Hello, and welcome to Wiktionary!
If you have edited Wikipedia, you probably already know some basics, but Wiktionary does have a few conventions of its own. Please take a moment to learn our basics before jumping in.
First, all articles should be in our standard format, even if they are not yet complete. Please take a moment to familiarize yourself with it. You can use one of our pre-defined article templates by typing the name of a non-existent article into the search box and hitting 'Go'. You can link Wikipedia pages, including your user page, using ], {{pedia}}, or {{wikipedia}}.
Notice that article titles are case-sensitive and are not capitalized unless, like proper nouns, they are ordinarily capitalized (Poland or January). Also, take a moment to familiarize yourself with our criteria for inclusion, since Wiktionary is not an encyclopedia. Don't go looking for a Village pump – we have a Beer parlour. Note that while Wikipedia likes redirects, Wiktionary deletes most redirects (especially spelling variations), in favor of short entries. Please do not copy entries here from Wikipedia if they are in wikipedia:Category:Copy to Wiktionary; they are moved by bot, and will appear presently in the Transwiki: namespace.
A further major caveat is that a "Citation" on Wiktionary is synonymous with a "Quotation", we use these primary sources to construct dictionary definitions from evidence of the word being used. "References" (aka "Citations" on Wikipedia) are used predominantly for verifying Etymologies and usage notes, not the definitions themselves. This is partly to avoid copyright violation, and partly to ensure that we don't fall into the trap of adding "list words", or words that while often defined are never used in practice.
{{Babel}}; please do not create or use them.We hope you enjoy editing Wiktionary and being a Wiktionarian. Conrad.Irwin 20:34, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi, we don't allow IPA pronunciations next to the head word. Can you please move them to the ===Pronunciation=== section, and use slashes (//) or square brackets () as I've just done for bergets. Thanks. Mglovesfun (talk) 14:39, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
De fyra sv-new-...-mallarna används av "You can create an entry..."-strukturen, d.v.s. "new" syftar inte på att mallen är ny, utan att den används för nya uppslag. (Den femte av de mallarna, sv-adj-new, var dock en temporär mall jag använde medan jag jonglerade med strukturen för att kunna göra mig av med ett par gamla mallar utan att riskera att förstöra uppslag under tiden. Dock hade jag bara omdirigerat den och glömt att radera den. Och ja, det finns fortfarande för många mallar. (Jag vet dock inte om vi egentligen kan göra oss av med -form--mallarna.) \Mike 00:34, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
I have created Wiktionary:Conjugation and declension templates in parallel with Wiktionary:Inflection templates, following an old discussion on the Beer Parlour here. I have also added some 'policy' on naming, taken from Category talk:Conjugation and declension templates, and also on the difference between the two. You should probably move the appropriate Swedish conjugation/declension table templates from the latter into the former. —CodeCat 10:25, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
I just noticed that Swedish wiktionary lists passive verb forms in its conjugation tables, but English wiktionary does not. See e.g. sv:kalla. Since you're already working on the templates, do you think you could add those forms to the tables while you're at it? —CodeCat 23:37, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
In your 'diary' I noticed you were wondering a few things, so I'd like to give my opinion on them. How do we create entries for all inflected forms? I think you might want to look at MewBot, which is a bot written by me that handles Dutch verb and adjective forms. If you know Python, you can re-use most of the code, and use the rest as an example to create your own formbot for Swedish. If not, then I can extend MewBot myself to do it instead. For that, it would be necessary to standardise the templates and reduce their amount as much as possible.
How should templates be named? Is the -reg-/-irreg- part of the name really necessary? I don't think -reg- is really necessary. -irreg- could be shortened to -irr-.
Can we do with fewer templates and shorter names? To reduce the amount of templates, I think the best course of action is to devise templates that have several parameters so that one template can be used in many situations. To that end, it makes sense that the parameters should have sensible defaults so that they can be left out. An easy approach would be to make one template each for the five types listed here: 1, 2, 3, 4, irregular. But it is also easily possible to unify types 1 to 3 into a single template. Something like this:
{{sv-conj-wk|kalla|r}} or even {{sv-conj-wk}} (the latter assumes infinitive+r if nothing is specified){{sv-conj-wk|stäng|er}}{{sv-conj-wk|läs|er|t=1}}{{sv-conj-wk|sy|r}}{{sv-conj-st|stryk|strök|struk}} (for type 4 verbs, i.e. strong verbs, specify the three stems)Should templates for Swedish words be standardized across languages of Wiktionary? I wouldn't try. There's too much work involved in standardising it, and while it is convenient, it's probably not worth the trouble. —CodeCat 20:47, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
{{sv-verb-irreg}}. As it happens, when I coloured the current templates blue, I already made that my base template, so renaming it to sv-conj is almost the next step. So, there are a few more details to sort out (conjunctives? passive forms? support for old -dt spelling?), but the main principle is sound. It would make sense to consider including Norwegian and Danish in any such redesign effort, so we end up with a common pattern of template design. --LA2 03:55, 22 August 2010 (UTC){{sv-conj-wk-ar}}, {{sv-conj-wk-er}}, {{sv-conj-wk-r}}. I've added various tests here. —CodeCat 09:20, 22 August 2010 (UTC){{sv-verb-reg-ar}} and {{sv-verb-reg-er}}, so is there any major improvement? --LA2 09:24, 22 August 2010 (UTC){{sv-conj-wk-er}} now handles -ar verbs as well so the other one has become obsolete, and this probably should become just {{sv-conj-wk}}. -r verbs are still separate, wondering how I could unify them in a neat way. It does seem that the deciding factor for many forms is essentially the final letter of the stem: voiced (stänga), voiceless (läsa), r (höra, göra), t (smälta), vowel (sy). So perhaps there could be something like an end= parameter, which can be either vd, vl, t, r or vw. That would then decide most of the endings. Only the assimilation of the supine would need to be handled with a separate form. What do you think? —CodeCat 10:18, 22 August 2010 (UTC){{sv-conj-st}} as well, and added a lot more test cases to my sandbox page. I believe the templates can cover all regular verbs now, and perhaps a few slightly irregular ones too. For the rest we have {{sv-conj-irreg}}. Mission accomplished, I would say, unless you find a serious flaw that I missed. —CodeCat 11:42, 22 August 2010 (UTC)Don't you think you might be going through the testing a bit too quickly? The recent changes is getting flooded... --Yair rand (talk) 06:03, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
blocked: too many edits, bad edits, e.g. egga. Robert Ullmann 06:38, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
You must manually check the "bot" edits. Every single one. And fix any problems. You would be well advised to slow down seriously, take a few weeks or months to get to know things. Robert Ullmann 06:47, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
Can your bot add {{t}} to Armenian translations, like this? Note, Armenian has transliterations. --Vahag 14:49, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I just wanted to point out a couple things about translation.
Cheers. --Bequw → τ 22:55, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
Is this a quotation or an example sentence? If it is a quotation, the line should start with #*. Nadando 21:14, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
CGEL is the most modern (2002) comprehensive grammar of English. C $150, but at many better libraries in the Reference section. You should look at their remix of part of speech ("PoS") categories. There is usually not a major problem with nouns, verbs, and adjectives. Adverbs like those ending in -ly are OK too. After that, among the "closed classes of grammatical function words" (all elements of which expression need explanation) all bets are off. And there are even difficulties with forms of verbs like -ing forms and past participles and with proper nouns.
You may find the pathbreaking Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language (1985) more available and more congenial. Both this and CGEL have the important category of determiners. See Category:English determiners. We had an interesting (to me anyway) discussion about adding that to the list of allowed PoS ("L3") headers.
We try to retain all the traditional PoS headers because of their widespread usage and because they are an adequate starting point. You might take note of some of the grammatical subcategories in, say, Category:English adverbs and take a look at Wiktionary:English adjectives for an example of the type of criteria for determining whether something is a given PoS. The field is both fascinating and maddening.
It is important to have a realistic perspective about these things. Dictionaries throw things into these categories for their users. Grammarians get insight from reclassification. Most people speak correctly by any reasonable standard when they need to, without remembering the parts of speech from their schooling, let alone the more up-to-date grammatical classes grammarians may invent and use. DCDuring TALK 19:41, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
The writings of David Crystal (including his Encyclopedia of Language and Encyclopedia of the English Language) are ways of getting a handle on matters. DCDuring TALK 19:46, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
In this edit, an incorrect substitution was made. The {{l}} template was created and should be used in lists, not within text. For that, we use the {{term}} template. --EncycloPetey 04:28, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
Why have you generating plurals of words that we don't have in the singular? SemperBlotto 20:38, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
Hello LA2, I saw on Special:RecentChanges when you create a new article, you write Swedish in the field Summary. If you do not fill the file Summary, then it is the beggining of the code which is showed. So, with the beggining of the code, we see in RecentChanges that it is Swedish and more. So, I think you could not fill the field Summary when you create a new article, there are more informations without filling. Thanks. Pamputt 22:08, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
Hi, MglovesfunBot using AutoWikiBrowser can only convert lang=Italian to lang=it for categories with up to 25 000 members, this is because that's AWB's limits. So categories like Italian, Spanish and French verb forms (for example) are too big. Can LA2bot do it instead? In fact I only managed to do about 12 000 of the members of Category:Italian plurals yesterday as I built up so much lag. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:37, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
If you know a way to do it, Swedish declension templates shouldn't go under the ===Noun=== header, but rather the ====Declension==== header. I've been fixing some by hand, but there are quite a lot of them! Mglovesfun (talk) 12:10, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
Hej! Yes, that was quite embarrassing to see those mistakes I made. Did I get it right this time? plasttallrik --dezzie 20:59, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
Dear LA2,