JeffDoozan

Hello, welcome to Wiktionary, and thank you for your contributions so far.

If you are unfamiliar with wiki-editing, take a look at Help:How to edit a page. It is a concise list of technical guidelines to the wiki format we use here: how to, for example, make text boldfaced or create hyperlinks. Feel free to practice in the sandbox. If you would like a slower introduction we have a short tutorial.

These links may help you familiarize yourself with Wiktionary:

• Entry layout (EL) is a detailed policy on Wiktionary's page formatting; all entries must conform to it. The easiest way to start off is to copy the contents of an existing same-language entry, and then adapt it to fit the entry you are creating.
• Check out Language considerations to find out more about how to edit for a particular language.
• Our Criteria for Inclusion (CFI) defines exactly which words can be added to Wiktionary; the most important part is that Wiktionary only accepts words that have been in somewhat widespread use over the course of at least a year, and citations that demonstrate usage can be asked for when there is doubt.
• If you already have some experience with editing our sister project Wikipedia, then you may find our guide for Wikipedia users useful.
• If you have any questions, bring them to Wiktionary:Information desk or ask me on my talk page.
• Whenever commenting on any discussion page, please sign your posts with four tildes (~~~~) which automatically produces your username and timestamp.
• You are encouraged to add a BabelBox to your userpage to indicate your self-assessed knowledge of languages.

Enjoy your stay at Wiktionary! Ultimateria (talk) 19:18, 11 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

Please check your code: {{syn}} doesn't work without a language code, and {{sense}} is not part of the synonym list. See carvallo, dobladora, Día de los Inocentes, and todo el tiempo, where I had to revert your bot due to module errors. Chuck Entz (talk) 03:21, 9 September 2020 (UTC)Reply

Thank you catching that. For what it's worth, I made all of those mistakes by hand when running the bot in a manual edit mode, so the blame is 100% on me. I'll build in some double-checking before using it like that again. Thanks! JeffDoozan (talk) 13:08, 9 September 2020 (UTC)Reply

Hi, could your bot also re-arrange synonyms for Portuguese entries? – Jberkel 19:48, 10 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

It's running now, it should be able to clean up ~8,000 of the ~10,000 Portuguese entries with synonyms. – JeffDoozan (talk) 16:55, 17 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

Great, thanks. So the bot doesn't make changes in ambiguous situations, which means that all remaining "Synonyms" sections (2000?) require human attention? – Jberkel 11:17, 18 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

That's correct, the bot won't make any changes when it encounters any sort of ambiguity when matching the synonyms to the glosses (eg, when a synonym has no {{sense}} and the word has multiple glosses). I have a wild idea of looking up the synonym's glosses and matching them against the word's glosses as a way of resolving some ambiguities. From my experience cleaning up the unhandled Spanish Synonyms, I'd estimate that could resolve at least half of the remaining 2000 entries, leaving the most ambiguous cases (gustar) in need of human attention. I'll do what I can to reduce the 2000 to something more manageable. JeffDoozan (talk) 13:21, 18 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

Ok, let me know how it goes, and maybe put a list of entries requiring attention somewhere, so the work can be distributed. – Jberkel 19:40, 18 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

We're left with 971 articles that need manual attention.JeffDoozan (talk) 15:26, 19 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

Hello,

Would you perhaps be interested in running a bot to replace all Inflection headers with Declension headers in Macedonian entries or subsections for nouns, adjectives, determiners and pronouns? Some will have three equal signs around them and others four. Since "Conjugation" has already been used for verbs, it is more logical to use "Declension" for nominal words, given that "conjugation" and "declension" are co-hyponyms of "inflection", such that having "Inflection" alongside "Conjugation" mixes degrees of specificity. Furthermore, the declension tables for nominal words use "declension" and "conjugation" in their internal title, and there is a general rule according to which nominal inflection templates are given names containing -decl-.

The change that I am proposing should only affect the bolded headers as they appear on a page when it is not being edited and not any headword-line templates or inflection templates. I am contacting you since you successfully took care of several other issues with Macedonian entries recently. Martin123xyz (talk) 08:48, 18 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Martin123xyz, It's a very simple bot job to rename every Inflection header to Declension in all Macedonian entries. Is that what you're asking for, or are there some Inflection headers that should not change (eg, in subsections outside of nouns, adjectives, determiners and pronouns)?

For reference, there are currently ~18,000 Inflection headers, ~6,000 Declension headers and ~7,000 Conjugation headers. JeffDoozan (talk) 13:36, 18 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

Yes, that is basically what I am asking for. As far as I am aware, there are no inflection headers that should remain as they are, because "Declension" and "Conjugation" cover all words and there are no cases where a single inflection table can be used for both a verb and a nominal word. I cannot think of any other scenario where "Inflection" would be the only possible choice. However, it is possible that a very small number of verb entries or subsections contain an Inflection header instead of a Conjugation header as well. In that case, those would need to be changed to "Conjugation". Could you check for the existence of Inflection headers in verb entries and subsections and program the bot based on your findings? Thank you in advance. Martin123xyz (talk) 13:54, 18 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Martin123xyz, I found and fixed two verbs that used Inflection instead of Conjugation and now the bot is running to rename all remaining Inflections to Declensions.JeffDoozan (talk) 14:31, 18 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

Thank you very much for the help. Martin123xyz (talk) 06:14, 19 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hi Jeff. Perhaps you could get your bot to make a note of all pages it doesn't add a DRAE link to - this would serve a couple purposes, firstly to find some errors and secondly to smugly say "ha, we are better than the DRAE coz we have all these words and they don't" QuickPhyxa (talk) 23:15, 18 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

@QuickPhyxa Such a list would be too large to be useful. DRAE has ~87,000 unique lemma words, we have ~82,000. We only share ~44,500 with DRAE. I'm still looking for a good way to divide that into a useful list of "hey, here are some words DRAE has that we don't" that could be of some use to human editors. JeffDoozan (talk) 23:32, 18 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

Those are pretty good numbers. QuickPhyxa (talk) 20:24, 20 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

when you start your bot to creat Spanish forms Amirh123 (talk) 16:28, 21 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

Yes. Your bot is creating lots of adjective and noun forms, that's great! MooreDoor (talk) 23:12, 23 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hello,

Would you by any chance like to create a list of all Macedonian adjectives which are currently formatted as comparable (with only {{mk-adj}} in the header, rather than {{mk-adj|-}}, which is for the ones lacking comparable and superlative forms) but which do not have comparative and superlative forms in the declension table, i.e. where the "c=1" parameter, which adds said forms, is missing? I could then open the pages of all such adjectives and add the c=1 parameter manually, essentially bringing the declension template in line with the headword-line template. This step should not be automatic because the adjective might currently be wrongly formatted as comparable when it is not, in which case I would add a hyphen to the headword-line template rather than adding the "c=1" parameter. Thank you in advance. Martin123xyz (talk) 12:16, 27 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Martin123xyz Here's your list. 483 matches out of 2528 total adjectives. JeffDoozan (talk) 13:06, 27 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

Thank you very much. Martin123xyz (talk) 13:09, 27 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

I have now gone through the list and fixed just about all of the entries (barring a few obscure adjectives that I don't feel knowledgeable enough about). Martin123xyz (talk) 14:11, 28 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

See diff. I doubt this is a common error, but I figured you should know. Ultimateria (talk) 22:47, 28 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Ultimateria: Thanks for the heads up. The bot doesn't currently parse {{form of}} - luckily it's only used on 39 pages and most of them are verbs forms. I'll make sure the bot learns to handle that and on the next run, it'll automatically clean up the duplicates. JeffDoozan (talk) 22:53, 28 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

Your bot blanked the page. DTLHS (talk) 20:28, 31 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

@DTLHS: Good catch, thank you. For now, I've reverted the bot edit on that page. It was blanked due to a bug that's been resolved: the lemma, fulano is technically a form of the Proper Noun Fulano, so the bot correctly removed the Noun form section, but failed to create the Proper Noun section. When the bot runs with the new database dump tomorrow, it should complete the page changes successfully (as well fulanos, which was also affected but not blanked because it has a Portuguese section) JeffDoozan (talk) 23:47, 31 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hello,

Could you please fix all Macedonian reference sections where the references are not preceded by a bullet point, as you did with the IPA transcriptions? Thank you in advance. Martin123xyz (talk) 11:35, 3 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Martin123xyz: All done. It fixed 94 entries. JeffDoozan (talk) 14:40, 3 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

Thank you again. Martin123xyz (talk) 14:41, 3 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hello,

Could you please compile a list of all Macedonian verbs with definitions that do not start with any label, i.e. which start directly with "# to", including those which have some definitions starting with a label and others starting without one? Until today's edit, се ороди (se orodi) belonged to this type of entry. I would like to fix them so that all verb definitions contain at least one of the labels {{lb|mk|transitive}}, {{lb|mk|intransitive}} and {{lb|mk|reflexive}}. Verb forms as well as verb lemmas with only a template in the definition (e.g. {{alternative form of}} or {{nonstandard form of}}) should be excluded. Thank you in advance. Martin123xyz (talk) 13:57, 10 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

Here's your list. 214 verbs. JeffDoozan (talk) 22:42, 10 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Martin123xyz: Oops, forgot to ping you. JeffDoozan (talk) 22:43, 10 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for the help. Martin123xyz (talk) 08:16, 11 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

What justification do you have for doing this? DTLHS (talk) 17:15, 14 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

@DTLHS "Preverb" isn't listed as an allowed header per Wiktionary:POS#Part_of_speech, but "Prefix" is. Since there were only 87 pages using Preverb and they all ended with "-", it seemed like it was a typo or a misunderstanding. Having now read the preverb entry, I can see that may have been the wrong assumption. I'm happy to revert all pages back to Preverb if you think we should keep Preverb as a POS. JeffDoozan (talk) 18:06, 14 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

You shouldn't change headers in languages that you don't know. Please revert your edits. DTLHS (talk) 18:07, 14 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

@DTLHS: All fixed, thank you for catching my mistake so quickly! JeffDoozan (talk) 18:49, 14 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hello,

I tried to create the category Category:Macedonian terms with red links in their headword lines with {{auto cat}} but it is empty, even though the Romanian and the Welsh equivalents, also created with that template, contain a great deal of pages. What code needs to be added and where so that the Macedonian page fills up too? I primarily need it in order to see which verbs have an aspectual pair in their headword line template for which no page has been created yet (i.e. verbs which have {{mk-verb|impf|pfn=X}} or {{mk-verb|pf|impfn=X}} where X is a redlink and n is an optional cardinal number (pf, pf2, pf3 etc.); for example, се распламти (se rasplamti) and мрази (mrazi)). If the page I have created cannot be made to work, could you create the list of verbs fitting the above description by other means? Thank you in advance. Martin123xyz (talk) 13:30, 18 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Martin123xyz:, I have no idea, I haven't used the category system much, but I'd be interested in learning. If you post this on WT:BP, and get a technical explanation of the changes needed, I can help you implement them. If not, I can write something to generate the list for you. JeffDoozan (talk) 13:42, 18 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for the reply. I have posted my query in the Grease Pit, since it is for technical problems, whereas the Beer Parlour is for proposals. Martin123xyz (talk) 14:06, 18 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

After receiving a reply in the Grease Pit, I looked at the language-specific headword modules and found that the redlink categories are populated by codes such as the following (for Welsh):

for _, inflection_set in ipairs(data.inflections) do

for _, inflection in ipairs(inflection_set) do

if not inflection:find("%[%[") then

local title = mw.title.new(inflection)

if title and not title.exists then

table.insert(tracking_categories, langname .. " " .. poscat .. " with red links in their headword lines")

end

end

end

end

I do not feel comfortable using such advanced code. Could you implement something like this for Macedonian at Module:mk-headword? Martin123xyz (talk) 09:32, 19 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Martin123xyz: Thank you, that's exactly the code that it needed! I created Category:Macedonian verbs with red links in their headword lines, which is just now starting to populate. You may need to create additional categories for other parts of speech that have inflections or plurals. JeffDoozan (talk) 02:02, 22 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

Thank you very much. For the time being, I do not need categories for parts of speech that have inflections in their headword lines, since I am focusing on creating new lemma pages, rather than pages for noun plurals, for example. I will leave those to a bot, when someone agrees to program one for Macedonian. Martin123xyz (talk) 07:45, 22 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

Have seen the latest change by your bot removing the "s" on the Idioms header on the Japanese sumo page. Weird, but doesn't this break the flow of other headers like Derived terms, Proverbs, and the like (may apply to other languages other than Japanese), that are in the plural? ～ POKéTalker（═◉═） 11:05, 24 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Poketalker: Before the bot edits, there were 7000+ pages using "Idiom" and only 400 using "Idioms", so it seems that the majority has already favored the singular spelling. Per WT:ELE, the rule seems to be that we prefer the singular for all parts of speech or, more broadly, for all things that would have definitions (including Proverb, without the s) and the plural for everything else (Derived terms, Alternative forms, Translations, Usage Notes, References). If you think if it as "Here are definitions for term when used as a noun/proverb/idiom" it makes sense to use the singular.

Per WT:POS, "Idiom(s)" is an explicitly disallowed section. Given its widespread usage that seems like something worth changing and while we're doing that we can decide which spelling should be used. If you have strong feelings about the category and its naming and you can get consensus to permit it and to use the other spelling, and I'll be more than happy to run the bot again to rename Idiom -> Idioms. JeffDoozan (talk) 12:24, 24 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Poketalker:. I see now that the "Idioms" section in 相撲 was actually a L4 section below the L3 Noun section, so it's not subject to the some POS rules. I will fix the bot to prevent future mistakes and undo the mistakes it already made. JeffDoozan (talk) 22:28, 24 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hello,

New categories have been created for the classification of Macedonian nouns by inflection type, and in all cases in which it was possible, I have incorporated the categories into the declension templates. For example, {{mk-decl-noun-f-e}} now automatically fills Category:Macedonian feminine nouns with vocatives in -е, which is why there are already 901 pages there (and the number is growing as I write). However, there are other inflectional categories for which a single generic template is used, the inflectional differences being dealt with by means of individual parameters. For example, masculine nouns with plurals in -ови and those with plurals in -еви use the same template, and the correct forms are generated by indicating the plural stem, including -ов- or -ев- in the second parameter. In such cases, the inflectional categories need to be added manually. Is there a way to generate lists of all the noun pages to which a particular category needs to be added so that I don't have to go through the list of all Macedonian nouns and spot the relevant cases one by one? For example, could a list be generated for Macedonian masculine nouns where the indefinite singular ends in a consonant X, with an undetermined number of characters before it, and the indefinite plural ends in Xови (to be checked in the output of {{mk-decl-noun-m}}, e.g. столб), so that I can open those one by one and add the category Category:Macedonian masculine nouns with plurals in -ови? I have written a code at {{mk-decl-noun-m}} which adds the category through pov=1.

For plurals in -еви, the singular will end in X and the plural in Xеви, but there are also cases where the singular will end in XYеви and the plural in Xеви (with deletion of the final consonant, e.g. рој), so those might be more difficult to collect into a list. Finally, for Macedonian nouns with final palatalization, the singular will end in -к, -г or -х and the plural in -ци, -зи or -си respectively (e.g. ученик). If it is not possible to compile lists for these, I will just go through all masculine nouns - it's not a very important issue.

Thank you in advance. Martin123xyz (talk) 08:22, 13 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

Does this search have the results you're looking for with your first example? If so, you can adjust it to find the other endings you're looking for. JeffDoozan (talk) 13:01, 13 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

I changed it to search for -ов- rather than -б- (the consonant before the plural morpheme does not need to be specified), but it also includes many false positives from Bulgarian and Russian, e.g. радон, because it has the related adjective радонов, even though it does not have a Macedonian plural *радонови. What can be written so that it looks for -ов- only within the curly brackets of {{mk-decl-noun-m}}, with an undetermined number of characters to the left and to the right (to cover cases like зет, with {{mk-decl-noun-m|зет|зетов|voc_sg2=зете}} in the declension section)?

The solution will work similarly for -еви, but not for cases where -к, -г, and -х pluralize in -ци, -зи and -си, because the plural -и will not be in the source code and because simply searching for the consonants ц, з and с in the source will return too many false positives, including Macedonian masculine nouns which already end in -ц, -з and -с, like светец, with the plural светци.

Martin123xyz (talk) 13:34, 13 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

I have another idea: to search for -овите and -евите in pages (the definite forms, which are distinctive enough to exclude many false positives). However, when I write *овите or *евите, with the asterisk representing an indeterminate number of letters to the left, I get no results, even though this works in the other direction: ов* gives me complete results for pages containing words starting with ов-. Martin123xyz (talk) 13:37, 13 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Martin123xyz: If you search for insource: /\{\{mk-noun\|m/ insource: /\{\{mk-decl-noun-m[^}]*бов/, you'll get results only inside {{mk-decl-noun-m}} JeffDoozan (talk) 13:42, 13 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for the help. This still gives me false hits like вдовец which contains -ов- inside the root, but I think these are few enough to be ignored. Do tell me if you come up with a solution for the plurals in -ци, -зи- and си with palatalization. Martin123xyz (talk) 13:45, 13 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

I have come up with a solution for all the categories where insource: is not specific enough: I export Macedonian nouns into Excel and use Excel functions to order them by their final letter or letter sequence. This enabled me to identify all Macedonian nouns ending in к, г and х. I then used more Excel functions to wrap them in -, so that I could copy paste them into a test page on Wiktionary, efficiently open them as links, and add the parameters assigning them to the relevant category. The whole categorization process is now advancing well. I just thought I'd post this in case it gives someone else useful ideas. Martin123xyz (talk) 09:19, 14 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

Good job making this list, BTW. Could you rerun it, as I think we've corrected most of them already? Br00pVain (talk) 22:06, 16 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

It's generated from the database exports that run on the 1st and 20th of each month. When I have new data, I'll update the list. JeffDoozan (talk) 00:14, 17 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

Also, Category:Requests for translations of Spanish usage examples is another useful cleanup list, but could be better - can you make a list of any untranslated quotations that appear more than once? I mean things like a costa de and coordinadamente, which have exactly the same quote. They should probably be done first to avoid repeating work, and I probably was responsible for most of them when adding them to help me study conectores for the C2 Spanish exam I did earlier this year (I passed, BTW) Thanks again for generally not being a substandard user. Br00pVain (talk) 22:13, 16 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

That was a compliment, BTW Br00pVain (talk) 22:13, 16 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Br00pVain: I appreciate the high praise. Here's your reward for passing the C2: Congratulations! JeffDoozan (talk) 00:14, 17 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

Another Spanish list that would be useful is one containing "someone from ..." or "of from from" but without being in Category:es:Demonyms. Any chance of whipping that up? Br00pVain (talk) 22:16, 16 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

How do they currently get classified into Category:es:Demonyms? Is it an explicit tag, or a template that includes them? I'm generating reports based on the wiki source code so I have to break it down into something like "page source contains this and does not contain this" JeffDoozan (talk) 00:14, 17 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

I always just manually classify it, either with [[:Category:es:Demonyms]] or {{C|es|Demonyms}} Br00pVain (talk) 11:14, 17 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Br00pVain: Here's your list. JeffDoozan (talk) 16:00, 17 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

Pretty good. We don't want any verbs in their, of course. Or stuff already under Category:es:Nationalities. I'll work through these... Br00pVain (talk) 20:18, 18 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Your bot wrongly corrected several Yoruba entries with ==Alternative terms== to ==Related terms== when they should have been corrected to ==Alternative forms==. E.g. Ọwọ, ọna, ẹnu, etc. Benwing2 (talk) 05:26, 5 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Benwing2: Thank you, I'll adjust the code and fix the 20 affected entries. While you're here, it looks like our bots have different ideas about the appropriate level of that section at ao, ua, pari, airo, ilu, agho. My bot adjusts section depth relative to the parent section so that any child with a section level > parent+1 is adjusted to parent+1 and will make this adjustment to all sections on a page whenever it's already making a more substantial edit. From your edit at aio, it looks like you might agree with the N+1 depth in this specific circumstance, but I wanted to get your feedback so we can avoid any unintentional bot edit warring before I fix the titles and depth of the other entries my bot edited at atupa, Ọwọ, ẹdun, ẹnu, ọna, aghọfẹn, aafin, ọrọkọrọ, sọrọ, ẹni, eewọ, ariro and aọn. JeffDoozan (talk) 13:56, 6 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

What my bot does is indent ==Related terms==, ==Derived terms==, ==Declension==, etc. to L4 unless there are multiple etymology sections (==Etymology 1== etc.), in which case they are indented to L5. In some circumstances they are left alone at whatever depth they are currently at, e.g. if there are two or more parts of speech above it in the same etymology section or if it's at L3 and after all etymology sections. This is because in some circumstances people want these headers to apply to all parts of speech in a given etymology section or to all etymology sections. I did not anticipate having these headers above the part of speech, which is why they are getting intended to L4 even in that case. My bot handles ==Alternative forms== specially and recognizes that it may occur above all parts of speech, in which case it should be L3. If you fix those entries to use ==Alternative forms== and put them at L3, my bot will leave them alone, but I will see about fixing it to recognize other headers above parts of speech (where they should not be ...) and leave them alone as well. Benwing2 (talk) 02:00, 7 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hello. Unfortunately, WingerBot has converted all {{bor}} templates to {{bor+}} in Indo-Aryan language entries: diff, thereby making this project page empty. What should I do now 😬? Is it possible for you to regenerate a list of all pages that formerly employed {{bor}}— possibly by tracking down archived revisions? Really sorry for the trouble cause, I should have noticed this development beforehand. Thank you. ·~ dictátor·mundꟾ 16:01, 17 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Perhaps the revision history could be of some help… ·~ dictátor·mundꟾ 16:32, 17 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Inqilābī: Updated JeffDoozan (talk) 18:06, 17 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Thanks a lot :) !! ·~ dictátor·mundꟾ 16:50, 18 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Could you use your bot to remove inflectional info from translation tables? Specifically under adjective headers, I see e.g. flojo m, floja f, flojos m-p, flojas f-p. I would limit the search to Spanish to start and only those that include a masculine or epicene gender. Also, I may be the only one who is bothered by this, but I believe in cases like e.g. flojo m, suelto m, etc, the gender should be removed. This would be consistent with our headword templates for Romance languages. Ultimateria (talk) 06:53, 21 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Ultimateria: It should be possible. Just to clarify, using smooth as an example, the bot should make the following change:

{{t+|es|sofisticado|m}}, {{t+|es|sofisticada|f}} -> {{ t+|es|sofisticado}}

and in nominative:

{{t+|es|nominativo|m}} -> {{t+|es|nominativo}}

JeffDoozan (talk) 23:35, 21 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Yes, exactly. Ultimateria (talk) 03:35, 22 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Ultimateria: Here's a list of the easiest changes, note that the bot will aggressively resolve forms to their "core" lemma, including forms that are "alternative spellings" (see Beige: beige -> beis, and Good: buen -> bueno, güeno -> bueno). JeffDoozan (talk) 22:38, 25 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Looks good to me! I hadn't thought to remove alt spellings but I think we're better off with fewer of them in t-tables. Ultimateria (talk) 01:00, 26 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hello,

Could you please create a list of Macedonian verbs whose verbal nouns and adjectival participles are red links (in the conjugation tables, e.g. the slots occupied by the blue links носен and носење in the table for носи), so that I can create them? I have been creating these forms manually for all verbs but I have probably missed some. Verbs where no verbal noun and/or adjectival participle exists, i.e. where the corresponding slots are filled by a dash rather than a red link, should not be taken into consideration.

Thank you in advance Martin123xyz (talk) 14:10, 6 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Martin123xyz:, My tools mostly use the wikidumps of the page source, so I just see {{mk-conj-и-и|impf|нос}}, and have no way of knowing if should generate носен and носење or when it would generate a dash. If there's a simple rule like always take the paramater нос + ен or ење, I can make something for you. If it's more complex than that, it might be easier to have someone modify {{mk-conj-и-и}} to generate redlink categories for those slots. JeffDoozan (talk) 16:10, 6 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

There are unambiguous rules, but they are complex and differ depending on the conjugation template. The generation of verbal nouns and adjectival participles is also regulated by special parameters. I was hoping that your tools could straightforwardly look at the output rather than the source code, but if that is not the case, I think it would be best for me to generate my own lists of red links manually. Thank you anyway. Martin123xyz (talk) 20:39, 6 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

The category Category:Buddhas wrongly contains some English entries— they should be relocated to Category:en:Buddhas. Thanks in advance! ·~ dictátor·mundꟾ 18:41, 20 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Inqilābī: I don't have a good way of doing that with my bot tools, sorry. JeffDoozan (talk) 18:47, 20 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

You just need to change {{cat}} to {{c}}, as in diff. Seems quite simple… ·~ dictátor·mundꟾ 18:52, 20 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Inqilābī: So '{{cat|en|Buddhas}}' should be replaced with '{{c|en|Buddhas}}' on these pages? JeffDoozan (talk) 19:01, 20 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

Yes. ·~ dictátor·mundꟾ 19:02, 20 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Inqilābī: Done. JeffDoozan (talk) 23:10, 20 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hey, sorry to bring this up again, it seems like some of the pages with {{l}} and {{affix}} were skipped for no reason? I took care of the lists, could you send you bot again? Vininn126 (talk) 11:33, 8 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Vininn126: Done. I also updated the list of skipped pages. JeffDoozan (talk) 17:20, 8 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

Awesome thank you. I'll do these. Vininn126 (talk) 17:28, 8 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hi JD. I hope your bot can mass-create lots of the forms soon - it'll make finding missing lemmas to create a lot easier! Notusbutthem (talk) 13:24, 15 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Per an RFM discussion, Category:Rhinos is to be moved to Category:Rhinoceroses. In order to do that the former category would have to be emptied; for that, would it be possible for you to change all [[Category:LANG:Rhinos]] to [[Category:LANG:Rhinoceroses]], {{topics|LANG|Rhinos}} to {{topics|LANG|Rhinoceroses}} (similarly for {{c}}, {{C}}, {{top}})? —Svārtava (t/u) • 09:20, 27 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

Can you create a list of Spanish lemmas ending in [x]ismo that don't link to [x]ista (where [x] is an identical root) and vice versa? Ideally the -ismos and -istas would be sorted separately. I'll probably request more of these but I wanted to start with a short-ish list. Ultimateria (talk) 04:32, 29 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

Here are -ismos without -istas and vice versa. I don't have a good way a checking links, so it just checks for any occurrence of the text, let me know if you need a better filter. The lists will update automatically twice a month when a new database dump is available. JeffDoozan (talk) 15:54, 29 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Ultimateria: and here's a ping that I forgot in the above message. JeffDoozan (talk) 15:56, 29 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

Thanks! I forgot to specify though, I was looking for all existing pages to make connections rather than find redlinks. Could you filter out redlinks? Ultimateria (talk) 16:19, 29 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Ultimateria: Done. JeffDoozan (talk) 19:48, 29 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

I finally migrated your list over to my own userpage, in case you wanted to remove it from yours! It's something I'm still gonna have to slowly chip away at. Thanks again! Vininn126 (talk) 13:00, 20 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Back in January, your bot made this change, from:

{{es-verb}}

# {{reflexive of|es|refugiar}}

to

{{head|es|verb form}}

# {{es-compound of|refugi|ar|refugiar|se|mood=infinitive}}

I'm not sure why you made this change, but it's not really correct. refugiarse is a pronominal verb meaning "to take shelter"; it's not literally refugiar + -se. (refugiar is a less common transitive verb meaning "to shelter, to provide shelter for".) The current convention is to place pronominal meanings like this on the non-reflexive page, and have the reflexive equivalent use {{reflexive of}}. Benwing2 (talk) 03:27, 22 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Benwing2: At the time of that edit, refugiar didn't have any senses tagged as pronominal or reflexive, so the bot made the change using the best available information. Now that refugiar has a sense tagged as reflexive, the next time the bot runs against a database dump containing the new changes, it will re-edit refugiarse and replace {{es-compound of}} with {{reflexive of}}. JeffDoozan (talk) 14:25, 22 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

... and friends are excellent lists! Some expressions are so basic that it's shameful we didn't have them until now. I'll duly work through the lists, doing the easy ones first. GreyishWorm (talk) 22:46, 27 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

@GreyishWorm: User:JeffDoozan/lists/es missing drae is the new hotness. It will get updated automatically, and it has a fancy comment section where you can dump lines that don't need to be fixed and shouldn't be regenerated by the bot. JeffDoozan (talk) 18:53, 29 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

I have a bot request to move lemma sections above non-lemma sections in Spanish entries (or any other languages you see fit). The worst offenders for Spanish are female equivalent nouns under adjective forms, and adjectives under past participles. Ultimateria (talk) 02:47, 29 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

I like that idea. In the event that the sections are not alphabetized, should it preserve the original order, or should it sort them? I'm slightly in favor of sorting alphabetically, but there are cases like leche where the non-alphabetic sorting might be intentional. For reference, here's a list of pages with forms before lemmas, and a list of pages where the sections are not alphabetical. JeffDoozan (talk) 15:43, 30 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

Lemma sections will be more complicated to sort. If possible they should follow the "primary" sense which can be difficult to determine. E.g. In Spanish demonyms, it's clear that the noun senses are extensions of adjective senses. The current format at leche seems ideal to me because the noun is much more common than the interjection, and also more "relevant" (whose exact meaning I can't pin down). In English dive, it's hard to say the verb is much more relevant than the noun, but the verb does predate the noun at least. Unfortunately these might be best handled on a case-to-case basis. Ultimateria (talk) 00:07, 3 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Ultimateria: I could sort by the most frequently used POS for a given entry, so that van#Spanish would sort the verb form before the noun lemma, although it would likely produce inconsistent results for demonyms. Otherwise, I can preserve the lemma ordering and sort all forms alphabetically by POS beneath them. JeffDoozan (talk) 00:37, 3 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

The latter option sounds better one to me. I'm not sure non-lemmas should go above lemmas even when they're more frequent. Ultimateria (talk) 01:39, 3 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Ultimateria: This should be done now. Let me know if you notice anything else that could use some bot work. JeffDoozan (talk) 23:16, 3 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

Great, thank you! Ultimateria (talk) 01:27, 4 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

Can you replace the headwords of these past participles to {{pt-pp}}? Ultimateria (talk) 00:52, 6 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Ultimateria: All done. JeffDoozan (talk) 02:08, 6 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

I undid the change on derroto that looked like an exception. JeffDoozan (talk) 02:10, 6 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

Could you apply {{comparative of}} and {{superlative of}} to Latin forms? See diff, where I removed a now redundant link to the lemma in the headword template. Ultimateria (talk) 03:17, 2 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Ultimateria: This looks like it'll need some manual review, here's a dump of the 'comparative of' forms where the bot has removed pos= and generated a line with {{comparative of}} but without removing the existing sense lines. You can delete or edit the lines that you think should be deleted. If there are entries that should be completely unchanged without removing pos= or generating the {{comparative of}} line, delete all the lines (but leave the ____xxx_____ header). JeffDoozan (talk) 02:18, 3 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

  Done. Ultimateria (talk) 03:41, 4 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Ultimateria: Fixed! Here's the list of 'superlative of' forms. JeffDoozan (talk) 22:46, 4 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

  Done. Ultimateria (talk) 23:29, 4 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

Your bot just did a run of converting [infinitive]la to use {{es-verb form of}}. The problem is that these aren't reflexives, which are the only pronoun-suffixed inflections that the module has been programmed to deal with. That means all of them are in CAT:E. Also pinging @Ultimateria, Benwing2.Chuck Entz (talk) 03:00, 6 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

Looking further, I see that things are more complicated than that, since most of those have no module errors. Something's seriously wrong, but I no longer have any idea what. Chuck Entz (talk) 03:04, 6 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Chuck Entz {{es-verb form of}} does know about pronoun suffixes like -la, but something like adormilarla is indeed not a form of adormilarse, because the latter is reflexive and the former isn't. I'm not sure which changes you're referring to that don't cause module errors but they might have -sela or something suffixed. Benwing2 (talk) 03:06, 6 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

Jeff, I would recommend making your bot change messages more descriptive than just 'Spanish: Replaced v forms'. If you look at some changes made by my bot you'll see the change messages are long and indicate exactly what is being done and why. This makes it possible later on to understand why a particular change was made. Benwing2 (talk) 03:11, 6 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Benwing2: Yes, I figured that out after my first post, which prompted my second one. The problem seems to be that some edits are using the bare infinitive and some are using the reflexive one, and I have yet to see any pattern that would explain why. I'm afraid I'm not being much help here... Chuck Entz (talk) 03:16, 6 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Chuck Entz Yeah, the existing mess as shown by examples like this is why I didn't fix up these cases by bot. I'm guessing Jeff's bot is looking to see whether there's an existing non-reflexive verb and picking the reflexive one otherwise. This probably works in most cases but there are almost certainly edge cases where this messes up. Benwing2 (talk) 03:22, 6 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

Okay, I see now what's going on. As you say, the ones using the reflexive are those where the lemma is reflexive and the infinitive is a form-of entry. I'm not sure why a reflexive verb would even have non-reflexive suffixed forms, but, then, I only got up to second-year high school Spanish, so there's a lot I don't know. Chuck Entz (talk) 03:28, 6 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Chuck Entz, @Benwing2 many thanks to two of my favorite editors for jumping in on this so quickly. As Ben pointed out, this is a case of my bot believing incorrectly that adormilar + la could be a possible form of adormilarse. Since this specific conversion is a new capability of the bot, I did review the first few bot edits manually to ensure that it wasn't generating module errors (a feature of {{es-verb form of}} that I really appreciate, since it surfaces corner cases like this) before stopping the run for unrelated errors. Unfortunately, as Chuck noticed, the first few edits didn't include these reflexive-only verbs and I didn't check CAT:E afterwards so I missed this.

While I fix the bot not generate incorrect forms of reflexive verbs, what should I do with the pages for non-existent forms that still appear in CAT:E, revert them or flag them for speedy delete? JeffDoozan (talk) 13:18, 6 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

My first inclination would be to do both: revert the bot edit, then tag them so the information isn't lost. I notice that these seem to be all created in a run by NadandoBot back in 2018, so we should probably get @DTLHS' opinion on this. I'm reluctant to just delete them based on my limited knowledge of Spanish. Chuck Entz (talk) 16:09, 6 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

Okay, they've all been reverted. For DTLHS' reference, since the pages are no longer in CAT:E, here's a list of the affected pages aborregarla, abstenerla, achaparrarla, achicopalarla, adentrarla, adormilarla, adueñarla, agermanarla. If we decide to delete these, I can generate a list of all the similar pages that match the reflexive-only-infinitive + la pattern. JeffDoozan (talk)

E.g. https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=aband%C3%B3nenos&oldid=64931347 versus https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=aband%C3%B3nenos&oldid=69687428. The latter is lacking Category:Spanish forms of verbs ending in -ar and Category:Spanish combined forms, as well as language about. Is this on purpose? Is there some consensus to remove these? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:43, 7 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Koavf: The bot is replacing {{es-compound of}}, which is difficult for human editors to use and contains no way to validate that the form is authentic with {{es-verb form of}} which automates all of the hard word and validates that the form actually matches the verb's conjugation (see also: previous thread on this page). Any category changes reflect the behavior of the new template and not a deliberate decision change categorization. If those categories happen to be useful or important (I would argue they're not), it would be possible to adjust {{es-verb form of}} to generate the equivalent categories. JeffDoozan (talk) 00:02, 8 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

When you swap usage notes and declension, the wording in the usage notes may need to be reworded. For example, in နဝမ (navama), after the per-gender feminine stems have been listed as part of the declension section, it makes sense to explain, "နဝမဳ (navamī) is the Mon writing of the feminine", but before presenting the declension, one should rather say "The Mon writing of the feminine is နဝမဳ (navamī)". Perhaps the explanation should be in free form writing in the declension section; the design of notes is taking a long time as it is not easy. --RichardW57 (talk) 17:01, 4 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hi @RichardW57, Forgive my lack of knowledge of Pali, but is that note something that could be automatically generated by {{pi-decl-noun}} whenever it has "gender" and "stem" parameters? If so, it's probably better to adjust the template rather than manually creating and maintaining Usage notes. JeffDoozan (talk) 17:09, 4 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

That's the aspiration, but it's especially complicated with adjectives, which are currently just built by fishing together noun declension templates. In this case, I'd ideally detect that the stem is also used in Burmese Burmese script Pali, though I think that detection should probably be done manually, as with the two Thai script Pali writing systems, and the multitudinous Lao script Pali writing systems. In a parallel case, the neuter singular of the relative pronoun ya and demonstrative pronoun/adjective ta (total of 3 lemmas per writing system) needs a tailored note for each of the eleven or twelve basic writing systems for a total of 33-36 forms. --RichardW57 (talk) 11:55, 5 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

That sounds pretty far out of my league. I see there are about 130 Pali entries with a Usage notes section and I'm happy to help get them adjusted to your liking. I see three options, feel free to suggest another:

• If you think they all need a minor rewording for their new position above Declension, I can extract them to one page where you could edit them all at once.
• If you prefer the freeform entry, I could extract the existing text and place it at the bottom of the Declension.
• I can make them child sections the Declension section and adjust my bot to leave them alone. JeffDoozan (talk) 01:44, 6 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

@RichardW57 I forgot to ping you on the earlier reply. JeffDoozan (talk) 14:35, 6 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

To my pleasant surprise, the other cases of my being flexible seem to have survived the transposition. There was just enough introduction, so we can leave them in the preferred, not mandatory order. Are you reviewing the changes, or just assuming that the commutator is trivial? --RichardW57 (talk) 14:57, 6 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

@RichardW57: I wrote the bot very carefully to only operate where there is no ambiguity and I reviewed the proposed bot edits before running it to verify that it operates as expected. I have not reviewed the text of each individual page for logical consistency. JeffDoozan (talk) 15:16, 6 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I was wondering if you could mark AutoDooz's formatting clean-up edits as minor. I'm getting a lot of emails because many of the entries are on my watchlist. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 00:26, 6 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Justinrleung:   Done. My apologies, I thought the bot flag was enough to suppress the notifications, I had no idea I was spamming all of Wikipedia. JeffDoozan (talk) 01:16, 6 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, and I appreciate you running the bot! — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 03:20, 6 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Justinrleung But note that swapping sections round without reviewing the text is not minor. And yes, I too have had a flood of notifications, with, as it transpires, just one bad edit unless one considers draft policy violations. --RichardW57 (talk) 15:01, 6 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

@RichardW57: I can see what you mean. I would think they're minor enough (like relatively uncontroversial and no content is being changed) to be marked as minor if it's run by a bot, but if you think otherwise, I am not too opposed to taking that off (and letting the notifications flood in again). — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 15:08, 6 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

@justinrleung: Most sections' content is fairly mechanical. However, 'usage notes' contain a greater element of composition, and could easily include 'above' and 'below' to reference other material. I don't know if it's a useful compromise, but perhaps transpositions should be consider minor unless 'usage notes' or 'trivia' are transposed. I would say that in general, transpositions are more likely to be minor if done by a human rather than a bot; one can hope for greater checking of subtle effects from a human. --RichardW57 (talk) 23:37, 6 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

I've just read (reread?) Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2015-12/Usage notes. It would seem that the usage notes following the Pali declension tables were in the right order, but perhaps should have been subordinated to the inflection section, as suggested by JeffDoozan above. They're still close, but not afterwards as formally required. Unfortunately, L5 headings do not suggest their status outside tables of contents even when they are at level 5, let alone level 6! I think I should raise this in the Beer Parlour. --RichardW57 (talk) 23:37, 6 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

Scrub that. The positioning clause was scrubbed in 2015. Usage notes are no longer required to follow what they talk about. The only defence for having them after the declension section is 'flexibility'. --RichardW57 (talk) 23:47, 6 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

Would it be possible to make a list of Spanish nouns with any definition marked as "m. y f." in the RAE that is not marked as m/f here and also has no f= parameter in the headword? And on a related note, could you make a list of Spanish nouns whose f= parameter is not the default output for the pagename? I've come across a few errors that were mistyped before the template overhaul. Ultimateria (talk) 03:15, 14 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Ultimateria: Here are not just mf, but all DRAE gender mismatches, and overriden feminine forms JeffDoozan (talk) 23:42, 14 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Ultimateria: I improved the mismatch detection on DRAE gender mismatches it now lists any Spanish nouns on Wiktionary that don't match any of the genders of the corresponding DRAE entries. Hopefully this makes it easier to identify any mistakenly gendered nouns on Wiktionary. JeffDoozan (talk) 15:28, 15 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

Great, thank you! I did sort of abandon this when I saw the number of false positives. Ultimateria (talk) 19:37, 15 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

Can you remove |m= parameters from Spanish nouns whose only definition is just {{female equivalent of|es|X}}? I'll review the ones with glosses inside or outside the template, and any with additional senses.

This is a holdover from the old acceleration code that has since been removed because of redundancy between the headword and definition lines, but should probably be included in special cases (most of which already have glosses). Ultimateria (talk) 05:06, 10 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Ultimateria:   Done, here are the items with glosses or additional senses. JeffDoozan (talk) 15:49, 10 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

[1] This edit was a mistake because the last further reading section applied to both etymologies, whereas the ones nested below the etymology only applied to their respective senses. 70.172.194.25 03:03, 22 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

You're right, thank you. I'll fix the bot and find and fix any affected pages. JeffDoozan (talk) 14:21, 22 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hello! Check this out. It looks like a mistake to me. Gorec (talk) 18:50, 3 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Горец: It is a mistake (and easy to fix, too), thank you! JeffDoozan (talk) 18:54, 3 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

Needs deleting. I think you muddled it with surtir efecto :) Half Norwegian Dude (talk) 12:50, 19 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

Yes, my mistake. Good catch! JeffDoozan (talk) 14:08, 19 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

Well, Jeff, you keep having to clean up my etymology-heading messes. I do appreciate your graciousness in helping me learn – albeit ever so slowly, and mostly by trial, error, and reversion – the subtleties of Wiki layout. 8-) – HelpMyUnbelief (talk) 21:48, 21 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

@HelpMyUnbelief: No worries, keep up the good work! JeffDoozan (talk) 22:06, 21 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hi! I've noticed that your bot is changing a lot of Akkadian Cuneiform/Logogram entries reverting the order of the "Sign values" and "Etymology" sections. The correct order is:

1. Sign values
2. Etymology
3. Logogram

Would you be able to fix all those entries that now appear in the wrong order Etymology > Sign values > Logogram? Thank you! — Sartma ^{【𒁾𒁉 ● 𒊭 𒌑𒊑𒀉𒁲】} 12:30, 4 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Sartma:   Done Thanks for the clarification. I remember looking at some Akkadian entries when I was trying to figure out originally where "Sign values" should go, but I guess I looked at the wrong entries or just messed it up when I coded the order list! They're now all correctly sorted Sign Values > Etymology > Logogram. JeffDoozan (talk) 15:25, 4 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

And we plunge from the erudite heights of Akkadian cuneiform back down to something on my level...your AutoDooz bot moved the Synonyms section for this (short and simple-structured) entry from its own section to a hideable line under the (single) definition. For my future reference – is the template the preferred format now even for entries whose definitions don't have multiple senses? – HelpMyUnbelief (talk) 09:06, 8 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

@HelpMyUnbelief: When editing Spanish always use {{syn}}. For other languages, use {{syn}} unless the entry already has a separate Synonyms section in which case you should use {{sense}} to specify the exact sense the synonym applies to (see: medicine) JeffDoozan (talk) 15:11, 8 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hi JD. I hope your bot can mass-create lots of the forms soon - it'll make finding missing lemmas to create a lot easier! Van Man Fan (talk) 23:25, 21 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Van Man Fan: I just had it add forms for the most common 250k words in the google ngrams corpus (we were only missing 700!) so anything that's still a redlink is either a form of a lemma we don't have or a form that's used infrequently in the ngram corpus. If you're working through a specific list of words, let me know and I can have the bot clear out those forms for you. JeffDoozan (talk) 01:06, 23 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

Thanks! How about those in User:DTLHS/eswikipedia and its subpages? I'm currently plodding through User:DTLHS/eswikipedia/7 Van Man Fan (talk) 08:13, 23 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Van Man Fan:   Done through /8. Pages that were created with just forms but that should have lemmas will show up on User:JeffDoozan/lists/es_forms_with_drae_lemmata on April 1. JeffDoozan (talk) 19:27, 23 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

Excellent teamwork :) If I have any quibbles, it is that Autodooz is missing a trick by creating yaruros but not yarura or yarura. Might as well get the whole set, right? Van Man Fan (talk) 21:33, 23 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

Can you do all the subpages? Van Man Fan (talk) 19:26, 29 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

I'll do everything with at least 7 uses, which will go through the middle of /10. If you make it past there with the lemmas, I can keep going. Note that User:JeffDoozan/lists/es_missing_drae only includes words with > 5000 uses in the Ngram corpus and I can always lower that limit if you want more words to work on there. My hunch is that it'll probably surface more interesting words than those with only 6 uses on Spanish Wikipedia. JeffDoozan (talk) 23:06, 29 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

Love you, Jeff. That should probably be enough for now. It's true, most of the es.wikipedia words are pretty boring these days. Van Man Fan (talk) 02:12, 30 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

Please check. Chuck Entz (talk) 16:35, 24 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hey, the Czech updates got me thinking, could we switch all instances of {{col3}} on Polish and Old Polish lemmas to {{col-auto}}? Vininn126 (talk) 13:02, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Vininn126: I can do that, do you want to change just {{col3}} or {{col2}}-{{col5}}? JeffDoozan (talk) 15:33, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

If those exist, then those should be changed too. {{col-auto}} is best for readers. Vininn126 (talk) 15:37, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Vininn126: Okay, it's running now, should be done in an hour or so. JeffDoozan (talk) 16:00, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

I'm cleaning up the Czech col-auto's, I think the "Multiple l's" section could easily be converted, looking at it. Convert all the l's into a single col-auto, and if it has |g=, I say just get rid of it. The other two remaining sections I think will require more attention. Vininn126 (talk) 16:36, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

I think we can reduce a lot of the text_outside_template section, because a lot of it is "}} se". I think we can safely delete the se (it's a reflexive particle and those aren't usually saved in the derived terms sections). Vininn126 (talk) 16:43, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Vininn126: I fixed up the pages with the "se" text, but I think I'll leave the "Multiple l's" for manual cleanup because there aren't a ton of them and I can foresee some corner cases that would take longer to code exceptions for than to manually edit. In case it's easier for you as an editor, you can just clean up the errors the bot's complaining about rather than converting everything by hand to {{col-auto}} and then I can run the bot again to do the conversion. Also, I didn't notice that you had edited the error page so your changes just got overriden when I updated it to excluded the "se" pages. Sorry! JeffDoozan (talk) 17:55, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

Oh, sorry! And thanks for the help. I can slowly work on the remainders. Vininn126 (talk) 18:03, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

I have gone through the list. Thanks for the help! Vininn126 (talk) 00:12, 28 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

Could you do the same for Maltese entries? There are probably some leftovers. Thanks in advance. — Fenakhay ^{(حيطي · مساهماتي)} 15:52, 11 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

• Screw Czech and Polish. Do it for all languages! Van Man Fan (talk) 19:25, 29 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

  Actually, don't screw those languages. I used to feign ability in both of them, and edit in them. I have a soft spot for the pl/cs editors Van Man Fan (talk) 19:32, 29 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

  • Especially Vinn. Best editor of the year Van Man Fan (talk) 19:33, 29 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

    <3 To be called out by Wonderfool like that, what an honor! Vininn126 (talk) 20:14, 29 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

    • Kinda awkward, but I meant this guy. Van Man Fan (talk) 21:53, 29 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

      That's actually me. Vininn126 (talk) 21:56, 29 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

      • • • • Your English has got slightly better since then Van Man Fan (talk) 22:17, 29 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

  I'll run it on Spanish since you're probably the most active editor on Spanish Related/Derived terms. Here are the Spanish sections that it can't parse confidently. If there's consensus for running it on other languages, I'm happy to do so. JeffDoozan (talk) 22:58, 29 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

• Thanks again. I'm not sure what I should do with those errors, though Van Man Fan (talk) 02:14, 30 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

  Replace them with {{col-auto}} manually. Vininn126 (talk) 09:57, 30 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

Man, I'm really sorry for these 3 quick-fire messages. It's like the time when I learned that Erutuon (talk • contribs) could make a list of pretty much anything, so I got them to make increasingly random ones, like the most reverted editor, all the Wonderfool accounts, the most thanked and thanking editors, and which editors stayed up until ridiculous times in the morning (it was basically just Equinox...) Van Man Fan (talk) 19:30, 29 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

The request is a French version of User:JeffDoozan/lists/es missing drae. User:JeffDoozan/lists/fr missing AF Van Man Fan (talk) 19:31, 29 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

I can make a list of missing lemmas pretty easily. Sorting it by frequency of use is a little trickier, but let me see what I can do. JeffDoozan (talk) 23:07, 29 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hi, {{R:TLFi}} was renamed to {{R:fr:TLFi}} some months ago, and I am currently doing a bot run to rewrite all the old usages, so you should update your bot script that adds these if you haven't already. Benwing2 (talk) 04:30, 2 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Benwing2: Thanks, I hadn't noticed the change. I'll update the bot accordingly. JeffDoozan (talk) 14:18, 2 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

Why did you just delete that? Vininn126 (talk) 21:18, 2 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

Nevermind, it was duped for some reason, sorry for the bother! Vininn126 (talk) 21:19, 2 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hi, your bot has converted 1500+ bare references to {{cite-text}}, which does not exist, so these instances are currently displayed as red links to the template (Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:cite-text). Could you please fix this? Thanks, Einstein2 (talk) 20:33, 23 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Einstein2: Thanks! Temporarily fixed by redirecting Template:cite-text to Template:cite-book until I can get the bot to rename them to the appropriate citation templates. JeffDoozan (talk) 20:39, 23 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

Could you run a quick bot job to replace stacked images with the {{multiple images}} template?

For example, replace

[[File:something1|thumb|something2]]
[[File:something3|thumb|something4]]
[[File:something5|thumb|something6]]

with

{{multiple images
|direction = vertical
|image1 = something1
|caption1 = something2
|image2 = something3
|caption2 = something4
|image3 = something5
|caption3 = something6
}}

The template both looks cleaner and stops the page layout from getting messed up on the mobile site. Thank you! Ioaxxere (talk) 22:32, 23 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Ioaxxere: I assume it should also handle "Image" as an alias of "File" and "thumbnail" as an alternative of "thumb". What about the extended image syntax parameters, what should it do in the event of

[[Image:MENISCAS 180.jpg|thumb|right|An optical telescope.]]
[[File:Telescope render.jpg|thumb|Telescope render]]

or

[[File:Finger = 4 open.JPG|thumb|right|200px|A human hand, showing its four fingers and thumb.]]
[[File:Mallet Xray anterior.png|thumb|right|200px|An X-ray of human fingers.]]
[[File:Fishfinger1.jpg|thumb|200px|Fish fingers.]]

? I'm guessing it's okay to drop any existing values for Border, Location, Alignment, Size, Page and Langtag and pass along Link, Alt, Caption JeffDoozan (talk) 20:16, 24 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

In those two cases, the "200px" and "right" parameters are redundant since those are the default values anyway. If you encounter some other alignment or size, I guess it would need a manual check but I doubt that nonstandard values are ever necesssary. Ioaxxere (talk) 22:18, 26 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

Also: using {{multiple images}} with a single image when that image is directly below a {{wikipedia}} template fixes a visual issue on mobile (example). This is a bit of a band-aid solution, but it would be great if you could do that as well. Ioaxxere (talk) 23:01, 26 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hey. Thanks for these guys. Are you aiming to templatize all the quotes on en.wikt? That obviously would be freaking awesome Wonderfool April 2023 (talk) 20:59, 24 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Wonderfool April 2023: I'm aiming to templatize as much as can be reasonably automated but there are still over 50k untemplated quotes outstanding each seemingly using its own subtle format variation. JeffDoozan (talk) 21:07, 24 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

• OK, good luck with it! Wonderfool April 2023 (talk) 21:21, 24 April 2023 (UTC)Reply
• …& send the invoice to "no templates" Equinox :) – Jberkel 17:19, 25 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Thanks for catching this one. I don't remember adding it, so I was probably drunk at the time Wonderfool69 (talk) 19:26, 26 May 2023 (UTC)Reply