Wiktionary talk:News for editors

What's the relationship (if there is one) between ] and ]? —Ruakh_TALK 17:17, 23 October 2008 (UTC)Reply

I think of the former as being news that editors need to edit according to Wiktionary conventions and policies, such as changes in templates, categorization, and the like. ] has been listing a few of those, but not nearly comprehensively, and also lists other news like "we have a new 'crat". (And ] lists only newpage stats.)—msh210℠ 17:04, 13 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Is it possible to add an interwiki link to fr:Wiktionnaire:Journal des contributeurs ? - Dakdada 23:34, 22 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

There is now a French page : fr:Wiktionnaire:Journal des contributeurs (which is not fully linked in the project, but it will soon be, I think). --Szyx 23:38, 22 December 2008 (UTC) Sorry, I didn't saw Dakdada's message.Reply

Have got a new shortcut: SLT or SMLT for "something like that"

The page asks that the "news" is kept in chronological order, and I'm noting that it isn't. I'm unable to edit this page (being anonymous as I am) and so I'm pointing it out instead of fixing it. 70.91.178.185 19:07, 18 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Yeah, it's confusing. The order indicates when a news item was added, but the month and year indicate when it actually took effect — which could have been months or years earlier. For example, see Wiktionary:News_for_editors?diff=6127134 —Ruakh_TALK 19:33, 18 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

The list of news is getting rather long now, and consequently less easy to parse. I have two thoughts on how to deal with this

• archive news items older than (say) four months either to a separate page (Wiktionary:News for editors/archive perhaps)
• change the format to have an L3 header or simple bold line for each month there is news, with the items being bulleted lists within these headers. See User:Thryduulf/N4E mockup. Although I've used both bold and headers there, this is just to illustrate both options. I think that only one style should actually be used.

These two are not of course mutually exclusive. Thryduulf 00:42, 30 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

I like the mockup. Eventually, the list will be long enough despite the format that we will need either to archive it or, I think more likely, to simply remove the oldest items.—msh210℠ 00:50, 30 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Uh oh, methinks we're blogging. —Michael Z. 2009-04-30 01:40 z

I'd vote for an archive. Even if it merely consisted of a link on WT:N4E/archive to the last version before each purge. \Mike 11:08, 30 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

If every addition comes with a removal, or most do, then one merely check the history for the last version before each purge.​—msh210℠ 20:13, 30 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

What's the purpose of Special:NewMessages being linked to from up top? I would like to know. —Internoob (Disc•Cont) 22:11, 17 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

Erm, where is it linked to? I can't see it on this page or the project page? Thryduulf (talk) 22:37, 17 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

It's between "my watchlist" and "my contributions" at the very top. —Internoob (Disc•Cont) 23:05, 17 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

Just to clarify, I think that there should be something on News for Editors about this. —Internoob (Disc•Cont) 03:17, 18 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

See Wiktionary:Grease_pit#special:newmessages. -Atelaes λάλει ἐμοί 22:54, 17 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

On Wiktionary:News for editors it says that "Liquid Threads is now live" but, apart from the test page, I could not find any talk pages using the new system. I am confused.--Commander Keane 11:00, 8 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

It's optional. User_talk:Internoob is using it, for instance. Equinox ◑ 11:41, 8 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

Stumbled a bit over the grammar for that revision. Perhaps better ways to phrase the 2011 February news might be:

• Minor revision: To be included, languages that are not natural languages must have consensus for approval.
• Larger revision: Languages that are not natural languages must have a consensus for inclusion in the project.
• Even larger revision: There must be a consensus for inclusion of languages that are not natural languages in the project.

Regardless, that "to be included" in the middle of the phrase just felt quite awkward. Didn't revise myself due to lack of permissions for the page.PolicyReformer 23:47, 22 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Could someone please clarify what "English verbs' headword lines (inflection lines) should no longer include to at their start" means? Thanks. — Cheers, JackLee ^–talk– 18:23, 25 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

The used to look like

to eat (third-person singular simple present eats, present participle eating, simple past ate, past participle eaten)

but now look like

eat (third-person singular simple present eats, present participle eating, simple past ate, past participle eaten)

.​—msh210℠ (talk) 19:37, 25 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Ah, thanks. So it doesn't apply to definitions, then? (For example, "trill#Verb".) — Cheers, JackLee ^–talk– 17:15, 26 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Right.​—msh210℠ (talk) 19:18, 26 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

I don't know if this is the place to ask this. I already have a userpage in wikipedia. I just want to know why my username is in redlink when I edit in wiktionary. Does that mean that I have to create another user page here?-Meerkatakreem 16:31, 3 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

Not the right place (try WT:ID in the future), but, yes, that is the reason.​—msh210℠ (talk) 17:50, 4 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

I suggest this project page add "noinclude" tags at the top and bottom, so users can transclude the main contents in their user pages without getting all the other stuff (shortcuts, instructions, categories, interwikis) — as, for example, at User talk:Cirt. - dcljr (talk) 03:02, 17 July 2012 (UTC)Reply

• Done. --Yair rand (talk) 03:21, 17 July 2012 (UTC)Reply

Are we really that boring, or is it time to use {{inactive}}? --Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 05:42, 10 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

I've been adding things here but it seems that some of them disappeared... —CodeCat 10:31, 10 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

This shouldn't be inactive. With major changes like that to {{proto}} happening it's important that there is somewhere infrequent editors can keep abreast of what they need to know. Thryduulf (talk) 20:43, 19 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

Could someone please remove the pointless "reference needed" template in the November entry about the PoS template parameters???? Circeus (talk) 16:55, 15 November 2012 (UTC)Reply

Under "nixie" there is no reference to the nixie tube, a vacuum tube which typically displayed the digits 0~9 on incadescent elements stacked inside a glass sheath. I doubt that they are manufactured any more, but some may be repaired by university glass-blowers to keep antique electronics running for a few years yet.

David Lloyd-Jones (talk) 22:42, 4 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

Nixie tube has an entry. Equinox ◑ 22:44, 4 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

I have a nice photograph of a number 3 nixie tube. I also noticed that "Nixie" is red-lined on the Nixie tube entry, presumably because it should be a Wikilink to "nixie", instead of "Nixie". I will check on that and fix it, if possible. --FeralOink (talk) 21:32, 13 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

It's not a nixie in the lower-cased sense. See Talk:Nixie tube. Equinox ◑ 12:19, 30 June 2014 (UTC)Reply

Perhaps someone could explain why Wiktionary and Wikipedia use a pronunciation standard (The International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA) whither one cannot determine the correct pronunciation without learning the standard first. Shouldn't there be a simpler phonetic guide that a novice could see and immediately pronounce said word? For example: wither = /ˈwɪðɚ/ whither = /wɪðɚ/ rhymes with -ɪðə(r) Honestly, can any of you look at this and immediately know how to pronounce it? The two words are pronounced differently but the only difference in this guide is ˈ , which tells 99.9% of page visitors nothing. Torturella (talk) 15:54, 3 October 2013 (UTC)Reply

Re: "Shouldn't there be a simpler phonetic guide that a novice could see and immediately pronounce said word?" in a perfect world, yes. But English has too many different sounds, most IPA sounds are pretty intuitive to an English speaker, but extra letters are needed for sounds that don't map to a single Latin letter. Mglovesfun (talk) 16:02, 3 October 2013 (UTC)Reply

Currently, IPA is the only standard that is widely known and used, and is unambiguous, precise, and can be used for all languages. There really is nothing else to substitute for it, without also making it less accessible (because people have to learn a new scheme) or less useful (because it cannot be applied to all languages). So maybe you can help us find something that works better. Which pronunciation standard are you familiar with? And will it have the same accuracy and applicability that IPA has? —CodeCat 16:06, 3 October 2013 (UTC)Reply

I did a minor-yet-surgical edit at the Wikipedia part of the WMF when it comes to religion, bascially. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 02:17, 9 November 2013 (UTC)Reply

There is no simpler phonetic guide, Torturella. We’ve spent a millennium on writing English and a century or more on pronunciation guides, and what you see is the best there is.

Also, this is a volunteer effort. How would you like to learn IPA and help improve the dictionary?

The reason there is little difference, in this case, is that these two represent the same pronunciation (the vertical line, missing from one example, merely marks the place of stress). —Michael Z. 2013-11-09 03:04 z

Hello. I recently created {{la-decl-adj-table-m+f+n bgc}} and {{la-decl-1&2 bgc}}, after the need for such templates became clear in discussions at WT:RFV#auroleus. I'm eager to inform the Latin-language editors here of their existence and to receive feedback on them. Could someone who has the ability to do so post a statement about them on this project page, please? Thanks in advance. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 16:37, 8 November 2013 (UTC)Reply

I made two changes which could be added to the news:

1. All Polish noun inflection table templates, except {{pl-decl-noun-log}} and {{pl-decl-noun-zm}}, now support the parameter tantum. Use tantum=s to generate a singulare tantum and tantum=p to generate a plurale tantum.
2. There is a new template {{pl-decl-noun-masc-pers-a}} which consolidates {{pl-decl-noun-m-ta}} and {{pl-decl-noun-m-sta}}, and furthermore adds support for masculine personal nouns ending in -ca.

--Tweenk (talk) 01:46, 12 December 2014 (UTC)Reply

@Tweenk Latin noun declension-table templates have a parameter similar to |tantum=, except it's called |num=; might it be worth including |num= as a synonym of |tantum= in those Polish noun declension-table templates? — I.S.M.E.T.A. 14:27, 12 December 2014 (UTC)Reply

It's doable. What are the parameters for |num=? Also s and p? --Tweenk (talk) 17:14, 12 December 2014 (UTC)Reply

They're sg and pl in the case of the Latin ones. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 17:28, 12 December 2014 (UTC)Reply

OK, done; |num= should be an alias of |tantum=, sg as a value is an alias to s, and pl is an alias to p. --Tweenk (talk) 23:15, 13 December 2014 (UTC)Reply

@Tweenk: Thanks. :-) That sort of thing makes the interlinguistic learning curve for editing somewhat less steep. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 13:27, 14 December 2014 (UTC)Reply

So, is this going to appear on the news page? I made some further changes and now there are also templates for nouns with adjectival declension and manual overrides for specific inflected forms. Details at Category:Polish noun inflection-table templates. — This unsigned comment was added by Tweenk (talk • contribs) at 03:49, 19 December 2014 (UTC).Reply

@Atitarev, CodeCat, DCDuring, Lo Ximiendo As recent editors of this page, would one of you mind dealing with this, please? — I.S.M.E.T.A. 10:15, 19 December 2014 (UTC)Reply

Let's ask User:Kephir, he's also Polish like Tweenk and has good programming skills. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 10:22, 19 December 2014 (UTC)Reply

Update: {{pl-decl-noun-masc-pers-a}} is actually deprecated - putting {{pl-decl-noun-m-pr}} on the page without any parameters will do the right thing. Over the last few months I did substantial development on Module:pl-noun, so that now it handles 95% of nouns automatically based only on the gender.

This is a new template that integrates Module:pl-noun and Module:pl-adj to generate declensions for noun phrases. Each element can be specified in a manner very similar to existing inflection-table templates. --Tweenk (talk) 19:38, 3 February 2015 (UTC)Reply

Does anyone have any idea about the time when next English Wiktionary XML dump will be available? (I hope is not related to "Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees Elections" but I think that Foundation Board is also responsible for making these backups available to the public).--Xoristzatziki (talk) 03:42, 25 May 2015 (UTC)Reply

I do not know when the dumps will be available (I know that there were some issues a while back but I don't know if they are continuing) but I can promise you that the delay is not to do with the election. While the board oversees the foundation (which does indeed make the dumps public) they are not responsible for the day to day work on that and none of the engineers who take part in that area were working on the election. Jalexander-WMF (talk) 21:05, 30 May 2015 (UTC)Reply

The entry for 18th August should be removed or modified - the inclusion of categories in watchlists/recent changes has been backed out. Keith the Koala (talk) 12:51, 28 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

I'd mention User:OrphicBot. Now editors can pretty much not worry about {{also}} --Q9ui5ckflash (talk) 18:50, 27 September 2016 (UTC)Reply

What about it? I don't understand: what is so significant about November 14th for the addition to be dated so if the book was published in October. Cheers, --biblbroks_{дискашн} 14:32, 15 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

@Biblbroks: That's just the date that the notice was posted. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 14:34, 15 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

I guessed so... rather lately. Tho at first I didn't understand the addition at all. My opinion it should be reworded to something like: "An instructive read about a competitor has been noticed by the editors". Unless we link to the copy of the book somewhere it gives the impression that it is not our worth-while. After all it is our colleague that spotted it and contributed about it and as far as I can tell all other additions bear our traces with them. --biblbroks_{дискашн} 14:44, 15 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

Is ‘competitor’ really the right word here? Ƿidsiþ 14:55, 15 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

@Biblbroks: I've added a couple of the book's ISBNs. @Widsith: Ask DCDuring. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 15:48, 15 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

We compete for users and respect with them. Among the various things we claim to be is a historical dictionary of English. Obviously we also use them as a vital resource. We are in a position analogous to a box manufacturer that buys its cardboard from a company that also makes boxes: strategically vulnerable.

We can learn a fair amount about modern lexicographic practice from the book. The OED is unmatched among English dictionaries for its inclusiveness. They share with us a desire to cover the entire language and over its entire life. What other English dictionary does that? DCDuring TALK 16:55, 15 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

I seem to gather it now. It's just that I haven't checked the whole N4E list before: there are news that don't take into account that we as Wiktionarians reported on them. Should've done that. :-/ I never had the intention to question the latest news' worthiness but only the style of its reporting. Cheers, --biblbroks_{дискашн} 19:11, 15 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

As of February 25, {{label}} can use the data in Module:labels/data/subvarieties, if a language = "<language code>" field is added to the labels' data files. — Eru·tuon 01:02, 4 March 2017 (UTC)Reply

{{Template:table:German playing cards}} was created. --Jan Kameníček (talk) 23:40, 15 March 2017 (UTC)Reply

I recommend the following news item:

Please endorse or critique meta:Grants:Project/Intelligibility transcriptions or both, at the end of that page, on its talk page, or at Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/March#Please comment on adding pronunciation assessment.

Thank you for your kind consideration. James Salsman (talk) 06:11, 16 March 2017 (UTC)Reply

If an admin thinks this is of general interest, please add it. Recently we have added tagging for certain scripts to page titles, using the headword module and the {{DISPLAYTITLE:}} parser function. This should prevent them from displaying as boxes (tofu) for some users. The list of scripts for which tagging is added is found in Module:headword/data. Users are welcome to add more scripts to the list. — Eru·tuon 21:34, 12 May 2017 (UTC)Reply

@Metaknowledge Only admins can post here, that might be why. —CodeCat 21:21, 24 April 2017 (UTC)Reply

I was kind of hoping an admin would post my statement about the labels module above to the page, but since I didn't ask, I didn't get, I guess. — Eru·tuon 22:41, 24 April 2017 (UTC)Reply

It's still pretty inactive... —suzukaze (t・c) 12:34, 19 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

It's because all proposed changes are being voted down. —Rua (mew) 16:36, 19 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

Maybe we should start posting less important stories and even make up stories? --WikiTiki89 17:13, 19 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

Let's start with "Wikidata turns out to be Skynet in disguise". —Rua (mew) 17:47, 19 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

If we only had regular news like "(name of dictionary publisher) adds more than 1000 new words" Jberkel (talk) 14:42, 7 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

That'd be quite good, something like WT:MILE but with a brief curated review of some of the new stuff (like OED's "what's new" press releases). Not sure we're equipped for it. Equinox ◑ 14:56, 7 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

"External links" (shortly also named "External sources")

"External sources" is longer than "External links" (by two letters or one syllable), so it's correctly "lengthly also named" or just "also named". -84.161.36.86 03:17, 3 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

"Shortly" refers to the duration of its use, not its word length. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 03:20, 3 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

I think "briefly" is the word we're looking for. "Shortly" is generally understood to mean "in the near future", as in "I'll be with you shortly". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:00, 7 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

16 November 2017: Template:Uw-tilde is created to greet newbies who are not yet familiar with the signing process. --Sije (talk) 21:42, 19 November 2017 (UTC)Reply