Last week you created several entries and I would urge you to be more careful about what you add.
volcan-: isn't this just volcano minus the final vowel? There are only two terms that can be derived using it, since volcanology is just volcano + -logy. I'm ambivalent about whether this one should be kept.
well-: This is just the word well with a hyphen.
volt-: I don't know where you got this from. The entry claims that "part or all of this entry has been imported from the 1913 edition of Webster's Dictionary", except that the link is broken. The definitions seem to be cribbed from https://www.websters1913.com/words/Volt which is an entry for a noun. I think this entry is most likely junk.
volvo-: Only two of your example terms start with volvo- and both refer to some kind of algae, not rolling.
vivi-: This one is good in my opinion. The examples are solid and the information is confirmed by the Merriam-Webster, Dictionary.com, and the OED. Thank you!
vitro-: This one is good as well.
Since you seem to be passionate about prefixes, I can give you a few recommendations on how to contribute more effectively:
{{R:Dictionary.com}}, {{R:MWO}}, and {{R:OED Online}}. The in-progress online third edition of the OED can be accessed at https://oed.com/ but is partially paywalled, while the printed second edition from 1989 (cite it with {{R:OED2}}) is available for free at https://archive.org/details/OXD1989ENEN. Also, don't use {{Webster 1913}}, but rather {{R:Webster 1913}} (or ideally, don't rely on a century-old dictionary in the first place), and check that the URLs work.Sorry if this comment seems too negative. I'm impressed by your major contributions to Appendix:English prefixes and I hope you can keep up that energy!
Ioaxxere (talk) 05:42, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
Check out User:Ioaxxere/affixes, a list of over 3000 missing affixes combining information from several online dictionaries. Just make sure to be careful when creating entries as I can't guarantee that these are all good. Ioaxxere (talk) 06:01, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for your mainspace edits! However, before doing any more please note the following:
===References=== or Further reading header. On super-, you just plopped it into a random spot which isn't good. One thing you can do is put whatever you're referencing inside a <ref> </ref> tag, and then add to the bottom of the page: ===References===
{{reflist}}====Synonyms==== section, I would recommend using the {{syn}} template to add the synonym directly below the definition being referenced. For example:# A definition of `word`.
#: {{syn|en|synonym of `word`}}There's also {{ant}} for antonyms, which works the same way. Ioaxxere (talk) 19:35, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
{{R:OED Online }} is for general citation and <ref> is for when you want to want to indicate a specific passage originates from a source? I'll change that to using <ref> there. Intersets (talk) 19:56, 1 March 2024 (UTC)I might be in the area... Ioaxxere (talk) 04:42, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
Hey, I saw that you've been sorting derived terms by the sense of the suffix that they're using. You might want to use the senseid system for this, in which you add |id= to the entry's etymology, and a category is automatically created. For example, see the entries in Category:English terms suffixed with -er (agent noun) and Category:English terms suffixed with -er (occupation) (in fact, -er has not yet been completely sorted, as there are many terms left in Category:English terms suffixed with -er). Ioaxxere (talk) 02:03, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
{{suffix|en|abandon|er|id2=agent noun}}. This could also be written as {{suffix|en|abandon|er<id:agent noun>}}. Either way, that line adds the term to the category Category:English terms suffixed with -er (agent noun). Note that "agent noun" is an arbitrary ID, and you can pick whatever string you want. Also, check out Category:English terms suffixed with -core for an example of a completely sorted suffix category. Ioaxxere (talk) 06:55, 9 March 2024 (UTC)Appendix:English prefixes by semantic category is now in CAT:E with timeout errors. This is no doubt partly due to changes in the modules, but I think that just speeds up the inevitable. As you add more content with more templates, you will eventually have more module use than the system can support.
Since we're talking about English, might I suggest using bare wikilinks instead of templates for simple linking? When you use {{l}}, the template loads and runs a module which then loads in and runs other modules to get information on the language code, the language, and formatting information. This is really unnecessary: English is the default language of the Wiki, so no special formatting is required. The only thing the template does in most cases is add "#English" to the link. Sure, there are cases with senseids and etymids, but you can use the template for those as long as you aren't using up all the processor time with the other links.
Basically, you would be going back to the way you were originally doing it. If it's important to link specifically to the English section, you would need to change to a more complicated wikilink: ] (pre-) to replace {{l|en|pre-}} (pre-), for instance. Switching would be a lot of work unless you have a script, since a simple find-and-replace wouldn't duplicate the term name. I'm willing to spend some time helping you, but I don't have script capabilities.
The other option would be to use a Lua-free template such as {{l-lite}} or {{m-lite}}. These use template syntax to create the link for cases where there's no need to worry about formatting of non-Latin scripts.
Without the changes mentioned above, you would need to split the page. Chuck Entz (talk) 17:07, 23 March 2024 (UTC)