Wiktionary:Information desk/2019/September

(revised to add nowiki tags and hide the source in a comment)— This unsigned comment was added by 50.201.195.170 (talk).

Why would you want to mess with a bot that hasn't made an edit in 6 years, and that was run by someone who isn't very active around here any more? Why would we want someone doing that who's made exactly one dictionary edit and apparently has no clue about this bot, our bot policies, or our policies in general?

To be blunt, if the abuse filter hadn't stopped you, I would have reverted these changes on the spot. There's a reason that filter exists, and you have yet to give us any reason why we should help you get around it. Chuck Entz (talk) 22:18, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Am I the only one who can't use New editors’ contribs anymore? Regardless what I type in there, I get no results. It worked fine the other day.--Robbie SWE (talk) 08:33, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

I did not know such an option existed. Is it documented? Anyway, this seems more an issue for the grease pit.  --Lambiam 23:39, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

It's one of those "special pages", so not sure if it's documented. I'll move this discussion to the Grease Pit. --Robbie SWE (talk) 09:16, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

See meta:Tech/News/2019/34. It was disabled "because of performance reasons". The Editor's Apprentice (talk) 01:38, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, heard about that late last night. It's really perplexing that such a drastic change was made without informing or consulting the users who actually depend on that tool to patrol new editors' contributions. Relying solely on RC just doesn't cut it for me I'm afraid, but I guess I'll have to adapt. --Robbie SWE (talk) 17:20, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Have you tried enabling the "Newcomers" and "Learners" filters in Special:RecentChanges? They seem the closest thing to the filter used by the "newbie contributions" feature. — Eru·tuon 17:28, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

@Erutuon, that's the thing — how exactly do I do that? I've typed "newcomers" and "learners" in the "Tag filter" box and I get zilch. --Robbie SWE (talk) 17:45, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Ahh, it sounds like you have the non-JavaScript version. If you uncheck "Use non-JavaScript interface" in the "Recent changes" tab of Special:Preferences, Special:RecentChanges will have an "Active filters" box and below it an input box where you can type in and select "Newcomers" and "Learners" filters. — Eru·tuon 19:11, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Another workaround is to go through the user creation logs and look for "contribs" bluelinks. Chuck Entz (talk) 21:30, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Erutuon! You were right, I had "Use non-JavaScript interface" checked. It works now! I had to rely on Chuck Entz's workaround yesterday, but I sure miss the old "New editors’ contribs" function. Oh well, times they are a-changin'. --Robbie SWE (talk) 08:33, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

Hello, I was hoping someone could explain to me how new reference templates are added? I have two main points that I would like to understand... 1. what the actual code does (and whether it is written in lua, javascript etc...) and 2. what the process is (if any) of getting the new reference material approved. I am hoping to add a reference template from U-Chicago's Digital Dictionaries of South Asia. Thank you! Hk5183 (talk) 20:55, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

You will find the reference templates in Category:Reference templates or one of its many subcategories. It is a mixed bunch. If the url to be linked to can be formed in a straightforward way by substituting the entry (usually the page name) in a string with perhaps the help of a few magic words and parser functions (if enabled here), a simple template will do. For an example, see {{R:Platts}}. A generic template that can be specialized for this approach is {{R:Reference-meta}}. Other templates invoke a module, written in Lua. For example, template {{R:Bailly}} invokes Module:R:Bailly. If you create a new template or module, please also supply the documentation.  --Lambiam 23:24, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

Thank you! your help is appreciated!Hk5183 (talk) 20:33, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

On all pages I don't see the quotes that are included on the page even though I see them in the source code. I am assuming there is some preference or something that I changed to make this the case but cannot seem to find it. If some one could point me in the direction of the option that allows to see quotes on pages again that would be greatly appreciated. The Editor's Apprentice (talk) 01:47, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

@The Editor's Apprentice: You should be able to see this on the left-hand "tools" menu. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:35, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

@Koavf I see the tools menu but am confused what I am supposed to see in it and how it relates to my problem. —The Editor's Apprentice (talk) 16:47, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

@The Editor's Apprentice: Sorry if I was obscure: there should be an option to "Show quotations" (also "Show declensions", etc.) and it's under "Visibility" which should be immediately below "Tools". —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:24, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

I have found it, thank you very much! —The Editor's Apprentice (talk) 17:32, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

On the pages with the invisible quotations, do you see a Visibility menu in the sidebar with "Show quotations" in it? — Eru·tuon 16:55, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

What is the language code for "Church Slavonic"? A new user is using "cu", which is the code for "Old Church Slavonic" - is that acceptable? SemperBlotto (talk) 09:48, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

I believe the discussion about this is being held at Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2019/September#I want to add Church Slavonic terms — Mnemosientje (t · c) 14:48, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

Hello!

I am currently using the wiktionary to extract German words and group them by declension. In the process of doing so, I noticed that a few "declension groupings" do not start with the same letter.

I am fixing the obviously wrong cases, but as I do not speak German, feel free to review/edit/rollback my contributions as you wish. :)

I already did that with Dutch words and it went fine, but I apologize if some of them might be wrong. That said, the list is not big.

Thanks! Jojva (talk) 13:06, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

They all seem fine to me. Keep up the good work.  --Lambiam 21:49, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

For users of Telegram, there is now @WikimologyBot (https://t.me/WikimologyBot). Send it a word in any language and get contents of the etymology field for that word from the English version of Wiktionary. — This unsigned comment was added by Fortecis (talk • contribs) at 18:20, 18 September 2019 (UTC).

@Fortecis Nice, but it should not strip tables like in the etymology section of بَلُّوط (ballūṭ). Also, while it does separate language sections and gives all languages there are entries in on a page, it does not does not distinguish etymology sections. Perhaps it should fetch the meanings too if it already accesses the pages anyway. Fay Freak (talk) 14:37, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

I recently edited affero () to provide more complete information (author, title, JSTOR number) to a reference. I used {{cite-journal}}, but I see that the rendered text is in a very different formatting, even apart from the missing information, than what was there before (it used to lead with the year, for example), I'm not certain I did it correctly.

I'm only an occasional editor here, much more active on English Wikipedia. Can someone check me on it? TJRC (talk) 00:27, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

@TJRC This looks fine to me: there's a preference here to start usage examples with dates (e.g. Orwellian) The way that you've inserted it without <ref> tags and a final <references /> tag is not how I would have done it but that's not necessarily a problem. I think a better citation would be to include some dialogue that uses the word, cite it, and then use the tags I mentioned, again Orwellian has examples of what I mean. Either way, this is a great addition on a very obscure language. Thanks. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 00:40, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

The quotation templates {{quote-...}}, meant for examples of actual use, start with the date. The citation templates {{cite-...}}, meant for references, start with the author. As this is a reference (with a mention, not a use), it is fine as is.  --Lambiam 12:37, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

I know that they’re very similar but I am wondering if there are (or were) at least a few exceptions. — (((Romanophile))) ♞ (contributions) 00:29, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

The Wikipedia article Quebec French states that the spelling differences are “sporadic” – unlike the grammatical differences, which are numerous. Two examples are given. (1) The Office québécois de la langue française recommends the spelling tofou for what is in France tofu. (2) In France the adjective inuit is invariable, but has regular feminine and plural forms in Quebec French according to official recommendations. (Our entry lists these forms without reservations. The French Wiktionary mentions both options without tying this to a regiolect.)  --Lambiam 18:53, 28 September 2019 (UTC)