Talk:айсберг

Declension adoption
@JeffDoozan @AutoDooz Hi, the bot's edit just deranked the declension on this Bulgarian section (which I set to L3 because it was common to both etymologies) to make it apply to only one noun, leaving the other noun with no declension. Can this be prevented in future, or is what I'm doing not principally meant to be done? Kiril kovachev (talk・contribs) 01:01, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
 * @Kiril kovachev Hi! This is just my opinion and I'm open to changing it, but I would say that putting a L3 declension after multiple L3 etymologies in should be avoided because 1) putting it lower down on the pages makes is possible that readers could miss it since it's not where it "usually" is (especially in the case that one of entries have many senses, lots of derived terms or long usage notes) and 2) it makes it slightly easier for future editor to introduce ambiguity to the page if they add another etymology, or add an adjective or a verb to one of the existing etymologies (possibly not an issue in Bulgarian, but something that might happen in other languages). Just as a point of reference, the Spanish verb duplicates a huge conjugation table for each verb even though the conjugation is shared by both etymologies of the verb. JeffDoozan (talk) 23:59, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
 * @JeffDoozan Okay, I guess it would be easier if I just duplicated it then. I personally think it's neater to have only one, which is the same thing we already do with pronunciation (I don't know if you do that for Spanish, but other editors did it too for Bulgarian), but as you say it may be better this way. And if it'll avoid this trouble for you with AutoDooz, even better. I will duplicate the tables for now then. Thanks for your thoughts, Kiril kovachev (talk・contribs) 00:08, 5 July 2024 (UTC)