I noted that you recently edited the page for 厸, and as I was curious about this character, I had a look at the page. I don't think this one is used in Japanese. The Japanese entry would seem to be for the kanji 隣, which I thought could be the traditional form for 厸, but looking into it over at http://www.mandarintools.com/worddict.html, I find no record for 厸 at all. Japanese 隣 turns out to be traditional Chinese 鄰 (I guess you could say the Japanese version is mildly dyslexic :) ), and the simplified Chinese 邻, which I only found by searching for the Pinyin reading lin.
I'm increasingly puzzled -- 厸 is absent from my Shogakukan, which while not the cat's pyjamas is still pretty decent, nor is it in any of the online Chinese dictionaries utilized by the site linked above. Might this character be a booboo? Curious, Eiríkr Útlendi | Tala við mig 18:13, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
Hm, digging further, I find 厸 is actually listed in the Microsoft IME for Japanese. In that case, perhaps we should make a note on the 厸 page that this is *not* a standard kanji? Eiríkr Útlendi | Tala við mig 18:16, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
Not really, because then people would have to type ". :-)" into the search bar (that is, if they wanted to get directly there, I suppose they could be redirected, but redirects are generally bad.) --Rory096 04:46, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
The more I poke around single-kanji entries, the more it looks like someone just dumped a kanji list and did a quick-and-dirty meaning and pronunciation lookup for Chinese, Japanese, and Korean. Few of the Japanese entries seem to indicate when the kanji in question is not one of the Jōyō kanji. Aside from 厸 mentioned above, I've also run across (and fixed) 體, 鄕, and 爲. 讀 does indicate the Jōyō form, using a different style than what I've been using so far.
I'm also seeing some odd readings included, such as ふるさと and さきに for 郷 and non-Jōyō variant 鄕, but I can find neither of these readings in the two dictionaries I have to hand. 爲 also listed つくる, which I'm so certain is not right that I've removed it.
Meanwhile, the meaning shown for 郷 was also previously given as homeland, which is just flat wrong -- the kanji means "village", and the supposed reading ふるさと (which by my ken should be 故郷, 故里, or 古里 in kanji) means idiomatically "home town" (which is what I've changed it to).
Categorization also appears to be very potshot, with some entries listed as "Japanese kanji", some as "Japanese nouns", some with no category, and one amusingly as "Category:讀" (since deleted, as there is no "ja:讀").
To wit, I see four basic concerns for the Japanese sections for single-kanji entries:
Without a category, I really don't know how to go about finding these entries, short of pulling out a Chinese dictionary and looking up each character one by one to see if it's in here, and to see if there's a Japanese section. しんどい。 I don't suppose you might have some hints for an easier way of going about this? Cheers, Eiríkr Útlendi | Tala við mig 19:18, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
* '''Other info''': Non-] alternate for ]. Rarely used.
See discussion there. I think we got it wrong. I am not very good at grammer though, perhaps you could give me your thoughts? Regards Andrew massyn 08:42, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
What's that supposed to be? I know there's a test wiki out there, but I'm not sure you mean that. —Vildricianus 20:57, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
I've just made you a sysop. Congratulations! Enjoy your new responsibilities. If you need any help, contact any of the other sysops at WT:A. Please visit that page and enter your timezone in the table at the top. It would also be useful if you could create a Babel entry for your user page and to transcribe its contents into the same table. Thanks. — Paul G 07:30, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
Hi Rod.
I read the formally description about participle, and there are similar. However, I do not think the same, and I will verify with my professor of English.
The typically ends with '-ed' or '-ing' isn’t incorrect, but incomplete because '-ing' is mentioned in an active voice, and '-ed, en, t, d' in passive voice. I was used the chapter 15 about participial phrases and gerunds of the following book:
“A participle is a word formed from a verb that is used as an adjective to modify nouns.”
Best wishes, --Ricardo 15:33, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
Re: embarazado: Don't worry about it. Everything looks a little better now. That example with miembro is a good one, and I hadn't thought of it. –Andyluciano 02:30, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for those. They were beyond me. By the way, I always put those sort of definitions into Category:English eponyms. SemperBlotto 07:27, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
{{see}}Hi. I was just looking at how it all works because I was thinking of doing the same for {{italbrac}} and {{italbrac-colon}}. I noticed that you've got it set up to generate HTML with a lot of comments in it. This doesn't seem like a good idea to me. Isn't there a way to set it up so that people editing the template see it all but the generated HTML is kept clean clean clean? — Hippietrail 18:51, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
{{see}} make it to the resulting page. Rod (A. Smith) 19:49, 26 May 2006 (UTC)Hi there. I have broken this template - see filter funnel. Should the plural (when not specified) just use PAGENAME+s? SemperBlotto 10:45, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
Don't you think named params would be a better option here? It's nigh impossible to fill in 50 numbered ones without constant consultation of the template documentation. The template is massive, though! Nice work. —Vildricianus 22:02, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
Hi! I noticed that you subst templates in entries. Contrary to Wikipedia, Wiktionary does not subst templates in entries. Let me know if you have any questions about that policy. Rod (A. Smith) 20:28, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
This reply is in reference to your comment to me. The only editing I'm doing is adding {{en-noun-reg}} links when the word doesn't link to its plural, and then creating the plural pages using the supplied plural template. Which action of mine is against the policy and where is this policy noted? Many thanks.
Zimage 21:15, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
{{plural of}} in the template you're using. I've fixed it. Thanks for the explanation! Rod (A. Smith) 21:26, 31 May 2006 (UTC)If you have a moment, could you take a look at the use of the ParserFunctions in there? Demonstration on its talk page. What do you think? Can it be simplified further? Recommendations? I'm already lost in {{en-infl-verb}}, that goes beyond me! — Vildricianus 13:56, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
Hi,
I saw you fixed upgrade and had some comment on patch. Thanks. I've put some comment on talk:patch. You might also want to take a look at hunk, apply a patch, patch file, diff, diff file, apply, diff program, and patch program because I mucked about in those too and am both new to wikitionary and not entirely comfortable with phrases like "transitive verb". You may also be interested in the questions raised in User_talk:Connel_MacKenzie#Please_hit_me_with_a_cluestick. If you're not interested that's ok too. Thanks. --kop 22:18, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
<nowiki>...</nowiki>" if you want via the "{{temp}}{{temp|computing}}". As you can see, that displays as "{{computing}}". Also, FYI, we're working on simplifying the "part of speech healine templates" (a.k.a. "inflection templates"), which are used exclusively as the first line after "===Noun===", "===Verb===", etc., so you many not have to worry too much about memorizing {{en-infl-reg-other-e}} et al. Anyway, your computing entries look great. You deftly explained the proper noun sense of "patch" etc. I suppose it wouldn't hurt to have entries for everything from "abstract base class" and "backreference", to "zero-based arrays". Anyway, cheers and happy editing! Rod (A. Smith) 04:59, 6 June 2006 (UTC)No, I wasn't saying "kiss my ass" to anyone in particular, nor to anyone, for that matter. :-)
Better get that moved off to BJAODN though - I am expecting a response from CSU on my talk page...
--Connel MacKenzie T C 06:45, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
See Talk:dereference
You may also be interested in multidimensional array and all the related array defs I've been mucking about in. --kop 04:31, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
Um, did you update {{new en noun}}, {{new en verb}} and the other dozen or so "new en *" templates?
I just realized how much reworking of my monobook this will force me to do. That is a good thing, though, as that reworking is long overdue anyhow.
--Connel MacKenzie T C 04:13, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
Do you have an idea of how it can be made waterproof? Currently, it bugs when the vandal's name consists of more words:
Do you have a clue? — Vildricianus 18:32, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
Is {{present participle of}} as intended? Not all p.p. are gerunds (although they can be, not all are.) Is there a separate template for normal p.p. without the gerund thing? --Connel MacKenzie T C 18:25, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
{{fr-present participle of}} or whatever.{{pp}} or the like).Copied to WT:GP#form of. Rod (A. Smith) 18:50, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
You are busy replacing all the inflection templates, which is a Good Thing. With your revisions of etymologies, though....has it been decided that we should put etymons in italics, as you're doing? I don't really like it, did I miss a BP vote or something? Widsith 14:06, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
News to me! I know Paul for one likes to bold them. And I just like them wikified. But, whatever. Widsith 14:13, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
Personally, I like to see the templates on their pages, so I'd prefer not to includeonly them. Any specific reason I should be aware of you're doing this for? — Vildricianus 20:06, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
Examining the code of {{en-verb}} more closely for the first time, I'm quite impressed. It's pretty well-constructed I must say. It could do without the bugs, though :-). I could track down the major one (the one including valid into each page that uses the template) back to {{isValidPageName|{{{1|valid}}}}}, more specifically to the part I have at User:Vildricianus/PageX/12. valid is listed among the included templates, together with every template used on that page (ARchar etc.). If you can, you should take a look at it and try to fix it. It has to do with the colon included in {{:{{{1|valid}}}}}, but it obviously won't work without it. Perhaps there's some work around with includeonly tags or the like, but I guess you can find that out more quickly because I can't really test whether it still works or not. Cheers. — Vildricianus 21:28, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
{{isValidPageName}}. I am not happy with the solution, but I couldn't find any other way to determine whether the argument contains wiki markup. Do you think the StringFunctions will eventually be installed in English Wiktionary? Rod (A. Smith) 21:48, 22 June 2006 (UTC)I don't know whether this has to do with the recent changes to isValidPageName, but this template can't be replaced by {{en-noun}}. Will it need manual fixing? — Vildricianus 12:12, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
The search pattern is this (adjusted for whatever flavor of regex you're using):
\{\{en-noun2\|.*\|(?<plural>.*)}}The replacement pattern is this:
{{en-noun|\g<plural>}}Another pass can add an sg argument for multiple-word entries. Does such a replacement scheme fail for some uses of {{en-noun2}}? Rod (A. Smith) 17:39, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
{{en-noun2|'''dozen'''|'''] '''when used attributive,''' ] '''otherwise}}
{{en-noun|'''dozen'''|'''] '''when used attributive,''' ] '''otherwise}}
My plan was to deprecate old templates by replacing instances of their use with equivalent uses of the new templates. Thus, the 2 regex above would be applied for en-noun2. I have a more sophisticated web browser that is specialized for Wiktionary template deprecation. If you want, though, I can suport the other migration model (template redirects) by adding the syntax to {{en-noun}} to support the curent invocation pattern of en-noun2. Rod (A. Smith) 18:57, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
en-noun-reg works differently to en-noun (so I have reverted your redirect) - see the sandbox or en-noun/test (test 10). SemperBlotto 16:38, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
Hello,
I haven't changed my JavaScript yet, to start using your new {{en-noun}} as I still don't fully understand the usage conventions. For nouns ending in "y" what is the correct form? For countable and uncountable, what is the correct form? Or are these still being worked out? --Connel MacKenzie T C 18:05, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
{{en-noun|-}}" or, if there are also countable senses, "{en-noun|geometr|ies|-}}". Rod (A. Smith) 18:24, 27 June 2006 (UTC)