irwin/一 Apr 08 → Jun 08
• User_talk:Conrad.Irwin/α' Jun 08 → Jul 08
• User_talk:Conrad.Irwin/١ Jul 08 -> Nov 08
• User_talk:Conrad.Irwin/१ Nov 08 -> Mar 09
• User_talk:Conrad.Irwin/¹ Mar 09 -> Dec 09
• User_talk:Conrad.Irwin/₁ Jan 10 -> Mar 10

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 format guidelines
• Criteria for inclusion
• 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 the beer parlour or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! --Connel MacKenzie 18:37, 1 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

I think part of these reason the template differ is that they were created so long ago. If you want to tidy the current verb conjugation tables, then by all means go ahead. All the templates should be listed at Category:Latin inflection templates. Two points though: (1) The infinitives and participles should remain separate. Unlike modern Romance lanugages, Latin had multiple infinitives, and this would be tricky to incorporate into a structure that would parallel what the other languages are using. The infinitive in Latin also serves a different grammatical function that may require an infinitive table be included where a full conjugation table is not needed. The same is true of participles. The participle is a grmmatical verb part, but a functional adjective. Pages about the participle should have a participle table and the principal parts, but need not list the entire conjugation table. So infinitives and participles should probably remain separate in terms of tables. (2) There already is a set of la-conj-* templates. I'm not entirely sure why we have two complete sets of verb inflection templates, but we do. You should have fun consolidating them.

One final note. Recent discussion has decided that the lemma (main entry form) for Latin verbs should be the first principal part (1st person singular present active indicative), just as it is for most Latin dictionaries. This means that at some point, when all the necessary templates and such are avaialable, we'll need to do a massive restructuring of all the Latin verbs, so I'd make the new templates, keep information posted here, but wouldn't recommend making lots of article edits until everything is set to go. It would be easier to make all the changes as a coordinated group than in a piecemeal fashion individually. --EncycloPetey 22:52, 1 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hi there. Do you think that the entries in these tables should be wikified - so we can see which ones are missing and then add them at some point. That's what we do with the Italian conjugation tables. SemperBlotto 11:04, 26 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Might I recommend placing the Imperative forms ahead of the Infinitives and Participles? Since these forms function often as another part of speech, it would be preferrable to have them last... or even as a separate table that isn't hidden, particularly since the participles are so imprtant to English etymologies. --EncycloPetey 07:58, 3 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

Oh, and please don't remove the inflection line following the part of speech header. We're trying to standardize to using them across Wiktionary for all languages. --EncycloPetey 08:04, 3 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

I feel that there is no reason to treat the imperatives section any differently from the rest of the verb. I think that if people are interested, they will look up the conjugation, otherwise it just takes up space and lessens the readability of the article. I have moved them to the end of the template though. Feel free to edit the template yourself if you want to change things, you seem to have spent more time around here than I have.

The inflection lines at the moment are both ugly to look at and ugly to use. They take up far more space than is warranted, a simple line of text can contain all the information, and a simple line of text is much easier to maintain. By using this template, wiktionary is harder to edit, and less comfortable to read.

Reading what I have written, I come across as a bit of a minimalist, I think that from wiktionary it should be trivial to extract the essential information, such as definitions, and merely easy to find the less important information such as inflections.

Conrad.Irwin 08:28, 3 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

While I agree that the template is ugly and bulky, the use of such templates following the part-of-speech header has become standard practice and is to be followed by the entire community. Removing them would constitute a community change of policy and would require a discussion and/or vote. Now, that doesn't mean that the template couldn't be edited to look much, much better. If you'd like to improve the look of the {{la-verb}} template then please do! Just keep in mind that it's already in place on many pages, so the sequence of parameters should not be changed. You might take a look at some of the other similar POS templates to see what kind of "look" the cmmunity is using. In particular, you could look at uses of {{la-noun}}, {{en-verb}}, {{es-noun-m}}, {{el-verb}}, and so on.

In any case, changes that affect the community do need to be discussed, rather than imposed. You may find that Wiktionary talk:About Latin is a good place to discuss proposed changes for Latin, since most of the other contributors to Latin entries keep an eye on that page for potential discussions. A couple of us have recently started a clean-up of Latin verb entries, so your help in making the templates look pretty is well-timed and appreciated. There is still much to do, though. --EncycloPetey 14:59, 3 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

Note: When you add in your new conjugation table template, don't forget to add an ====Inflection=== or ====Conjugation==== header immediately before it. The old template (incorrectly) included this section header in the template, so when the old template is replaced, a section header should be added. --EncycloPetey 23:18, 3 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

We usually mark {{transitive}} at the head of any definition for a transitive sense. Likewise for {{intransitive}} and {{reflexive}}. The new la-verb template looks much better, by the way! --EncycloPetey 23:05, 3 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

Just so you know, we at Wiktionary generally avoid redirects. —Ruakh_TALK 17:25, 8 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hi, would you create a user page User:Conrad.Irwin, even if essentially blank? The reason is that you name shows up in red, whic is usually an indication of a new user whose edits need to be looked at closely. (I keep going, um, look at that ... oh yes that's okay ;-) Robert Ullmann 02:15, 10 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

Appears in the {{delete}} template's category. I don't think this is intended. Please change "speedy" to "delete" here on Wiktionary (not a big difference; meh.) Please enclose those comments with <nowiki> perhaps, to prevent the category from accidentally being added. (I know it doesn't show up when you view the page itself, for some reason...but viewing the category shows it...very strange.) --Connel MacKenzie 06:24, 14 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hi again,

I'm not sure about your speedy nominations for those templates. In general, we don't ever use {{delete}} (note: not "speedy") on templates. Instead, we use {{rfd}} to list them on WT:RFDO to verify they are properly orphaned (for a week) before being thwacked.

Some of those, I think have been part of other WT:RFDO conversations - if so, your edit summaries of such {{delete}} nominations should refer to the section title of RFDO where they've been mentioned already (and orphaned for two maintenance/SpecialPages.php runs...one week.)

If they haven't been part of some other RFDO conversation, then they (ugh, sorry about this) really ought to be switched to {{rfd}} instead.

--Connel MacKenzie 06:30, 14 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

Ok, I have moved all of the current requests to WT:RFDO, however I felt I was justified in {{delete}}ing all of the (prefix) templates as all of the suffix templates were similarly dispatched. The problem with looking for previous nominations in the archives is that they are almost impossible to find, I know I didn't replace any {{rfd}}s with {{speedy}}s, and I find it hard to believe that any of these would survive an RfD. Conrad.Irwin 13:52, 14 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the explanation (and the welcome!) --Redaktor 16:12, 28 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

See note on the vote page. I think trying it out would be unanimously accepted; even though most people haven't taken time yet to look at it as a permanent change? Robert Ullmann 11:33, 30 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hi Connel, I wanted to run this idea past someone who knows how things work before trying to hard in the implementation stage. Instead of the current Cookie based WT:PREFS, it would be possible to set up an XMLHttpRequest based auto editor for a user's JS and CSS files, this would allow the preferences to be included more easily and transferred between browsers. It would also be possible to not include the User:Connel MacKenzie/custom.js for every user which is what happens at the moment. An initial test I did suggests that this would work, however there are some possible security implications. Do you have any thoughts about this? (Also - would it be possible for you to leave a note on my talk page when/if you reply). Thanks in advance Conrad.Irwin 14:27, 30 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

Yes, that could work. The only fundamental difference is that Javascript is cached, XMLHttpRequest is not. Yes, the custom.js stuff was supposed to be moved copied to the Wiktionary: namespace a long time ago, but each person caught in the attempt (myself included) soon becomes overwhelmed by the gigantic refactoring task. (Pretty much everything in MW:Monobook.js, cmack:custom.js + all related .js files belong in MW:Common.js instead.) Every time I've set aside a weekend for the task, something else has come up. --Connel MacKenzie 14:43, 30 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

In my experience XMLHttpRequest is cached. In fact I had trouble in my js where I wanted to request stuff not in the cache on Internet Explorer! — Hippietrail 05:13, 5 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Moved to one section so I can read it more easily.

Hi and thanks for contacting me.Just 1 question. what is your first name? thanks again. toodles.

dear Conrad, it says that directly in my languge arts vocabulary book.

conrad, how old are you?

Hey Conrad, I haven't been on yesterday so I wanted to reply to you. I am 12 years old. I live in Maryland. If you don't believe me then fine have it your way but it is true. By the way did you hear about a teen killed in a maryland car crash on wednesday? I knew her. Stephanie Weir was the nicest girl you could ever meet. I am not alowed to do that chat thing. I am afraid my dad would get mad at me. thank you agian. you can call me Alexis (my name). I call my friend andrew,lohren because his last name is lohr and thats why i am lohrengirl and 17 is my lucky number. love, Lohrengirl17 (--Lohrengirl17 17:02, 1 December 2007 (UTC))Reply

hey whats up. i am on right now soooo reply to me please.--Lohrengirl17 17:35, 1 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

I never got around to interpreting the URL for stuff like #Spanish to set the right language tab. Want to take a crack at it? Should I file a bug report on Bugzilla? — Hippietrail 05:10, 5 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

I got it working for following links from other pages, but for following links between languages on the same page that seems to be much harder. — Hippietrail 00:40, 8 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hi Conrad. I'm not sure if it's your JavaScript that's doing it but when I try to look at a diff on Wiktionary now I just see a regular article. It still works on Wikipedia or on Wiktionary if I log out. — Hippietrail 07:01, 5 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

I've sysop'd you there. Go wild. — Hippietrail 00:00, 8 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Re what we were talking about last night. I think it would be really cool to make a little interface which lets you switch between the standard article view and a custom view rearranged by javascript. Instead of each js extension implementing view-switching independently we should have a standard way to do it. Maybe a tabbed interface with one div for the standard dom and one div for each custom rearranged dom. The tabs set one to display:block and the others to display:none. Most CSS should work unchanged but any CSS which relies upon immediate parent or child classes right at the point we introduce a new level into the dom.

What do you think? — Hippietrail 00:47, 8 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

I think it is a good idea, There certainly needs to be a way of turning off the js formatting, however this could run into problems as the dom would need to be copied, if we were to have multiple different possible layouts. (Or we could just use innerHTML :). Conrad.Irwin 01:07, 8 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Yep innerHTML would be the easiest way to copy the dom. — Hippietrail 02:06, 8 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Are you around right now? Robert Ullmann 08:28, 11 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

You welcomed me on my user page. Thank you! Btw, If a user keeps going behind someone and reverting all their edits without edit summaries provided except for merely saying "Reverted back to last version", isn't this harassment I can report them for? Connel MacKenzie has gone behind me and reverted all of the edits I made yesterday and his only edit summary is "Reverted back to last version". The reason I bring this up now is because it's been a rather ongoing problem with him. 67.53.130.69 00:57, 13 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hello Conrad, Sorry to get you involved but the guy's behavior is very frustrating and I didn't really know who to go to and you seemed like a friendly, experienced user so I came to you. Thanx for the wiktionary tips. As per your advice on the matter, I have created the account name Webster Boy. I'll remember to provide edit summaries from now on. Hopefully, these steps will solve the problem. Bye :) Webster Boy 02:42, 13 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Unfortunately CM is correct, all of this user's edits need to be reverted/undone. Robert Ullmann 06:05, 13 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

For more information on this user, please see w:User:EverybodyHatesChris (block log) and w:User:67.53.130.69 (block log)on Wikipedia. The IP is currently blocked on enWiki as the source IP for banned abusive user and sockpuppeteer EverybodyHatesChris. This IP, since being blocked, has been trolling other Wiki sites leaving abusive attack messages directed at myself and other Wikipedia editors who reported him for evading his block. If you require further information, please leave a message here. Thanks. --Ckatz 08:51, 13 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

is a "rather ongoing problem"? Good grief. --Connel MacKenzie 08:07, 19 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for the welcome note! I was looking into translation templates and noticed that some entries use {{t+|, others use {{t-|, or simply {{t|. Is there a difference? Panda10 18:13, 16 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

a nomination for sysop? If so, let me know. Thanks. ArielGlenn 06:24, 17 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Yes, If people don't mind me being a bit of a technocrat. Conrad.Irwin 09:23, 17 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

I was just stopping in here, to mention the WT:VOTE has been created.  :-)   Please indicate your acceptance there. --Connel MacKenzie 19:29, 17 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

P.S. and enable e-mail messages (as is superficially required for sysops here.) --Connel MacKenzie 19:30, 17 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Looking at gadfly, the layout is getting strange. --Connel MacKenzie 19:28, 17 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Early this year, there was a request to glom the de.wikt (de.wiki?)'s IPA to SAMPA converter written in Javascript, but I never dug deep enough to find it. If you have a free minute, that too, would be a great boon. --Connel MacKenzie 17:58, 18 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Your recent edit has been undone. Please use the sandbox for any further tests you wish to make. To learn more about editing Wiktionary please read Help:How to edit a page or nose around in the community portal. Thank you. 62.141.59.167 20:07, 26 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

thanx for the message, heh. love it, the first time i ever got a message here. now, confess, how many girls have you talked to? (cough) delete if im going too far. hehe- maybe i am, just didnt know what to say, hehe Chloejr 21:18, 28 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

I think I get the default: Latin, IPA, Cyrillic, Greek, and a few extra things (punctuation and ad hoc English phonetics). Circeus 00:59, 29 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

I'd love for it to do that: I don't even see a drop down box! Circeus 01:07, 29 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Last version of Fx, cookies and script working just fine. Circeus 01:11, 29 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Re:refreshing, I did, and that is when I stopped getting the wiktionary-specific version of edittools. Circeus 01:24, 29 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hi Conrad, od you fancy taking on the task of revamping Wiktionary:Community Portal? It looks pretty stale to me, and you did such a good job on the Main Page. Thanks in advance --Keene 04:00, 31 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Catch(e)? How quaint. But um, I really dislike seeing **PARSER ERROR** as the title for every page I edit. --Connel MacKenzie 20:39, 31 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hi there, just to let you know that your recent edit to Mediawiki:Edittools broke them for all users, we are still unfortunately using an archaic system whereby our Mediawiki:Monobook.js has to be updated in parallel. I have patched the Javascript, and it seems to work for now - but I am hoping to replace the current Javascript entirely soon. If you are interested in how the future system may work, there is a discussion at WT:GP or more detailed information can be found at User_talk:Conrad.Irwin/edittools.js. Yours Conrad.Irwin 17:32, 3 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, sorry. I didn't realise that. Widsith 17:36, 3 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

hey mr. conrad happy new year i'm sorry i bothered some other people but i was wondering if i can still talk to you. I think that is sooooooooo sweet you put me in a seperate section that is awesome thanks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! --Lohrengirl17 18:09, 5 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

you shure will probably starting next week or so but i was wondering if you can help me.please thanks.!!!!!!!!! it's great to be back--Lohrengirl17 18:23, 5 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

Looks like it's working. I'm only able to test it on Linux (Galeon/Seamonkey and Firefox), so I can't try it out in IE. Perhaps you're better equipped to do that than I am. Mike Dillon 00:29, 6 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

I realize its not a blog host anddd I realize I must seem like a gigantic nerd but i work in a call center 8 hrs a day 5 days a week and were not allowed personal browsing. Wikipedia is basically the only thing allowed, and i find that theres lots id like to read and dont have time to so I make a record of it. I very much enjoy literature and the english language so wiki works for me. Its definitely my education fix and boredish killer. Im very picky and strange so ill only add definitions that I like that dont exist or correct things I know for sure are wrong. Other than the time I need to be at work I barely even touch a computer so I really wont make too much of an effort to make any actual contribution unless it benefits me or none boredom. Sorry Charlie =) The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:Neurosynthesis 02:15, 7 January 2008

Thanks for changing WS: links to WT:. But I think that on talk pages (and other places that people wrote comments), you should instead change, e.g., ] to ], so as not to edit people's posts without checking with them (i.e., because of Netiquette considerations).—msh210℠ 22:07, 8 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

Thanks Conrad.Irwin for informing me that inserting lots of urls is a blockable offense. I have no intent to misuse this wonderful resource. I'm brand new to Wiktionary and am trying to learn the rules. I thought I needed to support my statements with links to sites where the word was used in the context I stated.

Later, User: Hippietrail (the originator of the 'sesh' entry) reverted the page to the original. I'll try to contact this user to explain my intention.

I began this task because my son mentioned the word 'sesh' and after googling it, I found lots of references to it in many settings. In Wiktionary I found the current entry where the author was asking for info on the proper abbreviation. Wikipedia has a reference under 'session' to 'seiciun,' an Irish word, so it sparked a connection to my heritage.

I'll try to re-enter my edits without the links following the format I see under 'session.' I will only include a link to another dictionary or Wikipedia, since this seems acceptable. Thanks again. Dianana 17:23, 9 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

If I may intrude: While it's great that you tried to attest the word — in fact, someone requested verification of the word, as the page] indicates — and it's appreciated, and while the ban on adding URLs was intended as a ban on spam, not on links to quotations, and while that's probably why you weren't, in fact, blocked (although I can't speak for the person who chose not to block you), you should know two things: (a) citations from the Web are not great; (b) the way to include such citations, if you include them, is not by simply adding a link: yous should quote the use of the word. That said, however, any addition of good information to Wiktionary is helpful, even if you don't know (yet) on how to include or format it correctly.—msh210℠ 17:42, 9 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

When "archiving" WT:VIP, please leave an example, or perhaps the most recent entry. I.e. {{vandal|127.0.0.1}}. --Connel MacKenzie 19:56, 9 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

Will do. Conrad.Irwin 19:58, 9 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

You are doing amazing work! Can I ask you once again if you have considered creating an account? I have to admit I have been a little skeptical about your abilities, I even accused you of using an online translator - but people that can actually speak these languages seem to think that your translations are better than that. If you don't want to create an account, you may want to consider adding a {{Babel}} template to this page so we know what languages you can speak (though maybe a list of the languages you don't speak would be easier). If you have more questions, my talk page is always open. Yours Conrad.Irwin 21:42, 9 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for your kind words. I'm afraid that I do not actually speak any of these languages. I actually look up individual words in multiple online dictionaries in order to learn the usage of the word in context. I then select the most appropriate form for use in the entry. ---96.229.184.69 22:47, 9 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

I think we're asking a lot of TheCurran, the user's had about half a dozen messages on formatting in the last 24 hours asking to add non-necessary bits and pieces and categories (which are still useful) to pages. Could I advise to let TheCurran be for a bit, to avoid potential burnout. I for one hope to see more of this user, so let's try not to scare 'em away with too many requests. Easy does it. --Keene 01:38, 15 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hi cirwin.

I'm learning how to use api.php from ajax but running into some problems.

Some of the things I've done with with ajax looked up raw wikitext of articles. This can also be done with the API. Perhaps with a lower cost or better cache friendliness - I'm not sure. But one definite benefit of the API is you can query multiple pages at once.

One thing I do with ajax is look up messages in the MediaWiki namespace to emulate the PHP functions wfMsg and wfMsgForContent. These functions could look up a link/name pair and also look up the localized name if using a different interface language. But it took multiple ajax requests to do it all. What I wanted to do was look them all up in one hit and then take the best stuff from the results.

Since the page titles to be looked up are not 100% predictable i tried putting the titles and their functions in a JavaScript object which I could then look up when the result comes back asynchronously from ajax. This was more or less working until I tried to do several of these lookups. The object reference is getting reused between calls so the data is meaningless except for the last response.

I haven't been able to solve this problem but there's either a way involving JavaScript closures or somehow creating objects to pass around with the ajax request.

Do you have any ideas? The code is at: User:Hippietrail/apitest.js

Thanks. — hippietrail 06:01, 19 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

I'm not sure exactly what you are trying to do - but maybe the solution would be to create an object which contains enough information to deal with the request, and call ajax(msg.url(),msg.on200,msg.on400). That way each response would be correctly matched to each message, I think. Also the api.php is bad for the cache afaik, as it sends out do not cache me headers. Conrad.Irwin 10:24, 19 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for having a look. I think I got that part working after trying something similar to what you suggest but then tried removing it again because I thought the JavaScript closures should make it unnecessary - and that also worked. Now I'm trying to refactor it step by step into something that can be used as a library function or a stack thereof.

As for cache issues, api.php is generally advertised as the better way to do things so I would expect that it either already works well with the caches or will be adjusted to do so in the future. It definitely works well with the browser cache at least. — hippietrail 13:36, 19 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

Please check contributions by user:131.123.11.150. RJFJR 20:54, 22 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

Looks like good faith, will warn and see. Conrad.Irwin 20:56, 22 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

Thank you. RJFJR 21:01, 22 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

I'm sorry for changing the article heimwee, i was just confused: Dutch and Deutsch ... I supposed the language name to be native, therefore i didn't notice the missing "e". Do you know, why there is a page for everylanguage in every languages Wiktionary? I'm not gonna open again 6 accounts in all languages I speak, therefore, i don't see that, but I think, that you will gonna answer, that you can't change that either, and you can't help. Therefore I could just leave it as it is. However I'd appreciate, if you could get Wiktionnary to link between words, in a way, that whenever you click on a Word "Heimwee" it redirects to "nl:Heimwee" and so on. To be honnest, I'm not participating in Wiktionnary, because whenever I search a translation for a word (e.g. House) in a language (e.g. Ukrainian), I must go to the English Wiktionnary and search for "House", and if I don't find it there, I must go to DE:wkt "Haus", FR:wkt "maison", FI:wkt "talo" ... and so on, until I got a translation. And searching for a explanation of the provenance of a word, it's the same. Honnestly, whenever will you want to know something about a word, of which you don't speak/understand the language?
I use alot to translate from german into French/English (as a student from German speaking Switzerland in French speaking Lausanne) and vice versa and if possible I'd use Wiktionnary, but obviously this is not a good alternative. Sice i'd had to check twice. And I even think, that there would be many more prople participating, if it were not like that!
In the DE:WP, EN:WP, FR:WP, FI:WP and KL:WP you find me as Saippuakauppias. Please answer there! Thank you! Greets, Saippuakauppias 83.219.124.35 00:35, 23 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

It seems that importScript never worked on Microsoft Internet Explorer 7 but I didn't notice until today when I thought I was looking for a bug in my personalsidebar or wfMsgCentre. I had to go back to the old document.write method for now. I don't know if it's better in older versions of Explorer. — hippietrail 15:00, 23 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

I am fairly sure it was tested and working on IE7 - it is almost a direct copy of 'pedia's function, it is possible that I broke it adding oldid support a while back - but I can't see how. Reversion is fine for now. Conrad.Irwin 16:22, 23 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

The symptoms were that the import functions themselves executed without error but the code they were supposed to import was not available when attempting to call it later. I don't know if my ie security settings had anything to do with it - I restored them to defaults in case and it still didn't work )-: — hippietrail 01:51, 24 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

I have fought a free speech battle on Wikipedia for a long time, so can you please leave things like this alone? I think the "our goal is a dictionary (or encyclopedia) an dnot a soapbox"/neutrality thing is bullshiut. I mean, it takes freedom away and makes everything boring. I mean, we do have the goal of a dictionary but it is no longer diverse once it gets bland because of a lack of free speech. I'm tired of that. -Ionas Freeman (自人) 00:28, 26 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

I'm tired of it. Are you a conservative, or are you just a Jimbocrat? The line gets blurry here... --Ionas Freeman (自人) 00:39, 26 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

What "internet communities" have you found my name in? -Ionas Freeman (自人) 00:46, 26 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

Well, I mention the word "statistics" and you "(yawn)" and exit?  :-)

Before you ducked out, I wanted to say Nicely done.

One of the statistics rules, is also to eliminate sections that are outside two standard deviations from the main index. (I.e. if they have less than three members in the sub-grouping, throw them into "misc" and don't clog up the quickindex.)

Piggy-backing from the sort key before normalizing to uppercase is very handy. WT:STATS#Detail has the list of other language names (in order) to attack next.  :-)

--Connel MacKenzie 03:51, 4 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

Heh, sorry about that, (I didn't here the message about statistics) I could just see myself getting engrossed further and really needed to be up this morning. Thank you. Conrad.Irwin 08:42, 4 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

TOC links are broken (again.) --Connel MacKenzie 19:39, 4 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

Turning on "paper view" once again breaks the TOC language links. (I thought you fixed it, just the other day?) --Connel MacKenzie 19:39, 8 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

Take a look at User:Atelaes/Sandbox and User:Atelaes/Sandbox2. Let me know what you think. Atelaes 01:30, 5 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

Yes, I did see your addition. I've been pondering exactly how to respond to it. This is where a standard becomes messy, as everyone has their own sense of aesthetics.:) So, I suppose I'll just start out by saying that I prefer mine. I can live with the non-full screen width, as long as it will expand to fit longer words. I dislike all the empty white space. I dislike the fact that all the cases and numbers are just floating in it. I dislike the alternating colour rows. I also think that the blue needs to be balanced with some grey, as it just looks to cutesy otherwise. Having said that, let me finish by noting that it is not awful. If the community took it on as a standard, I would happily abide by it. To be sure, it is a significant improvement over the current grc templates. Sorry to be so critical. Atelaes 01:01, 7 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

I understand that they page change designed to try for more search engine hits was reverted. What was the rationale? Don't we want to have a lot of users? Are there a lot of performance issues? It seemed like one of the most important initiatives that I've seen here. Has there been progress or discussion on this in some other forum? At WMF? I can't contribute much technically, but would be willing to put in some effort on any matter related to user behavior, user statistics, etc.

BTW, I hope that my "offer" of WT services at the WP discussion was not a problem. Nobody seems to have taken us up on it so far anyway. DCDuring TALK 02:02, 5 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

This edit doesn't look like it matches the edit summary: . Your summary says "move to *Topics", but it looks like you just added every page using nav to *Topics without removing it from the language category. I'm not sure how this is a "move" and not just an addition. If you did intend to remove them from the top-level language cats, where is the concensus? (FYI, I agree with that change, but I didn't notice a discussion) Mike Dillon 15:50, 5 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

There was an old discussion on the Beer Parlour at which no-one objected, and I was asked (for the third time) to do something about it (on IRC). I had forgotten that we have this issue with categories being included even in else branches. What do you think is the best solution? Conrad.Irwin 18:17, 5 February 2008 (UTC) Fixed now (I think). Conrad.Irwin 20:13, 5 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

Your change worked for everything except English. It looks like {{#ifexist:Category:{{{lang|}}}:*Topics|...}} is failing when lang is blank. Testing in Special:Expandtemplates shows that {{#ifexist:Category::*Topics|...}} fails too, which could be considered a MediaWiki bug. I guess the fix is to have special case for a blank lang since we know in advance that Category:*Topics exists for English. Mike Dillon 03:50, 6 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the change, and sorry it was a little bit more complicated than I expected! Physchim62 12:56, 6 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hey, I still don't exactly understand. What does subst: do? And what is the meaning of the French templates {{fr-verb}}, {{fr-conj}} and {{infl|fy|verb}} in relation to Frisian? Thank you for your help. Greetz!SK luuut 16:52, 6 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

That page of that inflection template says: "Inflection template for languages without specific templates, see the discussion page." Didn't I already made a template for the Frisian language? Anyways, thanks for your help.SK luuut 00:55, 7 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

How does that pronoun template work, than?-SK luuut 11:45, 7 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hmm, okay. Thanks anyways --SK luuut 20:48, 7 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

Response at User_talk:Jeepday#trierarchy, please note I don't edit here often and there is a year and 2 days between your comment my previous talk page entry. Jeepday 04:28, 8 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

• Response at User_talk:Jeepday#trierarchy Jeepday 03:45, 11 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

The reason why I edited it was because I was mad because Americans think that they can just take words from other people, and in this case, Americans took it from the rightful owners, the Hawaiians. So please do not warn me for doing something that is more factually correct. I would appreciate it if you guys could do research on the etymologies of the words before posting them. Cuyler91093 18:14, 11 February 2008 (UTC)Reply