Bonjour, vous êtes venu ici pour chercher la signification du mot Discussion utilisateur:Interwicket. Dans DICTIOUS, vous trouverez non seulement toutes les significations du dictionnaire pour le mot Discussion utilisateur:Interwicket, mais vous apprendrez également son étymologie, ses caractéristiques et comment dire Discussion utilisateur:Interwicket au singulier et au pluriel. Tout ce que vous devez savoir sur le mot Discussion utilisateur:Interwicket est ici. La définition du mot Discussion utilisateur:Interwicket vous aidera à être plus précis et correct lorsque vous parlerez ou écrirez vos textes. Connaître la définition deDiscussion utilisateur:Interwicket, ainsi que celles d'autres mots, enrichit votre vocabulaire et vous fournit des ressources linguistiques plus nombreuses et de meilleure qualité.
Pour signer tes messages dans les pages de discussions, tape trois fois le caractère ~. Avec un quatrième tilde s’afficheront la date et l’heure. Les articles ne sont pas signés. Nous utilisons parfois des sigles mystérieux pour communiquer entre nous : tu pourras trouver leur explication sur la page jargon.
Si tu viens d’un autre projet Wikimédia, n’oublie pas de mettre les liens vers tes autres pages perso.
Oui il s'agit d'un robot qui ajoute les inter-wiki. Quelque chose de très utile, je pense. PS les liens inter-langue n'ont pas marché, je les supprime, donc. Mglovesfun31 janvier 2009 à 14:11 (UTC)Répondre
Speed of bot
Dernier commentaire : il y a 15 ans3 commentaires2 participants à la discussion
Yes, I have flags on most of the big wikts, including fr. Sometimes I have to make edits on 20 or 30 different wikts for one title. ::I'm looking for titles that have lots of mismatched links, either missing or not symmetrical. And watching recent changes on all the wikts. Ullmann, he watches me work. Interwicket11 février 2009 à 16:48 (UTC)Répondre
Oui, I am debugging a new control sequence. Should be faster, once it stops failing ;-). The objective is to catch all missing links, not just those on pages that already have links or are new. And integrate into one task. In the meantime, birdy can do some ... Robert Ullmann
Wrong behaviour of robot?
Dernier commentaire : il y a 15 ans5 commentaires2 participants à la discussion
This robot changed in French "cardan" page:
-en:gimbal
+en:cardan
but "gimbal" is English for French "cardan"
English "cardan" page only mentions Spanish verb "cardar"
So it looks like there's an extreme confusion here... How can we change that?
Traduction : Non c'est déjà bon, ce n'est pas comme on le fait sur Wikipédia. Interwicket n'ajoute les inter-wikis que pour les pages strictement identiques. Donc jouer a un lien pour jouer, et non pas play, spielen, jugar, etc. Mglovesfun1 avril 2009 à 18:58 (UTC)Répondre
Oups je sais pas pourquoi je cause ici en anglais moi (grosse fatigue !). OK, j'ai fait une bêtise, je vais rectifier, merci pour ces précisions et pardon pour le dérangement. MathsPoetry1 avril 2009 à 19:03 (UTC)Répondre
Dernier commentaire : il y a 15 ans17 commentaires5 participants à la discussion
Hi, I see Interwicket removed link of comme d’habitude (see here). It removes it because english article uses non typographic apostrophe whereas french article use typographic apostrophe. Can you correct it ? Pamputt3 avril 2009 à 08:05 (UTC)Répondre
Yes, this is the only wikt to use it. (English) QWERTY keyboards only have ' (and, amusingly, `) but not ’. It seems very odd to me to use RIGHT SINGLE QUOTATION MARK for an apostrophe... (Yes, in rendering/typesetting. But in content? ;-)
See en:User:Interwicket/redirects for a discussion of this and many other issues. The English wikt links to redirects, but here the default is as it was, to not link to redirects, however useful. (Gerard was adamant that linking to them was somehow wrong (?), and unilaterally imposed that attitude on all the wikts while running RobotGMwikt.) There are quite a few cases of differing conventions between wikts; it isn't possible to compensate in code, it would involve a large and endlessly growing series of exceptions and special cases. (;-)
Also by using the redirects the local convention for any given entry can simple be changed around at will.
Note that the entry in the en.wikt en:comme d'habitude, which does link to redirects, has an iwiki that properly arrives at the entry here.
If you add a link to the redirect on the English wikt, Interwicket will not remove it, but the other interwiki bots will. (Which is why they are prohibited from running on the en.wikt, so as not to remove the links to fr.wikt redirects, etc, etc) Robert Ullmann3 avril 2009 à 12:09 (UTC)Répondre
Could you please ignore the difference between ' and ’ here on French Wiktionary? That surely causes a problem. Not all language versions have pages with ’, and Interwicket deletes interwiki links again and again. That is really annoying. — TAKASUGI Shinji (d) 26 avril 2009 à 01:40 (UTC)Répondre
I agree that this is an issue. One solution might be to change Interwicket (special case). Another solution might be to add redirects between the two kinds of apostrophes on en.wiktionary (and on all other wiktionaries as well), and that all interwiki bots accept links to redirects for wiktionaries. Lmaltier26 avril 2009 à 06:33 (UTC)Répondre
It may be "normal" for French, but it is wrong in English. The entry here at (for example) wasn’t, is incorrect, as an English word it should be at wasn't. (English keyboards don't have’ ;-)
It would be possible to "special case" this just for the French wikt, but there are many many special cases overall. Please see en:User:Interwicket/redirects. What we should do is enable linking to redirects on all wikts, and then all of the special cases can be handled as needed. (In this special case other wikts would either use ’ (U+2019) for French words, or redirect them to the usual ASCII apostrophe, as they prefer.)
And do note that this is the proper function of redirects in wikis, we just need to allow the interwiki links to use them; not linking to redirects was an extremely poor design decision (before my time) Robert Ullmann28 avril 2009 à 04:29 (UTC)Répondre
Sorry, but what you state is wrong. Just have a look to any book or magazine, you'll see that wasn’t is the normal typography. Actually, it's exactly the same in English and in French (and in almost all other languages):
Publishers use the typographic apostrophe.
Early keyboard designers chose not to include this apostrophe (just as they chose to propose a single key for 1 and for l). Their idea was the fewer keys, the better.
Neither AZERTY nor QWERTY keyboards have this key. This is why ' is more usual in Internet pages, whatever their language (but text processors usually correct this into ’).
Pardon me, but my family was in the printing business, and I grew up learning this. I've run a Linotype. It has (second row from the bottom in the center section, usually blue keys :-) a character (font matrix) called "quote", and one called "apostrophe". These are used in combination to set single and double quotes: `` '' and ` ', and apostrophe '. They are represented in ASCII (decimal 96 and 27), with a double quote character (22) added (not removed to reduce the number of keys) so as to provide reasonable rendering in monospace fonts. (which is all there were on computers ;-) The Unicode/ISO standards then misrepresented "left single quotation mark" (96, `) as "grave accent", and added a spurious "right single quotation mark" (U+2019) saying that should now be "apostrophe" as well (!). Which results in the lousy presentation `` '' and ` ', and apostrophe ' in some fonts (including here). But the US and British standards specify (27, ') as apostrophe, and real typesetters like the Linotype and the optical film replacements for the Linotype set apostrophes (code 27) correctly, with the glyph you call a "typographical apostrophe" ... (;-). Enough history? All of which is off the direct topic, which is how to make the redirects work, as you say. Robert Ullmann28 avril 2009 à 11:15 (UTC)Répondre
(I'll also point out that I did all my schoolwork on a Royal Deluxe manual made in 1926, and have thousands of hours on an ASR 33 Teletype, so I know how those code sets fed into ASCII etc. ;-) Robert Ullmann28 avril 2009 à 11:28 (UTC)Répondre
As far as I know, this part is incorrect:
>The Unicode/ISO standards then misrepresented "left single quotation mark" (96, `) as "grave accent",
That author is saying what he thinks should be done, given the present state; but he is wrong about the original characters. The two characters (60 and 27) come from the left quote glyph (called "quote") and the right quote/apostrophe glyph, called "apostrophe", used in hot-metal typesetting from 1886 into the 1980's. Check out the keyboard I referred to; very familiar to me. Look at the appearance of "Quote" and "Apostrophe" in the bottom middle (in the full size image). It got messed up with 27 being mis-represented as a "straight" quote in computer fonts (but never in typesetting); so now if gets hacked (by MS word notably, and fr.wikt), to try to make it "look" right; to the point where the right single quote code is "preferred" to force the desired appearance for apostrophe in poor fonts. Robert Ullmann28 avril 2009 à 17:04 (UTC)Répondre
I must say that I'm not a specialist. I misunderstood you: I thought that you were explaining that ’ was the normal character in French and that ' was the normal character in English. What I wanted to say is that the apostrophe character is the same in French and in English, which is very clear when you read books. You may disagree with Unicode/ISO, but we have to do with this standard, as we use it. I don't want to enter into theoretical considerations (I'm not competent), I only want to ensure that readers printing Wiktionary pages get a good result. Lmaltier28 avril 2009 à 13:11 (UTC)Répondre
As you note, the problem is that the screen fonts don't display (27, apostrophe) correctly (it should look like the glyph for right single quote) so people (not just fr.wikt!) (mis-)use U+2019 to the point where it becomes "preferred". (Oddly, the windows console screen font does it correctly!) A fine mess.
As I have written in en:User talk:Interwicket/redirects#Apostrophe, U+2019 (’) is the standard Unicode character for both apostrophy and right single quotation mark (U+2000-206F). U+0027 (') is supposed to have a vertical shape, because it is used not only for apostrophe but also for both left and right single quotation marks (U+0000-007F). The old typesetting machine actually doesn’t matter here.
Why is Interwicket removing the links from the English Appendix:Variations pages to the Frech /voir pages?
Dernier commentaire : il y a 15 ans3 commentaires3 participants à la discussion
Identity of title should only apply in mainspace. I realize that the /voir pages (e.g. am/voir) are technically in mainspace, but they function as an appendix, for which the English variations pages (e.g. Appendix:Variations of "am") are the closest equivalent. The links between these pages are, therefore, useful and should be kept. Cheers! bd2412T7 juin 2009 à 06:32 (UTC)Répondre
As you say, these are appendixes; they should be moved out of main namespace. Given the way they are used, they could and should simply be moved to Template (Modele) namespace. (The redirects might be left for the time being, so as not to modify any pages.) Robert Ullmann9 juin 2009 à 12:54 (UTC)Répondre
Dernier commentaire : il y a 14 ans2 commentaires2 participants à la discussion
Bonjour,
la page anglaise ne mentione que la forme verbale, pas le forme nominale, qui semble être workout en un seul mot. N'étant pas un spécialiste de la langue anglaise, je te laisse juge de la pertinence de ce que tu as écrit.
--Szyx 26 janvier 2009 à 23:57 (UTC)
MathsPoetry 1 avril 2009 à 19:05 (UTC)
