User talk:Vildricianus/Archive3

Hello. We decided a while ago not to use language templates like {{sd}} in the translation section anymore. Instead, translations should look like this:

*]: {{SDchar|Sindhi word}}

Thanks. —Vildricianus 08:07, 1 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for informing about your decision. But I would express my reservations over the decision. The French Wictionary uses templates frequently. Using language templates helps share the information, and the matter typed into french wiktionary can easily be transported to any other wiktionary because of these templates. Think over it again. Aursani 09:10, 1 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Yes, this is probably the most FAQ. We have good reasons for not doing it. You can read more here and here. Thanks. —Vildricianus 09:17, 1 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Ok, I'm confused. Why do he contents of the January WOTD pages (e.g. Wiktionary:Word of the day/January 30 ) look different from the February ones? Is this another change or a mistake? --EncycloPetey 10:09, 1 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Keep an eye on which pages you're in. The Recycled pages have to be emptied after a while as they'll be used again next year. The Archive pages have the "real" contents from past WOTDs. Compare Wiktionary:Word of the day/Recycled pages/January with Wiktionary:Word of the day/Archive/2006/January. February and following needs to get emptied, too, of course. —Vildricianus 10:14, 1 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

But compare Wiktionary:Word of the day/Recycled pages/January with Wiktionary:Word of the day/Recycled pages/February. I'm just wondering why Janurayry looks different, and what it will mean for future edits. --EncycloPetey 10:24, 1 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

I've only just done January and have still to do February. Both pages will look the same. They're simply an index of all Recycled pages for that month and show their contents for the sake of convenience. I'm still seeing what would be the best contents of these Recyclable pages during their idle period. Do you think the current links (like on the January page) to the edit mode of each Recyclable page is ok? —Vildricianus 10:29, 1 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

I'm not sure. I didn't really understand it when I first went there, and anyone editing the page would need to know the syntax for what should be entered to set up the new entry. On the other hand, the current system is likely to baffle most vandals, who won't know what to enter. I've no opinion yet. --EncycloPetey 10:35, 1 May 2006 (UTC) addendum: The February page has no markers to indicate which word will show up on which day, the way that Wiktionary:Word of the day/Recycled pages/May currently does. This will be a huge headache for editing. --EncycloPetey 10:39, 1 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

It'll be clear when I've finished it all I guess. It's supposed to be quite simple, you'll have to do two things: 1) you write the new future WOTDs on the recycled pages, which you can access via Wiktionary:Word of the day/Recycled pages (they'll all look like the current January page with headers then), and 2) you'll need to move past WOTDs from the recyclable pages to the archives. —Vildricianus 10:42, 1 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

So the editor is expected to add the headers? While the January page is fine for adding totally new entries, once the page is filled with entries, how can someone figure out which entry will appear on a given day? The February page has this problem. It means that when editing a "full" page, the editor will have to coount the entries to figure out which day is which, and whether all the days have been entered. --EncycloPetey 10:45, 1 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

No no, I just still have to add the headers :-) —Vildricianus 11:17, 1 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

http://en.wiktionary.orghttps://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Template%3Awotd&diff=1009105&oldid=998267

Mmm. How do we use parameter 4 ? —Vildricianus 15:06, 1 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

For May 2nd, pass in a 4th parameter "|May 2", for May 3rd, "|May 3"... --Connel MacKenzie T C 15:13, 1 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Mmm. Too cheap. —Vildricianus 15:15, 1 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

I tend to do a great deal of editing (nearly 10,000 edits) on Wikipedia, and noticed a need for work over here as well. Just wondering, why did you rv my welcome to the user editing from an IP? Kukini 16:42, 1 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

My bad...it just reappeared. Kukini 16:43, 1 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

It's still there :-). And yes, there's a lot of work here, all hands are welcome. —Vildricianus 16:46, 1 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Once again sorry. I note that there could be a great deal more cross-referencing with Wikipedia. Is this a service that is important to this community? Kukini 16:50, 1 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Most entries that have articles there get {{wikipedia}}, yes, certainly proper nouns. It's not top priority, however. (I don't think it's any priority for Wikipedia either). —Vildricianus 16:54, 1 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

China operates under two calendars, the traditional and the Chinese calendar. I take it you would want all of them? bd2412 T 01:48, 1 May 2006 (UTC) --Yes. It might be worth creating an Appendix similar to the one for Months of the Islamic Year. --EncycloPetey 09:47, 1 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Hi again. There is already Category:zh:Months, in congruence with all others in Category:Months. Cheers! —Vildricianus 16:26, 1 May 2006 (UTC) PS: Now that I had a closer look, that's perhaps exactly what you intended -- to have two different ones? As China has different months of course. But then I think articles in the category should be English entries... —Vildricianus 16:29, 1 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Your second look is correct - I am modelling this after the reporting of Arabic vs. Islamic months - there is one category for Category:ar:Months (e.g. Arabic names for months in the Gregorian calendar) and separate Category:Islamic months for the months of the Islamic calendar. When you say the articles should be English entries do you mean pinyin or translations? bd2412 T 17:29, 1 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Hmm, okay. I don't know a thing about Chinese, so I'm probably completely wrong. But in Appendix:Months of the Chinese Year, there are English names for them, so they look like the likely candidates to be in that category, while the Chinese names would be in Category:zh:Chinese months. Does that make any sense? Forgive me if it doesn't! —Vildricianus 17:58, 1 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

The English names originally to be found in the appendix are what I copied from Wikipedia, but I can not find non-wiki support that these are actually in use. The fruit-or-flower month names (which are used) are not what the Chinese call their months (or what the months translate to), but appear to be a way of denoting them to non-Chinese only. I'll dig deeper on it, tho. Thanks. bd2412 T 18:55, 1 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Final remark - after consulting with my father in law, it turns out that the fruit and flower names are archaic, now used only by peasant farmers in the hinterlands, as it were. The modern Chinese simply say the equivalent of "month one", "month six", "month eight", etc., e.g. modern usage is the sum of its parts. Cheers! bd2412 T 12:53, 3 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Great! I like this a lot. —Vildricianus 18:28, 1 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

I want to introduce a lot more customisation stuff like this. Let me know if you have any similar ideas. — Hippietrail 18:30, 1 May 2006 (UTC) (PS glad you like it!)Reply

When you get back, could you help check the Dutch information on Appendix:Units of time? Thanks! --EncycloPetey 12:04, 3 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Done. What about decade, century, millennium? —Vildricianus 16:59, 3 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Some of the "larger" categories of tme will not have equivalents in non-European languages. Base ten is not universal. I suppose that a separate page might eventually be started for decade, century, etc, but I decided to stick with the most basic and most common time units for the initial appendix. --EncycloPetey 09:21, 4 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Point taken. Widsith 17:34, 3 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Good idea, but as you protected User:Musical Linguist, they can't edit their own user page? Or is it as with the custom monobook pages, that the user can always edit their own pages? —Vildricianus 16:31, 4 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

That one was a rather special case, that I discussed privately with that user at length. --Connel MacKenzie T C 16:34, 4 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the congrat! I didn't know about your wikibreak, I was wondering what was all this vandalism not reverted ;) Have a nice wikirest! Kipmaster 17:42, 3 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

I may poke in my head from time to time, but no vandal watching for me ;-) —Vildricianus 17:44, 3 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

FmtTransBot: 'bot add the {{top}}/{{mid}}/{{bottom}} to translation sections, and balance columns of entries that do (only change if unbalanced by three or more?)

Really? I thought we were supposed to put A-I in the first column and J-Z in the second. —Vildricianus 17:31, 4 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

• I've been removing those comments semi-automatically for quite some time now. Initially, when the translation table format was put forward as a formatting option, the guideline of A-I, J-Z was reasonable and naturally balanced most tables. After a short while, people realized that that was being misinterpreted as a rigid guideline (instead of a neat way to end up with balanced columns most of the time.) I strive for minimal vertical-pixel use when I balance a tables. I still do not have a satisfactory (to me, at least) way of automating this yet. --Connel MacKenzie T C 17:50, 4 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Cheers, I will try and make more use of WT:VIP...I didn't think it was much used. If someone nominates me I would be pleased to accept, but I'm far too English to nominate myself! Widsith 13:26, 5 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Ha ha! Thanks! Widsith 13:44, 5 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Harr. How about heading straight to ru.Wiktionary and borrowing anything you need there? (^_^) Cheers, --Schwallex 00:24, 5 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Well, I did look there, but you know, I was confronted with a thousand templates... Technically, yes, that's the way I wanted to do it at first, but I don't think, for now, that it's sane to have more templates than contributors to Russian :-) Cheers. —Vildricianus 16:12, 5 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Hehe. Looks like you're suffering from the same problem as we do. Those Russians are lazy folks, let me tellya that.

On a second thought, after having a look at this and this I don't think you can complain. (^_^) You've got three times as many users as we've got pages. That's what Germans call ‘Jammern auf hohem Niveau’.

Anyway, over at ru:, we're assembling all kinds of templates, from Kazakh to Icelandic to Romanian to Chuvash ones, just in case someone needs them (even though we don't expect that to happen any time soon). I mean, it's quite heartwarming for a new user to log on and have everything right at his fingertips. And I think that you can use that as an argument to actually gain new contributors.

Cheers, --Schwallex 23:08, 5 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Who's this and what is it doing with your pages? —Vildricianus 10:45, 6 May 2006 (UTC) Wow, IP are really agressive on en:, French guys are nice in comparison. Apprently, it's an angry user that didn't like me removing a definition in vicarious. Thanks for protecting my user page. Kipmaster 12:58, 6 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

That was my brother. He was bored last night and I just created my account.

Sorry for what he did Johnjohnston 18:51, 6 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

If you really want to have a WikiBreak, I'll make it a forced one and block you until mid-June. And then you can force a Wiki-break on me by blocking me until mid-June. How does this sound? --Dangherous 14:15, 7 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Haha, no that won't work. I'll just unblock myself. Perhaps I should ask Jhs to desysop me :-D. I'll block you if you want to, but I still want to pop in from time to time here. —Vildricianus | t | 14:19, 7 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Who's JHS? --Dangherous 14:27, 7 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Ah yeah, I know. Steward guy. If that fails, then do a Wonderfool on our ass! --Dangherous 14:29, 7 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Indeed. In the mean time Vile-and/or-itchy-anus, you may like to know that after detailed discussion between User:Wonderfool, User:Foumidable and I, User:Newnoise, you have been voted as Wiktionarian of the month for the "month" of January-April. As for Dangherous, I'll do a Wonderfool on your ass, boy. --Newnoise (Shout louder) 17:53, 7 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Haha, yeah. Given the fact that there's only four people nominated in ten years time, I'm honoured :-). —Vildricianus | t | 18:11, 7 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Did you know by the way, that page shows up fourth on Google:fecundist. —Vildricianus | t | 18:13, 7 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

And fourth on Google:entertainingish too! I should try a Google bomb to claim top spot. --Newnoise (Shout louder) 18:45, 7 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Ah, I see your wikibreak is much like my wikibreaks... bd2412 T 15:14, 9 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Absolutely! WikiAddict and proud of it. —Vildricianus | t | 15:16, 9 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Given the number of people independantly commenting here, it is clear you are hereby and forthwit prohibited from wikibreaking.  :-) Deal with it. --Connel MacKenzie T C 18:51, 12 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Sorry dude! Too many interesting Beer parlouring these days! :-) —Vildricianus | t | 18:52, 12 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Replying to your question at User talk:Hippietrail: this is the fix Meta has for its grey background (monobook.css).

#content { background: #f4f4f4; }
.ns-0 * #content { background: #f4f4f4; }
#p-cactions li { background: #f4f4f4; }
.ns-0 * #p-cactions li { background: #f4f4f4; }
#p-cactions li a { background-color: #f4f4f4; }
.ns-0 * #p-cactions li a { background-color: #f4f4f4; }

Cheers. —Vildricianus | t | 18:41, 7 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

. I can probably find out more css to get the entire screen customized; this was just pinched in seconds' time. Later, though. —Vildricianus | t | 20:55, 7 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Wow. Thank you! --Connel MacKenzie T C 21:14, 7 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Here's a basic grey skin for you. Customize as you please. I've also added some of the better tricks of my css to it, notably the compact sidebar tweak. It's tested it in Netscape, but perhaps some things may not display properly, so please tell me which parts are bad. Cheers. —Vildricianus | t | 22:16, 8 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

I now also have a black skin, but it isn't as good as the grey one because of the many light tables (top/mid/bot, Wikipedia, Ncik's inflection boxes etc) in the content area. —Vildricianus | t | 20:18, 11 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

I initiially blocked him for 1 week, and have not done anything about it since. If you had blocked him between the last thing I saw him post and when I did I might have screwed it up, my bad. - TheDaveRoss 16:06, 8 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Well, I think we can leave it alone for now, but in the future, open a tab to check the block log before applying the block, please. --Connel MacKenzie T C

The Block log tells me it was you, Connel, who blocked after TheDaveRoss had done so. —Vildricianus | t | 18:08, 8 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Wow, I'm quite a idiot. But, IIRC, he was blocked for much shorter durations first? I'm not seeing evidence of those blocks now - perhaps they were by numeric IP address? --Connel MacKenzie T C 18:47, 8 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

My first block was his IP indeed. Afterwards, it were only Wutykaze's 2 hour block and the 1 week block by the two of you, which will expire 20:26, 9 May. —Vildricianus | t | 19:12, 8 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Made #ifeq work in Noarticletext. Please adapt further. —Vildricianus | t | 13:53, 10 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Very figgin' strange. Was I doing something wrong, or was the server just giving the wrong response during heavy load time? --Connel MacKenzie T C 02:05, 11 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Yeah, I've heard about your ‘break’! No worries...it's always a good project when I want to waste some time... Widsith 15:59, 10 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

copied from ===WikiSaurus - compromise proposed (/more) === A possible compromise between the "tough criteria for WikiSaurus", and the "Don't lose even the least valuable "synonyms". Introduce, in WikiSaurus, a xxx/more subpage for the problem pages. Cull the trash from the main page (by whatever criteria), but don't just delete it, put it in the /more page. In the main page indicate that new entries not meeting the tough criteria have to be put in the /more page, and there can be researched for verifiability, and perhaps later promoted to the main page. With this I would then suggest we might even protect the main WikiSaurus page. Admin's would then be responsible for checking the /more pages every so often to see if there are any terms that could be promoted to the main page, as they meet the criteria. Thus we would meet two purposes. The main WikiSaurus page would be kept up to our "standard" (which I have to point is very subjectively applied), whilst the /more page would capture every possible synonym, and would in effect be a specific protologism page.--Richardb 23:26, 10 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

In Template:en-infl-reg-consonant... these have been removed a while ago (see its history). —Vildricianus | t | 15:45, 11 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the note. I reverted that addition. It seems strange that so many English entries end up nowhere under Category:English language, but I'd rather not open that can of worms. Rod (☎ Smith) 16:05, 11 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

You've been told before that those folk etymologies of yours are frowned upon here at Wiktionary. If you want to include them, you should at least do so in a separate subsection, with thorough references mentioned. Apart from that, be aware that, if you continue to remove or revert other people's work, a temporary block may be issued against you. —Vildricianus | t | 19:57, 11 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Lol Vidricianus, believe me, if a “temporary block may be issued against me”, that will only harm Wiktionary, not me!!! Other etymologists ( and not just users that have no idea of what etymology is and simply copy and paste…) can very easy justified me. Only unfortunately there aren’t many here…

Anyway, to go back to panther’s etymology: The existence of the not very well known Ancient Greek word πανθήρα (“whole catch”) that derives from πάν + θήρα, linguistically justifies the etymology of the word πάνθηρ from the same roots, πάν + θήρα. Therefore, because I am an etymologist, I can not accept the “probably oriental” origin of the Greek word πάνθηρ. The only reason that some etymologists trace πάνθηρ to a “probably oriental” origin could be their ignorance of the existence of the Greek word πανθήρα. Kassios 05:58, 12 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Whether or not your theories are correct, you must not remove or alter valid etymologies. Undoing other people's work is considered a serious crime on a wiki. Without mentioning decent and reliable sources, non-etymologists like me are not likely to support your Greek-centered theories, which, as far as I can see, are far from neutral. —Vildricianus | t | 07:42, 12 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Can you integrate some ideas you had on Wiktionary:Project - Improving WikiSaurus into Wiktionary:WikiSaurus improvements? —Vildricianus | t | 12:13, 12 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Yep, I will try to rationalise the area. I've already sort of proposed that we use WikiSaurus as the name for whatever it is we are working towards, so will also try to combine this stuff with Wiktionary:Thesaurus considerations too, in some way.--Richardb 12:24, 12 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Hi Vildricianus. I just noticed you adding CSS styles into the these templates. Why not instead add this stuff to your personal CSS page, and if it's good you can suggest it as default on the Beer parlour or the customization page. If everybody likes it we can add it to the global CSS. In any case unless you're planning something magic that I haven't thought of it's always better to use a CSS file than inline it - it also saves a few bytes. — Hippietrail 18:46, 12 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Hippietrail, I'd like to note that Special:Mypage is the most clever work-around for the lack of {{USERNAME}} I've seen yet. I'm delighted to notice that Special:Mytalk works too, as do Special:Watchlist, Special:Mycontributions and Special:Preferences. --Connel MacKenzie T C 18:59, 12 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Connel, did you notice Special:Watchlist/clear already for your overloaded watchlist? —Vildricianus | t | 19:07, 12 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Wow, the toc is quite an improvement. Can I take up your work and start trying from there? --w:User Talk:Soumyasch

Thanks. I will start working on it soon. --61.0.131.184 08:09, 13 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Hi Vildrcianus. Welcome back. Would you please check the etymology for voetstoots. Thanks Andrew massyn 08:16, 13 May 2006 (UTC).Reply

Looks pretty correct. —Vildricianus | t | 08:44, 13 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Are you still the keeper of the TOW lists? Would it be helpful to give you a list in descending order of number of {{ttbc}}s? --Connel MacKenzie T C 15:22, 20 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Template talk:TOW. --Connel MacKenzie T C 15:36, 20 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, very nice! —Vildricianus 15:50, 20 May 2006 (UTC) 15:50, 20 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

You're an anus, Vildrici (and so am I, I guess...) --Vildriciasshole 19:00, 20 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, I'm honoured :-) —Vildricianus 19:05, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree. What an anus Vildrici is! --SemperBlоtto 19:14, 20 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Looks like I got many fans out there! —Vildricianus 19:20, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Wiktionary talk:Beer parlour#Another idea. It just keeps bugging me. Anyway, what do you think? —Vildricianus 19:21, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

I wonder...where you you be doing the transclusion? The same page as has the inputbox? --Connel MacKenzie T C 20:16, 20 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

No idea. Wiktionary:Beer parlour (all)? —Vildricianus 20:25, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi and thanks for the warm welcome! I was wondering about your signature though — clicking on it takes me to my own user page instead of yours. Is this intentional? (Given your experience I would think it is.) If so, what would be the reason for this peculiarity? As I haven't come across it before. :) –Dilaudid 12:52, 21 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

It's some (probably darn bad) humour of mine. Arguably because I've spent too much time on Wikipedia lately, and it looks like a competition there to have the most extravagant sigs. You can, though, check the U T C links ;-) —Vildricianus 14:05, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Brilliant, I approve ,) Good luck with the wikibreak.. –Dilaudid 14:36, 21 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Thanks! —Vildricianus 14:45, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

In your monobook, there's was a bit where you could have the Special:Allpages on the left hand side, going from the page open. How do I include that on my monobook? Reply here, is easier. --131.251.0.11 12:58, 21 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

It looks like you need the following code:

 // add "favourites" to navigation box
 function addToNav() {
  var pagetitle = document.getElementById('p-cactions').getElementsByTagName('ul').item(0).getElementsByTagName('li').item(0).firstChild.href;

  var lastnav = document.getElementById('n-sitesupport');
  var newnav;
  var newa;

 // get page title
  var pagetitle = document.getElementById('content').getElementsByTagName('h1').item(0).firstChild.nodeValue;
  if (pagetitle.search(/Search/) != -1) {
    pagetitle = document.getElementById('contentSub').firstChild.nodeValue;
    pagetitle = pagetitle.replace(/For query /g, "");
    pagetitle = pagetitle.replace(/\"/g, "");
  }
  pagetitle = pagetitle.replace(/Editing /g, "");
  var pageexternal = pagetitle.replace(/\ /g, "_");
  var pageext =      pagetitle.replace(/\ /g, "+");

 // All pages starting from this page
 newnav = document.createElement('li');
 newa = document.createElement('a');
 newa.href='https://dictious.com/en/Special:Allpages/' + pagetitle;
 newa.appendChild(document.createTextNode('All pages'));
 newnav.appendChild(newa);
 lastnav.parentNode.appendChild(newnav); 

}

function reformatMyPage() {
   addToNav();
}

window.myAddOnload=function(f) {
  if (window.addEventListener) window.addEventListener("load", f, false);
  else if (window.attachEvent) window.attachEvent("onload",f);
}

myAddOnload(reformatMyPage);

—Vildricianus 14:11, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

PS: Just in case I'm not clear enough: paste the above in your monobook.js, refresh you cache and it should work. You'll need an account, though. —Vildricianus 14:15, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I've copied that stuff down, but what it ends up doing is pointing to This page, with the unnecessary http:// crap in. --131.251.0.11 22:27, 21 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

That's odd. It works fine for me. Can't say much then. Can you point me to your monobook.js ? —Vildricianus 15:40, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi Paul. Could you specify an e-mail address please? As an admin, you should be contactable for people who have been blocked. Cheers. —Vildricianus 15:30, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

OK, I'll do that. — Paul G 06:21, 22 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Sorry Paul, I still get an error message. Have you confirmed the email? Have you checked the box Enable e-mail from other users? —Vildricianus 10:34, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

I had confirmed my email some time back but not checked the box. Thanks for pointing this out. — Paul G 15:46, 28 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

OK, it works now. Thank you! —Vildricianus 22:16, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

I've got a whole bunch of new javascript ripped from Wikipedia, so if you have a minute, perhaps you can find useful stuff there. It's working way better than before now. Cheers. —Vildricianus 17:55, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Dude, you are too quick for me. I'm preoccupied with four other major things right now however, so I'll give you these as requests:

45,353: I haven't refactored my Monobook yet, to enable all the lovely buttons you have over the edit box.

45,354: I need a widget that parses the text of a page into ==Objects== with ===Child objects=== under them and ====grandchild objects====, etc. I meant to get to this, after doing the TTBC stuff, but other things cropped up, and I'd guess that someone has already written such a thing.

45,355: I more handlers for the Image: namespace (commons' links, commons' RFD links, etc.)

45,356: I never got around to the "change all wikilinks on page to: 1) edit, 2) history, 3) protect, 4) delete, 5) move, 6) watch" thing. Is that there?

45,357: I'd like something that adds interwiki links to all known wikimedia projects (off by default, turned on by a click) from the current page. So, 100+ wikitionary links, 200+ wikipedia links, 50+ Wikisource links, etc.

45,358: I'd like to see a central area where *everyone* can load the Wiktionary version of pop-ups, so that all regular contributors have the Javascript "rollback" available.

Back to parsing the XML dump for now... --Connel MacKenzie T C 18:16, 21 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

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)

It was my attempt to build a template-based unit test harness for Wiki templates, ala nUnit, but the quirkiness of MediaWiki parser functions limits its usefulness, so I stopped working on it. Anything in the main or template namespace referring to it should be deleted. Sorry for any inconvenience. Rod (A. Smith) 23:07, 21 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

All this stuff you did is magical, sure, but I'm requesting even more magic: can you think of a way to make these things more accessible? Is it possible for you or anyone else to fix something with javascript, something like Special:Preferences, or something that can be made via a small developer intervention? —Vildricianus 21:01, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Like, having separate skins?  :-) --Connel MacKenzie T C 21:16, 21 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

For example. Anything that doesn't require fiddling with CSS or JS is fine, as a matter of user-friendliness. —Vildricianus 18:53, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

• Sorry, I was isolated on an island in the middle of Lake Nicaragua for a few days. Without opening a gateway between the Wiktionary hackers (Connel, myself, yourself, and others?) and the actual MediaWiki hackers, there is no way for us to add features or customize besides Javascript, CSS, templates, and connecting via those to offline sites such as Connel's site where the random code is. It's true this is not user-friendly for non-hackers but there are several things we can do:
  1. We can use JS to add extra prefs pages which generate the code which can then be copied and pasted into the users's CSS and JS pages.
  2. We can coordinate a group of JS/CSS/Template hackers, possibly some of us can start hacking MediaWiki on our own machines or on a public site with CVS access for us, with another group of nonhacker Wiktionarians who can use and promote our changes to the MediaWiki devs etc, thereby opening a dialog so that when we have patches we want added to just en.wiktionary.org that we won't be ignored and won't be just 2 or 3 lonely voices
  3. There may be a lot more we can do with JS if the devs give us just the power to define a few cookies of our own - that would make possible adding JS/CSS customization directly from a new prefs page to the user's custom JS and CSS pages, among many other things.
• I think we need to continue with what we're doing, provide much more documentation and encouragement for non-hacker Wiktionarians to use our work, accept it, get used to communicating with us on improving it, help them to understand how we are held back by not having developer access to our own project, and getting such users to support our efforts on the way to either some of us becoming MediaWiki devs, or sustaining a reliable open chanel with the MediaWiki devs, or getting MediaWiki to split off to a certain degree en.wiktionary.org in some way that allows some of us to be devs just on it so that we can develop it into a dictionary-specific MediaWiki with our own extensions, etc.
• I think that's the short-term and long-term visions. By the way, this type of conversation belongs on a page where we can all talk about it and find it more easily. — Hippietrail 00:14, 23 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Primetime? I don't see him in the undelete history. —Vildricianus 23:04, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Sockpuppet User:John Hill. Or did I goof? Perhaps another Checkuser meta: request is in order. BTW, there is talk on Wikisource about trying to get Checkuser - and failing. Meta: has an odd request that there be at least 25 "support" votes in order to honor a Checkuser flag. I don't think Wiktionary will therefore get any checkusers, this year. --Connel MacKenzie T C 23:11, 22 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

I'll reply with CheckUser results by e-mail. --Connel MacKenzie T C 18:49, 23 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

I heard about the Wikisource CheckUser troubles. Seems indeed likely to strike us, too - unless we can urge all of the active users to show some interest, for once.

BTW, I don't think John Hill = Primetime. I could be wrong, but see User:John Hill and contributions. —Vildricianus 19:00, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Wow, I never knew about the Mypage, Mytalk, or Randomredirect special pages. - dcljr 18:12, 23 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

They're quite new AFAIK. Announce-l keeps me posted on those things, and on new magic words and such. —Vildricianus 18:17, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Sorry. --Newnoise (Shout louder) 17:12, 24 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Whatever. It didn't work for me either when I tried. —Vildricianus 17:32, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Please reassure me that we should use "Roman" now instead of "Latin" for Serbian in the translation tables, is that right? —Vildricianus 22:53, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi there! Yes, we should only be using "Roman" from now on. There are many Serbian entries that need reformatting. If you come across "Latin/Roman" on an entry page, please change it to "Roman". If you come across "*:Latin" in translation sections for Serbian, also change it to "*:Roman". --Dijan 04:21, 25 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Good, it happens now automatically as I edit pages. —Vildricianus 20:05, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your help to this new Wiktionary user in getting the Economics term Slutsky properly validated. We are still waiting for someone with Russian and English language background to help us learn how to properly pronounce this Russian-language derived eponymous term; but imagine that will get taken care of in due time. Keep up the good work on Wiktionary.

No problem; that's the way we work here :-). As for the pronunciation, it must be something like /ˈslʊtskɨ/ (or SLOO-tskee if you can't read IPA). I'm not familiar with IPA transcription for Russian sounds, so I'm not adding it to the page right now; but at least you know how it would sound. Cheers. —Vildricianus 14:41, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, that works for me. I will pass this pronunciation on to my collegues who were similarly interested, and I will begin using 'SLOO-tskee' forthwith.

User talk:Davilla

Nice idea to indicate them, but I'd prefer not to have these lines in between the definitions. Perhaps you can add a category to the entry for that purpose? I think it's a bad precedent to indicate them for each separate definition, or at least in between them, as moving quotations to a separate section is apparently being aimed at nowadays. —Vildricianus 15:55, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Happened to notice this. I have been doing quotes after each def too, ad requested in Help pages, and think it's a good method. So have put in my tuppence worth to Vildricianus, at User_talk:Vildricianus#Quotations —This unsigned comment was added by Enginear (talk • contribs) 23:14, 25 May 2006. I must have been tired too -- I nearly forgot to sign the one on V's page too. --Enginear 21:30, 26 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Well, come to think of it, quotes itself is not a problem of course, but the en-masse indication of them needed disturbs worries frightens <fill in yourself, too tired> me. —Vildricianus 23:32, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments. If I'm ever that ambitious about the quotations again, or any other lacking sections, I'll find a more elegant way to do it. Davilla 15:30, 26 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Do let me know if you think of another way which might be more elegant. I think quotations are a great asset, so am adding a lot, but I don't want them to get in the way, and am keen to do it the "best" way, once we find it. (And I haven't forgotten porta-potty, just not at the top of my list.) --Enginear 21:30, 26 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

On format, I agree with you if the numbers are small. I don't think you'd seen the page when I had requested them en mass. It was rather ugly indeed. Davilla 21:41, 26 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

I happened to notice your comment on Davilla's talk page re quotations in rock.

You say moving quotations to a separate section is apparently being aimed at nowadays.

If so, then the following Help pages, used by newbies like me, need to be changed to read the opposite to what they do now:

• Wiktionary:Entry_layout_explained#Quotations: Quotations are generally placed under the definition which they illustrate....

• Wiktionary:Quotations#How to format a quotation:
  1. First definition
     • Year: Author, Source title - First quotation

       Translation (if needed)

     • Year: Author, Source title - Second quotation
  2. Second definion

     .......

Having said that, my own view is that the layout suggested on the Help pages, and used both by Davilla and by me, is probably clearer and more useful in most (though certainly not all) cases (eg, I don't like what I've done at garden). I would vote for keeping policy as currently written.

If you want to look at a few such entries to see what they look like, the majority of entries I have added or edited have quotations following each def.

Perhaps a good compromise (ie better than either extreme) would be that there should be exactly one quote (or maybe no more than two quotes) adjacent to the def, and other quotes should go in a separate section.

Having a quote adjacent to the def allows it to help clarify what the def means, much more than if it were in a separate section which, for a medium or large entry, would often not be visible on the same screen. For those with a poor understanding of grammatical terms, it also differentiates (say) noun and verb use.

Please would you check what is the consensus of the more experienced/prolific users, (particularly if they add quotes themselves!) change the Help pages if appropriate, and if so, let me know, in case I don't check back.

Thanks --Enginear 22:53, 25 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Yes, the quotations guidelines are a bit fuzzy and partially out of sync with common practice - they're not the only one, though - probably because they're among the least developed parts of Wiktionary. I'm meaning to put a lot more effort into them, after my so-called "WikiBreak", that is. The biggest challenge is the format. An ongoing discussion (not right now AFAIK) is whether to put them on subpages or not. I think the general tendency is to do that for larger numbers of them (say 10+). Also common is a separate section under any of the various headers =Quotations=, =Quotes=, =Cites=, =Citations= etc. And the older format, amid the definitions, is also widespread, so you see there's a lot of choice actually, and none of them has a lot of advantages over the others. I think what you suggested (one or two among the defs, others in a separate section) is quite reasonable, but I'm sure someone will want to edit war over which to put up front :-). Summary: from time to time I'll push my personal preferences through to others, but actually, it's up to you how to format quotes :-). Tired now, hope you find something useful in my post. Cheers. —Vildricianus 23:28, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for explanation. I think an edit war producing a "quote of the day" for each def might be quite positive :-). Also, if you don't want your WikiBreak to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then don't submit it here :-D . It's good to have you popping in, but I hope some elements of "break" remain! --Enginear 00:09, 26 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

My problem with quotations is that quite often I like to put in poems see e.g. proud. The difficulty is that if the poem is related to e.g the second definition out of a possible five, then (because I format the poem to scan) the numbering buggers itself up and goes 1,2 (poem) 1,2,3. Is there a way of sorting this out (aside form the obvious "don't put in poems Andrew!")? Andrew massyn 21:40, 26 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

You'd have to keep the numbering going, like this:

1. Definition 1.
2. Definition 2.

   Poem poem poem

   Poem poem;

   Poem! Poem poem, and

   Poem...

3. Definition 3.
4. Defintion 4. etc.

But as for entering entire poems into the definitions, I would certainly not recommend that. Such things do belong here, but rather in a =Quotations= section, instead of amid the definitions. —Vildricianus 21:46, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Andrew massyn 21:49, 26 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Huh, I would have agreed with you, but having checked it, apparently the verb and the noun are from slightly different (though related) sources! Widsith 14:27, 26 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Thanks! Your explanation is much clearer than the SOED's. —Vildricianus 14:33, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Do you know if the word of the day is being updated on the main page at http://en.wiktionary.orghttps://dictious.com/en/Main_Page? JillianE 17:14, 26 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Sure it is. Wiktionary:Word_of_the_day/Recycled_pages/May#May_26.

Now I think of it, are you in a different timezone? The MediaWiki clock runs on UTC. If not, do you see something different? —Vildricianus 17:18, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

It's right now but I was seeing cacophony for two days. Thanks for checking. JillianE 17:50, 26 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

No prob. Perhaps your cache. —Vildricianus 17:51, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

I've sorted that one. If I see an Etymology that looks like that (ie with wrong scripts etc) I will always change it. But, I don't plan on looking for them systematically, if there is any way to even do that. Widsith 18:47, 26 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

No, I didn't mean that either, just this one (I won't make a habbit of bugging you, though). —Vildricianus 18:50, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

The etymology of abhor has been changed from that entered by you, stand aghast, to stand against. Would you mind checking please? Jonathan Webley 20:19, 26 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

AFAIK, it has to do with "fear". Thanks for notifying me! —Vildricianus 20:22, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

User talk:Connel MacKenzie

I doubt you will, but if you ever get bored, here are the latest of language templates to be subst:'ed, with numbers in main namespace:

• Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:sv 166
• Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:fr 132
• Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:io 119
• Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:fi 81
• Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:pt 70
• Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:it 52
• Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:lv 45

Yup, that's all that's left! (At least I think I didn't forget any). —Vildricianus 20:34, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

OK, all done. --Connel MacKenzie T C 00:14, 29 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Crazy! Thanks! —Vildricianus 16:15, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

God knows what happened but it started bugging all of a sudden. I managed to kick it out with your <includeonly></includeonly> trick. Cheers. —Vildricianus 21:28, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Heh. I usually bracket the ":" inbetwixt the includeonlys. At least something, as I'm convinced there are circumatances where it will make a difference (if not in MediaWiki, then within my off-line template subst routines.) --Connel MacKenzie T C 22:56, 26 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Hi. I see you added a large chunk of text from etymonline.com in silk. Please don't do that - it is protected by copyright laws. Did you do that anywhere else as well? —Vildricianus 23:05, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

• Isn't that an example of fair use law? It would be the same as if I had quoted a paragraph from a book, wouldn't it? Since the single paragraph about the etymology of the word silk does not constitute a substantial portion of the website etymonline.com, it should be fair game. Of course, I'm not a lawyer! I think we need a tag like {{copyvio}} similar to {{rfv}} where such things can be arbitrated by legal experts.

A-cai 21:51, 28 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

I'm not an expert either, but as fas as I know, fair use is restricted to instances where it's impossible to obtain the information via other means. That's certainly not the case here I think. It would be okay if it were only this one paragraph, but etymonline stuff is frequently inserted here. Also, since both our aims (etymonline's and Wiktionary's) are more or less the same, namely, describing etymology of words, I don't think it's appropriate here. You might want to ask User:Andrew massyn or User:BD2412, who are legal experts, if you want to know more. —Vildricianus 22:28, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

User talk:Andrew massyn

I'm wondering... why is your talk page here and not at User talk:Andrew massyn? —Vildricianus 07:30, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

As I said, I am a technical ignoramus. I moved it by mistake and couldnt get it back again. Oh dear! :) In fact I created a playpen for myself which Kappa kindly moved somewhere, and the only way I can find it is to go to my watchlist and access it from there. That's why some of us are lawyers and not useful things like engineers and street sweepers. Andrew massyn 07:45, 28 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Oh my! :-) I'm sure you can move it back now, as an admin (you'll probably get to confirm to delete the old redirect). And you can always put a link to User:Andrew massyn/playpen on your userpage! If you got any more technical questions, please don't hesitate to ask them! —Vildricianus 08:23, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

I did it for you, your talk page is now back where it should be. I hope you don't mind? Cheers. —Vildricianus 21:31, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Thank you very much.

You've introduced a return char than I'm not able to eliminate. 59.112.52.124 18:02, 28 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

I beg you pardon? —Vildricianus 18:05, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Have a look at any page that uses {{informal}} and others. 59.112.52.124 18:18, 28 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Fixed. It was {{italbrac}}, not {{informal}}, and it was Hippietrial who broke it, not me. —Vildricianus 18:24, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. Odd that I didn't see the problem... — Hippietrail 18:30, 28 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, shouldn't have implied that you broke it, or rather, I shouldn't have been so convinced it was your edit. Davilla 18:40, 31 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

No problem, I know how confusing it sometimes gets. —Vildricianus 19:04, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

By the way your signature is incorrectly linked. Try it when you're logged out. 59.112.52.124 18:20, 28 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

No it's correct. —Vildricianus 18:24, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Oh, I get it. U=User, T=talk, C=contributions. Yikes. But why the "Special:Mypage"? Humor. I see, I think. Davilla 18:40, 31 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

It's a call to improve one's self-knowledge. Or just plain bad humour. But then, at least people get to learn another special page they'd probably never heard of. I didn't know where to link to anyway. Besides, the more topics to my talk page, the better. It's also an easy way to discover my own IP address; I just have to log out and click my own sig. Or maybe it's just my very own personal way to waste other people's time. Or to test my technical proficiency. Or perhaps to test MediaWiki's technical compatibilities. I'll be the first to notice when Special:Mypage starts bugging. I may as well use this to start compiling an FAQ list from my talk page archives, as I'm sure this question will keep on recurring endlessly. Until I change it, that is, but I won't. (If I did, I'd link to WT:BP, or to another excessively long page). No really, scrutinizing the various comments about my signature will provide insight into the human nature. See it as a psychological test. I really don't know, I probably just want to upset people. Or find out the true temper of some users, by seeing which reactions I get. Perhaps I find another excuse to block somebody. —Vildricianus 19:04, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

What are you trying to prove? What is this format like? Since when do we include Google search results? —Vildricianus 18:48, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Not trying to prove anything at all. From memory I was doing a WikiSaurus entry for naive, and came across the various spelling alternatives/variants for naivety. I think I updated the main entry naivety, and then just popped in an entry for each of the other variants.

Since this is little more than a REDIRECT with explanation, it has sod all format. Can't see that it needs more than what it has. Following my own suggested policy, as the originator I can use such a minimal format if that is all I think it needs. If you think it needs more, then go ahead.

I just popped in the Google books hits count as a sort of informal usage note to say that it is not an insignificant spelling alternative, so that someone doesn't come along and Rfd or Rfv it. But, by all means, Rfc it if you think it deserves it, or clean it up as you wish. (Maybe just include the GoogleBooks hits in comments, so they are visible if someone edits it).--Richardb 23:58, 28 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Hello. Can you specify your e-mail? Cheers. —Vildricianus 10:33, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Sorry about that - I just forgot to confirm it on this Wiki. Fixed now. --Celestianpower ^háblame 16:28, 29 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

No prob, I went through the entire list of admins. —Vildricianus 16:42, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, still an error. Did you check enable e-mail from other users? —Vildricianus 10:36, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Okay, now is should be fixed. What a moron I am :P. --Celestianpower ^háblame 11:36, 30 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

OK now. What a moron you are indeed. :-P —Vildricianus 14:23, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

User talk:Stephen G. Brown

Please, help. How to transliterate these letters in articles? Is there any transliteration table in Wiktionary? --Jaroslavleff 14:20, 28 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Hi Jaroslavleff. For these six letters, I write ž, ts, šč, ", y, ’ (or '). That is: a, b, v, g, d, e (je at the beginning of a word or between vowels), jó, ž, z, i, j, k, l, m, n, o, p, r, s, t, u, f, χ (or kh), ts, č, š, šč, ", y, ’, e, ju, ja. —Stephen 13:43, 29 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

I've also seen ц transliterated as c quite often. Isn't that the international standard we generally follow? —Vildricianus 14:20, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Yes, c often means ts, but the problem is that it often means any of several other sounds. Whenever I see c used to transliterate a language that I’m not familiar with, I always wonder what system is being used. With ts, there is no question, and in the case of Russian, ts is by far the most common way to transliterate ц. —Stephen 14:57, 29 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Now that you’ve raise the question, I took a look at the different systems in common use, which are given below. I mentioned to Eclectology and others last year that we should select one of them as official policy for en.wiktionary, but I didn’t get much of a response. I still think we should have official policies for transliterating Russian, as well as for other languages. These are similar systems for transliterating Arabic. Unofficially, we have a policy of using the w:Revised Romanization of Korean for Korean, and I really like it. Perhaps this question should be moved to the BP, Tea Room or Grease Pit? It would be wonderful to finally get some agreement on the issue (although any change to Russian would mean a lot of work, since I have transliterated almost all the Russian we have as it now is ... perhaps someone could make a bot to convert the old Russian transliteration to whatever new one we decide on). —Stephen 15:41, 29 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Absolutely, it would be quite amateurish to use different systems on an arbitrary basis. I don't know whether a 'bot would be feasible for this, though. We'll see. But please raise the topic at the Beer parlour. —Vildricianus 20:43, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Notes

* ALA-LC: ъ is not romanized at the end of a word.

† BGN/PCGN: ye and yë are used to indicate iotation word-initially, and after a vowel, й, ъ, or ь.

I've been thinking about this for a very long time but now we're getting closer to being able to do it. If we choose the least ambiguous system as our default, we can make JavaScript that can convert it on page load to a system chosen per-user. Now it may or may not be possible to a) identify via javascript which system is in use and b) convert from any system to whichever system we decide to be the default.

Another solution would be to allow people to use whichever system they prefer as long as they label it. We could have multiple ones on a page even. Then a user preference would allow to a) display only the user's preferred system or b) generate the user's preferred system from whatever system is on the page - we could even put it in another colour to inform the user that it was translated.

Maybe that gives you guys some ideas. Have a think of what you think would be the best solution and then post to the Grease pit to let us hackers mull it over as to how easy it would be to implement. — Hippietrail 21:15, 29 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Sorry dude, I didn't see you had reworked this thing already. I'm sure you like the new version as well. What do we do with the old one? Preserve in a nostalgy archive? :-) —Vildricianus 22:27, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

   :-)   Well done. Is there a place for me to add the Alphabetical list of topics back in there at some point? --Connel MacKenzie T C 22:31, 28 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Ah yes, the headers. Say, you did/do that automatically, don't you? You may want to redo it perhaps: I reworked Wiktionary:Beer parlour archive/January-March 06 - it was inordinately large. —Vildricianus 23:16, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I did it semi-automatically. Where should I put it now, when I run it again? --Connel MacKenzie T C 23:43, 28 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

I've put it at the very bottom. —Vildricianus 22:13, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Looks like you subst:'ed {{plural of}} in its latest additions? It produces things like this:

# <span class='use-with-mention'>Plural of <span
class='mention'>]</span>.</span>

Are you sure that's ok? Looks quite magical for the average user (did I miss a mention or announcement of this? Sorry then.) —Vildricianus 13:29, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm sure that was an accident. Can Cheatbot go back and "de-subst"? Rod (A. Smith) 14:07, 29 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Ugh. When Ncik threatened to start vandalizing {{plural of}}, I experimented with subst:ing the template, on the generation pass. Later, when I ran the "201-to-end" entries, I forgot to undo that, before running. What I was focusing on checking was the list of entries, trying to catch "incorrect" plural entries, not looking at the entry contents.

The easiest way to "undo" it would be to delete those thousand+ entries, and re-run it. OTOH, cryptic or not, that part of the entry is not likely to be legitimately changed; it may be best to just leave them as they are?

--Connel MacKenzie T C 17:27, 29 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Mmm, perhaps not necessary to delete them. Subst'ing the template is also not necessary anymore - the template should anyway remain protected to prevent heavy server load. —Vildricianus 22:08, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

‘Did you know, the biggest dictionary in the world is the "Dictionary of the Dutch language" (way bigger than OED), and it took 147 years to complete. For one language.’ —Is this true? I am amazed, I've never heard of it! Tell me more! Widsith 20:59, 29 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Here's Wikipedia. This is more interesting: . I've never seen it, I'd very much like to. I don't know how many copies there are, but it's already out of print - only cd-roms available. It has damn 1,700,000 cites in it! I'm wondering whether it'll take Wiktionary that long to complete :-(. The most interesting bit is that until its completion in 1998, they adhered to the antiquated Dutch spelling of 1921, in order to remain consistent. That's what I call a good example for us! —Vildricianus 21:13, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

That is awesome. And I had always thought Dutch had a relatively small vocabulary... Widsith 21:15, 29 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

It has, compared to English. The difference is though, that Dutch doesn't have an "Old Dutch" variant like English has. It has, but there's little to nothing known about it - no sources or writings in it. The WNT then includes everything from the earliest known words, some of which it is highly speculative to say whether they are actually Middle Dutch or just one of the German dialects. Compare the WNT to a dictionary that would include everything from Beowulf up to Harry Potter. That would be much bigger than our Dutch one of course. —Vildricianus 21:25, 29 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)

Yes, it's difficult at the moment, but it's a work in progress. I'm going to create easy templates for the common conjugation classes. When I'm done, I hope it will be easy and obvious. Rod (A. Smith) 22:35, 29 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Good, I'm sure you know what you're doing. Who knows, perhaps some day I'll have a better understanding of Polish verbs (I have a history of conflictuous relationships with them). —Vildricianus 09:36, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Don't be so sure I know what I'm doing. :-) I'm not terribly strong in Polish. Before I move to the next step in implementing pl-conj*, could you let me know if you think I'm missing any key inflections from the basic template, e.g. by looking at the final output of "jeść" and "pić"? Rod (A. Smith) 15:28, 30 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Of course I could have a look at them, but that'll be it I guess. Never mind my Polish, it's nil. If you want feedback, this is the guy you may want to contact. The only thing I could do is layout, but that doesn't need any more work I guess. —Vildricianus 15:40, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

I wrote down where I am at on the formatting and put together this page to debate and establish WikiSaurus formatting policies, have a look. Wiktionary:WikiSaurus Format - TheDaveRoss 08:18, 30 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for notifying me. Looks like a nice page for gathering all technical Wikisaurus stuff. I'm sure it will become clearer and easier to discuss and work on WS when there are a set of separate pages for it like this. The content itself also looks promising; very neat distinction of relationships, and certainly in the right direction. Keep up the good work! —Vildricianus 09:43, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

WT:CUSTOM#Change headers, last note. You wanted Courier new for spotting spurious usernames, didn't you? —Vildricianus 16:37, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Sweetness! Thank you. Actually, it may be more important to identify usernames than titles, but this works if I visit their userpage. (Can RecentChanges even be messed with?) --Connel MacKenzie T C 16:41, 30 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

The content of most Special pages is withing the class special, so you could set

.special { font-family:courier new }

but that will also change Wanted pages & co, and I don't know how useful it is anyway (doesn't work with "enhanced recent changes" btw). JavaScript could probably do more if you want all usernames displayed in Courier. You can always look at the source code of pages and see which parts are defined by a class. In CSS, classes or IDs are easy to mess with. Most other things are beyond me. —Vildricianus 17:28, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi Dave. I'd like to put pain somewhere into the WikiSaurus page (sense: an annoying person) - where do I do that? Would you recommend making a separate page WikiSaurus:annoying person, or should we include such relationships into the already existing page? What do you have in mind? —Vildricianus 21:01, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

That sense would probably fit well on WikiSaurus:annoyance, but WikiSaurus:pain is certainly a merited entry if you have the desire to start one which would be huge ;) - TheDaveRoss 21:04, 30 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

I'm not going to start any entries for now - I'm still thinking and considering the best approach. Currently I think it's indeed best to create separate pages for the various parts of speech (annoyance vs. annoy), instead of one giant page for the same "theme". —Vildricianus 21:19, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree. Please do weigh in on the formatting and criteria discussion pages, the sooner we establish some policy or consensus the sooner we can get going full-steam ahead on the project. - TheDaveRoss 21:21, 30 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

I will certainly, but I also think it's really important to have the namespace fixed before we can really advance, for various technical reasons. —Vildricianus 21:26, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

I have started a discussion on WS:CFI to establish some sort of inclusion policy for WikiSaurus, weigh in if you like. - TheDaveRoss 05:44, 31 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Hi Widsith. Could you use the various gender templates instead of plain text, that is, {{m}} instead of ''m''? Thanks. —Vildricianus 17:00, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Sure thing. What is the advantage?, I've never really understood it. Widsith 17:29, 31 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

1. You can hover across it and see masculine gender displayed.
2. People like me can have a {{gender period}} there.
3. The future may bring us more options to take advantage of them. Compare the {{transitive}} templates; they were useless. Only now with the {{italbrac}} stuff they've proven their value.

Cheers. —Vildricianus 17:45, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the tips. I'm just starting to put this all together, and some examples like yours and Hippietrail's (which it wouldn't have occurred to me I could get to like that) were just what I needed. It also wouldn't have occurred to me that the evidence of per-user .css and .js is sitting there for all to see in the source at the top of any page, but you're right, there it is, I see what you mean!

(While I have you here, let me just say that your "UTC" links are just, well, way too cute. :-) )

–scs 23:21, 31 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Well, will you look at that. I just added

.gender-period { display: inline }

to my hitherto-unsuspected, newfound personal css file, and them little dots are showing up already. Thanks for the prod and the tips. –scs 23:35, 31 May 2006 (UTC)Reply