User talk:Fringilla

Welcome!

Hello, welcome to Wiktionary, and thank you for your contribution so far. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• How to edit a page is a concise list of technical guidelines to the wiki format we use here: how to, for example, make text boldfaced or create hyperlinks. Feel free to practice in the sandbox. If you would like a slower introduction we have a short tutorial.
• Entry layout explained (ELE) is a detailed policy documenting how Wiktionary pages should be formatted. All entries should conform to this standard, the easiest way to do this is to copy exactly an existing page for a similar word.
• Our Criteria for inclusion (CFI) define exactly which words Wiktionary is interested in including. There is also a list of things that Wiktionary is not for a higher level overview.
• The FAQ aims to answer most of your remaining questions, and there are several help pages that you can browse for more information.
• We have discussion rooms in which you can ask any question about Wiktionary or its entries, a glossary of our technical jargon, and some hints for dealing with the more common communication issues.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wiktionarian! If you have any questions, bring them to the Wiktionary:Information desk, or ask me on my talk page. If you do so, please sign your posts with four tildes: ~~~~ which automatically produces your username and the current date and time.

Again, welcome! L☺g☺maniac chat? 21:28, 29 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

I'm glad to see these, even if the definitions are a bit thin. I would really like it, however, if you would you learn to use the {{taxlink}} template for taxonomic names. This is used to track taxonomic names that don't have Wiktionary translingual entries yet. @DCDuring may have more to say about that. Chuck Entz (talk) 21:43, 12 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

Also, when you find a taxonomic group like the bulbuls doesn't have an English category, it's probably not set up in the data module and your category will have an error. Please ask me about these. I've spent a lot of time on our taxonomically-based categories, and there's usually a reason why I haven't already created one. I try not to create categories with fewer than a dozen entries in any one language, and preferably two dozen- a Wikimedia category is a navigational device for linking entries that have a specific thing in common, and it's not much good without entries to link.

That said, I'm happy to set up categories when they're needed. I concentrate on English, but it tends to have the most complete coverage here- so I usually don't miss anything. If you're adding lots of entries in other languages, there may be languages needing categories not justifiable based on English alone- so again, please let me know. My rule of thumb is that taxonomically-based categories should never have more than 200 entries in any one language. There are exceptions such as Category:en:Perching birds where everything is divided between too many small groups, but I'm always looking for ways to split those up.

Finally, it's good practice (though not a big deal) to add a |head= parameter to headword templates such as {{en-noun}} with wikilinking to avoid bad redlinks and to link to lemmas instead of inflected forms. For instance, at stripe-breasted tit, {{en-noun}} should be {{en-noun|head=[[stripe]]-[[breast]]ed [[tit]]}} .

Thanks! Chuck Entz (talk) 21:43, 12 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

What he said.

It is more important to use {{taxlink}} to simply enclose a taxonomic name than to have all the parameters correct. It's also nice to use {{vern}} for English vernacular names, especially the red-linked ones.

@Chuck Entz Nice chickadees. DCDuring (talk) 21:57, 12 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

Hi @Chuck Entz and @DCDuring!

Sorry about the bulbul, wasn't really sure how to deal with it, I should have tried to ask someone. I'll make sure to use the templates you referred to! Any ideas though how to make the definitions broader, if that'd improve the quality of the entries? I'm mainly focusing on adding english entries at the moment, and then adding their translated names in my native language, Swedish.

If you see any issues in the Swedish definitions, for example indisk gyllenmes, I'd like to hear it.

--Fringilla (talk) 16:40, 13 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

If you don't already, you might want to consult Avibase, which has vernacular names for birds including, for example, more than 20 for the black-fronted bulbul (Pycnonotus nigricans) at this page. DCDuring (talk) 20:48, 13 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

They also have regional checklists for species, including several for Sweden. DCDuring (talk) 20:55, 13 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

Hello! I've tried to use the avibase mainly but also wikidata for the translations. Sometimes I've missed them though. Thanks for the tip though!

--Fringilla (talk) 23:55, 13 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

Hi, please adhere to Appendix:Swedish pronunciation when entering pronunciations for Swedish. The phonemic representation should not contain subphonemic details like retroflexes and taps. —Rua (mew) 16:07, 17 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

Oh, got it! --Fringilla (talk) 16:11, 17 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

Hey. Not sure if we have translations in the Translingual section - the translation box should go under ==English== --I learned some phrases (talk) 21:55, 18 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

You're completely right... I was in the wrong section. I'll fix it, thanks! --Fringilla (talk) 21:56, 18 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

I appreciate that you add Dutch translations to those bird entries, but I would like to ask that you also include the gender if it is listed in the entry. Also beware that Dutch preserves capitals in adjectives derived from demonyms and geographic names (in compounds this can be irregular). ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 09:28, 13 May 2019 (UTC)Reply

Hello! Yes I always preserve capital letters in such names. (I see now I missed it in a few entries though…) The source I use is Avibase and they don't provide genders. And due to my very limited knowledge of Dutch, I don't want to guess or anything so I leave it out completely if unsure. Maybe there are easy ways to find out the gender of a noun? --Fringilla (talk) 14:39, 13 May 2019 (UTC)Reply

Often you'd have to know the head of the term, then you could look it up in the WNT. But that is difficult if you don't know the language, so you could also ping me when you've added a Dutch translation without a gender. ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 14:50, 13 May 2019 (UTC)Reply

A more general solution that I've used a few times is to add {{attention|xx|needs gender (or whatever it is)}}, where xx is the language code. This doesn't show on the page, but it puts the entry in a maintenance category. The advantage is that it doesn't rely on someone who knows the language being available right away. The disadvantage is that it could be quite a while before someone gets around to looking at it. In this case, having someone willing to be pinged makes the attention option unnecessary, but there are lots of languages where you won't be so lucky. Chuck Entz (talk) 02:50, 14 May 2019 (UTC)Reply

(A cursory search also finds Template:rfgender. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 02:56, 14 May 2019 (UTC))Reply

RMaung (WMF) 14:34, 9 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

RMaung (WMF) 19:14, 20 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

RMaung (WMF) 17:04, 4 October 2019 (UTC)Reply

I noticed that you added a seemingly incorrect etymology for the word mull .

bak (“rear”) +‎ säte (“seat”) +‎ dörr (“door”), used since 1911.

Can you provide a source for this? Hk5183 (talk) 20:39, 1 June 2020 (UTC)Reply

Hi! And sorry for a ridiculously late answer. I am unable to provice a source for this, since it's simply an error from my side. I'll fix it immediately. Fringilla (talk) 13:05, 14 September 2020 (UTC)Reply

I appreciate all the work that you have been doing among passerine birds. I had not taken notice until today that there has recently been major revision in the allocation of species in that family to genera. The source I rely on is Sylviidae at Avian Taxonomy in Flux. ATIF covers all of Aves. Its allocation of species to genera and families seems to generally correspond to Avibase, but has a more coherent explanation of the reasoning behind the recent revisions. (Avibase keeps records of all serious taxonomic concepts, at the subgeneric level, and provides little basis for making a judgment of which concepts to follow.) When I can, I address multiple lexicographically significant names by including entries for both of the recent names (eg, Sylvia curruca and Curruca curruca). If the new placement already has support from leading comprehensive databases (eg, NCBI, ITIS, EoL, COL, IRMNG), which lag the leading scientific consensus, then I make the newer term a full entry and make the older term a synonym entry. Sometimes both terms have full entries. Of course, older terms remain with full entries if no one has noticed the possible change. I try to have cross-references, especially in the definitions, for the two terms.

Sorry that this gets so complicated. DCDuring (talk) 00:20, 13 September 2020 (UTC)Reply

That is a bit complicated but correct is the only way to go. To assist adding all these entries I go through a checklist of birds found in Sweden on Avibase, and I have found several species with new taxonomic names. When I do encounter such, I check if wikispecies has a new entry. In one case there wasn't. I'm trying to remember which. Is Wikispecies badly updated or was this just an unfortunate case? Fringilla (talk) 13:04, 14 September 2020 (UTC)Reply

It is probably not that useful to add requests for translations into several smaller European languages for relatively 'obscure' birds from Asia, Africa or America. In many cases the names given by Wikipedia will be unused protologisms. Perhaps it's a better idea to instead add requests for translations into languages spoken in the area? ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 13:57, 17 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

That's a very good point and I will check this in future entries. Thank you! Fringilla (talk) 12:16, 18 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. I must say your requests have generally been useful and doable. Of course if a bird is very notable or is commonly kept as a pet in Europe, it probably does have a Dutch name; and birds that occur in the northern part of South America may well have a Surinamese Dutch name. ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 14:48, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Why don't you use the standard templates (Template:sv-noun-form-def etc.) on the entries for Swedish inflections? Glades12 (talk) 19:11, 27 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

I prefer not using the "standard" Swedish inflection form templates for several reasons. Firstly there already is an attempt at standardizing the inflection form templates, something which for example Norwegian and Danish seem to follow. I don't see why Swedish should have own templates when there already is a standardized template that works fine with Swedish too. And secondly I find the Template:inflection of template more visually appealing and helpful with links to the grammatical terms. To me personally also, it seems like the Swedish noun form templates are outdated and obsolete now when there is, in my opinion, a better alternative in the standardized template.

PS. I saw on your user page you don't like the Swedish inflection templates, which I can agree on. They are not only outdated in technology but also not very pleasing to the eye. --Fringilla (talk) 20:31, 27 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

Would you consider collaborating on hosting an event as co-host with me?(if you'd like to host an event and let me be co-host I'd be glad) I don't have a current date, I just wanted to see if you'd like to collaborate, I don't have anything tangible to work on other than some ideas I have written on my userpage LotsofTheories#Wikimedia_events. If you are not interested the coming weeks in this subject I might look for others to collaborate with. Thank you for reading this. LotsofTheories (talk) 07:32, 28 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

Are you sure this term can be neuter? Shouldn't the neuter form be venetianskt terpentin, according to Swedish grammar rules? Glades12 (talk) 05:51, 15 April 2021 (UTC)Reply

You haven't responded after 5 days, so I'll just go ahead and move the neuter form. Glades12 (talk) 05:29, 20 April 2021 (UTC)Reply

Sorry I had an inactive period for a while. According to SAOL both forms are valid. Fringilla (talk) 11:57, 29 April 2021 (UTC)Reply

Fringilla, though appreciate you adding terms to categories, I take some issue with it doing so when there is only single entry in them. @Rua, Mnemosientje, Chuck Entz --{{victar|talk}} 01:58, 29 April 2021 (UTC)Reply

So manually creating a category with a red link is discouraged? Now the category I added to the entry was moved to another category making this one empty. Fringilla (talk) 11:54, 29 April 2021 (UTC)Reply

In a language like English where there are tens of thousands of entries for plant names, using narrow sub-sub-sub categories is a good idea. Otherwise the categories get so huge they're not easy to use. With a language like Hiligaynon where the entries for plant names number at best a few dozen, you're better off starting with a broader parent category. When more entries are added later on and there are enough to justify it, you can always split off a sub-category. Remember that categories are a navigational tool- why should people have to click all around the hierarchy to find other entries? Yes, there are certain familiar, basic categories where that are generally worth it: plants, animals, birds, fish, etc. Mimosa subfamily plants is definitely not one of those, unless you're a botanist- and botanists are too busy rearranging the family (it turns out the Mimosoideae is really part of the Caesalpinioideae... sort of). Having Category:hil:Legumes at this point is questionable- there probably are only a handful of potential members. Having a subfamily category just doesn't make sense. Chuck Entz (talk) 14:17, 29 April 2021 (UTC)Reply

You appear to have given "alden" as an English gloss in some entries, but that is not a common word. Did you mean to write "alder", a certain tree? ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 18:45, 16 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Indeed it is. Thank you for pointing it out, I'll clean it up! Fringilla (talk) 20:29, 16 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hello local bird editor I was hoping that when you add Polish bird names, like with Dutch, could you add the gender? Vininn126 (talk) 17:30, 30 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hello! I usually do so as a habit since I have some basic Polish knowledge, and I simply don't add a translation if I'm unsure of the gender. I must have missed it somewhere, can you show me please? Fringilla (talk) 21:46, 30 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Oops, sorry, I see it's there. I must have over-looked it. Thanks! Vininn126 (talk) 21:47, 30 January 2022 (UTC)Reply