Vicipaedia:Taberna/Tabularium 5

Hac pagina taberna vicipaediae est. Nunc iam sunt 139 734 articuli. Hodie dies Martis December 2024.

Quaestio nova
Ut sententias antiquiores legas vide Vicipaedia:Taberna/Vetera

Template for missing interwiki links

I thınk we should have a template (and a category) for mıssıng ınterwıkı lınks. In Englısh ıt could go lıke thıs, maybe: This article has no interwiki links. Please help, if you can. In Latin maybe: Haec pagina nullos nexus externos habet. Adde si possıs. And then ... what would be a good name for the template? addnexex? add-nex-ex? nex-ex? nexex? nullos-nex-ex? ... --Roland2 10:35, 19 Martii 2006 (UTC) Haec pagina nullos nexus ad vicipaedias alias habet. Adde si possıs. ... better? --Roland2 12:42, 21 Martii 2006 (UTC)

Yes, that's better. How about formula:non-interwiki? At the other side, addnexex is very good: It is one word and short. --Misericordia 14:39, 21 Martii 2006 (UTC)

I would suggest, if this be done, that it would be a blank template, one that put the article in a category but display no text in-article. Missing interwiki links is a level of meta-work that probably doesn't need to be brought to a casual reader's attention. —Myces Tiberinus 22:32, 23 Martii 2006 (UTC)

Isn't that information already on the page? Don't you only need to look at the left hand column, and see that there are no interwiki links? As far as a list, doesn't Roland2 already have an automatically generated one? --Tbook 15:01, 24 Martii 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I have suggested this template and it's me who has this generated list. Seems to be odd ..., however, my intention is more than just signaling that a page has no interwiki lınks and there are some technical issues behind it:

1. The automatıc generation is done from a database snapshot. The actual one is from the 27th of Februaray, which means there is always some delay. I do not know when it wıll be updated the next time.
2. I get the missıng interwiki links with an SQL select from the database but cannot use that information with the intersect tool, another tool for Wikipedia.
3. I am not just interested in the fact that a page has no interwiki link. Some Latin pages might never have interwiki links because there are pages, which no other wikipedias wıll ever have. I am interested in marking the pages which could have one. Or should have one.
4. Maybe such a template could remember the reader or author that there is an information which should be added to the page. New authors/creators might not know about this sort of information.
5. Categorizing these pages via the template would make it easier to mantain those pages.
6. I think interwiki links are a very important information and they can help to make the Latin Wikipedia known to users of foreign Wikipedias.
7. Some time ago we talked about this color code. Red = errors lıke maxcorrigenda etc. I think the blue ones could be like a checklist what could be improved with a page. There are so many talk pages where readers discuss possible improvements or make suggestions. We should make these aspects searcheable and one aspect is the absence of interwiki links.

--Roland2 18:02, 25 Martii 2006 (UTC)

The service http://www.wikisign.org/ which could produce lists of missing interwiki links has been closed. See http://www.wikisign.org/ ... I think we need a template ... --Roland2 21:17, 31 Martii 2006 (UTC)

I am not opposed to a template, although I would suggest that it be discreat. If there were a way to make it show up in the area where the interwiki links normally show up, I think that would be ideal, but even a regular template could work - perhaps one that did nothing more than add the article to the category: Categoria:Carentes Nexus or something like that? --Tbook 21:15, 3 Aprilis 2006 (UTC)

See Aballaba ... would this be ok? Please change it as you like. (What about something like Alias linguas carentes since the section is named aliae linguae?) --Roland2 19:37, 4 Aprilis 2006 (UTC)

In my mind, that is ideal - those who are interested can find out which pages are tagged, but it doesn't affect the user's experience of the site. Thanks! --Tbook 21:24, 4 Aprilis 2006 (UTC)

Testing ... I could not resist ;-) ... what about this small tiny little icon in the left lower edge of an article like in Respublica Dominicana which indicates missing interwiki links? --Roland2 09:37, 9 Aprilis 2006 (UTC)

Wikiproject

Are there any Wikiprojects in Vikipaedia? If it is not, i think wikiproject:lingua latina deserves to be the first. even if it exists wikiprojects, the topic is worthy of a project. We should provide a broad, precise source to latin. We ought to be the best. I will do my best to contribute. What do you say? Ehjort 16:26, 3 Aprilis 2006 (UTC)

While part of me certainly agrees with you, the other part wonders which among us are qualified for this project. I certainly know a great deal about grammar in general, and about latin grammar specifically, but you say we should "be the best"; this might require a few more pieces of paper hanging up on my wall before I can with any amount of certainty claim my grammatical wisdom to be superlative by any means. To answer your question, there are a few projects apud vici, but with so few actively contributing members, it can be hard, in ym experience, to actually get any where with a project. One that interests me a great deal is a theoria musicae project. All this being said, I would be happy and interested to work on a lingua latina project. Tell me what I can do to be useful.--Ioshus Rocchio 16:31, 4 Aprilis 2006 (UTC)

Btw, new posts should go at the bottom of the page.--Ioshus Rocchio 16:33, 4 Aprilis 2006 (UTC)

I am not a very qualified person myself, as I have only learnt latin for a year. However, this is a great way of learning. And, I am sure, we could cover latin grammar pretty good in cooperation. Of course "the best" is very far away, but we should aim for covering all issues on grammar, all conjugations, declinations, cases, tenses, structures, etc in an easily accessible, well arranged and educating manner. If we managed this, it would really be something to be proud of. I do not expect you or any other to possess this knowledge all alone, but in the vicipaedian spirit it should be possible. As far as I remember, grammar and music are two of the essential artes. I will sketch up a plan and present it here as soon as possible. Ehjort 18:48, 4 Aprilis 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. Wasn't really sure cuz it got no responses. Glad to hear from you :) Ehjort 18:48, 4 Aprilis 2006 (UTC)

Do you know http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Latin ? --Roland2 19:00, 4 Aprilis 2006 (UTC)

Thank you! That's a nice one. Though it seemed a little lacking when it comes to the different ablatives. I'll erad better tomorrow. Ehjort 20:09, 4 Aprilis 2006 (UTC)

One thing I would like to make sure we do, is include both classical and archaic latin forms, quoi for cui, ducier instead of duceri or duci, indicative in indirect questions, etc. I don't so much care (or even know, for that matter) about medieval/neolatin grammar, but perhaps we should address that as well. Like you said, aim high, if aim at all.--Ioshus Rocchio 01:41, 5 Aprilis 2006 (UTC)

then Classic and archaic it is - Sine ira et sudio. i currently trying to figure out a structure for our work. One thing we should do is to decipe upon one verb of each conugation and one noun of each declination to serve as a standard examples. I propose the verbs amare(a), monere(e), ducere(3rd), facere(3rd) and audire(4th). In addition esse should be used. Irregular verbs should be listed in all tenses. For nouns I propose villa, servus, bellum, consul, nomen and fructus, dies. You get the idea. Next all cases must be covered, and all other parts of speech, lingvistics and syntax. But first: do we need a project page to coordinate our efforts? A page that also should be used to develop a standard for the articles.Ehjort 16:06, 5 Aprilis 2006 (UTC)

I definitely am against servus and bellum as paradigm nouns. Slave and war are not the mental images I want in any student's head when they are trying to remember the second declension. Probably out to include a deponent verb or two, and fieri.--Ioshus Rocchio 01:17, 6 Aprilis 2006 (UTC)

OK. Was just using the examples that I've learnt to use. AFter all that's an important part of roman history. But; let's find some other examples. I'd be happy if you decided on the deponent verbs. And fieri. Ehjort 05:37, 6 Aprilis 2006 (UTC)

I will spend my easter holidays terribly offline. Where I live, this means I will not be back until 17 April. That will be the start of this little project, to speak for myself. If you want something to do you could write articles on the different tenses and conjugations. Or something compeltely different. Ehjort 19:04, 6 Aprilis 2006 (UTC)

How about amicus and donum for our 2nd declension? Loqui would be a good deponent, especially since apud vici it is so often misused.--Ioshus Rocchio 22:19, 6 Aprilis 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. Ehjort 23:07, 6 Aprilis 2006 (UTC)

formulam novam feci

Salvete! Formula urbibus mundi feci : Velim aliquem formulam legere ut corrigatur. Formula est Formula:Urbs Mundi cum Provincia. Formulam legere potestis in rebus his: Hispalis aut Toletum. Nesciebam quo modo monstrarem me velle auxilium in ipsa pagina ut hoc scribam.

Howdy! I wrote a formula for cities of the world (with provinces) and would like it if someone could read it for correctness. The formula is Formula:Urbs Mundi cum Provincia. You can see the formula in these articles: Hispalis and Toletum. I didn't know how to show that I needed help with the formula on its own page, so I wrote here. Sinister Petrus 15:50, 6 Aprilis 2006 (UTC)

Ut in pagina ipsa opem vel auxilium quaesas, {{reddenda}}, aut si opem permaxime dandam sit {{maxcorrigenda}}, scribe ad summum articuli. Hoc monstrat:

Formula:Reddenda
Formula:Maxcorrigenda
--Ioshus Rocchio 23:23, 6 Aprilis 2006 (UTC)

Salve Sinister Petre ; Dicam " tempus regionis" vice " regio temporis". Correxi etiam tuam sententiam latine. --Marc mage 23:28, 6 Aprilis 2006 (UTC)

Multas gratias tibi ago. Sinister Petrus 02:15, 7 Aprilis 2006 (UTC)

Parvas emendationes formulae feci. Incertus de nomine recte "Time zone", at regio temporis...vix meo animo licet. Sed dic mi, necesse est rescribere "provincia nationis" si super scripseris nomen nationis?--Ioshus Rocchio 23:31, 6 Aprilis 2006 (UTC)

Hem, video ut regio temporis non mihi solo displacet =].--Ioshus Rocchio 23:34, 6 Aprilis 2006 (UTC)

1. Heu! "Regio temporis" in formula e Urbibus Americae dicitur ut corrigenda illuc etiam requirantur. Quo modo melius dicere nescio (anglice for a second, I really don't much care what it is called, but I thought "regio temporis" ((region of time)) sounded more latine than "zona horaria" ((hour zone)) even though I didn't make either one up). Quod scio, usus sum, quamquam illam formulam quoque feceram. In animo vero, in re de Sancto Iacobo prime visi. Zonane horaria melius sit quam "regio temporis"? 2. Si provincia est, volo lectores scire provinciam esse. Si non provincia est, aliam formulam faciam. An tuam quaestionam non intellego? Sinister Petrus 02:15, 7 Aprilis 2006 (UTC)

Category vs. categoria

I think, the term "Category" in the footer of the pages in the article namespace should be translated. I would prefer "Categoriae". The user namespace says "Categoriae paginarum" ... shouldn't it be "Categoriae paginae" (or just "Categoriae")? --Roland2 09:09, 9 Aprilis 2006 (UTC)

[[Categoria:MyCategory]] works as well. The pages that still say: <nowiki>[[Category:XYZ]] can just be switched to read Categoria</nowiki>. (I think I understood the question.) --Tbook 15:48, 9 Aprilis 2006 (UTC)

Now I see what you are talking about. Articles that only belong to one category, like Isidorus Hispalensis say Category: at the bottom. If they have more than one, it says: Categoriae paginarum. Also the titles on the category pages themselves aren't translated. --Tbook 15:54, 9 Aprilis 2006 (UTC)

{{Delenda}}

It seems like no one has gone through Categoria:Delenda to delete pages for a long time. Is anyone interested in doing that? --Tbook 16:33, 9 Aprilis 2006 (UTC)