User talk:Robert Ullmann/L2

Ummm...may I ask why Ancient Greek is listed as an invalid L2 header? Cerealkiller13 21:01, 30 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

Because {{grc}} says Greek (Ancient) instead of "Ancient Greek" Robert Ullmann 04:53, 31 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

Oh. Well, first of all, all Ancient Greek entries currently use the header "Ancient Greek." Also, if you care to take a look at Category:All languages you'll find that all three Greeks are under G. If you think that the header should be changed, please bring it up on Wiktionary:About Ancient Greek, so that it can be dealt with sooner than later. Finally, I thought that {{AGr.}} was the standard etymology template. It is certainly used more often. Cerealkiller13 05:34, 31 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

The language code templates and the etymology templates are two different things. I don't think the header should be changed. I do think that translation tables could just list Greek and Ancient Greek together without having to actually write "Greek (Ancient)", sort of like the category you mention.

But do keep in mind that this is just a heuristic used by this program to identify the languages: it goes through the database in one pass, accumulating a list of L2 headers, and another list from 2 and 3 letter templates, then generates the tables. It isn't perfect, and it isn't policy; just a tool to see what's out there. Robert Ullmann 05:47, 31 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

Oh, I think I may have misunderstood you. I guess I thought you were saying, "I think Ancient Greek is an incorrect header, and to back that up, the grc template says so," when in fact maybe you were just saying, "Because {{grc}} says Greek (Ancient) instead of "Ancient Greek." Sorry about that. I'm going to go ahead and change the template to reflect the header. Sorry for jumping down your throat. Cerealkiller13 05:59, 31 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

Yes, I was just saying how the code happened to work. Is okay ;-) I'm going to run this again presently, from the 24 January database. Robert Ullmann 06:12, 31 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

I think that's an excellent idea (putting Ancient Greek in translation tables). Perhaps I'll start doing that within translations from now on. Cerealkiller13 06:02, 31 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

You realize, that'll just make the translation tables harder to parse, import and export, right? --Connel MacKenzie 06:36, 31 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

I don't understand. How would changing Greek (Ancient) to Ancient Greek (and keeping it in the same spot) make things difficult. (Bear in mind that I have no idea what you're talking about when you say parse, import, and export). Cerealkiller13 06:42, 31 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, I read that backwards. The correct heading in translation tables should be "Ancient Greek" not "Greek, Ancient". --Connel MacKenzie 06:59, 31 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

So why are !Xóõ and 'Auhelawa listed? They are valid languages. How do I help create these "code templates"? --EncycloPetey 05:02, 31 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

Create Template:nmn define it as !Xóõ or !Xóõ. (just that, nothing fancy) We have these for all the common languages, really should have one for every language we represent. 'Auhelawa is kud, and could use an entry for the language name ;-) You know how to find these codes in the SIL/Ethnologue? Robert Ullmann 05:34, 31 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

Yes, thanks. I've been cleaning up Category:All languages, and categorizing our exisitng "Category:XXXX language" by language family and national geography to make them more browse-to-search friendly. I've gotten pretty good at recognizing odd language names as a result. I'm also standardizing some language names for languages like Romani/Romany, so that we won't have both Category:Romani language and a separate Category:Romany language. Slovene/Slovenian is the big headache, since each form has ardent supporters and unfortunately Wikipedia took the stance that BOTH are valid so BOTH get used. I'll try to drop in on this page (now that I know it's here) and help clear up the obvious mistakes while also creating language templates to move "good" entries off the list with the next data crunch. --EncycloPetey 05:41, 31 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

Someone (fairly recently) added a lot under Romani, which is better than "Romany", I do hope you are going to "Romani", it's more authentic, and the ISO name. (the rom template says Romany right now). Also, that is a language group code, so we might see some more specific entries later ... Robert Ullmann 06:19, 31 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

Yes; I've consolidated the category already as Category:Romani_language and put a notice of such on the deprecated "Romany" version. I;ll go ahead and change the template now. --EncycloPetey 06:22, 31 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

I think that should not be an invalid L2 header. There is {{fo}}: Template:fo. H. (talk) 15:54, 16 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

But if you check the history of that template, you'll find that it was recently changed from Faeroese. Whenever Robert runs his bot again, it'll be taken off the list. Atelaes 16:04, 16 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Indeed, I saw that discussion in the meantime. Robert, when are you going to run it again? (Your page says to prod you, but please mention if you prefer another way.) H. (talk) 11:45, 21 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Need a new XML dump. It has been almost a month, usually it is 2-3 weeks. Robert Ullmann 12:00, 21 March 2007 (UTC)Reply