User talk:Benwing2/2022

Header levels
You might want to check for this: DTLHS (talk) 23:42, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

How we will see unregistered users
Hi!

You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:14, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Replacement of unnecessary redirects (part 6)
Here is the next batch:



Also, when you are free, please update URLs in the format  to   (change   to   and the hex sign before   to a slash) in quotation and reference templates and their documentation pages. It appears that the Internet Archive changed the form of its URLs at some stage.

Thank you. — SGconlaw (talk) 20:18, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Should be fixed. You should check the following, where the format may have changed more drastically and the old format didn't quite match the format you mentioned above:

Benwing2 (talk) 06:45, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Template:RQ:Dunglison Dictionary
 * Template:RQ:Fitzgerald Great Gatsby
 * Template:RQ:Housman More Poems
 * Template:RQ:Lawrence Phoenix
 * Template:RQ:Melville Billy Budd


 * Thanks! I have also checked and updated the URLs in the five quotation templates you mentioned above. — SGconlaw (talk) 13:38, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Replacement of unnecessary redirects (part 7)
Here is the next batch:



Thank you. — SGconlaw (talk) 08:58, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Done. Benwing2 (talk) 20:02, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks! — SGconlaw (talk) 13:46, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

Header levels
See ; when I split the etymologies I forgot the "1" in "Etymology 1". I see 299 entries with "Etymology 2" but not "Etymology 1" that may need re-leveling. Ultimateria (talk) 23:43, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
 * What search are you using to find such entries? I am not super familiar with using MediaWiki search. I see 121 entries that my bot touched that are missing ==Etymology 1== but have some higher Etymology section (my bot script flags them but doesn't ignore them, which it probably should). Benwing2 (talk) 00:44, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I fixed those 121 entries manually. Benwing2 (talk) 01:52, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I just searched "etymology 2" -"etymology 1". At least half the results appear to be section headers. You can see weird stuff at e.g. третья. Ultimateria (talk) 01:39, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * There were more mentions than I thought. I took care of the actual section errors except ~10 weird cases that I'm not sure how to handle. Ultimateria (talk) 02:01, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Replacement of unnecessary redirects (part 8)
Here is the next batch:



Thank you. — SGconlaw (talk) 17:58, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Done. Benwing2 (talk) 08:51, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks! — SGconlaw (talk) 21:15, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

More Header Levels
Does your bot run on all languages, or just on a list of approved languages? I notice it fixed French agnelle but not Finish ainoihin, although that might also be the weird placement of ==Alternative forms==. I have a list of pages with empty sections that seems to almost double as a list of sections in need of some help from your bot. JeffDoozan (talk) 18:44, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I have been running language-by-language, going down the frequency list, mostly on lemmas. So far I have skipped Chinese, Japanese, Vietnamese, Korean and Thai as I felt more vetting was needed of the code for these languages due to language-specific weirdnesses. ainoihin got skipped because it has only non-lemma forms on it, although I have run it on non-lemma forms of a few languages (English, Spanish, Italian, Latin). I can run the bot on the pages on your list. Benwing2 (talk) 06:28, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I actually ran the bot on all the languages represented by the pages in your list, excluding the CJK ones. Benwing2 (talk) 05:08, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your consistently excellent work here! I hope you come up with a good solution for the ==Pronunciation== mess. If you're looking for other oddball sections beyond Adjectival Nouns, I have a list. JeffDoozan (talk) 19:07, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

CAT:Nouns with other-gender equivalents by language
It seems like upon using the |m or |f parameters in the headword, this category is created. But not when the formatting is different, as in সম্পাদিকা. Would it be possible to categorize pages like that one as well? Thank you. ·~  dictátor · mundꟾ  18:52, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
 * If you use it will automatically categorize into a subcategory of 'nouns with other-gender equivalents'. Benwing2 (talk) 03:35, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

Replacement of unnecessary redirects (part 9)
Here is the next batch:


 * , →  – there is a "deprecated" tag on this template, but I can't find any associated discussion. If you think it can be deleted, the  template should be moved into a "Further reading" section at the bottom of each entry – it appears that since  is a box, it is placed at the top right corners of entries.
 * , →  – there is a "deprecated" tag on this template, but I can't find any associated discussion. If you think it can be deleted, the  template should be moved into a "Further reading" section at the bottom of each entry – it appears that since  is a box, it is placed at the top right corners of entries.
 * , →  – there is a "deprecated" tag on this template, but I can't find any associated discussion. If you think it can be deleted, the  template should be moved into a "Further reading" section at the bottom of each entry – it appears that since  is a box, it is placed at the top right corners of entries.
 * , →  – there is a "deprecated" tag on this template, but I can't find any associated discussion. If you think it can be deleted, the  template should be moved into a "Further reading" section at the bottom of each entry – it appears that since  is a box, it is placed at the top right corners of entries.
 * , →  – there is a "deprecated" tag on this template, but I can't find any associated discussion. If you think it can be deleted, the  template should be moved into a "Further reading" section at the bottom of each entry – it appears that since  is a box, it is placed at the top right corners of entries.
 * , →  – there is a "deprecated" tag on this template, but I can't find any associated discussion. If you think it can be deleted, the  template should be moved into a "Further reading" section at the bottom of each entry – it appears that since  is a box, it is placed at the top right corners of entries.
 * , →  – there is a "deprecated" tag on this template, but I can't find any associated discussion. If you think it can be deleted, the  template should be moved into a "Further reading" section at the bottom of each entry – it appears that since  is a box, it is placed at the top right corners of entries.
 * , →  – there is a "deprecated" tag on this template, but I can't find any associated discussion. If you think it can be deleted, the  template should be moved into a "Further reading" section at the bottom of each entry – it appears that since  is a box, it is placed at the top right corners of entries.
 * , →  – there is a "deprecated" tag on this template, but I can't find any associated discussion. If you think it can be deleted, the  template should be moved into a "Further reading" section at the bottom of each entry – it appears that since  is a box, it is placed at the top right corners of entries.
 * , →  – there is a "deprecated" tag on this template, but I can't find any associated discussion. If you think it can be deleted, the  template should be moved into a "Further reading" section at the bottom of each entry – it appears that since  is a box, it is placed at the top right corners of entries.
 * , →  – there is a "deprecated" tag on this template, but I can't find any associated discussion. If you think it can be deleted, the  template should be moved into a "Further reading" section at the bottom of each entry – it appears that since  is a box, it is placed at the top right corners of entries.
 * , →  – there is a "deprecated" tag on this template, but I can't find any associated discussion. If you think it can be deleted, the  template should be moved into a "Further reading" section at the bottom of each entry – it appears that since  is a box, it is placed at the top right corners of entries.
 * , →  – there is a "deprecated" tag on this template, but I can't find any associated discussion. If you think it can be deleted, the  template should be moved into a "Further reading" section at the bottom of each entry – it appears that since  is a box, it is placed at the top right corners of entries.
 * , →  – there is a "deprecated" tag on this template, but I can't find any associated discussion. If you think it can be deleted, the  template should be moved into a "Further reading" section at the bottom of each entry – it appears that since  is a box, it is placed at the top right corners of entries.
 * , →  – there is a "deprecated" tag on this template, but I can't find any associated discussion. If you think it can be deleted, the  template should be moved into a "Further reading" section at the bottom of each entry – it appears that since  is a box, it is placed at the top right corners of entries.

Thank you. — SGconlaw (talk) 21:25, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
 * This is done. (Actually, everything but the changes were done yesterday.) Those latter changes required semi-manual handling; luckily there were < 30 pages using the old templates. You can delete those two templates along with, which is used only for these two templates. Benwing2 (talk) 08:46, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I went ahead and deleted, , and also , which you seem to have missed in the previous batch (#8). Benwing2 (talk) 04:38, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Actually, I thought some of the Shakespeare redirects, if understandable and especially if the full name of the play is rather long, might be retained (like, , , and ). — SGconlaw (talk) 05:30, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I see. Do you want me to undelete ? Benwing2 (talk) 05:32, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Sure, thanks. — SGconlaw (talk) 05:36, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
 * OK, done. Benwing2 (talk) 05:40, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Replacement of unnecessary redirects (part 10)
Here is the next batch:


 * (retain as redirect) →
 * (retain as redirect) →
 * (retain as redirect) →
 * (retain as redirect) →
 * (retain as redirect) →
 * (retain as redirect) →
 * (retain as redirect) →
 * (retain as redirect) →
 * (retain as redirect) →

Thank you. — SGconlaw (talk) 18:06, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Done. Benwing2 (talk) 19:36, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks! That was quick. — SGconlaw (talk) 20:10, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Replacement of unnecessary redirects (part 11)
Here is the next batch:


 * , [retained as shortcut] →
 * , [retained as shortcut] →
 * , [retained as shortcut] →
 * , [retained as shortcut] →
 * , [retained as shortcut] →
 * , [retained as shortcut] →

Thank you. — SGconlaw (talk) 20:42, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Done. Benwing2 (talk) 22:35, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks! — SGconlaw (talk) 17:55, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Replacement of unnecessary redirects (part 12)
Here is the last batch (for now):


 * [retained as a shortcut] →
 * [retained as a shortcut] →
 * [retained as a shortcut] →
 * [retained as a shortcut] →

You might want to do bot runs from time to time and update the results at "User:Benwing2/english-quotation-templates-redirects" to check for other quotation template redirects. Thank you. — SGconlaw (talk) 18:00, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Done, and I updated User:Benwing2/english-quotation-templates-redirects. Benwing2 (talk) 18:50, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks! — SGconlaw (talk) 20:18, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

errors
Thanks for catching lots of Wonderfool errors. I've generated loads lately, lol! Br00pVain (talk) 02:16, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Request for help
Hello, can you help me,, with this module? I'd like to have an IPA template for Romagnol language that provides the pronunciations without insert them! If you will, I can describe here the rules of the Romagnol pronunciation.--BandiniRaffaele2 (talk) 18:07, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Replacement of unnecessary redirects (new batch, part 1)
Hello, here is the first of the new batch:


 * (to be kept as a shortcut), →
 * (to be kept as a shortcut), →
 * (to be kept as a shortcut), →

Thank you. — SGconlaw (talk) 20:46, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Done. Benwing2 (talk) 02:40, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks! — SGconlaw (talk) 04:39, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Superseded characters in Ukrainian declension
дихання shows the loc. sg. ди́ханѭ, ди́ханѣ, диха́нѭ, диха́нѣ. I don’t know who or what or when but I report the result, which does not conform current Ukrainian and affects all the nouns that end in -ння and have this. Fay Freak (talk) 18:49, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you. It was a change made by User:Mzajac almost a year ago; I need to figure out how to undo the effect in reverse transliteration. Benwing2 (talk) 02:30, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi. Sorry if I screwed something up, but I can’t trace where’re that comes from off the top of my head. Can you link to the diff? That looks like the alphabet for Middle Ukrainian or Old East Slavic. —Michael Z. 2022-01-20 02:47 z  02:47, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I see. Thanks. I guess I had no idea how reverse translit worked or where it would show up. —Michael Z. 2022-01-20 02:54 z  02:54, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi. Must be this one: . I am curious how letter was used in old Ukrainian spellings and the choice for the transliterations. Is that an equivalent of the Russian, only used in loanwords from Russian? --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 02:57, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
 * The nineteenth-century yaryzhka (mandatory imperial alphabet for “Little Russian”) used it, but possibly others of the many proposals. —Michael Z. 2022-01-20 03:05 z  03:05, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks, "ё" should work as currently in Russian or Belarusian: should be "sljózy", also spelled, according to the article and  (also ), should give "čórnyj". Modern Ukrainian spellings:  and . Modern Russian:  and , note the translit. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 03:41, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

Plural of mass nouns
Hi Benwing2, I’ve never done this before so please let me know if I’m not following protocol!

I see part of WingerBot’s job is to add pluralizations to nouns that are lacking them. Of course some nouns are “mass nouns”, which are already both singular and plural in the same form (like “deer”). WingerBot added a pluralization of “ringworms”, which I believe is one of those cases.

At some point someone added “usually uncountable”, but unlike “fishes” or “salts”, I don’t think “ringworms” EVER has a pluralized usage.

I haven’t done enough Wiki editing (and _none_ on Wiktionary) to know how to handle this other than here on your talk page, which I just learned from WingerBot’s User page.

I would welcome any edifying you can send my way! I don’t even have a signature lol — Best, Cailan<3
 * Hi. Welcome to Wiktionary! I have moved your comment to the end. The best way to add a comment to someone's user talk page is to click the + sign on the top of the page, next to the "Edit" button. That will prompt you for the subject line and text, and add it to the bottom of the talk page. As for ringworms, my bot did not actually create that entry. If you look at the bottom of the history, you'll see it was created by User:RJFJR, who does not appear very active any more. If you Google for "ringworms" you can actually find many examples, some of which are certainly quotable according to Wiktionary's attestation criteria. Here is one, for example, from the Library of Congress: Google Books has several as well:  BTW you should sign your posts by typing four tildes at the end, like this:  . Benwing2 (talk) 04:11, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I would add that, while it's true that ringworm is a disease rather than a countable organism like an actual worm, you can have multiple types of ringworm, which would be refered to as "ringworms", and I'm sure there are at least a couple of other exceptions to its normal uncountability. Chuck Entz (talk) 04:26, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

Translations / anagrams levels
DTLHS (talk) 20:04, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks. In general what the bot did is correct, as ==Translations== should be indented under the Noun. Here the strangeness is that Anagrams is wrongly placed above Translations, instead of at the end. Benwing2 (talk) 20:50, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Beyond ==Anagrams==, it looks like your bot also found ==Translations== mistakenly placed after other sections including ==See also==, ==References==, and ==Usage notes==. I've got a list of Translations sections that appear outside of a POS section that coincides with places your bot could have run into trouble. JeffDoozan (talk) 15:01, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I'll take a look tomorrow. Benwing2 (talk) 06:44, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I went through and tried to fix up the errors in your list. This required significant manual effort; the pages had all sorts of mistakes in them. Benwing2 (talk) 04:04, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/173.206.1.109
Look familiar? Chuck Entz (talk) 08:10, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Replacement of unnecessary redirects (new batch, part 2)
Here is the next batch:



Thank you. — SGconlaw (talk) 18:27, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Done. Benwing2 (talk) 04:03, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks! — SGconlaw (talk) 12:35, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

and, ,
While looking at our entry for, I noticed a curious omission. exceptionally, retains synthetic passive forms (first/third person singular, second person singular , plural , unmarked for tense), but they are missing from. It could be argued that they're better left out of the template due to their anomality, but I'm unconvinced by such a hypothetical argument, as there is ample precedent for the inclusion of forms exclusive to a verb or a limited number of them in conjugation tables. Another possible solution would be making some sort of specialised conjugation table, but that seems somewhat inelegant. Given your work on and Module:ang-verb, could you change  so it can accomodate the passive forms? (Feel free to dismiss this if you don't think it's worth handling these in .) Hazarasp (parlement · werkis) 12:35, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Campbell's Old English Grammar mentions only and ; not sure  exists. Potentially we could add them to the conjugation table; I'm not sure it makes sense to stick them in the headword. Benwing2 (talk) 17:42, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I agree with you that it would be inadvisable to modify to display these forms; I meant to refer to the conjugation table/. As for, it's attested in line 3 of the . Hazarasp (parlement · werkis) 02:24, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

Template redirects
Hi. Can you please stop deleting template redirects? Notusbutthem (talk) 12:20, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
 * No. Benwing2 (talk) 17:40, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

"fix for cny; hopefully won't break anything"
Chuck Entz (talk) 13:26, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Another bot job
Could we send the bot to remove any *'s before ? it's a small thing but increases consistency. Vininn126 (talk) 14:38, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Yup, I am running a bot job to find the pages that need fixing and will then do a run to fix them. Benwing2 (talk) 02:36, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

I think this is the last one
I went through the non-lemmas and added pl-p to the ones that needed extra care. The rest I think we can apply (because we're gonna work on not splitting liquids in the IPA module itself). Vininn126 (talk) 14:09, 3 February 2022 (UTC)


 * (as in I covered all the ones that ABSOLUTELY need a respelling). Also, you can have the bot skip the ones that have multiple etymologies, I covered those, too. Vininn126 (talk) 21:43, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
 * OK. Presumably you want (without params) added to the remaining non-lemma pages without pronunciation? Just checking to make sure. I did a test run of this and it output 4 warnings: User:Benwing2/pl-p-non-lemma-warnings-2 These are due to the Pronunciation section being under Etymology 1 instead of at top level. Benwing2 (talk) 01:18, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I went ahead and started the bot run. Benwing2 (talk) 04:08, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
 * ćwierćdolarówkami and related forms are hyphenated wrong, will this be fixed automatically? Benwing2 (talk) 04:10, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Similarly ekonomistkach etc., entuzjastkach, etc., istnieniach, etc., kostkom, etc. Should all be fixable automatically. Benwing2 (talk) 04:12, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
 * zamarzałem etc. definitely need help. Benwing2 (talk) 04:32, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Those four warnings can be ignored. I think I might do ćwierćdolarówka specially, but the rest should definitely be done automatically. I overlooked zamarznąć. Thanks for all your help. Vininn126 (talk) 11:06, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Oh, you also converted synonyms. Thanks! Vininn126 (talk) 12:54, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
 * You're welcome! I'd recommend moving the Etymology 1 pronunciation sections to top level for the pages with those four warnings, provided of course that the Etymology 1 pronunciation also applies to Etymology 2 (otherwise add the separate Etymology 2 pronunciation under the Etymology 2 heading). BTW as for synonyms, I just took an existing script I wrote for moving Russian synonyms and applied it to Polish. For Polish, it successfully moved synonyms on 1,102 pages and issued 441 warnings in the process, when it ran into a condition that prevented it from moving a synonym. If you find yourself on a rainy day, maybe take a look at the warnings: User:Benwing2/pl-move-synonyms-warnings. Benwing2 (talk) 06:03, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Also, looking through the synonym warnings, I see some cases where animacy isn't handled correctly, e.g. autochton, which has an animate and also an inanimate meaning, with different declensions, but only the animate/personal declension is given. Not sure whether Polish noun declension tables have a way of indicating bi-animate nouns. For example, Russian noun declension tables do, but Ukrainian noun declension tables do not, both because Ukrainian has a three-way animacy distinction personal/animal/inanimate and because the animacy often affects other cases than just the accusative. You can see examples of both ways of doing things under the Russian and Ukrainian entries for туз ("ace, big wig"). Benwing2 (talk) 06:10, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
 * OK, I see that is the source of Russian and Ukrainian туз, and is split into two tables like Ukrainian. But the definition "ace" is specified as animate, is that really correct? Benwing2 (talk) 06:14, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Polish is like Ukrainian with a 3-way distinction. What we've been doing is including a new L3 and then a new L4 with the declension. Vininn126 (talk) 11:16, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

Replacement of unnecessary redirects (new batch, part 3)
Here is the next batch:



Thank you. — SGconlaw (talk) 12:41, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Done. Benwing2 (talk) 18:06, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks! — SGconlaw (talk) 16:41, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

Alternative forms cleanup
There's a small handful of alternative sections using nonstandard layouts, like siogun, could we fix that? Vininn126 (talk) 19:28, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Yup, I have done that elsewhere as well. Benwing2 (talk) 19:29, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Can we also have changed to ? Vininn126 (talk) 11:19, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
 * And also 's and to ? Vininn126 (talk) 11:33, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I am running most of these changes now. Unfortunately User:Derbeth's bot has gotten in the way on many pages so they aren't all getting saved; I will have to re-merge and push the changes again. BTW @Derbeth how often do you run your bot? Benwing2 (talk) 08:43, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
 * BTW what do you mean by "using nonstandard layouts"? What I did is to standardize on in place of  or whatever, but maybe you meant something else? Benwing2 (talk) 08:44, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I mean exactly the conversion of any l's to a single alt. Vininn126 (talk) 08:46, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Also, it's good to know his bot has been updated to work with pl-p. Vininn126 (talk) 08:45, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

@Benwing2: I will skip Polish for now until you let me know you are ready. --Derbeth talk 20:10, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

de-proper noun accel
There is acceleration support for the genitive but not for the plural, which can generate misleading entries as in the case of Auerbach. &mdash; Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 07:01, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I will probably remove the accelerator support for the genitive. The problem is that it's a bit tricky to figure out what the accelerator for the plural needs to be in the headword (in particular whether it does or does not encompass the dative plural). OTOH if you click on the accelerator in the declension table it should always work correctly. Benwing2 (talk) 07:09, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
 * On the note of German acceleration, I've noticed that the acceleration for plurals has changed, i.e. Abschlußfeier generates de now instead of the old de. For nouns that have a distinct dative plural form, this is arguably an improvement (but not universally standard on Wiktionary; I've always understood plural of to mean "nominative indefinite plural", i.e. the default parameters); for nouns that are identical in the plural in all cases I think we should keep using plural of. What do you think? &mdash; Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 08:30, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I am fine with using when all cases of the plural have the same form (although in other situations I'd prefer to spell out which cases of the plural a given form goes with). I will have to hack module:accel/de to recognize something like de and convert it to de. Benwing2 (talk) 05:30, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

As if you didn't have enough to look out for...
apparently some people use pipes in plain text to mark separate lines in quotes- when you wrap that text in a template, you get rather strange results. I fixed a few module errors by substituting "&amp;vert;", but you might have a more elegant solution.

At any rate, there might very well be an entry or two that had only two lines separated by a single pipe, in which case the two lines would have become the 2nd and 3rd parameters without triggering any errors. I'm not sure if it's worth going over a whole bot run to look for them, but I thought I would mention it. Thanks! Chuck Entz (talk) 06:12, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Acceleration
Have you done any work on the Ukrainian and Russian acceleration modules? I've been thinking about modifying the Polish one to include more parts of speech besides superlative forms. Vininn126 (talk) 10:46, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I wrote all the current accelerator code for these modules. Adding it to the Polish noun and adjective modules shouldn't be too hard. For verbs, we have to modify all the templates that contain tables; maybe that's only and . Benwing2 (talk) 02:39, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

The switch to plus templates
Given that most editors either don't care much, or support it, I suppose you can run the bot to switch the bor's and der's and such to +'s in Polish entries. I'm sure this is something you already have accounted for, but it should be able to account for when the template is in the middle of the sentence and add nocap=1, and ofc any gloss text within the template. Vininn126 (talk) 00:07, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Yeah I do it semi-manually so it handles things like this. Benwing2 (talk) 02:40, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

Triple square-brackets
Hi. As you might already be aware,  does not work and does not link correctly. Given that no page can start with,   is always meant to give “[  link]” as output. Is this something you (or anyone) can possibly solve? —Svārtava [t•u•r] 15:20, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
 * By "solve" do you mean to fix the output? That has to be done by the MediaWiki implementers. You'd have to file a Phabrikator bug report about this. Benwing2 (talk) 05:27, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
 * @Benwing2: Yes, I meant to fix the output. Thanks for the information, I had no idea; I have filed a bug report, is it correct just to be sure? —Svārtava [t•u•r] 06:09, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Replied
I replied on Grease_pit/2022/January. Just wanted to make sure you saw it. 70.172.194.25 02:57, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Yup, I will try to get to this tomorrow. Benwing2 (talk) 05:26, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I think this should do it, but I have not tested (not even sure how to do so without being able to edit the module): . 70.172.194.25 06:05, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

German nominalized adjectives
Hi Benwing, really appreciate the stuff you're doing, but this is in my opinion misleading; nominalized Gleiche can be all the same forms as (e.g. der/die/das Gleiche), so perhaps the entries of nominalized adjectives should look like the ones for their adjectival counterparts (gleiche, große, schöne ... ), only with "nominalization of..." instead of "inflection of..."? --Akletos (talk) 14:49, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
 * der Gleiche and das Gleiche are weak forms. German nouns here at Wiktionary are lemmatized under their strong forms, hence der Gleiche is lemmatized under Gleicher and das Gleiche under Gleiches. Gleiche can be listed as a non-lemma form of Gleicher and Gleiches; compare Erwachsene (for Erwachsener) and Junge (for Junges). Benwing2 (talk) 05:40, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Ah ok, thank you for the explanation. So another etymology header should be added to all those entries, with an "inflection of..." definition linking e.g. to "Gleicher" and "Gleiches"? Something like:
 * ===Noun===
 * Akletos (talk) 08:20, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Akletos (talk) 08:20, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Akletos (talk) 08:20, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Akletos (talk) 08:20, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Akletos (talk) 08:20, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

Yup, looks right although I might use two separate ===Noun=== headers as the lemmas are different. Benwing2 (talk) 08:38, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

Brünette
Hello! What would be the correct inflection here? (as on the German Wiktionary page there are three different cases ...) LinguisticMystic (talk) 18:17, 28 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Like this: &mdash; Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 18:21, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Replacement of unnecessary redirects (new batch, part 4)
Here is the next batch:



Thank you. — SGconlaw (talk) 19:39, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Done. Benwing2 (talk) 08:37, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks! — SGconlaw (talk) 16:47, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

User:Benwing2/convert-de-noun-warnings
Would it be possible to regenerate this list? I clicked around on a couple of articles but most of them seemed to have been taken care of already. &mdash; Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 09:36, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, I've been steadily chipping away at the remaining articles. You can see the current list here: Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:tracking/de-headword/de-noun-old There are a little over 500 entries left (out of an original 2,000 or so). I'll see if I can regenerate the warnings by running my conversion script on this list. Benwing2 (talk) 21:51, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
 * The tracking category is actually fine too, thanks. I'll also be chipping away at it.
 * On this note: I've recently tagged you in an edit summary where you did an incorrect semi-automated substitution. Could you please have a look whether more articles are affected? You could also just add them back to this tracking category if it isn't possible to process them (semi-)automatically. &mdash; Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 23:53, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Yup, I saw that, you are referring to, right? These changes are entirely manual; I've loaded the pages into a file and I edit them by hand using a text editor. The only purpose of the bot is to push the changes back to Wiktionary. So I don't think there are many others like this; if there are any others they are typos on my part. It may be possible to write a script to check my conversions against what's there currently, although most of the time there are errors in the existing entries, which is why my automated script couldn't convert them in the first place. Benwing2 (talk) 00:01, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Replacement of unnecessary redirects (new batch, part 5)
Here is the next batch:


 * (to be retained as a shortcut) →
 * (to be retained as a shortcut) -->

Also, it has been pointed out to me that some documentation pages for quotation templates refer to "Wikipedia entry pages" (or possibly "Wikipedia entries") instead of "Wiktionary entry pages" ("Wiktionary entries"). Could you fix these too? Thank you. — SGconlaw (talk) 20:03, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
 * All fixed. There were 169 documentation pages referencing "Wikipedia entry pages". Apologies for the delay. Benwing2 (talk) 04:51, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
 * No problem. Oh yikes, glad we’ve fixed them. Thanks! — SGconlaw (talk) 07:20, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Adjectival noun nonlemmas
I feel bad for spamming you with requests so feel free to ignore this. As you've recently completely revamped (or rather revolutionized) the treatment of German adjectival nouns, it would be really convenient if there were an easier way to generate the nonlemmas. , for instance, should have three sections: It is a nonlemma of all, , and. The lemmas however don't have green links. Being an admin, I could of course just temporarily delete them, but that's not nice as it muddies the page history and fills the log unnecessarily. I think a nicer solution would be something akin to de-adj form of: A "hit-and-run" template that automatically expands to the correct inflected forms. The only difference is that de-adj form of links to the ending-less adjective, whereas we lemmatize adjectival nouns with -er, -e and -es respectively. &mdash; Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 11:41, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Don't worry about making lots of requests, all of them have been reasonable. I agree with your solution and I don't think it will be that hard. (Doing it for adjective-noun combinations would definitely be harder because there are lots of different possibilities, but I don't think that needs to be in scope.) Benwing2 (talk) 19:44, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Amazing work, turned out even better than I had anticipated. Thanks a lot! &mdash; Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 22:59, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Who had this idea
to add, as you describe it, ===Further reading=== section to Polish lemma with and , to all Polish entries, which you do for about an hour now, even if it is only an altform entry, and even if there is no entry? Both the case for e.g. blajgiel and its alternative forms. I would think you could get a feedback from the webpage concerning whether a queried entry exists. Or did somebody opine that one should have these links so one can check whether they have an entry even if they have none? Fay Freak (talk) 23:02, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
 * See a few sections above. Benwing2 (talk) 23:03, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I have temporarily stopped the bot; but note my comment above that > 75% of lemmas already had both links before I ran the bot. Benwing2 (talk) 23:05, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
 * @Fay Freak There are good reasons to have them. PWN provides a searchable corpus and WSJP updates on a VERY regular basis, so what might be a dead link now will not be one very soon in the future. Vininn126 (talk) 23:07, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I have just read the discussion above. I am not against the idea (while I recognize that readers might be much more disappointed by dead links than editors who know the system behind …), but I note that one might link the corpus with another template (or parametrically) directly, e.g. blejwas or blajgiel, which also turns out non-existing links. Fay Freak (talk) 23:12, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
 * That's something that I could probably add in the not so distant future. I think it might also be worth making a template for PWN's encyclopedia (and to be honest a few more dictionaries but I'm working on it), but the current link at least gets them to the navigable page... @Benwing2 Could you start the bot up again? Vininn126 (talk) 23:16, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
 * You (whoever) should probably update the template documentations indicating that henceforth they are, unlike other reference templates, even put under pages when they currently link to pages excusing themselves, because there are people who, instead of asking nicely like me, instinctively remove reference templates pointing to nowhere as they often are copypasta. (The same German squares you might guess.) Fay Freak (talk) 23:22, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Good idea, thanks. Vininn126 (talk) 23:24, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
 * But wait, before restarting, by your script certainly does not make sense, isn’t it? Fay Freak (talk) 23:26, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Good catch - it should be able too add these under if there's a third link. Vininn126 (talk) 23:29, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for alerting me to this, I will fix this in the script and undo the duplication. Benwing2 (talk) 00:53, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
 * There were only 8 pages with either the WSJP or PWN templates under ==References==, which I've fixed, but there are also two pages gazda and ość where one of the templates occurs in ==Etymology==. Not sure how to handle these; can you take a look? Benwing2 (talk) 01:32, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
 * @Benwing2 Taken care of. Thank you so much for all of your help. Vininn126 (talk) 07:54, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Bot mistake
I think this was a mistake done by your bot: ; it put a header template into the Declension section. LinguisticMystic (talk) 15:39, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for catching this. These changes were done manually by me in a text editor; the only thing the bot did was push the changes to Wiktionary. That's why a mistake of this sort happened; if it had been completely automated, it wouldn't have happened. I checked and there were three other such cases, which I have fixed. Benwing2 (talk) 06:11, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

Further reading templates for German
Would you mind running your bot to add some further reading templates to German articles? If you want to do this, I'll list the exact constraints, but be advised that it involves fetching a website for every single potentially added template (to judge whether to add the template or not). It would also be great if the job could run continuously, i.e. also add them to future article that lack them. &mdash; Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 15:54, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
 * This is a good idea. I haven't written bot scripts that fetch pages from other websites but I don't think it's so difficult; there are good API's in Python to do this. As for running it continuously, I don't currently have a setup to do this. I think you can set up something like this in Toolforge, although I'm not familiar with how it works., are you familiar with this? Is it just a Unix account where you can set up a cron job or similar to run things periodically? For the moment I'm going to focus on converting German adjectives to the new and the new  (which I haven't made live yet); the plan is to make  work the same as , similarly to  and . Benwing2 (talk) 06:15, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
 * If you're familiar with pipes / subprocesses, you can also just use ol' reliable  so that you don't have to learn a new API. I personally use libcurl in C++ for my web stuff.
 * de-adecl sounds great! I lost count of the times I had to visit Category:German_adjective_inflection-table_templates just to find out how the correct one is called... If you need any help (e.g. if there's another tracking category to clean up), don't hesitate to ping me. &mdash; Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 13:38, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Oh, forgot to say: If you plan to revamp the German adjective templates, could you please also take this  into consideration? I'd say German adjectives fall into 4 categories (wrt comparability):
 * Obviously comparable (schön)
 * Traditionally uncomparable but colloquially possible and attested (proscribed) (illegal, letzte)
 * Comparative forms not attested but semantically sensible (madagassisch)
 * Comparative forms do not even begin to make sense (affenstark, fünfminütig)
 * We should probably lump 3 and 4 together and call them both uncomparable, but I think a little note in the headword for adjectives of type 2 would be reasonable. &mdash; Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 22:46, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Yeah, Toolforge is basically a Debian system (currently 9) that you can SSH into. There's a grid engine for running jobs that take CPU. I haven't tried to schedule any bot jobs on it (I just SSH in for anything I need to do), but I've seen people talking on IRC and Discord who do. — Eru·tuon 22:08, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

Replacement of unnecessary redirects (new batch, part 6)
Here is the next batch:



Thank you. — SGconlaw (talk) 17:39, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Done. Benwing2 (talk) 07:38, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks! — SGconlaw (talk) 22:19, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Hmmm, some of the replacements for don’t seem to have happened? — SGconlaw (talk) 22:23, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Can you give me an example? I don't see any remaining cases where, or  didn't get converted. Maybe you converted them by hand? Benwing2 (talk) 03:42, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Perhaps it was a caching issue. When I used “What links here” yesterday, entries were still appearing under the redirects. Now it looks fine. — SGconlaw (talk) 04:22, 5 March 2022 (UTC)

I'm sure you would have found this out by now, anyway, but...
There are 13 edits in CAT:E because of your bot runs. Most of them are because you forgot to allow for escaping "=". Even though your bot was the last to edit there, the error at B is probably due to an edit somewhere else propagating through to the entry via transclusion (it's been intermittently out of memory in recent weeks). Chuck Entz (talk) 01:48, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

Replacement of unnecessary redirects (new batch, part 7)
Here is the next batch:


 * (to be retained as a shortcut) →
 * (to be retained as a shortcut) →
 * (to be retained as a shortcut) →
 * (to be retained as a shortcut) →
 * (to be retained as a shortcut) →
 * (to be retained as a shortcut) →
 * (to be retained as a shortcut) →
 * (to be retained as a shortcut) →
 * (to be retained as a shortcut) →
 * (to be retained as a shortcut) →

Also, the 1st edition of is now available, so that should be made the default version used by the template. Would it be possible to do the following?


 * Add 2nd to uses of the template that do not have the edition parameter; then
 * remove 1st from any uses of the template.

Thank you. — SGconlaw (talk) 15:03, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Made the redirect replacements. Apologies for the delay. As for, just checking to make sure you want this done; there are around 360 uses of this template and only 9 have 1st, so all the remainder would get 2nd added. Are you planning on reviewing them manually to switch them to the 1st edition? Benwing2 (talk) 00:17, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks, and welcome back! Hope you had a good break. Regarding, yes, I think please go ahead and do the replacement. As there are so many uses of the template, I think it would take a long time to manually review and switch them over to the 1st edition so it's better to mark the existing uses as 2nd and to remove 1st. I'll then update the template and make it switch over to using the 1st edition as the default. — Sgconlaw (talk) 11:03, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

Non-replacement of useful redirects
It'll save you, SG and myself all lots of time if we just kept the redirects, you know. Notusbutthem (talk) 10:55, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Or do Template:RQ:Shakespeare Antony and Cleopatra again Notusbutthem (talk) 17:03, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅: sounds like a good idea to have as the full template name, and  retained as a shortcut. — SGconlaw (talk) 18:10, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

[Module:de-noun] localization
Hello Benwing2,

I was trying to localize your new "[Module:de-noun]" into Hungarian, but I ran into the following problem: The module categorizes nouns by genders, which is good, but when generating category names it uses the POS name, which is "nouns" in the English version, but must be "főnevek" in the Hungarian version. The problem arised from the fact that it gets the POS tag directly from the method name, which in turn gets it from the module parameter in the template. I was trying to modify these accordingly, but was unable to get it working since method names cannot use accented strings, e.g. "főnevek". Do you have a suggestion of a possible workaround for this issue? LinguisticMystic (talk) 14:10, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Apologies for the delay. You may have solved this already, but if not, I'm not sure what you are referring to by "it gets the POS tag directly from the method name". It looks to me like the POS is set to "nouns" on line 2200; you could just change this directly to "főnevek". Benwing2 (talk) 00:26, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you! The problem was the accent, but it was solved using a workaround i.e.   was changed to

LinguisticMystic (talk) 20:58, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, for a Lua table named,   and   are equivalent, but the latter is more general because Lua does not allow accented characters in the   format (analogously, variable names in Lua cannot have accented characters in them). Benwing2 (talk) 03:16, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

More bot changes

 * I've been thinking we should send a bot to convert all instances of, (and their short forms suf/pre), and  with . I'm also wondering if we should switch related and derived terms with . I would like y'all's input. I'm not the biggest fan of col4, but some people don't mind it, and it would be technically easier. it would also automatically alphabetize and could absorb part of speech information. Vininn126 (talk) 16:08, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't use . I don't know why but I don't see why it should be used. But yeah, we definitely should start replace all and {{temp|prefix} with . It's easier and works the same way. Tashi (talk) 16:38, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I personally don't mind it. It may not look very appealing but it can help us save some space. Shumkichi (talk) 17:02, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
 * As it happens I already have a script to convert //etc. to . I wrote it a couple of years ago and haven't run it very much but I can go ahead and do it for Polish lemmas. Benwing2 (talk) 20:40, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Somehow the above set of users pinged by Vininn126 does not match those listed for Polish for . Benwing2 (talk) 20:43, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
 * not to but to  though OwO uWu >w< But thank you!!11!!11!111 Shumkichi (talk) 00:08, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Yup, that's what I meant :) Benwing2 (talk) 00:10, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Hey! I think most have them now, but could we catch any that don't start with "From" and end with a period and add that text? Vininn126 (talk) 10:13, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Working on this now. Can you take a look at Fiszer and Fiszerowa? These are formatted weirdly. Benwing2 (talk) 00:04, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Done. Those were bizarre, good we caught them! Vininn126 (talk) 09:13, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

Language code in Template:place
The documentation for says that the language code is supposed to be that of the entry. But that leads to orange links, as in Condate. What corrective action is supposed to be taken in the entry or in the target? If none, then can the orange color be replaced with blue or the template not be so applied? DCDuring (talk) 15:30, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Apologies for the delayed response. You can specify the language of a holonym (one of the toponym components that the placename belongs to) by prefixing the holonym with a language code, like this:
 * I would prefer that this not be used excessively (i.e. use the English name if possible, and create an English-language entry for the holonym if required) but in a case like this it seems fine. Benwing2 (talk) 03:13, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I would prefer that this not be used excessively (i.e. use the English name if possible, and create an English-language entry for the holonym if required) but in a case like this it seems fine. Benwing2 (talk) 03:13, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

"we don't create entries for multisyllabic jyutping"
So, regarding this comment you've made on one of my older page creations.

Why is it that there are not multisyllabic jyutping entries? I mean, while sometimes you can come across some multisyllabic POJ or even pinyin, why isn't it the case for jyutping? (They're all romanization systems for those three different Chinese varieties all of which are the most widely spoken) Would like to hear your thoughts on this - thank you! AverageSampoernaAEnjoyer (talk) 08:26, 14 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Grandfathered in. Please don't create entries for multisyllabic Jyutping. —Fish bowl (talk) 08:27, 14 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Ik but what's the reason for it? AverageSampoernaAEnjoyer (talk) 08:28, 14 April 2022 (UTC)
 * And frankly, don't waste your time with POJ entries either. —Fish bowl (talk) 08:28, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

تعبان
Hi. I noticed you made [//en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/32262510 an old edit] indicating that the mentioned word is used in Literary Arabic, but you're making me doubt myself. Actually, this form appears in Egyptian Arabic, like تعبان سقعان عريان... compared to Literary Arabic versions تعب بارد متعرى. I don't know if you heard someone speaking Literary Arabic saying it, but if it happened, he must have been code-switching. Thanks. --Mahmudmasri (talk) 20:46, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

I'm a bit late, but
welcome back! —Svārtava (t/u) • 07:41, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Benwing2 (talk) 01:25, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

Latin future perfects
Hi, and welcome back. I've noticed you converted the small number of sigmatic inflections I missed after I managed to get it added to the inflection of template. I just wanted to say that that template also now supports  for the future perfect, so as to link to the definition directly. Would you be willing to use WingerBot to convert all of the inflections? Theknightwho (talk) 20:12, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Which sigmatic inflections are you referring to? As for, maybe there is a way to make the module itself link to the definition appropriately even when   is given. I think support for this sort of thing already exists. Let me look into it. Benwing2 (talk) 20:36, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
 * For example, dilapidasso. Perhaps it was just being picked up automatically. They're Old Latin forms that I added to la-conj with the subtype  and (in a tiny number of cases)  . It affects about 100 verbs. Theknightwho (talk) 21:02, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Interesting. The code definitely doesn't have any hardcoding of "sigmatic" in it, but it does query Wiktionary to get the current set of tags. It's been awhile since I wrote the script to clean up and it's a long script (about 2,000 lines of Python) doing several things, but I think what's happening here is that it sees that there's a known tag with a raw link and removes the link. BTW I added the Wikidata item for "future perfect" and put   as the first shortcut so it is considered the canonical one. It looks like there isn't an existing way to map two tags to one, so I'll see about running the conversion to  . Benwing2 (talk) 23:08, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
 * That makes sense! I'm really glad you're clearing up the inflections, actually, as I've always found the near-identical lists difficult to parse.
 * By the way, there's a bug with the acceleration in la-adecl - in most cases when a form is used in the masculine, feminine and neuter of a particular case, the acceleration only adds the masculine and neuter to the non-lemma entry. Have a look at these and you'll see what I mean:
 * draconigena (first declension)
 * chrysocarpos (second declension)
 * cladosporioides (third declension one-termination)
 * dorsomedialis (third declension two-termination)
 * (There aren't any three-termination adjectives with uncreated forms.)
 * despeculans (third declension participle)
 * This error has been carried through onto many (maybe tens of thousands) of non-lemmas. However, it doesn't happen with 'first and second declension' adjectives for some reason:
 * adamanteus
 * Theknightwho (talk) 00:12, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Hmm. This may be a bug in the labeling of the accelerator form for the "masc/fem" column; there is only a single column for both and I suspect it is underlying labeled as "masculine". Let me take a look. Fixing the non-lemmas will be a bit trickier but hopefully there aren't quite that many (and in any case it shouldn't matter how many there are, since we won't fix it by hand). Benwing2 (talk) 00:23, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I have some understanding of the module, and I believe it's to do with the way that the back-end recognises when the forms are the same and sets the duplicates to empty, which is part of the process for merging the cells. So from the template's technical perspective there is no feminine form, but that's normally irrelevant because the user doesn't see or care about that. However, I think that's getting incorrectly carried through into acceleration. What I don't understand is why it isn't happening to neuter as well, or why it only affects that combination (and not consistently, either). I've spotted that in each case where this happens the masculine and feminine columns have been completely merged as you say, so I think the template thinks there are no feminine forms at all (despite the column being renamed), which would explain why it isn't happening on 1&2 declension adjectives. Thanks for that! Theknightwho (talk) 06:56, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Hidden uncreated Latin forms
Hiya - sorry to bother you again, but I was wondering if it might be possible for WingerBot to do another task? There are quite a few instances where certain Latin forms haven't been created for a particular lemma because they happen to be the same as an inflection of a different Latin lemma (e.g. related nouns, verbs and participles). They're a bit faffier to create, as they're not supported by acceleration, and a lot more difficult to spot due to not showing up as uncreated on the table. I was wondering if this is something that WingerBot might be able to sort?

I appreciate that this would need some planning first so that we don't end up creating thousands of dud forms that shouldn't actually exist due to incorrect template parameters, but it might be worth setting some kind of threshold whereby the bot only does this if more than X% of forms already exist. That way, it would avoid any lemmas which could probably do with manual oversight first. Obviously there will still be some false positives, but those already need sorting anyway. Theknightwho (talk) 14:37, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I have written scripts to auto-create Arabic and Russian non-lemma forms but it's not such an easy task to do; there are lots of special cases and much code that needs to be language-specific (e.g. in Latin to handle forms that differ in vowel length, where both will end up on the same page; analogous to forms with different stress position in Russian). Once this is written, adding something on top of this to implement the threshold you mention isn't so hard. If you want, feel free to add an entry to User:Benwing2/todo, where I'm tracking requests that people have made for bot work. Benwing2 (talk) 03:20, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

Replacement of unnecessary redirects and templates (new batch, part 8)
Here's the next batch:


 * Please add the old template name as a chapter; for example, →.
 * Please add the old template name as a chapter; for example, →.

(I'll add some others in the next few days.)

Also, at some stage you may wish to update User:Benwing2/english-quotation-templates-redirects. No rush. Thank you. — Sgconlaw (talk) 16:14, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Apologies, I will get to this in the next day or so. Benwing2 (talk) 03:06, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
 * No worries; I’ve been adding requests as and when I encounter them. — Sgconlaw (talk) 04:18, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
 * All requests done. Benwing2 (talk) 00:17, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks! — Sgconlaw (talk) 22:12, 10 June 2022 (UTC)

Bot mishap
This edit caused a module error:. 98.170.164.88 04:07, 24 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Or rather, the bot edit itself did not, but this module edit that removed support for  did: . 98.170.164.88 04:09, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Benwing2 (talk) 04:23, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Another issue:. 70.172.194.25 12:50, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi, AFAIK, the curly quotes are if not preferred, allowed on wikt. Then why did you revert my edits on ? Or did I mess something up? Cheers, H. (talk) 08:16, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
 * It's a matter of preference, similar to American vs. British spelling ... generally you don't go through and systematically change spelling conventions so for similar reasons you probably shouldn't systematically change quote conventions. Also, other modules generally use straight quotes in error messages (and in fact your changes did mess things up, although someone fixed the issues earlier this month). Benwing2 (talk) 04:42, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

en-conj-simple
Hi Benwing! If you're after a little project (because I know you have absolutely nothing else to do around here 😉), I am thinking that it would be worthwhile to adapt en-conj-simple to use the same syntax as en-verb, obviously with additional parameters to allow the archaic/obsolete forms to be specified. Lua-ising it would also allow us to specify multiple alternative forms for each inflection. Thoughts? Would you rather I made a general call for input at WT:GP? This, that and the other (talk) 06:30, 27 May 2022 (UTC)


 * I've also mentioned elsewhere that we might as well move to  (which has been deleted). — Sgconlaw (talk) 20:37, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I honestly don't much like . I'd rather it be deleted entirely; and I think I'm not alone, as I'm pretty sure this has come up for discussion before and some others have expressed the same opinion. The template serves no purpose other than to indicate archaic forms, as all non-archaic forms are included in the headword. It doesn't seem so useful to me to have a template like this, and on top of this, these forms aren't standardized any more and are often not attestable, meaning the template is not only of questionable utility but actively wrong in many cases. I would be strongly opposed to including this template on most or even many English verbs, and even more so to any attempt to add it by bot to English verb entries. Benwing2 (talk) 03:05, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
 * You’ve hit the nail on the head, actually. The only time I use the template is where there are archaic forms of a verb to indicate, as we don’t generally indicate these in (too cumbersome). In fact, it is wrong to use the template in entries that have don’t have archaic forms, as the template automatically generates the archaic forms (so we shouldn’t make the archaic forms suppressible). — Sgconlaw (talk) 04:15, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I totally agree with everything Ben said too (other than it should be deleted - it does offer a way for users to "discover" the archaic inflections, and for that purpose it adds value). However, that doesn't take away from the fact that it is in need of Lua-ification if it is to be kept. That was all I was suggesting, not a bot job. I'm not aware of discussions that cast scorn upon en-conj-simple; are you perhaps thinking of WT:RFDO, which was a different, giant template that gave a Romance-esque conjugation table with all the persons and numbers and compound tenses fully inflected? This, that and the other (talk) 07:43, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

Additional French phonemes
Regarding “clearly non-French” pronunciation you mentioned, and pinging you also ping:, , , , , and others you have not touched such as : I have all actually heard from banlieue rappers, in particular from the exact raps quoted (of course: it is great for listening comprehension to pick a song and its lyrics). Since the words themselves are non-standard I do not see how this would hinder assuming this pronunciation standard (in as much as standardization can be conceptualized in the contexts of such words), the more so since the given sounds are essential for recognition. (You know also that Muslims in the US and UK pronounced the word Muslim differently from the other population, but in this case there is no other population.) An even distincter situation is present when a word is only present in African lects (counting as French), namely which I have quoted a few times; so in words written ⟨dj⟩ like  it is, rather than /d͡ʒ/, /ɟ/, though I have also heard the former and suspect individual free variation and I was unsure whether it is not something third so that I refrained from giving any IPA.

I wonder though whether we could label this lect in the cities of French-speaking Europe itself, circumscribed in the British Isles and analogously in France as talking “like a roadman”, more appropriately and as specifically as “Nouchi”, beyond hoting it “slang”.It is perhaps just the French  but only such nerds as us who edit Wiktionary in their free time know this word and if there is one for the French ones it has elapsed me. It also was only from someone just dropping the term in the Wiktionary main and category namespaces that I have come to know about Multicultural Toronto English—though long recognizing parallels to the UK and Ireland multiethnolects—, which is also basically a single linguist’s term.

Principally by the way the same standards apply to German, natively and by French borrowings (I have created stuff like, and I have heard other Oriental borrowings like passed via French into German using the vulgar route).

By the way there are a few glossaries particularly concerned with such words and Dictionnaire de la Zone often offers both audio and IPA, so in the case of, coherent with my statement regarding it, although I hear /ħ/ and not /x/ even particularly in the infamous piece they include. Fay Freak (talk) 02:05, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
 * IMO if Arabic-speaking rappers pronounce Arabic-derived words in French using Arabic phonemes that aren't found in French, this is simply code-switching; these words can't be counted as French. I have heard Spanish bilinguals pronouncing a word like Nicaragua in the middle of an English sentence as [ni.kaˈɾa.ɣ̞wa], with flapped [ɾ], approximant [ɣ̞], and Spanish vowels; this is analogous and does not make [ni.kaˈɾa.ɣ̞wa] a possible English pronunciation of this word. Benwing2 (talk) 02:17, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Proper nouns don’t make a good analogy, they are passed on differently. And of course I assume that the friends of the Arabic speakers of different background take over their words and imitate their pronunciation. Like there are also white AAVE speakers or “expats” moving to Africa and fitting in with localized English as well as with creoles—one totally can renew the phonology of one’s native language by switching the micro language community. It is always tempting to assume code-switching with bilinguals but the flaw is that their lexicalization mechanisms can work in the same manner as with monolinguals, due to the linear transmission of any individual language spoken.
 * You can of course opine that, conceptualizing the language world more essentialistically, but from an utilitarian perspective I was dropping the factual information that people reasonably seek out—a gap otherwise exploited by our competitors. Fay Freak (talk) 19:12, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

Vowel length in orichalcum and aurichalcum
Hi, could you have WingerBot re-shorten the i in the inflected forms of and ? The short i vowel seems to be unambiguously attested in verse for the spelling with o, and although I haven't found conclusive metrical evidence one way or another for the spelling with au, L&S and Gaffiot 2016 give it as having short i as well (according to Logeion). If there is evidence aside from the Greek form ὀρείχαλκος for a long vowel in Latin, it'd be worth adding to the entries so that readers can come to an informed conclusion about this somewhat tricky pronunciation question.--Urszag (talk) 06:08, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Sure, done. I was going by the Greek form, and somewhere else I saw that had a long i, probably derived from the Greek form. Benwing2 (talk) 06:13, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

Template:es-verb
Hi! I'd look to put an impersonal bit in Template:es-verb, because caer chuzos de punta shouldn't have first-person singular conjugations in the head line. Is there any way to do this? Zumbacool (talk) 14:50, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
 * There is existing support for impersonal verbs using  but the template didn't display things quite correctly; I fixed that. Benwing2 (talk) 18:03, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

Template:RQ:Charlotte Brontë Jane Eyre
Can you keep this redirect? Zumbacool (talk) 17:34, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I gotta ask, why are you so obsessed with re-creating this? It seems solely to have the diaeresis in the template name. Benwing2 (talk) 17:36, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I just love diaeresis Zumbacool (talk) 17:39, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

Nice work lately
Especially enjoying the stress positions for Italian conjugation charts. Nicodene (talk) 04:32, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks. It annoyed me that these were absent. I added the stress positions to the headword for many verbs awhile ago but am still updating the conjugation tables. It will take awhile to convert all the verbs because they have to be done one by one. Benwing2 (talk) 04:34, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

Your bot is removing valid categories
E.g. https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Samoa_am%C3%A9ricaines&diff=next&oldid=67047488 —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:33, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
 * This was not my bot's fault, but me manually removing that category. I have been planning to have automatically put translations of countries and other such place names into the corresponding place categories by matching the translation. Let me see if I can get to that. Benwing2 (talk) 05:37, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Merci. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:40, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Why is it removing the "Male people" and "Female people" categories? —Mahāgaja · talk 08:07, 14 June 2022 (UTC) Never mind, I found the discussion. —Mahāgaja · talk 08:13, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Where is the discussion? Vininn126 (talk) 09:26, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
 * . J3133 (talk) 09:27, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
 * But again/still: https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=%E7%BE%8E%E5%B1%AC%E7%B6%AD%E7%88%BE%E4%BA%AC%E7%BE%A4%E5%B3%B6&type=revision&diff=67452206&oldid=64434030
 * And then you deleted dozens of categories after emptying them. Why? —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:04, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
 * One thing at a time. I have lots of requests coming in for things to do from lots of different people. It is on my list of things to do to fix as I mentioned above. I periodically do runs to delete empty categories that are handled by . I also periodically do runs to create non-empty categories that are handled by  and haven't yet been created, so categories like Category:zh:United States Virgin Islands will get created automatically in time. Benwing2 (talk) 05:49, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

it-conj
It was a nice idea to add the stress to the conjugated forms. The only thing is, I've noticed that the first-person present conditional ending is given as -éi, and I believe it's usually -èi. GianWiki (talk) 00:28, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Hmm. DiPI has -éi for the passato remoto ending, see, and I would assume that the conditional is in origin the same ending. However, you may be right. DOP is the other likely source but is no longer online. Let me post about this in the Tea Room. Benwing2 (talk) 01:57, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Hoepli agrees with you e.g.  so I changed the module accordingly. Benwing2 (talk) 06:23, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

gsw-noun
(I know that I've asked you for a lot of assistance this year so please feel entirely free to ignore this.)

Hey, do you think it is possible to generalize Module:de-noun so that it can also serve as a base for other MHG descendants? Alternatively, would you be fine with me forking the entire German infrastructure and just throwing out the things that are not needed? &mdash; Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 17:31, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
 * This should be possible. I'm not sure at this point whether it would be better to generalize Module:de-noun or fork it; generally I try to avoid forking but it makes sense when there are a whole lot of differences. Can you point me to some documentation on Alemannic, Swiss German, etc. declensions so I have some sense of how different they are from standard German? Benwing2 (talk) 04:23, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I personally don't know any English sources on Alemannic grammar and my internet search hasn't proven terribly successful, I'm afraid. There are Alemannische_Grammatik and Alemannische_Grammatik but they don't offer a complete discussion of noun morphology. I have started User:Fytcha/gsw/Grammar with some examples and I will add more (substantivized adjectives will have to be covered too).
 * Most nouns are really simple in that they only have one singular and one plural form. with its -e dat.sg. is an exception and also the only one that came to mind. At that, it is debatable whether the forms with an intrusive n should be listed in the declension table.  seems to prefer listing them (see ; now that I remember that dispute, I also want to seize the opportunity to apologize to Sasha Gray Wolf as I have been quite unpleasant to him/her at least twice), I personally don't care all that much as long as they are properly qualified (see User:Fytcha/gsw/Grammar). &mdash; Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 16:05, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

Replacement of unnecessary redirects and templates (third batch, part 1)
Hi, here's the next batch:



(I'll be adding additional requests from time to time.)

Also, let's move ahead with making the 1st edition of the default version used by the template by:


 * adding 2nd to uses of the template that do not have the edition parameter; then
 * removing 1st from any uses of the template.

Thank you. — Sgconlaw (talk) 17:41, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Done. You'll have to fix up to default to the 1st edition, but I already changed the doc page. Benwing2 (talk) 00:37, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks! — Sgconlaw (talk) 02:30, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Categorization as historical polities
I wasn’t able to categorize the entries Assuwa and Asia (sense 5) as historical polities even though I attempted to do it properly. Could you fix it? Thanks! ·~  dictátor · mundꟾ  03:20, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Asia is correctly categorized in Category:en:Historical political subdivisions as a result of the use of placetype 'ancient province'. The problem with Assuwa is that the module doesn't recognize 'confederation' as a placetype. Let me see if I can fix that. Benwing2 (talk) 03:28, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Done. The module now treats league, alliance and confederacy (but not federation, which Wikipedia says is different) as synonyms of confederation. Benwing2 (talk) 03:38, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi, could you also fix British Central Africa? ‘protectorate’ needs to be set as a placetype, and the def also contains the colonial demonym British. ·~  dictátor · mundꟾ  00:14, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Still didn’t get properly categorized. ·~   dictátor · mundꟾ  01:03, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, I'm still working on that. Benwing2 (talk) 01:08, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Should be fixed now. I had to make some code changes to make any combination of "former/ancient/historical/etc." and "protectorate/autonomous territory/dependent territory/etc." categorize as Category:en:Historical political subdivisions without needing to spell out every combination. Benwing2 (talk) 02:31, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much for the hard work! ·~   dictátor · mundꟾ  02:35, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
 * By the way, shouldn’t protectorates be categorized as historical polities rather than political subdivisions? ·~   dictátor · mundꟾ  02:40, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Maybe? The definition of protectorate is "An autonomous territory that is protected diplomatically or militarily against third parties by a stronger state or entity." Wikipedia says a protectorate is a type of dependent territory. I already had 'historical autonomous territory' map to 'historical political subdivision'. Maybe that is wrong. Most of the entities in Category:en:Historical polities are former independent states, but some are former colonies like Portuguese East Africa and French Somaliland. Maybe we need to reorganize a bit and create a Category:en:Historical dependent territories and include former colonies in them (Wikipedia says "Historically, most colonies were considered to be dependent territories."). What do you think? I am not an expert in this stuff. Benwing2 (talk) 02:51, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I think Category:en:Historical political subdivisions should only be used for territories there were formerly integral parts of a country: e.g., Ireland (which was part of the UK), and not other colonies in Asia, Africa, etc. One might as well categorize India as a former political subdivision of the British Empire, but that is not how we actually categorize placenames. British India’s relation to that of the UK was not of an administration division. So yeah, I think it looks better to treat them merely as historical polities. ·~   dictátor · mundꟾ  03:07, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
 * What about my question concerning Category:en:Historical dependent territories? What do you think of that? Benwing2 (talk) 03:09, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I think it will make things complicated (because many editors don’t utilise our categories properly), but sure we can have it. Would it include former colonies and former protectorates? ·~   dictátor · mundꟾ  03:22, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
 * The thought is to categorize 'former colony' and 'former dependent territory' (which includes protectorates and autonomous territories) into this category. If you think it won't work, we can just use 'historical polity'. Benwing2 (talk) 03:24, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I don’t like the idea of former autonomous areas being in that category seeing that they are intregal parts of a country and therefore should be categorized under Category:en:Historical political subdivisions. If Northern Ireland or Scotland were to break free from the UK, I think it would be wrong to call them former dependent territories. So Category:en:Historical dependent territories should only include former colonies and protectorates. ·~   dictátor · mundꟾ  03:50, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
 * You can see what is currently tagged as an 'autonomous territory' here: Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:tracking/place/entry-placetype/autonomous territory. It includes things like Aruba, Bermuda, Greenland (in some languages), Jammu and Kashmir (with respect to Pakistan), the Netherlands Antilles (in some languages), the Cook Islands (in some languages), etc. These seem more like dependent territories than integral parts of a country. Maybe you're confusing an 'autonomous area/region' with 'autonomous territory'? The module knows about many types of autonomous entities and most of them categorize as if the word 'autonomous' weren't there, so 'autonomous province' categorizes like a 'province', etc. Let me know if you still want 'autonomous territory' separated from 'dependent territory'. Benwing2 (talk) 05:56, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Erm, ‘autonomous area/region’ and ‘autonomous territory’ are the same thing. I think they should definitely be separated from Category:en:Historical dependent territories. ·~   dictátor · mundꟾ  12:45, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Bot request for Erzgebirgisch
Hey Benwing. Could you please remove the manual categorization  in the entries that already have gmw-ecg (see e.g. sappn)? I've just changed the label module. Thanks in advance! &mdash; Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 11:15, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Done. Benwing2 (talk) 17:38, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Pseudo-acronym templates
Hello. Could you create the following two templates for pseudo-acronyms: pseudo-acronym (etymology template) and pseudo-acronym of (definition template)? Thank you! ·~  dictátor · mundꟾ  05:26, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I have done this. However, we need a definition for pseudo-acronym, and the documentation for needs its examples fixed. (Also,  could have more examples.) Can you help with these? Thanks! Benwing2 (talk) 06:10, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I’ll create the entry, and also check the other things you mentioned. Could you add a period to pseudo-acronym as it’s used in the etymology section? ·~   dictátor · mundꟾ  13:26, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
 * None of the other etymology templates have a built-in period at the end of them. Benwing2 (talk) 01:51, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Feminine equivalent of
Did you say you had a script for converting entries to feminine equivalent of? It seems we will be making the switch on Polish entries. Could you modify the script so as to absorb the link into t=, but remove the "female" text? So we end up with a format like on biochemiczka. Vininn126 (talk) 20:53, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
 * This shouldn't be hard. Can you point me to some existing entries that need to be converted so I have an idea what format(s) to expect? Benwing2 (talk) 02:30, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
 * OK, I found some entries. A couple of questions: (1) When converting entries like bandurzystka, do you want the m removed from the headword? (2) For entries like bandurzysta with definitions like , are these definitely male or should the definition actually read more like  ? Benwing2 (talk) 04:02, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I think we can go ahead and leave the m= in, unless @Shumkichi thinks otherwise? I think we should remove the "male" from the definition line altogether, so the male entries should just have the bandurzysta . Also, can we use the shortcut instead of the full template name? Vininn126 (talk) 09:53, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Sure. However, there are lots of different formats for "female" lines. Some examples:

It will take some work to figure out how to handle all these cases and what to do with them. So I'm thinking of rewriting all of them like this: etc. What do you think? If you'd rather put the definition inside the, that's OK too, but you'll have to specify at least for the cases above how you want each one handled. Benwing2 (talk) 00:38, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 1) Abkhaz
 * 2)  beginner female student
 * 3) female sloven
 * 4)  female abolitionist
 * 5) female absentee
 * 6) albino
 * 7)  young female who listens to alternative music and dresses unconventionally
 * 8)  female illiterate, female illiterate person
 * 9) Andorran.
 * 10)  amnestied, a female amnestied party
 * 11)  A female wealthy, private entrepreneur.
 * 12) female gossiper, chatter
 * 13) female blagger, smooth operator, smooth talker
 * : Abkhaz
 * : beginner female student
 * : female sloven
 * : female abolitionist


 * Any instance of female should be removed, and I think the link should be in the t= parameter, so:

#
 * Also while we are at it, can we remove "male" from definition lines? They should follow roughly the same patterns. Vininn126 (talk) 05:19, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I can remove "male". Can you tell me how to handle the following? Each one needs its own handling.


 * 1) Abkhaz
 * 2)  beginner female student
 * 3) female sloven
 * 4)  female abolitionist
 * 5) female absentee
 * 6) albino
 * 7)  young female who listens to alternative music and dresses unconventionally
 * 8)  female illiterate, female illiterate person
 * 9) Andorran.
 * 10)  amnestied, a female amnestied party
 * 11)  A female wealthy, private entrepreneur.
 * 12) female gossiper, chatter
 * 13) female blagger, smooth operator, smooth talker
 * Benwing2 (talk) 06:13, 23 June 2022 (UTC)


 * One of those in there just needed special attention. Let me know if any of these won't work. Vininn126 (talk) 06:28, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I'll see what I can do automatically, hopefully the remainder will be small. There are 1543 terms with "female" in the definition line that aren't given names or surnames; not sure how many of them have a m parameter. Benwing2 (talk) 06:31, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
 * And 776 with "male" in the definition line that aren't given names or surnames. Benwing2 (talk) 06:32, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Btw, no need to ping me - I have discussion subscriptions turned on :) Vininn126 (talk) 06:32, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
 * If we can figure out which ones don't have a corresponding m=/f=, I can take a look and see if they should automatically be removed or not. Vininn126 (talk) 06:34, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
 * What are discussion subscriptions? Never heard of them. As for missing m=/f=, I'll have the script output these. Benwing2 (talk) 06:35, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Discussion tools in beta features in settings. Check it out. And great, hopefully we'll be able to automate most, or there will be very few of them. Vininn126 (talk) 06:38, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I implemented this and made the changes. It made 1,796 changes on 1,522 pages. Some of these changes need to be reviewed and fixed up, e.g. klacz, źrebica, basiora where the words "mare, filly, she-wolf" ended up in the gloss. Also, sometimes the text inside of  describes the generic meaning and sometimes the female-specific meaning, which maybe should be cleaned up. The full list of changes is here: User:Benwing2/convert-pl-femeq-male.replacing Also, it output 515 warnings, see User:Benwing2/convert-pl-femeq-male.warnings. Most (436) of them are blocking, i.e. my script refused to change the line in question after seeing the warning, but some of them (the remaining 79, labeled "will continue") are non-blocking, and indicate places where the female equivalent should be added to the headword of a male term (e.g. in analizator, Arab, bachrocz, poznaniak, ...). The reasons for the warnings are various. In some cases the changes could potentially be made in any case, but I wasn't sure so I didn't make them. An example of this is terms with gender   instead of  . Some of them refer to animals (e.g. badylarz, baranek, kocur, ...), where they may actually refer only to male animals; others are mistakes that should be changed to   (e.g. abolicjonista). There are also places where two headword templates occur in the same section; in some of these, they are both on the same line, which may be OK (although perhaps they should still be combined), whereas in others, like abecadlarz, they are missing a section header. There are lots of other issues flagged as well (e.g. use of , missing m in the headword of a female term, terms that are actually relational adjectives, situations where a template call would end up inside of the  gloss (which may or may not be OK), etc. Benwing2 (talk) 03:25, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Just so I understand, female animals SHOULDN'T have the template? Vininn126 (talk) 10:30, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Okay, I think we can use a bot on a bunch of pages: could we make a diff like this to errors like
 * Page 15513 fajtłapa: WARNING: Saw male line without f= (will continue): headt=, line=# male inept person, bungler
 * Page 15513 fajtłapa: WARNING: Saw female line without m=: headt=, line=# inept person, bungler
 * ? Vininn126 (talk) 11:19, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Actually I went ahead and fixed those. The bigger issue is what do do with pages like biolog, where the feminine form is the same as the masculine but indeclinable, but there is a "synonym". What do you propose we do for such pages? Similarly we have ones like urolog where there is NO synonym. I think that might be easier, as we can use another headword with an indecl=1 parameter. Vininn126 (talk) 12:22, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
 * It's fine for female animals to use, but the gloss inside of should refer to the male equivalent (e.g. stallion if that's what the male equivalent of mare means). For cases like biolog I think what is currently there is fine, with two headwords, one using . 17:10, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
 * My signature somehow got messed up so I suspect you didn't get the ping. Benwing2 (talk) 00:09, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
 * So would it be possible to send it for the female animals? I know the bot doesn't like when there are different words, but can we tell it to ignore that for now? Vininn126 (talk) 09:57, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Can you give me an example of a line that didn't get changed, and how it ought to look? My bot didn't specifically ignore female animals; it did ignore male animals, on the theory that maybe the term really does refer to the male of the species and shouldn't have the word 'male' removed. Benwing2 (talk) 16:26, 26 June 2022 (UTC)


 * I think I misunderstood - as I was looking through animals it seems things are as they should be. Thanks for the help! Vininn126 (talk) 16:28, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

dicere
Could you please fix this error? 98.170.164.88 03:54, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

k*ck*n & f*ck*n
I got rid of the module error by passing k*cken (or f*cken, respectively) as the first parameter to the headword template, but this causes the headword to display improperly. Is there a better fix? CC User:Fytcha. 98.170.164.88 03:01, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I think it's OK to use here. If User:Fytcha can think of a better solution, I may be able to implement it. Benwing2 (talk) 03:04, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
 * A possibility would be to have a parameter to pass the the uncensored form so that the template knows which verb ending it is dealing with. However, seeing that there's only a grand total of two forms where this would be relevant, I would say don't waste your time on this. The simple head works too. &mdash; Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 03:13, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
 * It's like the old joke: "Patient: It hurts when I go like  [making a strange motion with their arm]. Doctor: Don't do ." Chuck Entz (talk) 05:52, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Verlan into back slang: Special:Diff/67180207
I don't quite see why this was done. With Category:Verlan being a subcat of Category:French back slang, all the terms are now redundantly categorized into a category as well as its parent which is usually category smell. &mdash; Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 11:51, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Most of the Verlan entries were explicitly categorizing into both categories using or similar so I wanted to preserve that; but feel free to change it, I think your logic is sound. Benwing2 (talk) 16:28, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Ah, I didn't know that. I'm going to remove it now so that fr only categorizes into the Verlan cat directly and not its parent. &mdash; Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 16:31, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello. As far as I’ve understood, is now changing to allow multiple terms, but is therefore switching out 3 and 4 with alt and t. My concerns are about changing the 4 parameter. Why not use the same solution as, which also allows multiple terms? After all, it’s more convenient, and seems to be the norm throughout the various link templates (i.e. writing the gloss after a double vertical bar). Eilífr / ᛅᛁᛚᛁᚠᚱ 09:39, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Not quite sure what you are referring to. It's true that uses a blank term, but what comes after the blank term is not a gloss, but a set of descriptions that apply collectively to all terms, where a description can be a qualifier like "rare" or "archaic", a dialect label, etc. Glosses must be added to terms using t, t2, etc., exactly as will be the case for . Note that  is only one character more than . It is possible to support the  format along with multiple terms, but (a) it's hacky, (b) it supports only one term and associated gloss, (c) it doesn't allow for an alternative/display form to be given in 3. My plan instead is to throw an error if the  format is used, with a descriptive message indicating that you should use t instead. I am also thinking of supporting the inline modifier format usable by //etc. and by //////etc. In this format, instead of using separate params like   you add the params as inline modifiers e.g. . This way you don't have to keep track of the number of terms in question, which is especially helpful if there are a large number of them. Benwing2 (talk) 01:16, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I’m sorry; I didn’t consider the possibility of multiple glosses. In the languages I contribute on, descendants usually haven’t diverged enough to need different glosses, so it didn’t strike my mind. You obviously know what’s best. Æilīfʀ / ᛅᛁᛚᛁᚠᛦ – Write to me 05:41, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Replacement of unnecessary redirects and templates (third batch, part 2)
Here is the next batch:


 * (to be retained as a shortcut) →
 * (to be retained as a shortcut) →
 * (to be retained as a shortcut) →
 * (to be retained as a shortcut) →
 * (to be retained as a shortcut) →
 * (to be retained as a shortcut) →
 * (to be retained as a shortcut) →
 * (to be retained as a shortcut) →
 * (to be retained as a shortcut) →
 * (to be retained as a shortcut) →
 * (to be retained as a shortcut) →
 * (to be retained as a shortcut) →
 * (to be retained as a shortcut) →
 * (to be retained as a shortcut) →
 * (to be retained as a shortcut) →
 * (to be retained as a shortcut) →
 * (to be retained as a shortcut) →
 * (to be retained as a shortcut) →
 * (to be retained as a shortcut) →
 * (to be retained as a shortcut) →

Thank you. — Sgconlaw (talk) 11:20, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Done. You might need to protect the Brontë ones to prevent them from being re-created. Benwing2 (talk) 01:31, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Maybe protect all of them just to be safe, seeing as how WF is determined to re-create them ... Benwing2 (talk) 02:12, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks! However, one replacement appears to have been missed: to . — Sgconlaw (talk) 07:41, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Which pages got missed? I only see some template pages still linking to . Benwing2 (talk) 10:10, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Looks like it was a caching problem again. Strange – I purged the cache but it was still showing entries transcluding the template. — Sgconlaw (talk) 12:52, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Bacon's Essayes
Here are a batch of templates all pertaining to. Essentially they relate to individual chapters published in the same book, so there is no reason why they should be individual quotation templates. Please replace the templates like this: →.

Thank you. — Sgconlaw (talk) 13:32, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Done. Benwing2 (talk) 01:02, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks! — Sgconlaw (talk) 19:43, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

Re:
Regarding adding a usage note for reflexive forms, I think this is unnecessary. It's quite a common feature of Italian verbs to add a clitic just to convey possession instead of adding a pronoun. E.g., "Mi sono lavato le mani" ("I washed my hands") or "Le hanno rubato la borsa" ("They stole her purse"). Imetsia (talk) 19:11, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I thought there was something going on other than just a regular dative clitic of possession. Benwing2 (talk) 23:22, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
 * @Imetsia, @Benwing2: Total OT, but since I heard this expression from you more than once: is "clitic of possession" a thing? I can't really find that category anywhere and I don't think any Italian would think of dative clitics as "possession" (unless they're thinking in English, and not Italian). The "mi" in "mi lavo le mani" is the same as the "gli"  of "gli parlo", they're both there just to substitute a prepositional phrase governed by the preposition . The meaning of "possession" is just incidental in reflexive verbs and works only if the object of the prepositional phrase happens to be a part of the body of the subject or some other thing closely connected to the subject itself. So mi lavo le mani = "lavo le mani a me" (not "lavo le mie mani", which would be wrong in Italian as a neutral sentence) has the same grammar as "gli lavo i piedi", as derived, say, from "lavo i piedi a questo bambino". If "possession" was the determining or main meaning of the clitic, you would also normally say things like "mi lavo la macchina" (which is not impossible but not neutral and in fact quite marked - it would be a case of reflexive pronoun used with an intensifying meaning, same as mi bevo una birra.). Sartma (talk) 10:13, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, you're right. Calling it a "clitic of possession" is a useful shorthand IMO (especially to explain the concept to an English speaker) although it's not, strictly speaking, correct. Imetsia (talk) 16:55, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

"Stop editing so fast"
lol, sadly, you can't stop the Wonderfool. I've seen him provide the part of speech as "Nun" instead of "Noun". Equinox ◑ 05:09, 5 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Yes I know; maybe we need to block him more aggressively though, at least that way it will temporarily slow him down like sticking a stick into the spokes. I'm getting tired of cleaning up after him. Benwing2 (talk) 05:11, 5 July 2022 (UTC)


 * I briefly tried doing a mass-deletion of his pages, whenever he got perma-blocked for switching into troll mode, because that might actually deter him (nobody wants weeks of work erased). I did that two or three times. But, end of the day, I didn't feel great about deleting mostly good entries. Sigh. The solution is probably just to take it all less seriously. Certainly as the project grows a bit, and trying to keep your eye on all of Recent Changes (while logged in) gets harder and harder &mdash; this is unnecessary stress. The project will succeed or fail, malgré Wonderfool. If it fails at least we made a really good bunch of free content. Although perhaps future historians will be more interested in the savage psychology of the talk pages. OK I'm gone. Equinox ◑ 10:57, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I'd be open to a block, guys. I'm not asking for one, but it's worth a try. Zumbacool (talk) 12:55, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

mistake on дочь
your bot seems to have deleted the listed diminutive and colloquial forms haphazardly on this entry https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=%D0%B4%D0%BE%D1%87%D1%8C&type=revision&diff=59737402&oldid=59729664. Anarhistička Maca (talk) 00:39, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
 * hasn't DELETED the diminutive and colloquial forms but MOVED them to the header. ( can be both colloquial and diminutive). The only issue with that edit I see that the empty headers and labels are not removed at the same time. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 00:49, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

desc and internal links
Thanks for your work on supporting multiple words in. I noticed that there are a lot (several thousand) desc which mention multiple words using internal links, e.g.:



Maybe that's something that could be cleaned up with your bot?

BTW, have you considered publishing the latest source code of your bot?
 * That can be cleaned up by bot, yes. I should put my bot's code on github, let me see about that. BTW you should sign your posts with four tildes, like this:  Benwing2 (talk) 03:56, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I forgot to sign. I'd appreciate it if you'd publish the source code. Thanks for your work on this bot! MartinMichlmayr (talk) 04:25, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
 * did you have time to publish the source code? MartinMichlmayr (talk) 05:06, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
 * but github says it has too many files to display. I don't know if you can pull the entire repository or if you'll hit that same limit. Benwing2 (talk) 05:58, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks so much! I was able to clone the repository. MartinMichlmayr (talk) 01:47, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

desc and bor=1
I noticed that you move the bor=1 parameter to the beginning of when you modify entries to use the new 2=, 3=. I would have thought an optional parameter like bor=1 would go to the end. I have seen both styles being used.

Is there any standard/consensus on what is more "correct"? (I know the order doesn't matter) MartinMichlmayr (talk) 03:58, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I put it at the beginning because it creates an arrow+tooltip at the beginning before the language name. I put certain params at the end for similar reasons. There isn't any consensus I know of in this case. Benwing2 (talk) 04:01, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the explanation. MartinMichlmayr (talk) 04:25, 9 July 2022 (UTC)

alt parameter for
You asked me to use alt= instead of 2= for.

I then wanted to use alt= for since alt= is much nicer/clearer than 2=, but that template doesn't support the alt paramater. Could you add it, or how should I request this? MartinMichlmayr (talk) 04:03, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I would bring this up in the Beer Parlour. It is not hard to add in this case but there are a great deal of templates that work like, and if we are going to make alt= an alias for 2= we should do it everywhere or at least in many places. Benwing2 (talk) 04:05, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I'll do that MartinMichlmayr (talk) 04:25, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
 * @MartinMichlmayr I’m unsure if you’ve tried this, but there’s no need to write “2=” when using l. You could write something like en, and that would show as helped (i.e. the word “helped” linking to “help” in English). Theknightwho (talk) 04:39, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
 * @Theknightwho Yes, the syntax you suggest is exactly what we use for Swahili and it works fine; I just thought using alt= makes it more explicit and is more consistent with other templates. MartinMichlmayr (talk) 11:56, 9 July 2022 (UTC)

dot in surname template
Hiya - how come you're removing the dots from the surname template? Is there a particular reason we want to do this? Theknightwho (talk) 04:10, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I'd like this to be consistent with (and ), which don't include the dot by default. Also, in general it's much easier to add a dot at the end than to use nodot or dot, which become unnecessary without an automatic dot. Benwing2 (talk) 04:13, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
 * BTW I am going to push some Lua code to clean up, making its overall format more consistent with and adding several new features. Benwing2 (talk) 04:15, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Cool - thanks. I have a mild preference for including it, but a bigger preference for consistency. Theknightwho (talk) 04:17, 9 July 2022 (UTC)


 * For Japanese entries at least, please don't do.
 * Before the bot edit, the display was (mostly) correct --  generated  .  For Japanese, we don't want a final dot.  (We don't want initial capitalization either, but that is out of scope for this thread. :))
 * Cheers, ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 21:43, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
 * The surname template used to automatically generate a final dot, so the call to  would have generated a final dot automatically. All the bot did was preserve the existing display; now it's more obvious that there's a final dot, but it was always there unless you used 1. If you want I can do a bot run to remove final periods from Japanese surname calls. Benwing2 (talk) 02:11, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Re: default dot, ah ya, I think I got confused by the two-step the bot did -- adding  and the period was a bit odd.
 * Re: removing the dot from in JA entries, that would be awesome if you could, thank you!  I know this is scope creep, but while you're at it, any chance you could also add   to ?
 * Cheers! ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 17:15, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I am doing a bot run to remove the trailing periods. I am also removing a rather than adding it because I changed surname to default to a lowercase article when the language is other than English. Benwing2 (talk) 05:02, 1 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Brilliant, thank you! ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 16:58, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Moby-Dick chapter in Wikisource
Hi! Can you train your bot to do some template changes? Things like this to link to Moby-Dick (1851) US edition, as Wikisource decided to delete the redirects. Dunderdool (talk) 18:02, 9 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Also, we have a new cleanup page at User:This, that and the other/broken interwiki links/2022-07-01/wikisource which has a bunch of similar errors Dunderdool (talk) 18:06, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Clever user name ... did you consider Thunderdrool or Chundertool? Unfortunately, in broken links like this I don't know where/how to find the correct non-broken link. Also ideally if the link to Wikisource is contained inside of a template reference like the one you mentioned above, the Wikisource link should be in the template itself, e.g. Template:RQ:Melville Moby-Dick should directly point to Wikisource (although it already points to archive.org, which is probably good enough). Benwing2 (talk) 04:37, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Well, I assume it can be done on a case-by-case basis, like replacing all instances of Dunderdool (talk) 19:33, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Go ahead and whip up that list, I can work with User:This, that and the other's list assuming it is complete (please comment if it's not). Benwing2 (talk) 20:01, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I don't see any reason why the list should be incomplete; it's from the  table in the latest DB dump. If anything, it will contain false positives. This, that and the other (talk) 23:17, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

Replacement of broken Wikisource links
The first batch, to see how successful it is
 * [[s:Moby-Dick/Chapter → [[s:Moby-Dick (1851) US edition/Chapter
 * [[s:The_Pickwick_Papers/Chapter → [[s:The Pickwick Papers (Gutenberg edition)/Chapter
 * [[s:Frankenstein/Chapter → [[s:Frankenstein, or the Modern Prometheus (Revised Edition, 1831)/Chapter
 * [[s:Treasure Island/Chapter → [[s:Treasure Island (1883)/Chapter
 * [[s:The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn/Chapter → [[s:The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn (1884)/Chapter
 * [[s:Romance of the Three Kingdoms/Chapter → [[s:Translation:Romance of the Three Kingdoms/Chapter
 * Should be done. Fire away with the next batch. Benwing2 (talk) 00:32, 16 July 2022 (UTC)


 * The Treasure Island and Huck Finn ones don't look to have been fixed. The other main one is [ [(s|wikisource):Song of Everlasting Regret → [ [s:Translation:Song of Everlasting Regret This, that and the other (talk) 06:14, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
 * The unfixed links use weird formatting (at least two different unusual formats); I'll have to update my script to account for this. Benwing2 (talk) 06:19, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

Template:descendants tree and alts
In I removed several parameters from desctree because the module was looking for descendants sections in those entries and they had none, so it put the entry in a tracking category. I can see why put them there: they're all alt forms of the first Old French entry in the list. It used to be that the module would display all the alt forms next to the main descendant, but now it doesn't. Is this the way it's supposed to work now, or is something wrong? Or is it temporary while you're working on the modules? Chuck Entz (talk) 07:10, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
 * This must be a mistake; I was not trying to change the behavior of desctree. I'll look into this tomorrow as it's 2am where I'm at now :) ... Benwing2 (talk) 07:12, 13 July 2022 (UTC)

 templates: no subcategories
E.g., see, which uses : when the triangle (▶) is clicked, it is stated that there are no “no pages or subcategories”, which is not true: Category:English words suffixed with -ful has three subcategories. J3133 (talk) 09:45, 15 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Works for me. Either someone fixed it or it was a transient server issue. This, that and the other (talk) 04:24, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Oh lol I thought this was GP. Sorry for interrupting! This, that and the other (talk) 04:25, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
 * No problem. BTW it works fine for me too. Benwing2 (talk) 04:26, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Now also works for me, but it did not work from 12 (when I noticed it after moving the pages to subcategories) to 15 July. J3133 (talk) 08:11, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I think this may be a transient server issue; the server sometimes takes awhile to refresh categories and related data. Benwing2 (talk) 16:58, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
 * You need to add pos as I did. — Fenakhay ( حيطي · مساهماتي ) 17:57, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I agree with your change (adding “adjective” to etymology 1 and “noun” to etymology 2); however, it is supposed to also work without pos, as it did previously but does not any more:
 * J3133 (talk) 18:03, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure what's going on. I did clean up the implementation of the  function about a month ago, but I checked this talk page with the older code and it still shows no subcategories. The actual implementation of   is a parser function that we don't have control over; maybe you need to file a Phabricator ticket, I suspect they changed something in the underlying implementation that broke this use case. Benwing2 (talk) 18:16, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure what's going on. I did clean up the implementation of the  function about a month ago, but I checked this talk page with the older code and it still shows no subcategories. The actual implementation of   is a parser function that we don't have control over; maybe you need to file a Phabricator ticket, I suspect they changed something in the underlying implementation that broke this use case. Benwing2 (talk) 18:16, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

Wikisource replacement part 2

 * [[s:Ulysses (novel)/Chapter → [[s:Ulysses (1922)/Chapter
 * [[s:David Copperfield/Chapter → [[s:Personal History of David Copperfield (1850)/Chapter

Dunderdool (talk) 08:54, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Done. Benwing2 (talk) 17:02, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

Wikisource replacement part 3

 * Dunderdool (talk) 15:22, 17 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Already got this. User:This, that and the other mentioned it above. Benwing2 (talk) 18:47, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

Replacement of unnecessary redirects and templates (third batch, part 3)
Here is the next batch:



Thank you. — Sgconlaw (talk) 21:49, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Done. Benwing2 (talk) 22:20, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks! — Sgconlaw (talk) 21:07, 17 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Can you check the correctness and naming of the templates I extracted from projectlink? They are R:Collier's, R:New International Encyclopedia, R:New Student's Reference Work, R:American Cyclopedia, R:Americana, R:Britannica 1911, R:Britannica 1922. They are counted currently as interwiki templates (CAT:Interwiki templates) because they link to Wikisource, but maybe that's wrong. Benwing2 (talk) 21:18, 17 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Correctness and naming in what sense, please? — Sgconlaw (talk) 21:22, 17 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I guess mostly do they have the right names for their purpose, and are the templates formatted correctly for R:... templates that go into Further Reading or References? Benwing2 (talk) 21:25, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

There are some redirects which I missed, and a newly created one. Could you please carry out the following replacements?


 * Oh dear, and I spotted a typo. Please replace →
 * Oh dear, and I spotted a typo. Please replace →

Thank you. — Sgconlaw (talk) 04:43, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Should be fixed. Benwing2 (talk) 00:33, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

entrarle los siete males
Hi. I want this to appear as a headword only used in third-person plural. Like the handy. Same for caer cuatro gotas and caer chuzos de punta. Dunderdool (talk) 07:30, 19 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Also, I want no ser para tanto and no ser plan to show (if anything) "no ha sido..." and not "no sido". Same with ni ir ni viene. These negative words in the headword seem to fuck things up a bit... Dunderdool (talk) 07:33, 19 July 2022 (UTC)
 * And at llover a mares and others, I tried to combined two things inside the <> bit but it broke. Dunderdool (talk) 07:39, 19 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Finally, írsele el santo al cielo should have as past participle "se le ha ido el santo al cielo" Dunderdool (talk) 07:42, 19 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Yup, Module:es-verb needs several things changed in it; I'm working on it now, hopefully I can finish the changes by tomorrow evening. Benwing2 (talk) 06:14, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I added support for and changed the reflexive verb table so that the combined forms are removed (they didn't really make sense for reflexive verbs) but in their place are what I'm terming "personal non-finite" forms (jambarme, jambarte, ...; jambándome, jambándote, ...). This might be the wrong terminology but it reminds of me the "personal infinitive" in Portuguese. Benwing2 (talk) 05:19, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Fixes for the past participle still to come. Benwing2 (talk) 05:20, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

Template:el-noun-proper-form
Whether or not was good or useful or whatever it would surely have been polite to discuss the matter with what a cursory look would have shown to be the main users. It is helpful to old and especially new editors for HWL templates to follow similar patterns. — Salt  marsh  🢃  18:18, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you, because I forgot about it. Also, no problem, if a unification of all languages with is decided. I understand too the necessity of facilitating all editors to edit all languages. &#8209;&#8209;Sarri.greek &#9835; I 18:26, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi, I'm a bit confused, what is the context here? I remember a discussion a month or so back about orphaning some  templates, is this a continuation of this same discussion? Did something happen recently? In general, as you know, I think we should eliminate templates that don't do anything but wrap head, but if we are to keep a template of this nature it should be called   or maybe  ; the current template has the words in the wrong order. Benwing2 (talk) 20:32, 7 August 2022 (UTC)


 * When I created 13 years ago this "correct" nomenclature must have passed me by. Going from lang > POS > POSproper > form seemed logical. I'm easy about whether spaces or hyphens should be used in a name, BUT all should be changed as quickly as possible. Many el- templates don't "merely wrap" they may be shorter and are certainly more familiar to this old dog who has difficulty learning new tricks :) ! Having templates which wrap another surely do no harm, newbies can still use the generic ones.
 * A quick word might have saved all of this - fraternally — Salt  marsh  🢃  07:15, 8 August 2022 (UTC)


 * I should be more positive about this — please hold your fire for a few weeks while I learn a bit more about . I have few loose ends to sort out first. — Salt  marsh  🢃  19:17, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your consideration. Perhaps the el-...head templates were created at a time, when  was not thorough enough. I understand the agonising  effort by Benwing2 to unify hundreds, maybe thousands, of xx-head templates which are in reality no different. Only some, serve a language-specific task, like the grc-..head templates which add Declension.Categories.1.2.3 (and again, for some PoS, not all).
 * ! could the parameter |head= (which is practically an alt=) be a free text?? at the moment, we cannot do italics in it. As in taxonomic terms. cf [attempt@Κίτρος], Thank you, keep up your good work. O!, and also, please, pretty please, consider at some time in the future my problems with greek etymological categories (-at my Talk-: I am desparate and depressed about them) &#8209;&#8209;Sarri.greek &#9835; I 19:52, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
 * It took me awhile to figure out why you can't do italics on Κίτρος like you tried to do. This doesn't have anything to do with head per se; rather, head (and lots of other templates) wraps the text in the  CSS class, which sets up appropriate fonts for Greek text but also on this line  overrides the font style to be , which prevents italics (and bold face) from having any effect. For the same reason, en appears in italics  but el  doesn't. It works when you write Κίτρος manually because it isn't being wrapped in this fashion. If you take out the offending line, Greek headwords display as bold by default, and also as italic if you put quotes around it like this. I really don't know why this line is present but I would be in favor of removing it. Maybe you can bring this up in the Grease Pit? Someone like User:Erutuon might know why things are the way they are. Benwing2 (talk) 03:49, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

de-noun male/female referents
What should be the standard formatting for entries like, which can refer to both male/female? The way it is handled in that entry (2 headword lines, separated by or) looks a bit weird. If we need two headword lines, shouldn't it be handled by the template/module itself? Jberkel 19:54, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I formatted it with two headword lines because (as I gather) the genitive differs depending on whether the gender is male or female, and having two headword lines seemed the clearest way of expressing this. The alternative, I think, is to have two entries on the same headword line saying something like genitive when masculine and genitive when feminine but that would introduce significant complexities into the code as well as into the template specification, and it didn't seem worth it just to handle this particular situation. Having the module generate both headword lines would introduce similar complexities. What do you think is weird about the format, is it having two lines or is it the word or, or something else? Maybe User:Fytcha can comment. Benwing2 (talk) 20:47, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
 * On a balance, I think this (2 headword lines) is probably the best (or, least-bad) approach, clearer/easier than trying to combine the forms and then re-explain which one applies when. One other possibility, although I'm not inclined to it, is to have two entirely different ===Noun=== sections. - -sche (discuss) 22:27, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I personally really like having two separate headword lines (and two declension boxes) for different grammatical genders (makes the correspondence of which genitive/plural belongs to which gender unmistakable), but I do see the concern brought up by Jberkel; having to write HTML is definitely a bit weird. Not sure if there is any better solution though. &mdash; Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 12:27, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I find it weird because this pattern (2 headword lines) seems particular to German entries, and there's also some inline HTML formatting required. I understand that you don't want to further increase the complexity of the templates, but couldn't we have a smallish wrapper template which delegates to  and does the necessary formatting evils inside the template? It would also ensure these entries are formatted consistently. So in summary, if we need two headword lines, make it look (from an editor's perspective) like one.  – Jberkel 23:02, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
 * IMO having a separate template just for this special case would be worse than updating the module appropriately. The problem is that it's not going to a simple template unless you want it really hacky and clunky and supporting only this particular use case. Benwing2 (talk) 01:27, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Ok, no problem. I'll add some documentation to to mention these cases. – Jberkel 08:00, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
 * On second thought I think it may be possible to create a template like you suggested. Let me think about this. Benwing2 (talk) 03:14, 9 August 2022 (UTC)


 * FWIW, I just noticed Wirrwarr which presents one way of doing something like this on one line; it could be made more concise by not repeating the headword the second time (i.e. just saying "...or rarely f..."). Whether this is better, IDK; it seems like a question of whether concision (putting everything compactly on one line) or clarity (showing, on each line, the inflected forms for the given genders) is more important. - -sche (discuss) 02:00, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Question
Hi, i am from bnwikt. I need help with a module. produce. For bnwikt, i need to write this as "saccharin-of plural". Question: from which module is this "of" coming from? আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 14:40, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
 * See lines 920 and 923 of Module:form of. Benwing2 (talk) 01:25, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
 * How can i swap the position? For bnwikt, i need to write this as "saccharin-of plural". I am not good at lua. Please feel free to edit here. You can preview with this page. --আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 02:40, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I don't have time to do this. It will be significant amounts of work to change the module to support Bengali. Benwing2 (talk) 02:45, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Errors in Italian bot fixes
Hi, I've found an error in the rollout of uder seen at (I think with etymology-only codes), and another at  with syn absorbing text in parentheses. Ultimateria (talk) 19:59, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for pointing these issues out. The script to convert synonyms to use syn is pretty complicated and Italian was the first language I ran it on; I've since fixed it to better handle parens after the synonyms. There were 46 examples I found where it incorporated parenthesized text like this and I cleaned them up. I think the issue with uder is not related to etymology-only codes but simply happens whenever the link was a raw one rather than one that used l or m. Let me see if I can fix these up too. Benwing2 (talk) 01:22, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
 * There are too many different formats involving  to clean them up automatically (often the translation and/or transliteration follows the raw link, in various formats), plus several false positives like this:
 * From the onomatopoeia.
 * Benwing2 (talk) 03:13, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Module:see
Hi — when used with an English term (I haven't tried other langs) the term is produced in italics, not so with Greek. I assume this is an error, but I am reluctant to attempt editing Module:see. — Salt  marsh  🢃  08:30, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I think this is the same issue as I mentioned above under Template:el-noun-proper-form; there's a CSS setting in MediaWiki:Common.css that disables italics for Greek text. User:Sarri.greek brought this up in the Grease Pit. Benwing2 (talk) 02:42, 10 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Sorry - not paying attention! So the Greek term from should be in italics as well. But shouldn't the "term", in all cases, be in regular text - as with ? —  Salt  marsh  🢃  09:46, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I think I put it in italics because your template implementation did that (maybe?), but probably it's better in regular (upright) text, because it's essentially a list of items, and we normally use l for that, which produces upright text. If you agree, I'll fix the code appropriately. Benwing2 (talk) 06:05, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Replacement of unnecessary redirects and templates (third batch, part 4)
Here is the next batch:



Thank you. — Sgconlaw (talk) 20:28, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Done. Benwing2 (talk) 06:18, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks! — Sgconlaw (talk) 13:10, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Other Misc Cleanup
I just wanna say I noticed you did some other cleanup on Polish entries. Thanks! Vininn126 (talk) 15:43, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Undeletion of Female people / Male people
Hate to be annoying but would you mind, if you have the time, having a look into WT:RFDO again? It's relatively simple: what was formerly categorized as "{Male,Female} X" should now be categorized as "{Male,Female} people" and "X". If you're not interested or don't have the time, let me know and I'll stop pestering you about it. &mdash; Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 00:10, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Haven't forgotten about this; been meaning to look into this. I'll get to this after the stuff I'm doing with numbers. Benwing2 (talk) 01:05, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Should be done, and the categories are being created now. Benwing2 (talk) 06:57, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you a lot! &mdash; Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 23:04, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Could you remove them from Polish pages? It's creating a lot of inconsistency, especially since we've switched over to . Sorry to bother! Vininn126 (talk) 07:51, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Which categories do you want removed? Just "Male/female people" or also the occupational categories, and just for femeq pages or for the masculine pages as well? Benwing2 (talk) 02:14, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I'd prefer to have them more generic - so we'd end up with just "People" and "Occupations". Vininn126 (talk) 07:00, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Can you be more specific about exactly what you want changed/removed, and on which sets of pages? Benwing2 (talk) 08:30, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm wondering if we can go back to what we had before the recent bot change re-adding the male-female categories. I can see why we should keep the distinction for some languages, but since femeq basically takes care of that, I think pages with Male/Female people/occupations should just go to "People/Occupations" Vininn126 (talk) 08:32, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
 * So before the latest additions, a term like altowiolinista had no topic categories except Music. Now it also has Male people and Musicians. Surely that's better than before? If we undo this, it will remove both of the added categories. Does a term like altowiolinista refer specifically to males, or generically to people? If the former, then IMO Male people should stay, otherwise it should be removed, but IMO in either case Musicians should stay. Similarly for altowiolinistka, Musicians should stay but maybe Female people is redundant to Category:Polish female equivalent nouns. Benwing2 (talk) 08:52, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Well the lack of ANY category seems like some sort of oversight, not sure how it came to be that way. I suppose we can keep the genders on pages with the m/f parameter in the headword, and remove it from those without. (Those are the ones that refer more generically to a person). Vininn126 (talk) 09:01, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
 * What do you mean "pages with the m/f parameter in the headword"? Can you give me an example or two? Benwing2 (talk) 01:48, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Hang on, I see the male/female categories are placed under the general "People" category now?
 * I had in mind, for example bandyta/bandytka (distinction should be kept) and arcyleń (distinction should not be kept, there is no female equivalent). Vininn126 (talk) 06:51, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

fiellan
Why is English "fell" through the Anglian variant? What form would we have through the West Saxon variant? https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/fiellan ПростаРечь (talk) 18:49, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Most everything in modern English is derived through Anglian, cf. cold from Anglian cald not from West Saxon ċeald. Can't say what would be the West Saxon version. Benwing2 (talk) 00:43, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Replacement of unnecessary redirects and templates (third batch, part 5)
Here is the next batch:



Thank you. — Sgconlaw (talk) 22:14, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Done. Benwing2 (talk) 06:46, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks! — Sgconlaw (talk) 13:28, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Small Bot Job
Would you be willing to do a small bot job on Polish lemmas? change any instance of {{gl|a, {{gl|an and {{gl|the (with the space) to just {{gl| ? Essentially I want to remove articles from glosses, us Polish editors don't add them. Vininn126 (talk) 08:21, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

add missing final period (full stop) in 'From ...' line
Thanks for adding the period to From lines. However, I noticed at least two cases that the bot didn't handle properly (i.e. where no period should have been added). See these two reverts:

https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=sali&type=revision&diff=68974555&oldid=68778733

https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=VVU&diff=prev&oldid=68970000

Hopefully you can improve the detection. MartinMichlmayr (talk) 03:37, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for pointing these out. I do have a check for ; in this case there was a hidden U+200E (left-to-right marker) after the final   that was throwing things off. I also have a check for periods followed by various sorts of quotation markers, but I forgot to account for double and triple apostrophe markers. Benwing2 (talk) 04:18, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Should be fixed now. Benwing2 (talk) 04:49, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks! MartinMichlmayr (talk) 10:29, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Category:English compound words
Did your bot just move a page? How does that work? Anyway, I am seeing a lot of red category links in old entries now like and. Can I assume this problem will fix itself later? Thanks. Equinox ◑ 01:36, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, it will fix itself later. I changed the module code to use 'terms' instead of 'words' in categories like this; in time, all the pages currently in Category:English compound words will get automatically moved to Category:English compound terms as the servers regenerate the pages. Unfortunately this will take a bit of time (maybe a day or so); there's no way to rename categories and have the pages instantly move to the new categories. Benwing2 (talk) 01:39, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
 * BTW I suppose the alternative is to create new categories while leaving the old ones alone, and then eventually delete the old ones; but that would lose the page history. Benwing2 (talk) 01:42, 2 September 2022 (UTC)


 * I reckon we should do automatic "null edits" on every single entry in the dictionary. Ha ha. Okay, fine, I trust you. Equinox ◑ 01:43, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Spanish participles renamed from Verb to Participle
I saw you changed a number of Spanish "Verb" forms to "Participle", including neviscada but not neviscado. Is there any reason you didn't convert neviscado? If "Participle" is the preferred, format, I'll update my bot to detect and generate "Participle" forms where it would have previously generated "Verb" forms and it should catch and convert anything your bot might have skipped.

Also, I saw the switch from R:DRAE to R:es:DRAE. Are you planning something similar for R:TLFi to R:fr:TLFi? I have no preference, but will need to update my bot if there is a change. JeffDoozan (talk) 23:46, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Definitely neviscado's header should read "Participle" and not "Verb", and its headword should have "participle" as the POS rather than "verb form". Normally a participle's headword should read es-past participle but in this case since it's an impersonal verb it should read es-past participle (and forms like neviscada, neviscados, neviscadas should be deleted). I think the reason this didn't get converted is I went through the categories Category:Spanish past participles and Category:Spanish past participle forms but didn't catch participles that exist only in Category:Spanish verb forms. If you can clean these up, that would be great; last year I wrote a script to clean up Italian past participles and past participle forms in a similar fashion and it ended up running over 1,000 lines due to the multitude of different ways these terms were formatted. As for R:TLFi, I will probably make a similar change; I'll let you know if/when this happens. Benwing2 (talk) 02:37, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Bot's edit to volere bene
Hi Benwing, I fixed a mistake by your bot, which edited in the tenses for 'volere dire' instead of 'volere bene' as you can see. Just letting you know in case there were other such edits, Kritixilithos (talk) 19:25, 11 September 2022 (UTC).
 * Thank you. This is likely to be a one-off; anything that says "manually assisted" means I manually edited it in a text file and only used the bot to save the changes. This was almost certainly just a one-time cut-and-paste error and I imagine there aren't others like this. Benwing2 (talk) 19:34, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

multitrans
There's an issue with multitrans, as you can see here, blank space is added before the first entry. Would you mind fixing it? Esszet (talk) 03:28, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
 * The only way I can think of "fixing" it and allow multitrans to go on its own line is to output a  at the beginning, but this will cause issues (I think) if multitrans is added on the same line as trans-top. User:Erutuon and/or User:This, that and the other, can you comment? Benwing2 (talk) 04:13, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Having done a few experiments just now, surprisingly enough, I don't think this is going to break anything, even if multitrans is on the same line as trans-top. It gets transformed to  either way. This, that and the other (talk) 05:00, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the late reply, but I don't know how to do that. Esszet (talk) 16:18, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
 * That was directed at Benwing. I'm not sure if he took action on this or not. This, that and the other (talk) 01:55, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Not yet, let me see if I can fix it. Benwing2 (talk) 03:52, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

Russian syllable count bug
Hiya - (you may well be aware of this), but I've noticed that Russian has incorrect syllable counts for words ending in, which the module treats as a single syllable. That means is categorised as two syllables and so on. I'm also not sure that is two syllables either. Theknightwho (talk) 03:29, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I don't think it's a bug. Consonants clusters are common in Russian and inserting a shwa, which you may have in mind in such words, may not even sound standard. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 03:43, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
 * This similar two-syllable -изм entry has an audio - . Russians don't have issues pronouncing such consonant clusters. They may happen in much more awkward positions from some non-Slavic perspectives. Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 03:51, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
 * @Atitarev That sounds like 3 syllables to my ear - same for . The pronunciations are very similar to English. Theknightwho (talk) 04:00, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
 * This is what you perceive. In any case, what you're suggesting seems like an original research. A few reference books were used to make the module. Optional shwa-insertion does happen in some positions and for some speakers (e.g.  - the recording has no shwa) but it's not considered the norm and not in this case. Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 04:11, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Normatively there is no schwa in -изм. Ivanova, for example, underlines all occurrences of -изм in her "New Russian Orthoepic Dictionary" to indicate that it should be pronounced as written rather than with a schwa. Benwing2 (talk) 04:14, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
 * BTW what Anatoli is referring to with schwa insertion occurs optionally e.g. in контр- (I think at least; e.g. see the pronunciation of контрреволюция). Benwing2 (talk) 04:15, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
 * @Benwing2, Yep, that one is hard even for Russians, LOL. However, some people make a stop and pronounce as two words with a micropause in between but no shwa. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 04:28, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Ah yeah - also compare and километр - big difference. Theknightwho (talk) 04:34, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks both - this came up in the process of making something similar for Mongolian, which has a large number of Russian borrowings (and does have a syllable boundary at that point, as it has a defined set of allowable word-final clusters). I'll defer to you both. Theknightwho (talk) 04:19, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
 * This document on pages 127-128 talks about consonant clusters, which arose from the deletion of older syllabic ъ and ь in Old East Slavic (there are examples of initial and final positions): http://mproctor.net/docs/diss/chap6.pdf
 * Yeah, thanks for working on Mongolian pronunciations! The vowel harmony in Mongolian is quite different from Russian, so it may not help in that respect. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 04:23, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Definitely - there's a recording here, and it's really distinctive. It also doubles the middle consonant, too. Theknightwho (talk) 04:28, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Belarusian and Ukrainian, which are very close linguistically have various vowel-harmony feature that Russian doesn't have. Ukrainian is considered more harmonious than Russian for that reason. Take a look at the declension and usage notes at Belarusian Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 04:33, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Theknightwho (talk) 04:36, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

Mongolian words borrowed from Russian - a technical question
Hiya - Mongolian has three regular rules that apply only to words borrowed from Russian: the two straightforward ones are that becomes  (with a regular exception) and that unstressed final vowels are dropped. However, the third is that is treated as  for the purpose of vowel harmony, but remains orthographically unchanged. This therefore affects the vowels used in any inflectional suffixes (e.g. the genitive of is группийн not группын). It's not always easy to determine whether a word has been borrowed from Russian, and I was wondering if there might be a way to make use of your extensive Russian modules to run a spot check as to whether a word is likely of Russian origin. This would also be more useful generally, as loanwords as a whole have other rules governing them too, and Russian is the source for most of them. In a broad sense, the situation is probably analogous to the Greek inflections in Latin. Theknightwho (talk) 12:03, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
 * This is not easy to do. In general it's possible to exclude terms from being potential Russian loanwords by looking for things that don't occur in Russian words (e.g. non-Russian Cyrillic characters, certain sequences of vowels, characters like ы and ъ at the start of a word, sequences like кы and гы, etc.) but beyond that I'm not sure what can be done. This type of problem can be approximated using machine learning but even then there will be mistakes in both directions, so it couldn't be used to issue an error and probably wouldn't be good as a default since there wouldn't be an easy way of predicting whether the default is correct, and any change to the algorithm will cause some breakage. In a declension module I don't think you could do much better than implement some basic, easy to predict defaults as to whether a term is a loanword, and have a param to override. Benwing2 (talk) 00:40, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks - I did consider looking for consonant clusters that don't exist in native Mongolian terms, and specifically in relation to Russian it might be worth including a list of predictable prefixes to cross-check against (e.g. ), particularly given that it's often technical language that has been borrowed. In essence, I don't want knowledge of Russian to be a requirement to actually use the template, and the last thing we want is a load of incorrect forms being generated by someone cluelessly putting things through acceleration. I wonder if it's worth having a mandatory parameter re loanwords, that if excluded would give a prediction with a warning that it may not be accurate, which would be intended for the preview field. Theknightwho (talk) 00:50, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I would think a mandatory param needs to be truly mandatory to be of use, i.e. it throws an error if omitted. Otherwise people will miss the warning or ignore it. Note that it doesn't have to be an actual param, it could be a single character with two possibilities (e.g. '.' = no loanword, '+' = loanword or something) attached to the word, required if the word has a -у- in it (except possibly with certain well-defined cases with a default). Benwing2 (talk) 01:01, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Sure thing - that's a good idea. I might actually create a distinction between Russian and non-Russian loanwords (which are, realistically, from English), as the non-Russian loans don't have the shift in vowel harmony with у. It's essentially because they're approximating the Russian pronunciation. Theknightwho (talk) 01:13, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
 * It must not be easy to determine words of Russian origin but as you suggested, sometimes just dropping the final vowel from the Russian term may give you a Mongolian descendant if it exists, like -> . You may not be able to tell, if it takes a form like, though and there could be false positives like , as you know :)
 * Complex consonant clusters may also suggest foreign origin. Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 04:16, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks! If you take a look at this list and sort by status, you can get an idea of which loanwords may be a problem. The list is actually to test my code for detecting which stems lose the vowel before the final consonant when inflected, but as loanwords never do it's useful to see which ones need manual filtering (there are 884 in the list). Looking for foreign clusters would knock out (no ск) and  (no double consonants at the start of words). It's a slow process. Theknightwho (talk) 04:38, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

top
Hi Benwing,

Has something about this template changed recently? It doesn't seem to be splitting things into columns now. For instance the descendants section of furunculus displays as one giant column for me instead of the three that there should be.

Nicodene (talk) 05:46, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
 * There's a difference between top, which is a redirect to topics, and the templates with numbers in their names such as top2, top3, etc. top3 splits things into three columns. Chuck Entz (talk) 06:02, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Right, thank you. The latter then. Nicodene (talk) 06:06, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

German compounds are written solid
Heads up, German compounds are written solid. This makes a bot's incorrect. See e.g. de:W:Leerzeichen in Komposita. --Dan Polansky (talk) 15:18, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I think this is an opinion. I know German closed compounds are written solid but no one says German open compounds aren't compounds. Benwing2 (talk) 16:40, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
 * There is now a discussion about this in Beer parlour in August. Reliable sources I linked from that discussion say German has no open compounds. And even in English not every adjective-noun combination is a compound. For your convenience: Duden:Kompo­sition: Zusammen­schreibung, Ge­trennt­schreibung, Binde­strich; Leerzeichen in Komposita. --Dan Polansky (talk) 16:43, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Bot Job
Hey, I was hoping you could help with what I hope is a fairly easy bot job. On User:Vininn126/wanted I have a few indices.

What I would like specifically is: If there is a blue link in the indices for any word in "Linde" or "SJP1861", to add (Linde) and  respectively to Further reading. I have them organized by letter so the bot will have to be able to check that, or perhaps just download the lists. I'd also like them to appear in that order on pages after any currently existing links. Unfortunately due to historical spellings many words that we could add the link to will be skipped in this way, but the way I see it we are adding free value to pages. I'd also like to do this for, but unfortunately some of the links from there will be dead, perhaps there is a way to check that but it would be extra work. The other dictionaries listed there require parameters and as such can not be added so automatically. I am unsure if I explained the first part 100% clearly, so let me know if there's something I need to expand upon. Thanks! Vininn126 (talk) 22:19, 1 October 2022 (UTC)


 * There would be an exception - when the templates already exist on the page. In that situation it should be skipped. Vininn126 (talk) 13:10, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I'll get to this soon. Benwing2 (talk) 01:09, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Another exception will be if a term appears multiple times in the index, in which case the link(s) should only be added once. Vininn126 (talk) 09:48, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Any update on this? Vininn126 (talk) 13:58, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I think I understand what you're looking for. When you say for that "some of the links from there will be dead", what do you mean exactly? Benwing2 (talk) 22:06, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
 * What happens is a word is in their index, but if you go to the page (i.e. ambona) you get this, when normally a pages looks like this.Vininn126 (talk) 22:08, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

Replacement of unnecessary redirects and templates (third batch, part 6)
Hi, here's the next lot:


 * → (update 2 to II, and 3 to III.)
 * (to be retained as a shortcut) →
 * ,, (to be retained as a shortcut) →
 * (to be retained as a shortcut) →
 * ,, (to be retained as a shortcut) →
 * (to be retained as a shortcut) →
 * ,, (to be retained as a shortcut) →
 * (to be retained as a shortcut) →
 * ,, (to be retained as a shortcut) →
 * ,, (to be retained as a shortcut) →

Also, has been updated so that archaic forms of verbs such as walkest and walketh are only displayed if the parameter 1 is added. Is it possible to have your bot check for situations where the template has been used in an entry, and if a verb has archaic forms that have been created, to add 1 to ? Thank you. — Sgconlaw (talk) 19:03, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Apologies for the slow response. Everything will be easy to do except for the changes to en-conj, which I haven't evaluated yet. I will go ahead and do everything else. Benwing2 (talk) 20:34, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
 * No worries – thanks very much! — Sgconlaw (talk) 20:42, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Sorry to jump in here, but Landon and Haggard are done now. For Landon, there are some quotes which specify "pages" without "pageref", so they need manual fixing:
 * – Jberkel 21:08, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
 * oh, great! Thanks. — Sgconlaw (talk) 21:14, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
 * oh, great! Thanks. — Sgconlaw (talk) 21:14, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

Module:orv-IPA
Hi, could you help me out? I'd like to display the pronunciation the same way the Ancient Greek module does it (so with a switch that alternates between inline E -> L on one hand and all three the IPA pronunciation each on its own row on the other), but I can't figure out how to do that. Would you know how to do that? Thanks in advance. Thadh (talk) 16:53, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Akkadian inflection tables
Hi @Benwing2! How is your workload these days? I'd still like to borrow you and your skills to create inflection tables for Akkadian verbs, nouns and adjectives. Would you be available sometime? — Sartma 【𒁾𒁉 ● 𒊭 𒌑𒊑𒀉𒁲】 13:59, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi. That would be a major undertaking and I don't really have time to help right now. Feel free to add the request to User:Benwing2/todo but I can't guarantee any time line for when I can help. Benwing2 (talk) 04:57, 14 October 2022 (UTC)
 * @Benwing2: It's ok, I do understand it would be a lot of work. I'm just quite unhappy with the templates we are currently using. They are partial, badly structured and don't really take into account all cases. They also give automatic generated phonetic cuneiform spellings just for the sake of it, without taking into account actual attested spellings or dialectal/language stage variants. The matter of cuneiform spelling is too complex and nuanced to be dealt with a simplified automatic cuneiform spelling module. Would it at least be possible to delete the cuneiform spellings from the templates? They've been added by the creator of the templates without any previous discussion. If it's not possible, I'm also considering deleting all the instances where the templates have been used. They're not finalised templates anyway, they have a lot of issues, but I guess they do give a degree of information, even if incomplete/simplified, so they might still have some worth? The cuneiform really needs to go though. — Sartma 【𒁾𒁉 ● 𒊭 𒌑𒊑𒀉𒁲】 08:27, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

de-noun plural
Something's strange here: Special:Permalink/69508182 The plural is correct for the main lemma. Some special logic with lowercase? Jberkel 14:29, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I think the issue here is that lowercase genitive and plural forms are treated as endings. If you need to specify a full form that begins with a lowercase letter, prefix it with . This is mentioned under Template:de-ndecl/documentation but I have added an example to make it clearer. Benwing2 (talk) 04:55, 14 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Ok, thanks. Didn't spot this in the docs. Jberkel 21:13, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

Module:inflection utilities - add_forms feature request
Hiya - I'm using this function in the new Module:mn-noun (which is a very heavily modified version of your own uk-noun module). A problem that I'm running into is in relation to the Mongolian "unstable nasal", where around 1/3 of noun stems acquire an epenthetic "n" at the end of the stem under certain conditions, including before 3 case suffixes. This is also a feature of certain suffixes, which becomes relevant when further agglutination occurs. It's not an inheritable feature, so regular suffixes don't inherit the unstable nasal from the stem or vice-versa. It's also not orthographically predictable, so has to be manually specified.

In order to avoid having massive lists of endings, the module instead works by having an algorithm for each case form. The results from these are then fed through again where necessary (e.g. each case has a reflexive form, and I'm also intending to add certain double-declension forms to be enabled when appropriate). As an example, at the moment it runs, where the   function generates a reduced stem where appropriate and the relevant genitive suffix, and the   function ultimately plugs these into. Then, I can just run  to generate the reflexive form.

However, the problem with this is that there's no way to feed metadata into  about the resulting form other than footnotes. I'd like to be able to tell it whether the form has the unstable nasal (or whatever other feature), so that I can utilise that when I feed that form through another case function. The current implementation currently treats the lemma as either having the unstable nasal or not, which is a problem when you start doing compound cases, as it wrongly applies whatever applies to the stem to the inflected forms as well.

Is there a straightforward way to amend  to account for metadata? It wouldn't need to process it other than making sure it ends up as a field in the forms table for that form, in the same ways as the  field is. In other above example, it'd be something like, which could have the value   (regular) or. Two less common areas where this would also be useful are: (1) with the much rarer unstable velar stems (which have an epenthetic "g"), and (2) where a suffix containing a vowel harmony reset ("уу" or "үү") is suffixed to a borrowed stem, which should have its vowel harmony calculated as though it were a native stem (i.e. the vowel harmony reset can't be ignored as it would be under the rules for borrowings, as the suffix is a native morpheme). This affects the usual plural suffix and the directional case, so comes up a lot. Theknightwho (talk) 21:30, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes this is a current limitation that I've been meaning to fix. So far I've hacked it by adding special Unicode characters to the string to carry extra information and removing them later, but this is really ugly. At one point I started adding proper metadata support but ran into the issue of how to combine metadata when you inflect a multiword term. I think I will have to allow that to be customizable. Can you give me some requirements as to what you're looking for in the metadata support, an examples of how you'll use it? That will help when designing the support, so I can make sure to support your requirements. Benwing2 (talk) 03:44, 21 October 2022 (UTC)
 * @Benwing2 That makes sense! I was wondering why you were using those codepoints and then stripping them off right at the end, but I understand now. So the two flags I'd want to use for each form would be:
 * :  (regular),   (unstable nasal) or   (unstable velar). e.g.    →    →  . Currently it outputs жингээсгээ, as the epenthetic "g" is wrongly applied to the regular suffix.
 * :  if the stem is a borrowing and has no inflectional suffix. e.g. with no VH switcher involved:    →    →  ; by comparison, with a VH switcher involved:   →    →    →  . Applying the VH rules for borrowings to   generates аксиомууд оо and аксиомууд оо р оо, as the "уу" switcher in the plural suffix is ignored.
 * I've realised the  flag is also needed in order to calculate whether an inflection of a borrowing gets reduced on agglutination, as reduction can only ever happen to native stems or borrowings with a native suffix. e.g.    →    →  . Treating it all as a borrowing incorrectly generates щитэдээ, as reduction is incorrectly omitted. By comparison, no reduction occurs with   →  . The occurrence of stem reduction is always possible to calculate but very intricate, so it would be totally infeasible to do anything other than feeding the first inflection through the second inflection function - otherwise things will start getting exponentially complicated.
 * I think the easiest way to handle this would be to allow arbitrary parameters in, where anything that doesn't match the parameters already specified gets treated as a flag. Just as with   and  , these could be either (a) a non-table (applied to every output), (b) a table of the length of   (each flag is applied to any combo with the corresponding ending), or (c) a table with two subtables, of the length of   and   (allowing 1 to 1 correspondence with each combo of stems and endings). Anything not matching one of these three (e.g. tables of the wrong length) throws an error.
 * The results are then plugged into the table that gets fed into, and the final output would be that each subtable in each form in the  table would have an entry with the key "decl" (or whatever). Theknightwho (talk) 13:45, 21 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the info. I was actually thinking of having the form objects have arbitrary fields in them, not just the footnote and manual transliteration. Then there might be an additional parameter or parameters when inflecting to describe how to combine fields when concatenating forms, similar to how we have special logic to combine footnotes. Benwing2 (talk) 06:17, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
 * @Benwing2 That sounds like a better solution! Theknightwho (talk) 14:01, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

-ola
The headword line had a broken categorization template, should have mentioned this in the diff. See Special:Permalink/69577082. But it looks like a one-off error. – Jberkel 13:24, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Yeah I saw that, that was definitely a one-off; all the work behind the latest Portuguese run (and all the prior runs labeled "manually assisted") was done by loading the Portuguese lemmas into a text file and editing it manually, and that tends to lead to occasional errors of this sort. Usually they cause actual module errors, so I can be alerted to the problem, but sometimes (as in this case) not. Benwing2 (talk) 16:56, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

Russian pre-1918 inflections
Hiya - would it please be possible for the acceleration of Russian pre-1918 spellings to add an appropriate context label? This probably only makes sense if the lemma spelling didn't change, but that should be possible to determine (either algorithmically, or as a last resort by having Module:accel/ru check the contents of the page to see if there are a pair of modern and old declension tables). Theknightwho (talk) 19:53, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi, can you be more specific in describing what you are looking for? Benwing2 (talk) 20:19, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
 * So as an example, the lemma didn't change spelling in 1918, but the dative and prepositional changed from  to . As such, it would be good for the acceleration of  to automatically put something like:
 * or
 * However, there's no point doing that where the lemma spelling did change (e.g. ). In fact, it would probably be misleading, as it would suggest there are modern inflections of . Theknightwho (talk) 20:47, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
 * However, there's no point doing that where the lemma spelling did change (e.g. ). In fact, it would probably be misleading, as it would suggest there are modern inflections of . Theknightwho (talk) 20:47, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
 * However, there's no point doing that where the lemma spelling did change (e.g. ). In fact, it would probably be misleading, as it would suggest there are modern inflections of . Theknightwho (talk) 20:47, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

Belarusian pronunciation
Hello, I see that you are one of those users who edit the Module:be-pronunciation so I'd like to ask you about the followings (I'm simply curious, not trying to contest or anything like that):


 * Is there any rule about the regressive palatalization in Belarusian, or could you point me to the book that mentions this phenomena? For example, I see that цвёрды is transcribed as [ˈt͡sʲvʲordɨ] while Міцкевіч is transcribed as [mʲit͡sˈkʲevʲit͡ʂ] (and not [mʲit͡sʲˈkʲevʲit͡ʂ]), but I can't grasp when this type of assimilation occurs and when it doesn't.


 * in Belarusian, are there any words in which some consonants are dropped to make the consonant clusters easier to pronounce (even in standard pronunciation)? I'm talking about something like the words здравствуйте and чувство in which the first в's are silent in Russian. --Potapt (talk) 10:07, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi. Unfortunately I am not an expert in Belarusian pronunciation. Maybe User:Atitarev could help. As for regressive assimilation, this is implemented in the assimilate_palatals function in the module; whether the assimilation happens depends on the particular cluster. As for dropping consonants, I suspect this doesn't happen because Belarusian spelling tries very hard to correspond as closely as possible to the pronunciation, whereas Russian spelling is a lot more etymological. The only exception to this that I know of is syllable-final stops and fricatives, which automatically assimilate to the voicing of the following consonant (and are voiceless utterance-finally and word-finally before a vowel) but are spelled etymologically. Benwing2 (talk) 01:52, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I agree with what Benwing2 said in both cases. I am not a great expert either but the decisions were made based on what we were able to find. Belarusians are able to pronounce complex consonant clusters but where the consonants are dropped (or merged/assimilated), they are not written or the spelling is adjusted to the change (студэнт -> студэнцкі), which also quite often happens in Ukrainian as well. Note that the regressive assimilation is not unsimilar to Russian assimilation and it's often or always reflected in the traditional Belarusian orthography or Taraškievica where this alternative spelling reflects the pronunciation in such cases, for example,, , (compare with the official , , ). Where the assimilations doesn't occur, letter "ь" is not written in Taraškievica, as in your case of . --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 02:07, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your answers. --Potapt (talk) 10:37, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

Greek HWL templates
Hello — I have just resurrected, I have no wish to be contentious. I want to have some form of uniformity for el-editors and, for me at least, simplify entry. While I understand a desire to reduce anarchy, I would contend that el-HWL templates are not the area to concentrate on. — Salt  marsh  🢃  06:41, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
 * OK fine. Can you call it el-proper noun form for consistency with other templates? Benwing2 (talk) 07:23, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
 * OK — originally proper (as a variety of noun) came second! But I would like to use hyphen spaces, ie . — Salt  marsh  🢃  16:53, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
 * OK, that's fine with me. Benwing2 (talk) 00:25, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

Katharevousa etymology language
Hello! Could we have an etymology language for Katharevousa, needed at etymologies like ἀγυιά? The Category:Katharevousa is limited and contains only some words needed elsewhere in etymology sections, it also needs some corrections. Thank you! &#8209;&#8209;Sarri.greek &#9835; I 06:49, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
 * under el (Modern Greek)
 * code: kath (is used at el.wikt)
 * transliteraion: polytonic: Module:grc-translit
 * https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q31035762


 * Seems like there is no way in specifying a transliteration module different from the parent language for etymology languages right now. — Fenakhay ( حيطي · مساهماتي ) 07:10, 1 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Thank you . If translit is as in parent=el, than characters with diacritics (like alpha+diacritic ἀ instead of α) do not transliterate. The parent could become =grc or, easier: I can correct the mistakes manually, no problem. Already, there are many such non-transliterated mistakes in many pages.   &#8209;&#8209;Sarri.greek &#9835; I 07:18, 1 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Thank you very much for solving the problem here and showing me the code 'el-kth' &#8209;&#8209;Sarri.greek &#9835; I 07:27, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Let me see (tomorrow, have to sleep now) if I can figure out how to specify tranliteration modules for etymology-only languages (although I am not sure if this is possible). Benwing2 (talk) 07:28, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
 * , no problem! It is OK now. Have a happy month! &#8209;&#8209;Sarri.greek &#9835; I 07:34, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

Way to block from my Talk
Hello, again Benwing. Sir, is there a way to block specific users from my Talk page? I have 2 personae non gratae. Thank you. &#8209;&#8209;Sarri.greek &#9835; I 07:30, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi. I'm not sure there's a way of preventing a specific user from editing your Talk page (or any specific page), other than using the general protection mechanisms (which are hard to target to specific people), although User:Chuck Entz would know. I do know it's possible to mute notifications from specific users (e.g. if a user is pinging you a lot or sending you gratuitous thank-you's); use the "Mute preferences" tool on the left side of the screen. Benwing2 (talk) 07:35, 6 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Ι see, thank you. No, I do not mind notifications, and I do not mind answering their rude questions at public rooms. I just do not want them to tell me off at my own home. Perhaps this is not a sincere thing to do as an administrator, but I need to keep my sanity... There is a person, for whom I reviewd 4.000 edits because he refuses to put full stops at the end of sentenses, and because I often notified him, he gave me a rude speech at my Talk (at el.wikt, that is).... That kind of thing... Am I wrong to avoid him? ufffff &#8209;&#8209;Sarri.greek &#9835; I 07:40, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
 * It is possible to block users from your talk, though it goes on their block log (as it counts as a partial block). An admin would have to do it. Theknightwho (talk) 07:40, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Perhaps a Module? something like if User:X at MyTalk, then error or mw.warning. &#8209;&#8209;Sarri.greek &#9835; I 07:45, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Ο, just saw your note . Thank you, I might try it, &#8209;&#8209;Sarri.greek &#9835; I 07:47, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

Category Category cleanup
was told by @Fenakhay on the discord to bug you about(...i guess how to approach?) cleaning up the Category of Categories, particularly the fact that there's a glaring amount of examples of manually added categories that could likely be better implemented as part of various modules

https://w.wiki/5vCd this should be pretty much a search of all potential offending Categories Akaibu1 (talk) 04:19, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Not sure exactly what you are referring to and I couldn't make out what you mean from the tiny URL you linked. In general, yes there are some manually added categories that could be put into the modules, but a lot of them are already in the modules, as I have converted most manual categories already. You should familiarize yourself with the poscatboiler category system; see especially Module:category tree/poscatboiler/data/documentation. Then if you want to work on adding more categories to the modules, let me know specifically what you'd like to add and I can help you. Benwing2 (talk) 04:45, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

A Minor Bot Oddity
I just deleted a template that an IP accidentally created. When I looked at Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:abbreviation, I was surprised to see two transclusions that resulted from recent edits by your bot: and - which was especially strange since you were the one who deleted it back in 2019. Chuck Entz (talk) 08:26, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Yeah those two edits were manual changes where the bot's only contribution was to push the changes I made manually in a text file, and I misspelled the name of the template. abbrev is intended for Etymology sections while abbr of/abbreviation of is intended for definition lines. (The formatting is different.) But the names are rather confusing. Benwing2 (talk) 08:36, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

Bot mistake (whitespaces)
Hey. I pinged you in Special:Diff/69623933 but I'm not sure if you've seen it. Could you please, when time permits, run a bot job that restores all the extraneous spaces that were used in preformatted blocks on otherwise empty lines? In other words, whitespace-only lines should not have become empty lines IF the preceding line begins with a space. See mw:Help:Formatting/ta, C-f "Preformatted text". Thanks in advance! &mdash; Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 12:57, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the message. I didn't get your previous ping at all for some reason. There were about 6000 pages with a space in an otherwise empty line, but only 119 pages where this occurred along with a preceding line beginning with a space, and of those, the majority were in template code that didn't need fixing. Only about 10 pages needed fixing and I did those by hand (generally adding  at the end of the line to avoid having a trailing blank space). Benwing2 (talk) 02:03, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

Request for mass deletion of invalid Spanish combined forms
Thanks for adding the double clitic support to, I've converted all of the valid forms using to.

With the exception of the pages listed in Category:Spanish verbs with lexical clitics, I think all of the pages still remaining in Category:Spanish combined forms are junk in that they don't match up with forms generated by. For the most part they seem to be the regular forms of irregular verbs, words with misplaced accents, or gerund + object_clitic for reflexive verbs that require gerund + personal + object clitic. JeffDoozan (talk) 18:27, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you. You are probably right about Category:Spanish combined forms, although at first glance I also see obsolete combinations of third-singular preterite + object, like acabose, asomose, alejose/alejóse. I had a discussion about these, maybe in the Beer Parlour a year or so ago; they were created by Wonderfool, who asserted he had only created forms that actually are found in old literature. If this is correct then technically these forms are attestable, although I don't know what to do about them: delete them anyway, hack the module to handle them, leave as is? I would definitely like to eliminate Template:es-compound of and the old template code for Template:es-verb form of (see Category:es-verb form of with old params). I was able to do that last night for Template:pt-verb form of, but there were many fewer remaining cases; there's still Template:pt-verb-form-of (with all hyphens), which has about 400 remaining uses, all of which reference undefined verbs. Benwing2 (talk) 18:43, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I'd vote to delete them anyway. If they're valid and not just OCR errors, he can add them back with citations. I'm close to converting the remaining valid entries in Category:es-verb form of with old params to, I'll ping you when it's ready to be purged. JeffDoozan (talk) 18:57, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you! One other thing has to do with past participles and past participle forms ... currently for example amado, amada, amados, amadas are defined using es-verb form of, which defines them as 'masculine singular past participle of amar', 'feminine singular past participle of amar', etc. For Italian and various Slavic languages, at least, the past participle lemma is defined using e.g. es, and the non-lemma past participle forms are defined as forms of the past participle, hence e.g. amadas would be defined as es rather than as a direct form of amar. This is in keeping with the headword, which after all specifies a 'past participle form' rather than a 'verb form'. What do you think? Benwing2 (talk) 19:03, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I have no strong opinion either way, but I'm all in favor of consistency wherever it makes sense. I can adjust my bot to generate Spanish participles using past participle of, feminine plural of, etc and convert the existing es-verb form of participle entries. JeffDoozan (talk) 19:17, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
 * OK, I thought about it and I think this change is a good idea for consistency purposes. Benwing2 (talk) 19:48, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
 * One more thing ... I'm thinking it would be a good idea to move the definitions of all the Portuguese reflexive verbs that have non-reflexive equivalents (e.g. desenvolver-se, desculpar-se, ...) to the equivalent non-reflexive page, similar to what you did for Spanish. How hard would it be to modify your bot script to do this for Portuguese? The relationship between reflexive and non-reflexive Portuguese verbs is simpler than for Spanish because -se is added with a hyphen and never changes the accentuation of the base verb (likewise for other reflexive pronouns). Benwing2 (talk) 20:08, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I'll add it to my to-do list. JeffDoozan (talk) 20:13, 3 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Spanish participles now use the same format as Italian participles.
 * Category:es-verb_form_of_with_old_params is now just junk except for possibly valid irregular conjugations avemos, circunscripto, cocho, descripto, dijistes, haigan, proscrito, seigo, subscripto which I'm unsure how to handle.
 * On an unrelated note, Module:es-verb hangs if using the json=1 param, I think there's a circular reference in alternant_multiword_spec.alternant_or_word_specs[0].alternant_multiword_spec but I don't have a lua dev environment to verify that. JeffDoozan (talk) 16:20, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for doing this, and thanks for pointing out the source of the circular reference; I encountered this when working on Module:pt-verb but didn't have a chance to find the source (I don't have a Lua dev environment set up either, I just debug using error statements ... crude but effective). I have fixed the JSON issue and ported some features from Module:pt-verb that should make it possible to address avemos, dijistes, haigan, seigo and a few other such forms I see in Category:es-verb form of with old params such as hé and mies; see the bottom of User:Benwing2/test-es-verb form of for how seigo is handled. Basically you specify a slot override for the specific form in question (respectively you would use pres_1p, pret_2s, pres_sub_3p, pres_1s as the slot name). Note that there are now also stem overrides as well as `addnote` to add a given footnote to a collection of slots specified using a Lua pattern, but it's not clear they will be needed; I found them useful for Portuguese because Portuguese verbs are a bit more irregular and there are often differences between Brazil and Portugal that need to be taken into account. (Actually all this functionality originates conceptually from Module:it-verb; Italian verbs are significantly more complex and irregular in some ways and there are a lot more irregular verbs.) The remaining problematic terms you mentioned are past participles and should be able to be handled just using past participle of. Benwing2 (talk) 22:07, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Portuguese -se verbs are done. Thank you for updating es-verb, I adjusted all of the obsoleted/regional forms in Category:es-verb form of with old params but I ran into trouble trying to use it on hé and hizieron so I added them as tests to User:Benwing2/test-es-verb_form_of. JeffDoozan (talk) 22:29, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you for doing the Portuguese verbs. As for hé and hizieron, there are two separate issues here. What's happening with hé is that the monosyllabic accent is getting removed after the override is applied, and hizieron is running into issues because hacer is treated internally as a prefixed verb ('h' + 'acer' in order to handle obsolete facer and jacer), and the 'h' prefix is getting added to the override. Both should be fixable by processing the overrides later. Benwing2 (talk) 05:39, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I finally got around to fixing the two issues mentioned above for hé and hizieron. I still see 444 terms in Category:es-verb form of with old params and 1,226 terms using es-compound of; can you specify what the remaining issues are with these terms that prevents them from being corrected? Is there any more work needed on Module:es-verb? Thanks! Benwing2 (talk) 03:38, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
 * A handful of those entries were pages my bot wouldn't handle because they contained some manually entered data (labels, quotes, etc) which have now been manually converted. I think the remaining entries are pages that don't match any declared conjugation either because the accent is wrong or they're forms of reflexive verbs without the personal clitic or they're WF's obsolete forms. JeffDoozan (talk) 17:30, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
 * In total there are 308 forms labelled as obsolete using es-compound of. Many of these are words like adelantose which uses a slot (pret_3s_comb_se) that isn't used in modern Spanish and isn't handled by es-verb form of even using the <> overrides. Beyond the obsolete terms, there are also érase and dícese, which are not obsolete but (I think) derive from the archaic slots impf_3s_comb_se and pres_3s_comb_se. Would it make sense to create something like es-obsolete compound of to handle all of these? JeffDoozan (talk) 21:11, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

The alts of a desc don't link
... if they have the same spelling as the etymon. See for example the Sicilian descendant of barba. I presume this is not intended. Catonif (talk) 23:32, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

accidental bracket deletion
Hi, I got your pings on reverts. I don't quite know the purpose of those brackets and don't remember what I did. There must be a reason, I guess. Let me know if you have a moment. Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 04:18, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
 * You deleted one of the two brackets but left the other, not sure why ... the brackets are surrounding cases either where the base verb itself appears in the table or a suppletive verb from a different stem appears in the table. I am converting all these manual tables to use ru-derived verbs and my conversion script flagged these cases due to the mismatching bracket. Benwing2 (talk) 04:26, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Alt forms
Hey; I am considering making something similar to for Polish (see Wiktionary_talk:About_Polish). How would I go about altering to allow this? And before I implement it I want to work out a few more details, but I'd like to ask now. Vininn126 (talk) 10:26, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
 * You need to modify Module:pl:Dialects similarly to Module:ru:Dialects. Benwing2 (talk) 08:42, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks. And what if there are many reforms? Would we need to employ multiple times on a page or would it be possible to list them in one instance? Vininn126 (talk) 22:09, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
 * You can definitely list more than one reform attached to a given term, something like pl; in this case having both "pre-1918" and "pre-1936" doesn't really make sense but I can see it working if the reforms involved differing changes and weren't strictly chronological, e.g. it took time for a given reform to be implemented and in the meantime another reform happened or something. If you mean however that you want to list term A with reform A, and term B with reform B, and include them on the same alt line, that isn't currently possible with alt, although it is with syn; look near the bottom of the "Dialect tags" section in the documentation for synonyms and you'll see an Armenian example of this involving different dialectal terms for "mouse". Potentially the same thing could be implemented for alt using the same syntax. Benwing2 (talk) 02:34, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the help! Vininn126 (talk) 10:24, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Curious about template argument tweaks
What is the benefit of edits like ?

This is one character longer in the wikicode, and using  is not really any clearer to the editor than just using the fourth positional parameter (someone has to read the template docs or code to understand what either will do).

Is there some back-end technical consideration at play here? Does an empty third parameter cause some kind of problem? ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 19:57, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi. Yes, I would not do such a change just for aesthetic reasons; you are right that it doesn't make things any clearer. In this case, this was done preparatory to changing the structure of desc to take multiple positional terms; formerly additional descendant terms had to be listed one by one using l for each. Before I made this change I discussed it in the Beer Parlour and got consensus to make the change; I notified (or tried to notify) the main editors who were adding descendants about this change; and I made the template throw an error when it sees a gap in the positional arguments, to catch most cases where people were trying to use the old syntax. Benwing2 (talk) 01:24, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the explanation! I've seen other editors do similar things with, such as changing  to .  If I've had occasion to edit after them, I've undone such changes, but after seeing your edit that sparked this thread, it occurred to me that maybe I'm missing something and what if there's a compelling technical advantage gained from this change in parameters.  Sounds like "no, there isn't", and your edit was specific to the circumstances of a change in  and not based on any kind of broad underlying consideration affecting all templates.  Cheers!  ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 18:27, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Double N in Spanish
As a rule, a written double N is Spanish is pronounced as a double N (see OLE 2010, p. 177). It occurs mainly in prefixed words, e. g. ennoblecer, connotar, innecesario, but also can occur within a root in loanwords (including cultisms), e. g. cánnabis/cannabis, henna, perenne. Often etymological double N is spelled and pronounced in Spanish as a single N, e. g. anual, eneágono. Some words have two spellings and pronunciations: jienense/jiennense.

But Johannesburgo is indeed pronounced with a single [n], according to DPD. Minnesota and tennesiano — probably yes, a single [n], as Minnesota and Tennessee are proper names foreign to Spanish. For pínnula, the DLE only shows the spelling with a single N. Giovanny is a nonstandard spelling. Yinn does not appear in the DLE, having two n's at the end is very non-Spanish, perhaps italics would be accepted when writing this word. Cannoli also does not appear in the DLE; in Italian, double consonants are geminated. Burzuchius (talk) 18:03, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Unstressed hiatuses and secondary stress
If I correctly understand RAE prescriptions, pronouncing combinations of vowels with an unstressed i and u as diphthongs (or triphthongs) is always considered correct, but in some cases a hiatic pronunciation may coexist.

As for the secondary stress, according to the RAE it is present only in adverbs ending in -mente (and also in words with hyphen, but some of them, such as épico-lírico, may be pronounced without the secondary stress). So, if we follow the RAE prescriptions, polineuropático should not carry a secondary stress. Of course, how people actually speak may be different from how the RAE prescribes. Burzuchius (talk) 10:15, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Where does the RAE say there's no secondary stress in any words other than those in -mente and hyphenated words? Are you maybe confusing a statement about writing vs. a statement about pronunciation? I find it doubtful that words like esternocleidooccipitomastoideo and amidofosforribosiltransferasa don't have any secondary stress in them. Benwing2 (talk) 01:33, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Feel free to stop with the condescending notes anytime.
I copypasted the wrong pronunciation templates. I understand that. You don't need to tag me every time. And regarding the bullets: templates have been changed. They used to require bullets. Thanks. embryomystic (talk) 07:10, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I stand corrected on the bullets, but as for the wrong languages, I would not ping you like this except that I have observed that you edit very quickly and sometimes sloppily. IMO it is better to slow down a bit and make fewer mistakes. BTW please write es-pr not +; the + serves no purpose by itself. Benwing2 (talk) 07:19, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Spanish hyphenation
In the Wikipedia article w:Spanish orthography, I have written a section containing a summary of RAE rules of syllabification and hyphenating words at the end of line: w:Spanish orthography. So, I guess that cadherina can only be hyphenated cadhe-rina or cadheri-na, because unusual h-containing combinations are not permitted at the beginning of line. If the prefix is just etymological, then hyphenating before h is also incorrect, so adhe-si-vo. Hyphenating before the h is accepted only in words with "living" prefixes, e. g. in-humano, des-hidratado. As for quetzal, I guess the correct hyphenation is quet-zal: the RAE does not anywhere mention tz as a digraph or an inseparable group. Burzuchius (talk) 16:36, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the pointers. I think we need to distinguish between hyphenation and syllabification. What the module labels as "hyphenation" is actually syllabification, and internally I use the latter word. Words like cadherina and adhesivo clearly have four syllables so there should be a syllable division next to the h. IMO it's incorrect to override these two words to remove the syllable division marker next to the h, as you've done, because it implies that there are only three syllables (compare prohi-bi-do). As for quetzal, syllabification should match the pronunciation; if tz is pronounced /ts/, we should write que-tzal, but if it sounds as [ðs], we should write quet-zal. Benwing2 (talk) 01:29, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm confused by that: what is the point of having something that's labeled "hyphenation" and displayed separately from the pronunciation (which already includes periods to mark syllable breaks: "[ka.ð̞eˈɾi.na]") if it is not supposed to display hyphenation, but is actually supposed to display syllabification. Wouldn't that make it both redundant and inaccurate? Why not have the thing labeled "hyphenation" actually display the hyphenation points?--Urszag (talk) 01:57, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
 * What about introducing a mark (e. g. #) for syllable borders that should not be hyphenated according to the RAE rules? For example: a#bue.lo, o#be.de.cer; pa#e.lla, ma.ri#hua.na, pa.ra.no#ia, chi#hua#hua (a nine-letter whord that cannot be hyphenated!); a#dhe.si.vo, ca#dhe.ri.na, sul#fhí.dri.co. (Why not sulf.hí.dri.co? As sulf- is a root but not a word, morphological hyphenation is not valid for this word.) Of course, a note clarifying the meaning of "#" should be added, such as: "The sign # means a syllable border that should not be hyphenated according to the RAE rules". Cases when morphological hyphenation is allowed and not must be distinguished manually: in.hu.ma.no (living prefix) but i#nhe.rir (etymological prefix). What about words where both phonetic and morphological hyphenations are valid? Should we write bie.n.es.tar or bie.nes.tar, bien.es.tar? Burzuchius (talk) 16:45, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Since your module actually shows syllabification instead of hyphenation, I have changed the caption to "Syllabification". But you may also add hyphenation. It should be an additional row of the module "Hyphenation", like this: local hyph2text = require("Module:hyphenation").format_hyphenations { lang = lang, hyphs = hyphs2}. Hyphenation in Spanish differs from syllabification in that RAE does not allow to hyphenate one letter, to split hiatuses (including those with an intervening silent h) or to leave unusual h-containing combinations (dh, nh...) at the beginning of a line. Burzuchius (talk) 19:00, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Secondary stress in words prefixed with
Hello. Just wanted to specify that the reason I used the secondary stress in Italian words prefixed with was the fact that, on the Treccani page dedicated to the prefix (here), I saw it written as pèri-. GianWiki (talk) 07:22, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Yeah I've seen this in Treccani for several prefixes but I don't have too much faith in this because it's often contradicted by specific examples in DiPI and Olivetti. I think the way to interpret that is "if the prefix is stressed, it has this vowel quality" but it may not always be stressed. Benwing2 (talk) 07:28, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
 * One more question ... the Olivetti dictionary specifies secondary stress on poli- as /ˌpɔli/, e.g. for polisaccaride given as /,pɔlisakˈkaride/. Treccani at  also writes pòli-. DiPI doesn't include secondary stress markers but consistently gives pronunciations with /poli/, e.g.  for polisaccaride given as /polisakˈkaride/. I see you marked a couple of poli- words with póli-: polilalia, polistadio. Is this a case of "modern" póli- vs. "traditional" pòli- pronunciations or is there something else going on? DiPI explicitly indicates tele- as having "modern" téle- vs. "traditional" tèle- e.g. in  for telecomando but gives no such indication for poli-. Benwing2 (talk) 01:23, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Rhymes
If I've just added a rhyme, and not the whole pronunciation template, it's because I added it to the rhyme page, and that automatically adds the rhyme template. I try to do that before I add dictionary links, fix other templates, add related terms, etc. because it doesn't recognise the pronunciation template, and adds a redundant pronunciation link. If I failed to complete that whole process, it's probably because I got distracted (possibly by something in real life), but I do try to follow through. Rest assured, though, I'm aware of the issue, and it annoys me when I run across it. embryomystic (talk) 16:22, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the explanation. Didn't realize the rhymes gadget automatically adds to the mainspace page; that makes a lot of sense and it also explains e.g. why User:GianWiki added redundant it templates to various pages. We should modify the gadget to recognize pronunciation templates like it-pr, es-pr, fi-p, pl-p etc. and not add the redundant template. User:Erutuon, can you give me some pointers as to how to test JavaScript changes to gadgets using a private copy? I can see the code in MediaWiki:Gadget-RhymesAdder.js but I'd like to avoid hacking the production module directly as I am not very familiar with JavaScript. Benwing2 (talk) 01:13, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Disable the production version of the gadget (if possible) in preferences, make a userspace copy at, grab the dependencies of the gadget ( ,  , etc., if any) from MediaWiki:Gadgets-definition add   to your Special:MyPage/common.js. I didn't test that exact code, but it's similar to what I use. Then you can edit the userspace copy and changes will be much more quickly reflected than with edits to MediaWiki JavaScript pages. I think that's the basics, so please ask if you have any problems. — Eru·tuon 17:45, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

cs-reflexive
Hello Benwing. Do you think you could run your bot to orphan and replace it with ? PUC – 10:37, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
 * If yes, maybe wait a bit before doing so. I've opened an RFD, and I don't want to give to the template's creator another opportunity to complain that proper procedure hasn't been followed... PUC – 10:45, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Sounds good. Benwing2 (talk) 18:38, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I find it beneficial that language-specific reflexive templates expose the particle to be used, including Bulgarian and Macedonian ones, similar to the Czech template. I’d rather the generic template to do that as well, also showing the position of the main verb with a tilde ~. Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 06:02, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
 * With the current support in Module:labels, we can override the display of 'reflexive' for specific languages and make it show e.g. reflexive with  for Bulgarian and reflexive with  for Czech. We can also add a label 'reflexive-si' and make it display appropriately for Bulgarian, Czech, etc. while having it undefined for the general case. If you think this is sufficient, I can go ahead and implement it. It will take a bit more work if you think it ought to work like the current bg-reflexive etc. templates, i.e. display just reflexive for the 'reflexive' label and show (~ ) at the end after all the labels. Benwing2 (talk) 06:16, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you! The ~ with the position of related verb is nice to have but less important. I forgot about si-reflexive verbs. Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 06:30, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I noticed the effect of this in some of the Macedonian entries, but I didn't know where it came from. It was rendered well at се (se)-reflexive verbs, but it was wrong at си (si)-reflexive verbs. Now it is gone. Did you exclude the Macedonian language or what? Gorec (talk) 12:57, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I created two new labels for Czech, Slovak, Bulgarian and Macedonian:  and  . Originally I made   be an alias for , but then I realized that might be wrong (just as you describe), so I removed the alias. Now,   just displays reflexive, while   displays reflexive with  and   displays reflexive with . Feel free to use the new labels as appropriate. Benwing2 (talk) 19:10, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I see... but that last change is not very good for Macedonian. I think added almost all the reflexive verbs, there are total of 1600. And only 8 of them are си (si)-verbs. Is it possible, exclusively for Macedonian,   to remain an alias for  ? Then I will manually edit those 8 entries with си (si)-reflexive verbs. Gorec (talk) 20:49, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
 * sure, done. Benwing2 (talk) 21:01, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Great! 👍 Thanks. Gorec (talk) 21:04, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Macedonian adverbial participles and mk-IPA
Hello, Benwing! I think you understand well the Macedonian. You know that the word stress in Macedonian is antepenultimate, but the adverbial participles have irregular stress. They are stressed on the second-to-last syllable i.e. on -а́јќи and -е́јќи. Is it possible in the module to be added some code, to skip the antepenultimate rule, so when  is applied in entries with adverbial participles, the stress to be automatically added on -а́јќи /-'ajci/ and -е́јќи /-'ɛjci/? I want to avoid manually typing it, as in or. Thanks. Gorec (talk) 08:58, 27 December 2022 (UTC)


 * I updated the template to include the reflexive verbs too. Maybe the rules of this template can be used into the module? Or, if it is possible, I will create a separate template  for the adverbial participles. Gorec (talk) 13:20, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm taking a look now. The module has gotten messy due to some changes by User:Martin123xyz (who has not been active lately); I will clean things up and then add handling for the adverbial participle endings. Benwing2 (talk) 05:22, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Okay, thank you! By the way, in the meantime, I upgraded the code for the template . Now it creates a headword line and definition for Macedonian adverbial participles. For that purpose there I used the function . It works well, but I wondered if maybe there is a shorter function, for the same purpose, that works on Wiktionary!? When you have the time, can you please check the functions I used there? All the parameters are explained well in the Documentation. Thank you in advance! Gorec (talk) 14:17, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Replacement of unnecessary redirects and templates
Hi, here is the next batch:



Also, the 1st edition of has now become available at the Internet Archive, so I have updated the quotation template to make that the default version. Could you please do a bot run to search for instances of the template that do not use the parameter edition, and add 2nd to them? (Note to self: already refers to the 1st edition, so it will need to be edited to remove the edition parameter after the bot run.) Thank you. — Sgconlaw (talk) 16:45, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
 * The first four are done and the last request is running now. It's going to edit the doc pages as well so you might want to take a look when it's done and possibly revert the bot's changes or otherwise fix them up. Benwing2 (talk) 08:11, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much! — Sgconlaw (talk) 10:12, 30 December 2022 (UTC)