Template talk:Wiktionary

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

See also, Template talk:Wiktionary, Template talk:Wiktionarypar

1 Doumentation
2 Discussion
3 Why lc search
4 ALT code
5 Add Documentation Edit Request
6 search

[edit] Doumentation

This template is a self-reference and so is part of the Wikipedia project rather than the encyclopaedic content.

Usage:

{{wiktionary}} - provides a search link to the Wiktionary page, using the current page's name. Important: Check the link before using this method, as Wiktionary uses proper capitalization for its entries, unlike Wikipedia's uppercased first letter or page name.
{{wiktionary|sophisticated}} - provides a link to the Wiktionary page for the given word, "sophisticated" in this example
{{wiktionary|hippopotomonstrosesquipedaliophobia|hippopotomon- strosesquipedaliophobia}} - provides a link to a specific Wikitionary page (1st parameter) and an optional display name (2nd parameter)

[edit] Discussion

Regarding Wikipedia:List of templates see Wikipedia talk:List of lists#Templates. Gangleri | Th | T 15:46, 2004 Nov 19 (UTC)

I think Netoholic has a point here - why include template Sisterproject in this template, except when subst'ing it? R adiant _* 13:23, May 18, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] wiktionarypar

Template:Wiktionarypar is a variant on this template that takes the word to reference as the parameter. This template is consistent with wikipediapar, et al., on the other wikis. --Quuxplusone 01:24, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] uncapitalization on wt makes this template redundant.

The uncapitalization on wt means that wiktionary:foo and wiktionary:Foo are different pages. This takes the page name, which is always capitalised. I suggest a bot to replace template:wiktionary with template:wiktionarypar? Dunc|☺ 30 June 2005 19:21 (UTC)

I'm not sure that a 'bot would be appropriate, as some articles would need to link to the uppercase word whilst other articles would need to link to the lowercase word. A human will have to decide for each individual article. Uncle G 13:00, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
- But the bot could look at the WT entry and decide if the main entry for it is capitalised or not. Dunc|☺ 13:07, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
  - That's not reliable. Not all words at Wiktionary are yet at their correct capitalizations, subsequent to the 'bot that ran immediately after the switchover and that moved all entries to lowercase. Several Wiktionarians are still working hard to remedy this. Moreover, we will need a new template ({{Wiktionarypar2}}, perhaps), for the cases where Wikipedia actually needs to link to both the uppercase and the lowercase words. Melody is such a case, for example. Uncle G 13:19, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
    - Yeah, okay, WT is in a state of transition right now but this ought to be done in the future when it's up to speed. Dunc|☺ 13:22, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
      - I changed this template to link to Special:Search/PAGENAME since that will assist with any case-sensitivity. It's slightly less reliable (gives search results rather than go directly if there are two articles with the same letter pattern) and is useless if the search function ever gets disabled due to traffic (rare). Other than that, it's a good solution. I'm going to do the same for the other Wiktionary template, once people have tried it out on here. P.S. {{Wiktionarypar2}} is unneeded... just use two {{Wiktionarypar}}'s. -- Netoholic @ 15:08, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
        
        It's a bad solution. Please don't make any such change to the template. Pointing directly at the correctly capitalized articles is the way to go, as discussed both here and on the Village Pump. Turning all interwiki links into database searches is unnecessary overhead. Moreover, using two {{Wiktionarypar}}s instead of {{Wiktionarypar2}} is another poor solution, too. There are cases where I've placed two Wiktionary boxes on a page, but they are rare exceptions, and not the rule. Uncle G 16:07, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Replacing wiktionary with wiktionarypar

Uncle G - I understand that the link to Special:Search isn't ideal, but it's fine as an interim solution. I just don't think we should go off immediately replacing templates on all these pages, and my change will work for the time being while we make a plan. Here is my main concern with your replacements... you are moving us away from {wiktionary} to {wiktionarypar} with the intent of eventually orphaning {wiktionary}. The problem is that "wiktionary" is the best name if we only have the one style template. -- Netoholic @ 16:13, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

We don't need to make a plan. We have a plan. Replace {{Wiktionary}} with {{Wiktionarypar}} (or {{Wiktionarypar2}} or {{Wiktionarypar3}}). It's the plan that was mentioned on the Village Pump, and it's the plan that was mentioned here. Given that Paul G, Duncharris and myself all appear to have come to the same conclusion independently, it would seem to be the obvious plan, too. The only actual question about the plan was whether a 'bot should do it. I think that a 'bot won't do, and won't be able to do, the right thing, and that it requires a human to actually think about the links and make the appropriate fixes. (AI actually should link to three Wiktionary articles, although originally it was only linking to two, for example.) I'm happy to make the changes by hand and to scrutinize each article individually. I fail to see what your problem with orphaning "wiktionary" is. You haven't expressed it clearly. It is the "best name" for what? The template relying upon {{PAGENAME}} should be orphaned (It breaks whenever a page is renamed anyway. I've fixed two articles just now where {{Wiktionary}} was used on a disambiguation page. That's the sort of problem that the template causes.) You might want to put it to some other use, not involving {{PAGENAME}}, afterwards. But such putting to another use still involves replacing it on the articles where it is used in its current form. Uncle G 16:35, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
- I forgot to give Susvolans, who also pointed to {{Wiktionarypar}}, a name check in the above. ☺ Uncle G 16:47, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

I'll give you your plan, Uncle G. Go through the articles and replace {{wiktionary}} with {{wiktionary|somepagename}}. Extra parameters are ignored, so there won't be an immediate change. Once you're all done, we can copy the text from wiktionarypar to wiktionary, suddenly enabling that function and parameter on all those articles. We can then redirect wiktionarypar to wiktionary as our long-term solution. -- Netoholic @ 18:27, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] wiktionarypar2, etc.

Uncle G - Why is using multiple wiktionarypar boxes a worse solution than using the cluttered {{Wiktionarypar2}} & {{Wiktionarypar3}} boxes? -- Netoholic @ 16:13, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

That question is unanswerable, being based as it is upon the false premise that the boxes are cluttered. They are, of course, no more cluttered, since they take exactly the same form, than {{Wiktionarypar}} is cluttered. Multiple boxes will result in objections of "box stacking". Look at 7 July 2005 London bombings to see this same idea in action, in that case consolidating multiple {{Wikinews}} templates into a single box. Uncle G 16:19, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
- It's instruction creep and over-linking to create additional templates. I can forgive it for the bombings article, but that is an extreme circumstance. Once the news dies down, replacing all those with single "{wikinewscat|2005-07-07 London bombings}" would be better. Bad example.
  For simple definition links, I don't see a problem stacking two, maybe three boxes. Once you go past that, you're probably over-doing the linking anyway. -- Netoholic @ 16:26, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
  - Asserting that this is instruction creep is bizarre. There are no new instructions here at all, merely new templates that take more parameters and provide a different, further, form of interwiki linking. It think that it's ironic that you mention {{Wikinewscat}}, a template that, just as here, was recently created to fill the need for a further form of linking to a sibling project that the existing templates didn't cover. Uncle G 16:45, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
    - Wikinewscat's existence fits with other sibling project category linking templates, and it make sence because it can elminate the need for multiple Wikinews template calls. -- Netoholic @ 18:29, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Best of Both Worlds

I combined Wiktionary and Wiktionarypar, creating a new template that allows a person to specify a parameter or not.

See User:GraemeMcRae/wiktionary, which is fully explained at User talk:GraemeMcRae/wiktionary

I would like to replace the existing Template:wiktionary with my version, if no one objects.

—GraemeMcRae^talk 01:45, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

I'm happy, and hoping nothing breaks. Josh Parris # 01:12, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

I made the change just now. I will check for breakage!—GraemeMcRae^talk 07:48, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

I did some tests, and it appears all is well...

It is known that some editors use parameters of templates as "clever" comments. For example, they might write,

Such usage will cause breakage when the {{{1}}} parameter is added. I hope no such thing happens, but you never know.

One thing that has been the subject of discussion here is the load on the Wiktionary server caused by the Search parameter, which was added to cope with the fact that Wikipedia views all pagenames as starting with a capital letter. I have good news: if you supply a parameter, then the link created by the template does not invoke Search, so this template truly is the best of both worlds. (Fingers crossed)—GraemeMcRae^talk 07:55, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Wiktionaryleft

I made Template:Wiktionaryleft for if you wanna put the tag on the LHS. --Dangherous 17:08, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Text: looking up a word on Wiktionary or in Wiktionary?

I'm not a native speaker, but somehow the phrase "look up the word on Wiktionary, the free dictionary" seems strange to me; we say "look up the word in the dictionary" but "look up the word on Google". I think "Wiktionary" is closer to "dictionary" than to "Google" and so I would prefer "in Wiktionary". Do others agree or disagree? AxelBoldt 17:47, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

I agree with you, AxelBoldt.—GraemeMcRae^talk 04:42, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

However, it is a website, and when I usually hear people say, "let's look this up on the OED's website, or on Wikipedia.--Max Talk (add) • Contribs 18:35, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree too. Would "Look at this word's entry in Wiktionary" be less controversial? — brighterorange (talk) 01:42, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Category?

I see that Cat:Articles with Wiktionary pages has been added to, and then again removed from, the tempalte, all without any discussion here that I can see. My first thought is thqat such a category is a good idea, but I don't feel strongly. Why was this category added, and why was it removed again? what are the argumetns, pro and con? DES ^(talk) 21:05, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

I added the category because it seemed like a good idea to help see the connection between Wikipedia articles and Wiktionary. Apparently User:Duncharris didn't think so.--Max Talk (add) • Contribs 23:41, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- It has been listed at categories for deletion. Wikipedia:Categories for deletion#Category:Articles with Wiktionary pages--Max Talk (add) • Contribs • 01:32, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Placement

Is this template supposed to be placed at the bottom of the page, along with the external links, or at the top of the pages, like an infobox?--Max Talk (add) • Contribs 18:32, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

This template is deprecated. But Wiktionary templates in general should be placed next to the appropriate section of the article, if there is one. On disambiguation articles, they are placed at the top. Note that these are interwiki link templates, and that an interwiki link is not an external link. Uncle G 22:13, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Wikt

I made this, which is just a copy of Template:Wiktionary, but shorter (to save people time). --Dangherous 09:30, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

This template happens to have been TfD'ed back in July last year. I'm nominating it for CSD under G4. Saving 5 letters doesn't a new template justify, imo. Kimchi.sg | talk 13:48, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

I've recreated template:wikt, but as a redirect this time, similar to Template:wt. Redirects are cheap, and I keep forgetting the two-letter variant. -- nae'blis 20:05, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Deprecated or no?

I've skimmed over some of the debates that surrounded Wiktionary vs. Wiktionarypar and it remains a bit unclear to me whether this has been resolved or not. With the parameterization of the Wiktionary template, it seems Wiktionarypar has been rendered superfluous. Is that a reasonable conclusion to reach? User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 00:59, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

That's the conclusion I reached too. "wiktionary" is certainly a nicer name for the template. — brighterorange (talk) 01:44, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
No. {{Wiktionarypar}} supports up to five words (in case you want to link them all at once), while {{Wiktionary}} supports only one, but additionally supports a different name for the link. -- Petercrabtree 04:41, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New logo & interwiki

Look up Wiktionary in
Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

Please add fr:Modèle:Wiktionnaire. I also suggest you to use the new logo.

[edit] Interwiki

{{editprotected}} Please, add hr:Predložak:Wječnik. Thanks! --Ivan Štambuk 09:29, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

done. CMummert · talk 00:30, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

{{editprotected}} Please add tr:Şablon:Vikisözlük. John Vandenberg 04:53, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Done in a moment. – Luna Santin (talk) 10:37, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Why lc search

Why doe this template do a lower case search?(Gnevin 08:46, 1 May 2007 (UTC))

Unlike Wikipedia, Wiktionary does not ucfirst page names by default. – Luna Santin (talk) 10:36, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] ALT code

There is an alt code issue. Please see http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11277

$ w3m -dump http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free |fgrep [|head -n 1
[50px-W]

Jidanni 16:23, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Add Documentation Edit Request

{{editprotected}} This template is protected for obvious reasons, but I see no reason the documentation for this template needs protection. Indeed, there isn't any documentation on the page itself (only a little on the talk page), presumably because of the protection. Please add this to the bottom of Template:Witionary:

<noinclude>
{{lts/Doc}}
</noinclude>

Petercrabtree 04:21, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

MZMcBride has added a doc page. --- RockMFR 02:32, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Oops. I put the wrong code in there. That's what I get for editing so late at night. MZMcBride got what I meant anyway. Cheers. Petercrabtree 04:34, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] search

Could somone show how to write this code so that it defaults directly to the article rather than to the search page for the article's name, but without destroying the ability to pipe to a different page or to pipe a different title in the box? I am not advocating that the Wiktionary template actually be changed to that; rather, I am trying to get a better understanding of how this code works. Thanks! --M @r ē ino 16:23, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

To make the template point directly to a Wiktionary page, it would be something like:

<div style="margin-left: 60px;">Look up '''''[[wiktionary:{{{1|{{lc:{{PAGENAME}}}}}}}|{{{2|{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}}}}]]''''' in <br />[[Wiktionary]], the free dictionary.</div>

All I did was remove the Special:Search/ (note that I don't think this should be done on the actual template). Superm401 - Talk 05:16, 23 April 2008 (UTC)