I thought a long time about a mail where someone said that redirects
should not be deleted. It is not logic to me that a wrong writing should
redirect to a correct form of writing.
Let's take the German word for "German" – language and adjective.
adjective = deutsch
noun = Deutsch (language)
These two would have two different pages – so there's no re-direct
possible – you can just add deutsch/Deutsch as related word on the page.
if you take the Italian word:
There's only one way to write it "soprattutto" with lower case "s". At
this stage it would be "Soprattutto" that is going then to be redirected
to "soprattutto". And the wrong writing should then remain as a
redirect? This would confuse people – they could believe that the
version with the capital "s" is correct.
Another thing: many people, in particular language students, write this
very particular word wrong – they write "sopratutto". Since to easen
search you would also allow redirects from wrong words to the right ones
this one should then be added? No… this does not make sense.
The only way a wiktionary may be: with correct written words, with
correct upper and lowercase. All the other, obviously wrong, stuff must
be deleted – otherwise the credibility and the work of many people will
become less credible and important.
I know, this is hard word, but the sooner you do it the better it is.
All contributors to the English wiktionary should for some days/weeks
(depending on the number of actively contributing people) concentrate on
the conversion of upper to lowercase where necessary and the admins
should concentrate on the deletion of the redirects. When someone sees
that somebody still adds with uppercase instead of adding a word just go
on his/her user page and tell him/her what to care about and to help
with the conversion work. If everyone does this you'll not need longer
than a month and than have a neat and correct wiktionary.
All discussion on the WikiData proposal is explicitly welcome. When you
are interested in cooperating in the development of WikiData, you are
more than welcome to do so. With the details of the RFC you find the
likely timetable will be. When you are interested in helping in the
development of the project you are more than welcome.
The part where the GEMET database will be implemented in the Mediawiki
software is included because the design and the data of this database
can both be used based on the GEMET data that can be found here:
http://www.eionet.eu.int/GEMET. This is a big important body of work
and already has data in 20 languages, it will allow us to add content in
any and all other languages and it is included because it will give us
the opportunity to experiment with the user interface. The current GEMET
database does have XML data available and we are hopefull that we will
find people willing to help with an XML import and export module.
The development as outlined in the plan is what will be done. With more
people working on the project we will be able to get better
functionality. It is a project that is part of the Mediawiki environment
and as such it is open for colaboration.
By not commenting before the deadline the project will start on the
given date. By commenting before the deadline the project may start a
week later if the comments make this a necessity. At all times comments
Jonathan Leybovich wrote:
> Hi All-
> I was wondering what the proper channel would be for voicing
> suggestions/comments about the technical design of the WikiData
> project. I guess this would be the WikiData discussion page on Meta,
> but this has not been updated in a while and I wanted to make a few
> comments before the Ultimate Wiktionary deadline.
> Also, how will development work be coordinated? The Ultimate
> Wiktionary project page implies Eric will be doing all the
> development, and though I am happy to follow his lead (as well as let
> him claim the contract ;) I would like to help with development as I
> am preparing a project proposal that will have WikiData functionality
> as a prerequisite. Thanks.
> Gerard Meijssen wrote:
>> I am very happy to announce that Kennisnet is willing to
>> underwrite/pay for the creation of wikidata and the ultimate
>> wiktionary. This will allow us to host relational data within a
>> Mediawiki environment. Wikidata will particularly enhance projects
>> like Wikispecies and Wiktionary where a lot of the relevant data is
>> relational in nature. The details of this project can be found here:
>> Thanks, :)
Do we have a Czech speaker here?
What does "Ježíšek" really mean - Father Christmas?
I had an edit on it. wiktionary and I am not sure if this is a vandal or
serious edit - He added that the Czech word means "Jesus, the child"
Thanks for your help!
Stephen Forrest wrote:
>On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 22:41:28 +0100, Gerard Meijssen
>>One request, please add those pronunciations of important people, places
>>etc to Commons, there is no better way of learning how something is to
>>be pronounced for someone who is not failiar with your language.
>Probably this goes without saying, but those interested in this will
>probably wish to read
>to request pronunciations, to fulfil pronunciation requests, and
>perhaps add links to pronunciation request pages on their own wikis.
Well actually, I request all words in all languages :) This is a not
really practical so I started with Dutch politicians that have been
categorised on the English wikipedia. I will produce more
pronunciations in this way. Basically, everyone knows how much of a mess
it is when foreigners try to say something in your language. So have a
look at the bigger wikipedia's and start adding those to commons. Add
pronunciations and it will take some time before we will be asked to add
this missing word or that ..
Three people, all very active in Wiktionary, agreed that the
pronunciation of names and places are quit different in the non local
languages. Many wikipedias add how a place is written in the language
where this name is local.
The three people pronounced a few words and, they have been added to
commons. I have also been so bold to add these pronunciations to the
wikipedias that have an article on these illustrious people; they are
Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, Silvio Berlusconi and George Walker Bush. I have
added some famous Dutch politicians for good measure and, if you want me
to pronounce Dutch words, you can always ask. I am aware that not
everyone in a country pronounce things in the same way, but it is most
often superior to what you make up if you see the characters that make
up the name.
One request, please add those pronunciations of important people, places
etc to Commons, there is no better way of learning how something is to
be pronounced for someone who is not failiar with your language.
There is this joke about these Americans asking for the "tjamps
ilajsies" in Paris, and nobody ever heard of it... Many words cannot be
properly pronounced by people not speaking the language. Many news
organisations have their presenters trained in pronouncing foreign words..
When we write about things foreign, there is often no difinitive word
for the subject in the language that the article is written in. So often
we try to find something that will do. Most often we use what others
used before us, often it is a transliteration or a transcription to yet
another language. With our digital encyclopedia, it is easy to add
pronunciation of words in the local language. We often add how it is
written in another script and, it would make equal sense to add the
pronunciation in the local language as well.
As an example I have done this in the wikipedias for "Jaap de Hoop
Scheffer" and for "Silvio Berlusconi". I have also pronounced and
uploaded the category of Dutch politicians from the en:wikipedia to
Commons... Could an American please pronounce and upload George W. Bush
and a Chinese 胡锦涛 ??
Ray Saintonge wrote:
> Angela wrote:
>> On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 19:10:05 +0100, Anthere <anthere9(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> Wikidata is a new project... does the community supports this ?
>> Wikidata itself isn't really a project. It's more of a technical
>> solution to some of the problems on existing projects.
>> The implementation of Wikidata will obviously need community support
>> -- do Wiktionarians want to merge their projects into the "ultimate
>> Wiktionary", for example -- but I don't think the feature itself
>> should need consensus before its written, only before its implemented
>> on Wikimedia in a way which would affect existing projects.
> Gerard is full of technical solutions. Some of them may indeed be
> brilliant, but I don't have the technical expertise to judge. The
> real question lies in whether contributors whose primary interest is
> language will be driven away because the editing process is too
> complicated. One of the most important features of Wikipedia has been
> that anyone can learn how to edit with very little training. At one
> time their were passionate arguments over the use of html or wiki
> markup. Wiki markup was seen then as too complicated. We've gone a
> long way since then, but we still need to be aware that many of the
> contributors that we may seek are not computer geeks, but
> knowledgeable people in the subjects that are their passion.
One of the aims of the ultimate wiktionary is to hide all the
complicated stuff that you currently find in nl:wiktionary. I am on
record saying that it is a crutch. (typically you use a crutch when the
walking is difficult). When you CAN use it, you have learned many
ISO-639 and codes by heart like I have. In the ultimate wiktionary the
crutch will not be needed anymore as all the needed information will be
hidden in the User Interface.
> I also see Gerard's proposal as directed toward the needs of
> translation. That's a commendable goal, but a dictionary is more than
> that. It is just as much a reference for people about their own
> language. And people writing about their own language need to feel
> free to do so easily without needing to be concerned about the
> potential effects on translations. \
The current implementation that led to Ultimate Wiktionary was directed
toward using content in multiple wiktionaries. The ultimate wiktionary
is directed towards integration of the wiktionaries so that content
added/changed in a language will be available to all people interested
in that language. The crux ot all that I have done in wiktionary, is
that 80% of wiktionary content is language independent.
> Also much of what Gerard says is theoretical, and very little of it
> gives real practical examples of how things will work Saying that a
> database structured on xml would be a big improvement does not mean
> much to those who are not intimately acquainted with xml.
The current content of nl:wiktionary can be easily moved to
it:wiktionary to hi:wiktionary or to .. and it will be correct with the
exception of stuff like description and etymology. That is not
theoretical, that is really practical. I have moved stuff to the
fa:wiktionary (Persian) and, it works..
XML is nice. We will want an import and export mechanism. BUT the
proposal that is to be implemented is not about XML, it is about making
the 80% of all effort count in all wiktionaries so that when I add the
3000+ words in Papiamento with translations and everything, there will
be a Papiamento resource to ALL users of wiktionary.
> As much as I've advocated for a unified Wikisource, I also advocate
> for separate Wiktionaries. Without getting too far into that debate
> now, I can at least point out that Wikisource deals with static texts
> that will not need to be repeatedly edited.
> If Gerard wants to experiment with his ideas on some form of Wikidata
> project I won't stand in his way. If he wants to go from that into
> some kind of "Ultimate Wiktionary" he may come up with something that
> works. Maybe it will eventually be meaningful to migrate existing
> translation material there. But let's not go there until he has
> something practical established. The timetable for that may be
> considerably longer than the one which he so optimistically expresses.
The one thing I am asking is: read about the proposals, think about what
this tries to accomplish. Ask questions about what does not make sense.
The great thing about the wikimedia projects is the importance of the
community. I have a dream and, was able to accomplish something. I
sincerely hope that we will find it usefull and will be happy to move
The current timetable is about implementing the necessary building
blocks. It is split up in several milestones that will allow us to do
reality checks on the way. The timetable says nothing about the
conversion of all the wiktionaries and, it does not make it mandatory to
move over to the ultimate wiktionary. In time, people will move over as
and when they think it is usefull to do so.
I am very happy to announce that Kennisnet is willing to underwrite/pay
for the creation of wikidata and the ultimate wiktionary. This will
allow us to host relational data within a Mediawiki environment.
Wikidata will particularly enhance projects like Wikispecies and
Wiktionary where a lot of the relevant data is relational in nature. The
details of this project can be found here:
Hi, before I upload words to wiktionary I normally create tables with
the terms and then with mailmerge I create the pages to upload. In this
way it is quite easy to create glossaries together with wiktionary
contents and we have at least a double use.
Now creating the texts of Wikijunior in Italian (to have it then
translated by one of my pupils into German) I created a short list of
the big cats in English/German/Italian - Gerard already passed me the
terms in Dutch. Now what would be really great is to edit this list
online - so that many people could contribute. Then have the possibility
to export into csv-format (with utf-8 coding).
Is there a software around that already does that? I could install it on
my server for now - and of course any wikipedia project could use the
contents as license would always be GNU FDL.
It would be the fastest way to create contents... can you help me with this?
Thank you for any hint!
Meetingplace for translators
Vuoi la parola del giorno nella tua casella di posta?
Invia un'e-mail vuota a: