Thread:User talk:CodeCat/Afrikaans/reply (8)

I've just followed the same approach as the Dutch templates, which show the same notice. I've found that it works quite well; since adding it, a lot of editors have taken notice and added the missing forms on Dutch nouns. Some have even become regular Wiktionary editors after doing so. So I really don't think it should be removed unless there is a very pressing reason to.

The plural is really a lot like the present participle, except even less predictable. You can't generally know whether to add -e or -s, but even for plurals in -e there are also spelling changes that you need to account for, which the template can't predict or account for (even a module could not). This is why I opted to make the plural just required in full for Dutch nouns, and I don't think it is any problem to do it for Afrikaans nouns as well. The only downside is that you have to type a bit more, but I'd rather be correct than lazy.