Wiktionary:Grease pit/2019/June

See Category:Margaret Thatcher and note a missing quote mark in the line "Subcategories named like...". I went to "edit category data" but could not see this string. Equinox ◑ 13:06, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

@Equinox: I did a search in the module namespace (module: "Subcategories named like") and found it. Fixed. — Eru·tuon 15:47, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

@Benwing2, Rua: "Category:English noun plural forms" was deleted as redundant to "Category:English noun forms" pursuant to your discussion at "Wiktionary:Requests for moves, mergers and splits#Category:English noun plural forms into Category:English noun forms", but the use of {{head|en|noun plural form}} is still categorizing entries into the deleted category. — SGconlaw (talk) 17:16, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

Oh, I see, we're supposed to use {{head|en|noun form}} now. Perhaps this should be pointed out at "Wiktionary:News for editors". — SGconlaw (talk) 17:20, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

@Sgconlaw Just saw this. The use of {{head|en|noun plural form}} will necessarily categorize into Category:English noun plural forms; in general {{head|en|foo}} will categorize into Category:English foos. It's always worked this way. I guess you're suggesting that Wiktionary:News for editors should say that you should use {{head|en|noun form}} instead of {{head|en|noun plural form}} when creating new entries? Feel free to modify that page appropriately, I won't object. Benwing2 (talk) 02:11, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

@Benwing2: OK. — SGconlaw (talk) 04:57, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

hi, is there any solution to the "Lua error: not enough memory" on pages like a, do, or any of the rest in Category:Pages with module errors? they have been there for a while now.

for swahili a, i was thinking about moving the entry to a/sw and then transcluding it onto a, with a message that if you see out of memory errors you can click a link to the subpage which should fix it. would that be a kosher solution? i'm thinking about going through with it but don't want to do it if my a/sw page will be deleted. --Habst (talk) 14:27, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

@Habst: Transcluding from a subpage a/sw wouldn't help the main page a. No matter where the content comes from, the main page still has to have enough memory to render it. But moving the entry to a subpage would allow it to be viewed on the subpage though. — Eru·tuon 15:50, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

@Erutuon: thank you and yes, i know it wouldn't help the main page but it would at least make the entry viewable with an extra click. i did my best to implement it over at a#Swahili and a/sw, so hopefully my solution is sound and it works out. --Habst (talk) 16:08, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

• I am getting a huge number of these errors when attempting to load "a." Nicole Sharp (talk) 12:36, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

  @Nicole Sharp hi, it's happened for as long as i can remember, and the only way i know of to work around it is to do what i did above for swahili. --Habst (talk) 14:18, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

  • OK, yes, I see that "a/sw" works but "a/es" does not. It would be really great if someone can design a bot to automatically generate those subpages. The best way to do it would be to use Labeled Section Transclusion to label each language section, and then have the subpages transclude the sections from the article page, so no content is actually duplicated, and the subpages remain consistent with the main article page. Nicole Sharp (talk) 14:24, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Though actually the opposite would work out better technically (putting the content for each language on subpages, and then transcluding the subpages onto the main article page). Editors can then not have to deal with the errors by editing the subpages instead, and their edits are automatically transcluded onto the main article page. Nicole Sharp (talk) 14:30, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

I am looking for somebody who can help me to construct an IPA-module for Azerbaijani pronunciation. All phonology needed to convert strings of Azerbaijani graphemes into IPA representations are here. Ketiga123 (talk) 11:40, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

hi, i was wondering if an administrator could upload this low quality image with the fair use rationale i wrote at User:Habst/Kappa for use at the Kappa#Symbol article. as the picture being defined, i think it's necessary to have this image in the definition somewhere. thank you, --Habst (talk) 01:27, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

I think we don’t permit fair use images at this project. — SGconlaw (talk) 11:33, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

We do have a very few, e.g. at Citations:thagomizer. —Mahāgaja · talk 12:11, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

As an administrator, I'm not even sure how to do this. When I click on the "Upload file" link it goes straight to the Wikimedia Commons. — SGconlaw (talk) 12:29, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

You can go straight to Special:Upload and upload from there. But as long as we don't have a fair use policy here, we probably really shouldn't upload any new nonfree images. Even File:Far Side 1982-05-28 - Thagomizer.png probably violates Wikimedia policy, but it survived two RFDs back in 2012, and by now I guess no one cares. —Mahāgaja · talk 16:22, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

Ah, right. Thanks. — SGconlaw (talk) 16:49, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

It might be a good idea to clean up the entry (See WT:RFC#Kappa.) and make sure that any image meets minimum standards for visibility as the one above does not, IMO. In any event, I don't see any smirk on the image at its current size. DCDuring (talk) 17:24, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

hi @SGconlaw and @DCDuring, yes, admins can still upload images to wiktionary by going to Special:Upload so i was wondering if you could do that with my fair use rationale linked above for this image. i think this process is technically covered in policy by WT:Images, although seldom used. i also responded to the cleanup request and i think the page is in good shape, but only requires the image to complete the definition.

also, as for standards for visibility -- the 25x28px image is actually the most common way to view Kappa as it is usually displayed inline with text, used as a word. higher-quality renditions are rare, and might be misleading in the definition because that's not how the symbol is most frequently viewed. i think some people use Kappa without even realizing the picture is of a smirking man -- the smirking detail is of interest to the etymology and maybe the description, similar to how many Chinese symbols have an etymology not known to many speakers, but it doesn't belong in the definition.

let me know if you guys have any further questions or concerns, because i do think adding this image would be a great step forward to getting the most used words in online language on wiktionary. --Habst (talk) 01:51, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

@Sgconlaw, i also wanted to add that meta:EDP#Wiktionary explicitly says that nonfree content is allowed here, and i now see that there is in fact a whole set of guidelines at Wiktionary:Non-free content criteria. i think my rationale at User:Habst/Kappa meets all those requirements, so policy-wise i think we should be set here. i edited the WT:Images page to link to the NFCC to help clarify things. --Habst (talk) 03:18, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

We greatly prefer that all image licensing be handled by Commons as we are not set up to evaluate claims of non-free content. Please upload it there. DCDuring (talk) 04:58, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

Wiktionary:Non-free content criteria is not an adopted policy. It is a draft. DCDuring (talk) 05:01, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

hi @DCDuring, i mentioned this on the rfc page but i wanted to clarify that it is impossible to upload the kappa image to commons because non-free images are not allowed on commons at all, even under fair use. that's why it needs to be uploaded to wiktionary, i am not just trying to upload it to wiktionary because it's allowed, i'm doing it because it is unfortunately the only option.

i also see that the WT:NFCC page was voted on in 2013 here Wiktionary:Beer_parlour/2013/June#do_you_support_Wiktionary:Non-free_content_criteria to indicate that it is consensus-backed, and it does not say the word "draft" anywhere on the page. i also see that it has been used in the past to keep images like File:Far Side 1982-05-28 - Thagomizer.png, so i think it is a policy that we can trust for this process. --Habst (talk) 05:12, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

I am not familiar with this usage, but the definition states "based on a photograph of Josh DeSeno." So perhaps it does not need to actually be a photograph of Josh DeSeno, just close enough. My suggestion would be to find a copylefted photograph of someone who looks like Josh DeSeno, or draw an original picture of Josh DeSeno, and then use that. Nicole Sharp (talk) 14:58, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Kappa is a specific image used in Internet chat and an image that is merely "similar" would not be Kappa. It's a bit like the famous troll face, or that "biting pear" with teeth that was posted everywhere a decade ago. Equinox ◑ 15:16, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

yes thank you both, Equinox is correct, however the main difference between Kappa and the trollface or biting pear is that unlike the other two, Kappa is used inline with text similar to an emoji the vast majority of the time. --Habst (talk) 16:40, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Could someone please help me change Category:Cambridge University slang and Category:Oxford University slang so that they don't say slang (and they shouldn't be subcategories of "British slang" etc. either). They should just be categories for the two universities, as many of the words are not slang. Those that are slang should already have "slang" as a secondary gloss on the sense lines in the entries. Equinox ◑ 23:04, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

@Equinox: What do you need help with? As far as I can tell it's a simple matter of moving the category pages, changing the category links there, and then in Module:labels/data replacing "Cambridge University slang" and "Oxford University slang" in the plain_categories lists with whatever the new category names are. — Eru·tuon 20:40, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

That "simple matter" is not simple to me because I am stupid. Equinox ◑ 02:39, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

@Equinox: Sorry for not being more understanding. I can do some of the work if you don't want to. I just don't know what the category names should be or what the parent categories should be. — Eru·tuon 03:12, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

Perhaps change the categories to “Category:Cambridge University English” (with the parent “Category:Cambridgeshire English” < “Category:Southern England English”) and “Category:Oxford University English” (with the parent “Category:Oxfordshire English” < “Category:Southern England English”). — SGconlaw (talk) 07:51, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

As someone who regularly writes braces in sense lines like (Yorkshire) I just find it really obnoxious that I spent hours of my time adding Cambridge and Oxford stuff and then some magical wizard fucked it all up by changing stuff I don't know how to change. YES I COULD LEARN how to change it, but honestly, I don't care. I just want it to be right. I Just want it to be correct. At the end of the day, if no Wikt nerd wants to fix this, it will just remain wrong, and I will move on to other things, and I will feel really bad and sad because I know that entries I spent a lot of time on are literally incorrect. But until some random journalist says "this is wrong" it will just survive, because guess what! every single other cunt is too busy creating fucking Lua templates, or changing all the pronouns to make them trans-friendly. I mean, fix it or not. Fuck off. Just see this as a helpful observation. I am a bad person but I have other things to do, like creating instead of editing. Equinox ◑ 09:14, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

The really annoying point here is that IT WAS RIGHT IN THE FIRST PLACE, and someone screwed it up by adding "slang". Put it back how it was! Equinox ◑ 09:21, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

Not having come across any of these entries before, I don’t know what the previous position was, and unless someone remembers it’s probably going to be quite hard to figure out when the edit was made and what it used to be. — SGconlaw (talk) 11:31, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

@Equinox: I made "Cambridge University" and "Oxford University" and "Oxbridge" not magically transmute into "Cambridge University slang" and "Oxford University slang" and "Oxbridge slang" in {{lb}} but didn't change the categories yet... like with Sgconlaw "change it back" doesn't really help me know what to do. Also AdamBMorgan merged "slang" and "Oxford University" or "Cambridge University" in entries (for instance in mathmo, in pigeon post) and I don't know if you think that's a problem or not. — Eru·tuon 15:27, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

I tried to make some changes too but realised I ran into @Erutuon's edits, so I stopped and reversed it. Obviously, as the category creator, I think Category:Cambridge University slang and Category:Oxford University slang have merit and don't think they should either be changed or emptied. Separate categories, or none, for non-slang terms might be better. They both have a large body of specific slang terms that I think makes categorisation worthwhile. Also, I did check everything when I made those categories and everything appeared to check out as slang at the time; I didn't just do this blindly. (NB: There was no previous categorisation of the University labels.) - AdamBMorgan (talk) 17:12, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ The question I'd ask is how many "slang" entries are there (and likely to be), as opposed to entries that relate to the universities but are not really slang. If the answer is that there aren't (and aren't going to be) that many entries anyway, then it may not be worth having a separate slang category – just put all the entries into the university category, and additionally label the slang entries with {{lb|en|slang}}. Also, I wonder whether it is easy to distinguish between slang entries and entries that are, say, jargon.

However, if it is thought desirable to have a university slang category, then it should be a subcategory of the university category (see my 15 June 2019 comment above). — SGconlaw (talk) 15:20, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

So, in an attempt to fix the problem I created, I've done the following:

1. This edit on Module:labels/data to remove the University labels (while leaving the specific slang labels)
2. This edit on Module:labels/data/regional to add the University labels
3. Created Category:Cambridge University English (albeit as a child of East Anglian English at present)
4. Created Category:Oxford University English

It will take some time for those categories to populate; it seems to be working so far. I've listed all of that in case any or all of it needs to be removed or changed again. I'm not sure if this is an ideal solution, or even a well implemented one, but this is a wiki so everything can be refined over time through future editing. The jargon vs. slang problem still remains and could be resolved in different ways depending or how, when or if it arises in practice. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 05:42, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

@Equinox: Has this problem been resolved now? The categories should have finished updating, with regional terms separated from the slang. (NB: Labels of the form of "X University" or "University of X" — where X is either "Oxford" or "Cambridge" — should both currently appear the same, all labels link to the universities' Wikipedia articles, and all categorise accordingly. I have not created an "Oxbridge" label at this time, although "Oxbridge slang" does currently exist.) - AdamBMorgan (talk) 14:36, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

Literally putting my hand over the screen while I scroll down because I don't want to see the always entertaining fallout of my last rant. Um I can see that there are now separate X uni and X uni slang categories so that looks great. Sorry for spazzing and all. Whether we should have a category for X uni just because it's famous and ancient I don't know. I just objected to the wholesale shoving of non-slang into slang. Thanks whoever spent time on this. Equinox ◑ 03:11, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Can someone enable m-p and f-p as genders for this template? Ultimateria (talk) 18:29, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

@Ultimateria: Done. — Eru·tuon 20:16, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Now it too easy to waste resources by painting word, let search engine find it and clicking wikipedia link. :( — This unsigned comment was added by 46.132.47.188 (talk) at 15:11, 16 June 2019.

Wikipedia links are added by editors when they think such links are appropriate; you will either see a box at the top right corner of the entry, or (more commonly now) a link in the "Further reading" section at the end of the entry. However, it's not always appropriate for an entry to be linked to a Wikipedia article. If you have suggestions of Wikipedia articles that could be linked to Wiktionary entries, please suggest them at "Wiktionary:Feedback" or "Wiktionary:Tea room". — SGconlaw (talk) 15:20, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

It would be nice if these two categories linked directly to each entry, instead of the top of the page. DonnanZ (talk) 11:34, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, please explain? — SGconlaw (talk) 12:01, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

@Sgconlaw: Try the link from Category:American English forms to center, for example. You end up at the top of the page, not at the actual English entry. DonnanZ (talk) 12:09, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

I think that’s just how Mediawiki works. I don’t think it’s something that can we changed here. You might have to file a Phabricator ticket. — SGconlaw (talk) 13:22, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

No, there's a template called {{catfix|en}} that adds the link to the language section. All the templates used by {{autocat}} have it in there somewhere, so you don't normally have to add it by hand. Chuck Entz (talk) 13:28, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

I just learned something new today. Perhaps these categories can be added to {{auto cat}}? — SGconlaw (talk) 13:43, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

@Chuck Entz: That fixed them, thanks a lot. DonnanZ (talk) 13:48, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

There are 3 columns with colspan="4" and 4 columns with colspan="3", so both rows have the same number of columns. For me in Firefox, the three "foo" columns don't appear the same width, although the four "bar" ones do. Does this happen in other browsers, and is there a way to make the cells in each row evenly sized? —Rua (mew) 16:47, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

Same in Safari. Canonicalization (talk) 16:50, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

Chrome too. —Mahāgaja · talk 16:55, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

Moved from WT:TR

Something strange is going on- I made a page for the simplified and traditional versions of this word, but the traditional page still says "(This form in the hanzi box is uncreated: "没戏唱".)". Must be something I don't understand going on. I would appreciate any help solving this problem. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 01:32, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

"Save" the page without making a change. The system can be slow to update the page. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 01:37, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Geographyinitiative: It's purely technical, no problem. A delay in processing the database or something. A zero-edit helps or just ignore the message, it will go away later. The correct place for this type of questions is WT:GP. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 01:38, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

woah, okay got it. far out --Geographyinitiative (talk) 01:40, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

NEW PROBLEM I am now experiencing an identical type of problem with jû-hô and 如何, but the "save without making a change" method is not working. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 02:02, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

Update- the problem is still happening. 'jû-hô' shows up as a red link on the '如何' page. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 04:32, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

@Geographyinitiative: You have to be patient. 'jû-hô' is not showing as a red link for me but I experience delays today as well. Pages I have visited still show in bold. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 04:40, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

　I was originally uncertain whether this was a problem with an individual character or Chinese word or was a technical issue generally, so I posted to the tea room --Geographyinitiative (talk) 04:45, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

@Geographyinitiative: You have to be patient. 'jû-hô' is not showing as a red link for me but I experience delays today as well. Pages I have visited still show in bold. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 04:40, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

Something happened between 2019-nî 6-goe̍h 19-ji̍t 01:26 & 2019-nî 6-goe̍h 19-ji̍t 01:29 as far as I can tell. 行規 had no problem producing a normal traditional/simplified pair, but then 沒戲唱 did. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 04:41, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

I've said that years ago, but no change: The current pharyngealization mark used as the default in Wiktionary is the wrong one used for IPA, but looks similar. Whenever I edit pages using the template:IPA and add the correct mark (ˤ), I get a warning to use the wrong mark instead! --Mahmudmasri (talk) 12:31, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

How do we know which pharyngealization mark is the right one? Probably both are right. Unicode misencoded here as in many places where the same is encoded twice. We don’t even know which apostrophes are correct, Wiktionary:Grease pit/2018/November § U+2019 in notWordPunc. Fay Freak (talk) 12:46, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

@Mahmudmasri: You're right; Module:IPA only allows U+02C1 when it should be allowing only U+02E4. Editing the module to switch those around is the easy part, but then every page with U+02C1 on it will be added to CAT:IPA pronunciations with invalid IPA characters unless and until someone with a bot goes through and fixes them all. Is anyone reading this willing to set their bot onto that task if I fix the module? —Mahāgaja · talk 13:32, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

If it would help the bot operator, here is a list of entries with the incorrect character in {{IPA}} or {{IPAchar}}. — Eru·tuon 18:40, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

@Erutuon Thanks, this isn't too many, I'll get to this sometime soon. Benwing2 (talk) 00:27, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

OK, I fixed the module (hopefully correctly) and I'm doing a bot run to correct the 806 pages that Erutuon found. Benwing2 (talk) 02:05, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

@Benwing2: Thank you! Here is an updated list from the June 20th dump, which came out today. It has just a few new instances. — Eru·tuon 02:14, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

@Erutuon Done. Benwing2 (talk) 02:25, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Me, User:Suzukaze-c and User:Erutuon cleared out most of what was in there. I'm a bit stumped about the rest, though. Any chance we could combine our efforts and clear it out completely? —Rua (mew) 10:39, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

@Rua Only 7 pages left, all of which are user pages, perhaps not worth fixing. Benwing2 (talk) 02:32, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Our rhyme pages use IPA, but for some reason Telugu rhymes are entered in the native script instead, as seen in Category:Telugu rhymes. This is tripping up our IPA module, which is called by {{rhymes}} and {{rhymes nav}}. As a result, Category:IPA pronunciations with invalid IPA characters is completely flooded with Telugu pages. Is there a way that we can fix this? —Rua (mew) 10:42, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

(User talk:Stephen G. Brown/2016#Telugu rhymes, Category talk:Telugu rhymes —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 10:45, 20 June 2019 (UTC))

I've wondered about this too, but the idea of converting them all to IPA is daunting to me, especially since I don't know Telugu. Doing a one-to-one conversion (e.g. moving Rhymes:Telugu/క to Rhymes:Telugu/ka) would also result in Rhymes pages that include the syllable onset, and I don't know whether that's accurate for Telugu poetry (it certainly isn't for the European languages whose rhyme conventions I'm familiar with). —Mahāgaja · talk 14:05, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

I guess {{rhymes}} and {{rhymes nav}} could specially treat Telugu rhymes, language-tagging them instead of passing them to Module:IPA. — Eru·tuon 19:54, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

Done, I think? It was very easy so maybe I missed something. — Eru·tuon 20:00, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

I do hope that this is just a stopgap and that our intention is to change these to IPA in the future. —Rua (mew) 20:09, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

Well, my edits make it very easy to go back to IPA-tagging the Telugu rhymes. — Eru·tuon 20:18, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

@Rua, Wikitiki89, Erutuon, DTLHS, Donnanz, TheDaveRoss, Benwing2 (who touched {{top3}} or replied in Wiktionary:Grease_pit/2017/April, Wiktionary:Grease_pit/2017/May )

From stackoverflow.com i see 2 solutions:

• display: table -- it seems to work (though there are no "tr" and "td"), for some reason 'table' behavior differs from 'block'
• overflow: hidden

Since both solutions remove list item, they require additional support:

• .derivedterms > ul > li { ANYSOLUTION; position: relative; }
• .derivedterms > ul > li::before { content: ""; display: list-item; position: absolute; top: 0; left: 0; }
  or .derivedterms > ul > li::before { content: "•"; font-weight: bold; margin-left: -14px; position: absolute; top: 0; left: 0; }

I don't know what solution is better, i could not make enough tests (e.g. *koňь) in different browsers. —Игорь Тълкачь (talk) 19:21, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

(Notifying TAKASUGI Shinji, Atitarev, HappyMidnight): @Wyang The implementation of {{ko-l}} is pretty crazy. It allows its parameters to be passed in any order, and does some extremely complex processing (including what looks like a dynamic-programming edit-distance computation) to figure out which parameter is which. This makes it very hard to work with it in any sensible fashion in a bot script. I ran into this when trying to figure out whether it's allowable to convert a raw inflection-of definition that involves {{ko-l}} into a call to {{inflection of}}. I think, for example, that the following can be converted:

# Infinitive form of {{ko-l|오다|to come}}.

# Past adnominal form of {{ko-l|미다||ostracize, go bald, or tear a hole}}

because they have only a single Hangul lemma and a gloss; but if both Hangul and Hanja are present, I don't think the conversion of possible. What I'd like to do is do a bot run to reorder the params into a fixed order, and then remove the complex code that guesses which param is which, so that the fixed order is enforced. I would naturally have the bot call the existing param-guessing code to correctly fetch the params. The format I'm thinking should be imposed would be this:

{{ko-l|HANGUL|HANJA|tr=ROMANIZATION|t=GLOSS|pos=POS_OR_NOTES}}

where

{{ko-l|HANGUL|HANJA|GLOSS|tr=ROMANIZATION|pos=POS_OR_NOTES}}

is also allowed, but the former will be used by the bot. This is mostly compatible with the existing {{l}} and {{m}} templates, where the HANJA param takes the place of the ALTTEXT (display text) param. Thoughts? Benwing2 (talk) 20:00, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

I guess the current implementation is complicated for backward compatibility. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 21:54, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

@Benwing2: The problems with some inconsistencies are historical but I agree some clean-up must be needed. The hanja parameter is not an alttext, since hanja is also displayed along with hangeul. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 23:35, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

@Atitarev Right, I'm not saying the Hanja parameter is an alttext but rather that I'm putting it in the same place as the alt text. Benwing2 (talk) 00:05, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

@Benwing2: OK, thanks. Please keep us in the loop about any changes. BTW, in the past there were strong objections about creating Japanese and Korean entries for inflected forms - apparently they are almost endless because of the nature of these languages. Just looking at your examples in your first post. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 00:13, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

@Atitarev Yeah, I would not create any new entries for Japanese/Korean inflected forms, but several of them already exist and I want to clean them up. Benwing2 (talk) 00:23, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

{{ko-l}} should be simplified, but I think that {{ko-l|HANGUL|GLOSS}} would be nicer than {{ko-l|HANGUL||GLOSS}}. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 00:39, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I would eventually also like to do a similar cleanup of {{zh-l}}. It's not quite so bad but it too guesses whether its second parameter is a simplified Chinese equivalent, a translit or a gloss. Benwing2 (talk) 00:40, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

@Suzukaze-c I don't much care about the exact order of arguments as long as it's fixed. If you prefer to put GLOSS directly after HANGUL (note, this is contrary to the normal calling spec of {{m}}, {{l}}, etc.), where would you put HANJA? Benwing2 (talk) 00:42, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

I think that having HANJA share the same parameter as GLOSS wouldn't be too egregious or complex. Hanja isn't always necessary or applicable, and the empty parameter is meh. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 00:44, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

"Gloss" doesn't require to be linked but "hanja" does. It's also formatted. I'm not sure I would agree to "gloss" being the 2nd unnamed parameter, "hanja" was always the second. I think both "gloss" and "tr" should be named. Or leave "gloss" at the 3rd position as in {{m}}. To complicate things, we only allow one type of Korean transliteration, so "rv" (for "revised") = "tr" as in Korean headword templates. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 01:49, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, I'd also prefer to put HANJA second, and not overload a single parameter with two meanings. Using t= for gloss is standard in many templates and easy to type. Benwing2 (talk) 02:07, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

t= is fine. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 02:53, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

I think that simple script detection could resolve whether {{{2}}} is HANJA or GLOSS, but {{{t}}} is also good. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 07:00, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

While on the topic, I think that {{ko-l|HANJA|HANGUL}} could be useful as well, for the Compounds section of Hanja (人#Hanja). —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 07:00, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

It's minor but I think we should use "hangeul", rather than "hangul", since RR (Revised Romanization) transliteration is the current solid transliteration policy for Korean, even if "hangul" is the original English spelling from MR (McCune–Reischauer) "han'gŭl". --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 07:08, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

@Atitarev, Benwing2, Suzukaze-c, Wyang Greetings. I've recently compiled a set of Middle Korean lemmas over here and here. Would it be possible to make {{ko-l|HANGEUL}} redirect to ] rather than just ]? KevinUp (talk) 14:55, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

On another note, {{ko-l|지지하다|支持하다}} gives the output 지지하다 (支持하다, jijihada), so I hope this format can be retained. KevinUp (talk) 14:55, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

I've noticed that whenever there is text following an {{RQ}} template (e.g., {{RQ:Authorized Version}}) on the same line, such as to give a page or line number, there is a line break that shouldn't be there. An example I just ran across is at clave, the past tense of cleave, which display the following:

1611, The Holy Bible,  (King James Version), London: Robert Barker, , →OCLC:

, Genesis, 22:3

And Abraham rose up early in the morning, and saddled his ass, and took two of his young men with him, and Isaac his son, and clave the wood for the burnt offering, and rose up, and went unto the place of which God had told him.

1611, The Holy Bible,  (King James Version), London: Robert Barker, , →OCLC:

, Ruth 1:14

And they lifted up their voice, and wept again: and Orpah kissed her mother in law; but Ruth clave unto her.

Can this be fixed easily? Andrew Sheedy (talk) 01:32, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Page or line numbers vel sim. should be available as parameters in the {{RQ}} templates themselves (as appropriate). In this case the needed parameters are already available, so there's a straightforward fix:

1611, The Holy Bible,  (King James Version), London: Robert Barker, , →OCLC, Genesis 22:3:

— Vorziblix (talk · contribs) 16:08, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Good to know, thanks. I've been seeing it so often I just assumed whoever used the templates didn't have a choice. Andrew Sheedy (talk) 22:57, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

By the way, @Andrew Sheedy, the template is now called {{RQ:King James Version}}, so feel free to update the template name wherever you encounter it. — SGconlaw (talk) 15:02, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

OK, good to know. Andrew Sheedy (talk) 03:32, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

Can someone make the forms link to Occitan L2? Also, accelerated forms would be fantastic, but my first request is more of an issue. Ultimateria (talk) 22:44, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Updated. DTLHS (talk) 16:54, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

Thank you so much! Ultimateria (talk) 17:06, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

Can someone please 1) make comparative and superlative forms optional, for example by adding the possibility of inserting "-" in the first parameter 2) add the possibility of adding an optional intensive form. Ketiga123 (talk) 01:30, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

To see an example of how an adjective with an intensive form should look, see kobud Ketiga123 (talk) 12:26, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

@Rua, Wikitiki89, Erutuon, DTLHS, Donnanz, TheDaveRoss, Benwing2 (who was pinged Wiktionary:Grease_pit/2019/June#Problem: template top3 splits ...)

{{top3}} is using CSS column. When size of element1 >= element2 + element3, #2 and #3 will be placed in same column (e.g. this revision). Such behavior is normal for columns but it's not satisfactory when elements can't be breaked. I don't know is there something like <br/> for columns or how to make an element that would fill remaining height of column.

Previous version of the template was using table and it can break anywhere. Therefore probably it should be revived as alternative template. If table is undesirable for mobile version, it can redefined in CSS, e.g. .CLASSNAME > table > tbody > tr > td {display: block; background-color: inherit !important;}. —Игорь Тълкачь (talk) 18:44, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

I used {{R:Gaffiot|proprius}} and {{R:L&S|proprius}} in Wiktionary:Requests for verification/Non-English#Latin proprietor, expecting to see both times something like “proprius in ...”. Instead, I see “for verification/Non-English proprius in ...”. This looks like an error to me. Apart from that, I think that the default for the second parameter should be what is displayed; i.e., {{R:Dict|foo}} should be equivalent to {{R:Dict|foo|foo}}.  --Lambiam 12:53, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

@Lambiam: I agree, but some instances of these templates might rely on the old behavior, so I'll check to see which template instances would change with the new behavior. — Eru·tuon 15:54, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Okay, there are 658 instances of {{R:Gaffiot}} that have parameter |1= or |entry= and it is not equal to the page name and parameter 2 is not supplied, and 1782 instances of templates that use Module:R:Perseus (including {{R:L&S}} and {{R:LSJ}}) in which parameter 1 is not equal to the page name and parameter 2 is not supplied, 904 non-Greek instances (because the Greek templates have more complex rules). I'm not sure if all of these will need to be changed. It's possible that editors supplied |1= or |entry= with the expectation that it would be used in the URL as well as the link text. — Eru·tuon 18:20, 30 June 2019 (UTC)