Anthere wrote:
>Hi Gérard.
>
>
>
>I disagree with you on one point.
>
>You say "The fact that dictionary information has no place in Wikipedia is also
>an established and respected fact."
>
>It is not as true as you seem to imply. It is roughly what is done, but it is not so widely established.
>I think this might be a very cultural issue :-) The french wikipedia long hesitated, and I would say some users
>still consider the encyclopedia and the dictionary content may be available in one common place.
>I have personnaly no problem with an encyclopedic article containing some dictionary content, and when I see some
>I certainly do not remove it.
>However, I recognise that some dictionary articles have no encyclopedic content, so are not so welcome
>in the encyclopedia. Hence, it is best that there is a dictionnary :-)
>
Maybe I should have said, on nl:wikipedia it is accepted that dictionary
content has no place. On nl:wikipedia it is a reason to remove stuff.
Thanks,
GerardM
Hoi,
I have just posted the methodology of handling alternate ways of writing
in Wiktionary on Meta
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Alternate_writing_in_Wiktionary. This
method is, as used on the nl:wiktionary and it follows a previous post
on this mailing list where I asked for comments on this subject.
This method handles both the descriptions of alternate spellings (colour
vs color) as alternate spellings and the different usage of
charactersets (eg simplified and traditional Chinese)..
As always I am happy to receive your comments as these allow for the
improvement of the methodology. One recent change implemented for
instance is the use of categories to indicate words in a language. As
almost all words have been touched by a database change recently, the
categories that are populated from the language templates, will show
their content. (Currently there are 375 Dutch words and 185 English
words on a total of 5414 articles). 125 more to go to reach the 500 mark
for Dutch words :)
Thanks,
GerardM
Hoi,
There is an acrimonious discussion on nl:wikipedia. This has to do with
some people who consider wiktionary to be external to wikipedia and,
they consider the information that a dictionary supplies to be of no
additional value to wikipedia.
I want to diffuse this situation and I need the help from the
developpers for that. The content of other wikipedia's can be found by
clicking on the left hand side under "in other languages". I would like
a method that allows us to link to the wiktionary article in that
general area.
*This will remove any standard references to wiktionary from the
wikipedia article itself.
*The content of a sister article in another wikipedia should
(theoretically) not add information to a wikipedia article as, it should
only present the information in another language. As the referal to
other wikipedia's is an established fact, the inclusion in that space of
wiktionary information should not be a problem as wiktionary DOES add
relevant information to the wikipedia article (translations, etymology,
pronounciation etc)
* Technically, the link requires a parameter as some wiktionaries do not
have first character capitalisation.
The link from Wiktionary to Wikipedia is not a problem; here it is
accepted that encyclopedic information should find its way in Wikipedia.
The fact that dictionary information has no place in Wikipedia is also
an established and respected fact.
Thanks,
GerardM
Hi Erdal,
(moving this thread to the wiktionary mailing-list)
I think there has been some discussion of running bots like this.
The validation setup at fdicts looks pretty sweet; some collaboration
between the projects would be a fine thing.
+sj+
On Thu, 07 Oct 2004 22:46:42 +0200, Erdal Ronahi <erdal.ronahi(a)gmx.net> wrote:
> Hello everybody,
>
> I am proposing a joint venture of Wikipedia with fdicts.com, a Free
> Dictionaries Project (not run by me, BTW)
>
> The aim of fdicts.com is to provide free (GPL or GFDL) dictionaries in
> multiple languages. What makes fdicts.com unique is an algorithm for the
> automatized creation of new dictionaries out of existing. This process
> is similar to creating interlinks (to NONEXISTING pages) with a bot and
> is more effective, the more free dictionaries already exist.
>
> An example for de, en, fr and tr (turkish):
> if there are these entries
>
> [house - Haus] (en-de)
> [house - maison] (en-fr)
> [maison -Haus] (fr-de)
> [house - ev] (en-tr)
> [Haus - ev] (de-tr)
>
> then you can be almost sure that the automatically generated
>
> [maison - ev ](fr-tr)
>
> will be correct, even if you know neither French nor Turkish. And that
> is true for thousands of other words.
>
> Nevertheless the results must then be improved with by-hand-validating.
> This is a quite Wiki-like process, and the Wikipedia-community is
> perfect for that.
>
> This may not be very exciting for English and German. But think
> of the language XY for which NO free dictionaries or JUST an English-XY
> dictionary exist, but no German-XY, French-XY, Chinese-XY and so on.
> This approach will produce a lot of fine free
> dictionaries easily.
>
> What does that have to do with Wikipedia/Wiktionary? Wiktionary is also
> a free dictionary, but with a different approach. The translations in
> Wiktionary can be extracted to create free dictionaries for the
> "smaller" languages, fdicts.com can use its algorithm to multiply the
> entries and the result can be given back to Wiktionary for adding more
> details if necessary.
>
> The final result would be a really global Free Dictionary. (sigh) Maybe
> then hosted by Wikimedia?
>
> If you like, have a look at the project page. (http://www.fdicts.com)
> Maybe someone on this list has also ideas how to cooperate with that
> project.
>
> Erdal
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l(a)Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>
--
+sj+
_ _ :-------.-.--------.--.--------.-.--------.--.--------[...]
Hello.
Would there be any objections here to setting $wgCapitalLinks = false;
for the Czech Wiktionary? I have been advised by en:User:Angela to ask here,
before posting the change request submittal to wikitech-l. On the wiktionary
itself there are no objections as of today (three users supporting the switch
of a total of thirteen users).
--TMA [http://cs.wiktionary.org/wiki/Wikipedista:TMA]
There is a person who thinks it funny to add texts to templates that are
used on almost all pages of nl:wiktionary. I have protected the
templates that were abused so far.
I have two questions:
*The latest IP number used is 213.224.16.165
<http://nl.wiktionary.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Speciaal:Contributions&target=2…>
can we find if this person is known as a wikipedia user as well ?
*I want to protect all templates against this kind of abuse. Is there a
way of doing this easily ?
Thanks,
GerardM
Hoi,
Wikipedia and Wiktionary are currently the two biggest projects of
Wikimedia (as far as I know). These projects are quite seperate from
each other. They are more seperate than is good for either project.
Typically, the type of information in Wiktionary cannot be found in
Wikipedia, things like translations and pronounciation are better
developped in Wikipedia while more more encyclopedic information can be
found in Wikipedia.
To enhance the cooperation I added a template in Wiktionary (both in en:
and nl) called -info-. This template will refer to the Wikipedia article
with the same name as the Wiktionary article.
On Wikipedia (both en: and nl:) I have added a template called wikt,
this template has one parameter; this is the name of the article on
Wiktionary. The reason for a parameter is that Wikipedia has many
articles that are disambigued and given a name that differs from the
Wiktionary name. A second reason is that the nl:wiktionary does not have
first character capitalisation for article names any more. Here it is
important that the word is spelled correctly.
The importance of these interproject links is not only in giving more
information to our users, it is also important to make people aware that
dictionary content has its place and that it is really welcome in
Wiktionary. It makes for people that are used to contributing to
Wikipedia, to contribute to Wiktionary as well.
One nice word recently added to the nl:wiktionary is [[wikt:nl:grote
muggenorchis]], an orchid it has three translations. This information is
not really welcom on nl:wikipedia and this way it finds its place .. :)
Please add these functionalities to your wikipedia and wiktionary and
add it to the content you work on, it really makes us a greater
resource !!
Thanks,
GerardM
On [[wikt:nl:Egypte]] I have two things that I would like your comments for.
* Under the header for pronounciation, it says on a line: * Geluid: Egypte
When pressing the template for sound ( {{-sound-}}translates to
Geluid ), you get a sound.howto
When pressing on Egypte, the process of letting you hear Egypte will
start (media)
*Under the header for Translations, there are three lines for Portugese;
* Indicating Portugese
One line with Brazilian Portugese and the word
One line with Portugese Portugese and the word
With the first thing I think I give ample attention to the potential
problems with sound. When there is a SAMPA transliteration, it would be
on a seperate line and the SAMPA would get you to something about SAMPA,
With the second thing I think I have a proper way of presenting
alternate standard translations within one language. the templates used
are {{pr br}} and {{pt pt}}
Thanks,
GerardM