Berjocht oerlis:noun

Ferbetterings

Improvements to make: If the parameter is blank, center a hyphen.

For parameters 2-4, if they're not blank, make them into links (surround with [[]])

Ferskaat oerlis

• Ik mei ens net sa oer dit soarte fan tabellen, mar oare lju nimme dy graach op, dat ik nim oan dat it in doel hat.
• Jildt de side Wikiwurdboek:Berjochten noch?

Is dizze side in part fan it antwurd op myn fraach, ûndersteand?

• Wat is krekt it doel fan dy reade keppeling ûnderoan it berjocht?

Kategoryen, ik begryp net (gjin idee!) it totale ûntwerp fan de kategoryen hjir. (Dêr hoech ik net op te rekkenjen, dat man bysûndere siden --> net-kategorisearre sjabloanen sjocht.)

• I'm not really a fan of such tables, but others like to add them so I guess they serve a purpose.

At first I thought maybe I'd propose this one for use mainly with Dutch entries. (Probably not for Frysk. With pictures and whatnot in the Frysk entries, that's probably be too much clutter.) I find those things very helpful on the English site in foreign language entries. They seem more form over function in the English entries though, to me. I thought maybe others here might share my paradigm, or have more use for it.

But that was before I saw other people preferred to use pictures with foreign language entries. Now I think such a thing might be more clutter than it's worth. Especially for Dutch, where you guys (unlike me) basically all speak that language anyway, and it's so close to Frysk.

Swedish inflections, or something else like that, something far more alien though, on that, some people here might kind of agree with me. Figured I'd use a few things like that for a little while, see how it looked and ask for comments. *shrug* Speaking of Swedish, I couldn't get this working (in the time I felt like spending on it for two blasted entries anyway.) If you think it's at all valuable, maybe you can peek at it and see somewhere I obviously went wrong.

Update, I figured it out. It's the fact that for some reason sometimes this site calls "Special" (as in special pages aka bysûndere siden) "Special" and sometimes it calls it "Wiki." It's not consistent. For that reason, the function that tests whether something is a valid page as opposed to a redlink never returns true--the two values compared can never be equal under any circumstances if one says "special" and the other says "wiki," and that happens to be one of the inconsistencies. That also, coincidentally, is why I had to put the enhancement above the line on hold. Same reason it didn't work the first time--I was trying to using the same function!

P.S. Yes, I tried the obvious, the additional permutations switching either or both values from special to wiki. It overrides in any case, mapping it to the term special or wiki that it feels like using. Winter (Username:Snakesteuben 18 mai 2008, 15.10 (UTC))

Update 2. Tried something. Cautiously optimistic. Aid request on hold... Winter (Username:Snakesteuben 18 mai 2008, 16.11 (UTC))

• Is the page Wikiwurdboek:Berjochten still valid?

That might have something to do with what I'm wondering below?

• What is the purpose of the red link at the bottom of the template? Aliter 17 mai 2008, 23.14 (UTC)

I for one am totally clueless how the founders intended to categorise templates. That's supposed to be an assignment to an eventual category--if somebody who knows something comes along; or somebody like me who doesn't know anything figures that out. (I didn't want to rely on somebody actually looking at the special page for uncategorised templates.) Winter (Username:Snakesteuben 18 mai 2008, 14.33 (UTC))

• The reason I asked about the templates page, is that it includes an explanation of why I didn0t think it a good idea to use 2-4 letter minuscule templates for other purposes than translations.
• If there's no hint as to how anyone wanted to categorise the templates, then feel free to do it as you see fit.
• De reden dat ik dat frege oer de berjochtenside, is dat der in útlis op stiet fan wêrom ik it doe de tiid gjin goed idee fûn en brûk 2-4 lytse letter berjochten foar wat oars as oersettings.
• At nimmen oanjûn hat hoe er de berjochten yndiele woe, fiel jo dan frij it de dwaan sa't it jo goed liket. Aliter 18 mai 2008, 19.54 (UTC)

Winter, I don't know why you're testing for page existence, but if it serves a purpose: Do you know there's an #ifexist? Aliter 18 mai 2008, 19.54 (UTC)

Berjochten

I take it the word sjabloanen is a total synonym for berjochten? Is there any advantage to standardising the terminology, or is that a non-issue? I do kind of find it confusing, myself, that system messages and templates are the same word. But that might just be the way it is in your language! English has 10 times more confusing stuff than that.

Is sjabloan in synonym foar berjocht? Wolle wy in iental term brûken, of is dat gjin probleem? Ek berjocht betsjut beide sjabloan en de wikiberjochten, tekst fan de systeem, foar fersinne en advys. Dat fine ik dûbelsinnich. Mar Frysk hat minder as in tsiende part fan de problemen fan Ingelsk! Winter (Username:Snakesteuben 18 mai 2008, 15.06 (UTC))

To keep a story of good intentions and poor communication short: "Berjocht" is "message", but it's the word for "template" on the Frisian wikis. "Sjabloan" is "template", and as you know that's not really a good name for them either. The texts saying "sjabloan" are trust upon us by one of the many projects we don't have the man-power to coordinate with, much like new English texts are thrust upon us. It's upto the sysops whether they want to change them, or want to report a bug being a request for a different namespace name. The latter does the advantage of a better distinction from system messages, but those have become less message like as well, so maybe that's not appropriate.

Om in ferhaal oer goede bedoelings en minne kommunikasje koart te hâlden: "Berjocht" is "message", mar it is it wurd for "template" op de Fryske wiki's. "Sjabloan" is "template", en dat is ek al gjin goede namme foar dy dingen. De teksten mei "sjabloan" wurde ús tafoegd troch ien fan de folle projekten dêr't wy de minsken net foar hawwe om oerienstimming mei te hâlden, min ofte mear lykas nije Ingelske teksten út tafoege wurde. It is oan de behearders at dy dy oanpasje wolle, as in brek rapportearje wolle dat stiet foar in fersyk foar in oare nammeromtenamme. Dat lêste hat al it foardiel dat wikiberjochten dúdliker ûnderskieden wurde kinne, mar dy binne ek minder berjochteftiger wurden, dat faaks wie dat net tapaslik. Aliter 18 mai 2008, 19.54 (UTC)

Short templates

Sorry, I glommed on the first sentence and thought it was a hint for organisation of the in protte berjochten that it wikiwurdboek is opboud mei, and maybe using that page to hold an index of them. (I guessed then, and still guess, opboud means "made up of" or "composed of" but for some reason my brain wants to parse it as "infested." Gheheh. I really should invest in a dictionary some day.) And I apologise, with the ISO reference, I guess I totally missed the fact that the text said 2, 3 and 4.

Well, as you know, this thing was kind of a test draft. If we keep it, it certainly could, and probably should, be given a more descriptive name indicating its function as an inflection template. I think some sort of standard naming convention in this language would be a good idea (English uses infl-blahblah, some Frysk equivalent of that maybe), even independently of your concern. What do you think?

But one exception I'd like to lobby for, just in case, the {{p}} {{c}} and {{n}}. A fair number of other sites have them, and they make it really easy for somebody who's shaky in the language to do a drop and run if they happen to be looking up something on our project. Even those whose primary language isn't English seem to use them. In fact, just today, I clicked the Swedish translation for "stoarm" to go check my inflection and figured I'd take two seconds to drop the Frysk translation in. I wasn't sure what they called common gender, so I ended up guessing and noting that in the summary line. Winter (Username:Snakesteuben 19 mai 2008, 10.48 (UTC))

De 4-letterige koades binne de ISO dialektkoades. Binne dy ienkear beskikber, dan kinne wy al dy "allinnich yn Amerikaansk" ensfh. allegear kodearje. De p, c en n binne 1-letterige koades, dat dêr binne gjin problemen mei. It grutste probleem is op it stuit pn, tink. Dy koade wurdt noch net brûkt yn ISO 639-1, mar is ek net reservearre. Dat makket PN in feiliger alternatyf.

De 4-letter codes are the ISO dialect codes. Once they are available, we can code all these "allinnich yn Amerikaansk" (American only) etc.. The p, c, and n are 1-letter codes, there are no problems with those. I expect the biggest problem currently is pn. That code isn't currently in use in ISO 639-1, but it's not a reserved code either. That makes PN a safer alternative. Aliter 19 mai 2008, 19.05 (UTC)

Excellent point on PN/pn. At very least, I'll update the bot macros now while I'm thinking about. (I was using that in them--bad Winter, no biscuit.) Perhaps ironically, I used another 4-letter word, er, template I'd like to keep in my last reply, again without thinking about it. {{temp}} --> {{temp|templatename}}. A handy way to avoid that blasted nowiki syntax that always balls me up. Also handy because clicking on the template takes the user to info about the template--the template talk page, or failing that, the template page itself (I hope; it's supposed to do that), if there's any confusion as to what the message is talking about. The name's very intuitive for me, and I'm used to it on other projects. There's also a clone Frysk alternative {{berj}}, a name I'm less wedded to. (If there's a need for it at all, of course.) Winter (Username:Snakesteuben 20 mai 2008, 08.33 (UTC))

Fine, but as a 5-letter wurd: {{tempt}}. Bêst, mar dan as fiif letters: {{tempt}}. Aliter 20 apr 2010, 01.54 (UTC)