Template talk:pt-noun

Gender
Something is wrong with this template. Even though the gender has been specified where the template is in use, it still adds the Category:Portuguese nouns lacking gender (see escroto). —Stephen 14:23, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Documentation
This badly needs documentation. How do you specify feminine forms, if not using f=. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:35, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Overhaul needed
If this is to replace, and  it needs to be more like say,. Right now it's not possible to specify other gender forms such as feminine forms for masculine nouns, and vice-versa. I'm pretty sure I could do this quite easily without losing any data (I've done it before) - does anyone object, either to a specific part of this proposal, all the whole thing? Mglovesfun (talk) 13:24, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I've created which does exactly this. Will make the switch tomorrow if not objected to. Mglovesfun (talk) 14:19, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I rescind my previous statement that the template should automatically display an -s plural. It's quite useful to be able to use (or f or mf) without an automatic plural a it avoids incorrect plurals. And -es is a common plural ending as well, just like it is in Spanish. --Mglovesfun (talk) 12:11, 26 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Just for the record, this template still automatically adds s, leading to incorrect plurals all over Wiktionary. Championing mediocrity, we are. —  [Ric Laurent] — 17:48, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Missing plurals
It would be useful to add something to the code to find missing noun forms. Something similar is in place at Template:es-noun, and missing forms are categorised at Category:Spanish nouns with missing plurals and Category:Missing Spanish noun forms. --Type56op9 (talk) 15:56, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Masculine listed in feminine lemma forms
Hi! I came across the entry and I've noticed this template doesn't list the masculine form. Most of the time, there's no problem, since the masculine form is the lemma, but in this case, the lemma is the feminine form and the masculine one the derivation. It just feels weird that the word is nowhere in the entry. - Sarilho1 (talk) 19:58, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
 * In the case of nouns, both the masculine and feminine forms are the lemma. Both appear in Category:Portuguese lemmas and Category:Portuguese nouns. —Rua (mew) 11:01, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
 * But what about words like ? It has  (masculine ', masculine plural ')  which looks pretty awkward to me, especially when compared with  which has    Personally, I think m and mpl should be parameters, as with it-noun. 158.106.52.10 20:13, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

redone
I have redone this template, similarly to adjectives. Please pay attention to the new parameter structure, thanks! It should be much easier to use than before (although the differences are less dramatic t han for adjectives). Benwing2 (talk) 21:20, 11 September 2022 (UTC)


 * Obrigado! —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:22, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Can you explain the change from mf to mfbysense? Why not simply use mf? I really appreciate that most multiword expressions are no longer categorized as irregular plurals. That's a great change. - Sarilho1 (talk) 14:15, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
 * mf and mfbysense are different; the latter means "masculine or feminine according to the natural gender of the referent" and categorizes into Category:Portuguese masculine and feminine nouns by sense while the former just means "either masculine or feminine" (usually with no difference in meaning). Formerly this was distinguished respectively in pt-noun by  and  . I made the change because the new system is how Module:gender and number (and hence several languages) works. See Category:Masculine and feminine nouns by sense by language. If you're concerned about the length of the identifier , we could potentially shorten it although I'd be a bit concerned that it would become obscure; as it is it may not be obvious at first what "by sense" means. (Sometimes the terms epicene or common gender are used to refer to   nouns but I've avoided them because each of them have two conflicting definitions; in fact we already have a "common" gender in Module:gender and number that uses the definition that's appropriate to Dutch and Danish rather than to Portuguese and Latin.) Benwing2 (talk) 00:31, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I understand now. I would indeed prefer a shorter identifier, in particular because I think most Portuguese words that take both genders are "by sense". A possibility to shorten it would be to make  different from , making the later "by sense" by default, but your argument about clarity is reasonable and I see that you've implemented the identifier in other languages already so I think that it should be preferable to keep it in this, more standardized, way. - Sarilho1 (talk) 09:41, 13 September 2022 (UTC)