Wikidata talk:Wikidata Lexeme Forms/Archive 1

From Wikidata
Jump to navigation Jump to search

French[edit]

@Lucas Werkmeister: I've just added the possibility to create french templates for new lexemes. Djiboun (talk) 08:32, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Djiboun: Thanks! But the identifier for the template should be in English – I’m not sure if a ç in a URL is a good idea :) also, is it intentional that the “CSRF protection failed” part of one message is not translated? --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 11:53, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Lucas Werkmeister: Done. The template name is now in english and the message “CSRF protection failed” is translated. Inside the template, as I didn't know how to preceed, I included every cases for the four combinations between singular/plural and masculine/feminine, but most of french nouns will only need two of them. Is it possible to activate the advanced mode by default to allow blank forms? Or I've just got a better idea: would it be possible to add an option to first choose between masculine and feminine that would switch the example sentences, then to add the singular and plural forms? Thanks for your help. Djiboun (talk) 22:07, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Djiboun: well yes, that would simply be two different templates :) or three, I suppose: one for masculine nouns, one for feminine nouns, and one for nouns that do need all four forms. Does that make sense? (Edit: or perhaps only two templates after all? «chien»/«chienne» looks like it should perhaps be two different lexemes…) --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 09:03, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Lucas Werkmeister: Yes, you're right, two different templates should be the best solution, one for masculine form and one for feminine form. The other special cases will be done manually. Djiboun (talk) 11:57, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Djiboun: thanks! The template is live now. (I made a few minor changes as well, see the page history – please let me know if anything’s wrong.) --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 17:05, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Lucas Werkmeister: Great! No problem with your changes, everything seems ok. Thanks! Djiboun (talk) 19:20, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Lucas Werkmeister: Me again. I added a new french template for adjectives. Could you have a look on it? Thanks. Djiboun (talk) 19:28, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Djiboun: it’s live now, thank you! --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 21:52, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Asturian[edit]

@Lucas Werkmeister: Translation for Asturian (ISO 639-2 code «ast») is ready. What come next, templates? --Oriciu (talk) 16:39, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Oriciu: Thanks! Yes, adding templates would be the next step. --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 21:55, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Oriciu: I see you’ve added some templates now – is this still work in progress or can I add them to the tool? --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 16:46, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Lucas Werkmeister: Existing templates IMHO are usable now as they are; but a lot of templates are still missing (verbs, for instance). If you can add them to the tool, it will be a good proof of concept for philologists here In Asturias (I have had a hard time trying to explain a friend of mine how he could take advantage of this tool.) Other templates will be added, but for now I have more pending tasks than I have time. --Oriciu (talk) 23:03, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Oriciu: thanks! The templates are live now, please let me know if there are any problems. --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 10:26, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple variants of a form[edit]

@Djiboun, KaMan, Shinnin: yesterday, I added support for creating multiple variants of a form to the tool: if you enter “X/Y/Z” for a form, three forms with the same grammatical features and the representations “X”, “Y” and “Z” will be created. I updated the examples in the German templates to make use of this where it makes sense (diff), to give users a hint that this is possible – can you perhaps check if there are any similar cases in the templates you wrote? --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 10:19, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have already tried this in aronia (L7313) and it works fine, thank You. KaMan (talk) 10:26, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@KaMan: the question is not whether the feature work, the question is whether it would make sense to use the feature in any of the temlates you wrote, so that other people can also find out about the feature. --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 11:21, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Lucas Werkmeister: I see, You are right, I changed most general template to show such case (diff). If I find examples for other two templates then I will let You know. KaMan (talk) 11:40, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@KaMan: thanks, I updated the tool accordingly. --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 13:14, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Lucas Werkmeister: I changed the examples for french adjectives and it should be ok. Thanks. Djiboun (talk) 16:25, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Djiboun: hm, I have to admit I’m not happy with that – since the placeholders/inputs are no longer directly part of the sentence, I feel like it might be confusing? At least I found it pretty confusing, but I also don’t speak French, so I the beau/bel part confused me more than it would probably confuse a native speaker :)
But is this common in French? If it isn’t, then I would prefer to keep the template simpler and not mention the “/” feature in there, if it can’t be made to fit into the sentence easily. --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 16:37, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Lucas Werkmeister: the different form variants for a singular masculine adjective in french concern a few words only, depending on how the word just after it begins (if the next word begins with a consonant, we use "beau", if it begins with a vowel, we use "bel"). But most of the adjectives have only one form for singular masculine adjective.
I found this way to give example sentences, in order to include this special case of different form variants for singular masculine adjective. If you don't like it, the possibility of adding different form variants is described in the documentation page, so we can keep the previous version. Djiboun (talk) 21:10, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Djiboun: then let’s revert to the previous version, yes. I feel like those variants should perhaps be created manually anyways, since they might also need special statements (it sounds like that word and a (L2767) should both have some statements describing this special feature, and which form should be used when, although a (L2767) is currently lacking such statements too). --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 21:40, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Italian forms[edit]

Hey Lucas, hope you're well. :) I did some Italian forms for your tool, hope you can upload them easily. :)

Cheers. --Sannita - not just another it.wiki sysop 13:26, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Sannita: cool, thanks a lot! But the “Avverbio” template seems to be missing forms – is that still work in progress? If yes, I could add the other templates for now. --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 14:48, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Sannita: I’ve added the templates for nouns and adjectives for now, thanks again! --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 20:28, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Lucas Werkmeister: Thanks! For the "avverbio" template, I think we will need a bit of time, because there could be up to five different forms and it seems we don't have all items for this. I'll try to look after this too in the next weeks. Cheers! --Sannita - not just another it.wiki sysop 21:20, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Prefilling[edit]

As grammatical forms tend to follow some rules, it would be great to have them prefilled. And if there is an exception, then changing it by hand. -Theklan (talk) 09:08, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Theklan: see Topic:Uhfuc8rcc80d3str – I don’t want to support automatically generating or pre-filling forms at the moment. --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 11:30, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I see your point, but uploading 46 forms for every lexeme by hand it's a hard work and can be easily done automatically once the norms are known. -Theklan (talk) 13:00, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Esperanto[edit]

@Lucas Werkmeister: I've completed one template for esperanto. I do not know sample sentence for accusative case (Q146078) in singular and plural, but I will continue searching for that. KaMan (talk) 12:58, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Jens Ohlig: do you want to help out with the Esperanto template? I’d prefer to have a full sample sentence for accusative case (Q146078) before adding the template to the tool. --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 11:24, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Lucas Werkmeister: I'm several months late, but I did it. :) Jens Ohlig (talk) 20:57, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Jens Ohlig: Thanks! The template is live now :) --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 19:42, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Russian[edit]

Hello, Lucas! Please check and add template for Russian nouns. --Infovarius (talk) 09:15, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Infovarius: Thanks! I’m transcribing them now, but I’m confused about the labels of the plurale tantum forms: shouldn’t e. g. the first form be “мн.ч. им.п.” instead of “ед.ч. им.п.”? --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 10:35, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Also the label for that template seems to be the same as for neuter nouns? --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 10:44, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Since the fix seemed pretty clear to me (the three other templates all use the same labels for the plural forms), I’ve taken the liberty to fix the problems myself, and the templates are now live. Please check that everything is working :) --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 11:18, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, you're right! Thanks for the corrections! --Infovarius (talk) 18:27, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Estonian[edit]

The Estonian translation and noun template should be ready, I think! --Reosarevok (talk) 10:37, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Reosarevok: Thanks, it’s live now! :) --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 11:18, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Arabic[edit]

Hey! Added Arabic :) Zack (talk) 22:22, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@زكريا: Thanks! But there are a few problems with the template…
  1. Why is the heading of the template section (اسم مذكر عربي) different from the label given in the template (اسم عربي)?
  2. If the lexeme should have the statement grammatical gender (P5185)masculine (Q499327), shouldn’t that be reflected in the template identifier (e. g. arabic-noun-masculine), and shouldn’t there be templates for other grammatical genders as well?
  3. If there is a form with the grammatical feature singular (Q110786), shouldn’t there also be a second form in plural (Q146786), or some other kind of grammatical number?
  4. The example sentence (كتاب لي) is missing the part in [brackets], which is the part that users replace with the actual text of the form.
Can you look into this? --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 16:08, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That's Right. Issues fixed. Zack (talk) 16:22, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, looks better now! But I still have two questions:
  1. It looks like the feminine template is still missing? I’d prefer to add them both at once (unless perhaps one grammatical gender is vastly less common than the other?).
  2. I looked up the example word on English Wiktionary, and it lists a lot more forms: 36 instead of 3. If I’m not mistaken, your template only lists forms for what English Wiktionary calls “Indefinite” and “Informal”, but not “Definite”/“Construct” and “Nominative”/“Accusative”/“Genitive”.
I’m unsure what to make of this. Of course, I don’t speak the language – I don’t even trust myself to say whether two similar-looking Arabic words are the same or not, since I can’t read the alphabet – so at some point I need to just trust you that your template makes sense. And I don’t want to make you jump through too many hoops when I’ve already added some other templates with arguably less scrutiny. But on the other hand, as long as I notice things that look odd to me, I suppose I should still look into them and try to ensure the quality of the tool :) so can you check the template again, and/or explain to me how I got this all wrong? :D --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 19:45, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Time to move this out of user space?[edit]

As this tool is becoming more widely used, perhaps it's time to move it out of user space and to a more central location, e.g. Wikidata:Lexeme forms? --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 12:09, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Daniel Mietchen: I don’t know… what would be the advantage? Do you think it belongs there? (I don’t have any real objections, I just don’t feel like it’s necessary at this point.) --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 19:49, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Many of the tools we have can be found somewhere predictably under WD:ToolName, so moving it there would increase findability. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 02:10, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Daniel Mietchen: I would prefer WD:Wikidata Lexeme Forms, since that’s the full name of the tool to me – is that duplication of the “Wikidata” acceptable? :) --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 11:59, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Spanish[edit]

Hi, Lucas! I have completed three templates for Spanish: masculine noun, feminine noun, and adjective. Hope it all works well. Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 00:48, 12 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Andreasmperu: thanks, they’re live now! And sorry for the delay. --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 19:14, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bug in advanced mode[edit]

Hi @Lucas Werkmeister:, when your tool is used in advanced mode (forms are added to existing lexeme) then statements from template are not added to forms, I had to add them by hand, see: https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Lexeme%3AL13356&type=revision&diff=728460270&oldid=728458561 KaMan (talk) 09:05, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@KaMan: yes, I know :( I’m afraid this will have to wait for phabricator:T194732 to be fixed. --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 18:48, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I’ve documented this on the documentation page now, see Special:Diff/743816913. --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 12:16, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Lucas Werkmeister: the phabricator task is resolved. Does it mean it works now in your tool as expected? KaMan (talk) 07:04, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@KaMan: I just created L120 on test.wikidata.org and its forms still only have one statement, instead of two as I would expect if the bug was fixed. It looks like the fix is in the wmf.26 branch, which is apparently not currently deployed – see phabricator:T191072 for deployment blockers. --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 19:28, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@KaMan: this should be fixed now, can you try it out? --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 11:58, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Lucas Werkmeister: I tried on warszawiak (L32407) and it looks fine, thanks. KaMan (talk) 11:32, 24 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

nynorsk verb[edit]

@Njardarlogar: I see you’ve added another template for Norwegian Nynorsk – should I add it to the tool or are you still working on it? --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 16:48, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Lucas Werkmeister: Not quite sure yet how to best model the verbs, so it should wait. I'll notify you when/if I think have something ready :-) (I might start with a basic template that doesn't have all the possible forms, just like the current version) --Njardarlogar (talk) 17:36, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Njardarlogar: alright, thank you :) --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 16:02, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Form was not redirecting after creation of lexeme[edit]

Hi @Lucas Werkmeister: I was creating lexeme książka@pl with "polish-noun" template. I filled form and clicked "Create" button. Page reloaded with my prefiling and looked like nothing happened. I was still in template form. I checked in my contributions and found that lexeme was created książka (L19620). No error message was displayed. KaMan (talk) 09:05, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@KaMan: according to the server logs, the form was submitted twice (at 08:59:14 and 08:59:17 UTC): the first time, the server returned a redirect, the second time it returned the form again (because the lexeme would now have been a duplicate). Perhaps you accidentally pressed the “submit” button twice, or your internet was acting up or something? --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 12:06, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Lucas Werkmeister: if so I would say it was internet connection issue. KaMan (talk) 12:16, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Could not create noun in advanced mode[edit]

Hi @Lucas Werkmeister:! I have problem with creating gronostaje (L21347) minutes ago. According to http://sgjp.pl/leksemy/#68931/gronostaje it has only last seven cases so I tried in advanced mode with template polish-noun. I filled last seven cases and clicked "Create". Form was realoded, no error message was displayed, lexeme was not created. So I created gronostaje (L21347) by hand and then again tried advanced mode giving this ID to complete cases. And again after clicking create there was no effect and no error message. I completed my noun by hand. I'm sure this worked earlier because I made this way my (L21188) where last seven cases were used too. KaMan (talk) 05:39, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

PS. I could not complete gronostaj (L21318) in advanced mode as well with full set of cases so number of cases was not a problem. KaMan (talk) 05:49, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
PS2. I just tried to create lexeme "Mars" in normal mode and it failed too, so the problem is general. KaMan (talk) 06:44, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@KaMan: sorry, I introduced a bug last night. Should be fixed now, please try again! --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 11:04, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Lucas Werkmeister: Yes, it works now, thank you. KaMan (talk) 11:24, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@KaMan: great, thanks for the report! --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 12:32, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Czech[edit]

Hi. I made some Czech templates. I hope those are okay. --Lexicolover (talk) 20:18, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Lexicolover: Thanks! Sorry for the delay, I was busy for a few days. I’ve added the templates now – please check that I haven’t made any mistakes when copying the templates. (The labels and grammatical features for the noun templates seemed to be the same across all four templates, so I copied those and only replaced the examples – I hope there weren’t any subtle differences that I missed?) --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 19:06, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It's okay. It works great, thank you. --Lexicolover (talk) 20:35, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Lucas Werkmeister: there should be probably "české" instead of "České" on the main page (small first letter) like in other languages. KaMan (talk) 12:39, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@KaMan: sounds reasonable, but note that this is the same title that is also shown on the template page as a heading. @Lexicolover: do you concur? --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 14:58, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@KaMan: @Lucas Werkmeister: From my point of view it is fine either way. I don't have any objections against change. --Lexicolover (talk) 21:36, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, ✓ Done. Thanks! --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 10:50, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Swedish nouns[edit]

Hi, I've been working on some templates for Swedish nouns: User:Lucas_Werkmeister/Wikidata_Lexeme_Forms/Swedish

I wonder if you could possibly have a look at them when you get the chance? Thanks :) // Vesihiisi (talk) 14:37, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Vesihiisi: Have you seen the debate at Wikidata talk:Lexicographical data#Danish missing genitive, which concerns the inclusion of forms with the -s clitic? I presume the situation is similar for all the Scandinavian standard languages. --Njardarlogar (talk) 15:26, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Vesihiisi: Thanks, the templates are live now! (By the way, is it intentional that the last example sentence is missing a period at the end?) @Njardarlogar: in the existing Swedish lexemes with forms, there seems to be some precedent towards including the genitive forms, so I included them in the template for now – let me know if there’s consensus to remove them. --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 21:21, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Lucas Werkmeister: Thank you! Not intentional, just a typo :|
@Njardarlogar: – thank you, I've looked at the discussion… There's the same dispute in Swedish, definitely. But the view that Swedish has two cases (nominative and genitive) is the tradional one in our linguistic tradition. --Vesihiisi (talk) 05:31, 24 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

New hint for switching to advanced mode[edit]

@Oriciu, Lexicolover, Jens Ohlig, Andreasmperu, Djiboun, Shinnin, @Sannita, Njardarlogar, KaMan, Infovarius, Vesihiisi: I’ve added a new feature to the tool where it gives you a hint to switch to advanced mode when you’re trying to create lexemes with missing forms while not in advanced mode. Could you translate the hint message into your language(s), please? I’ve already added the English version to the language subpages. --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 20:00, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Czech message is translated. --Lexicolover (talk) 20:11, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
French message should be ok too. Djiboun (talk) 22:17, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Italian message done! --Sannita - not just another it.wiki sysop 22:45, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Polish done! KaMan (talk) 05:59, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Swedish done! --Vesihiisi (talk) 07:10, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Esperanto done. --Jens Ohlig (talk) 15:38, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ukrainian[edit]

Hello, @Lucas Werkmeister:! I have just created translation and forms for nouns for Ukrainian - User:Lucas Werkmeister/Wikidata Lexeme Forms/Ukrainian. When nouns will be implemented well, I will add adjectives and numerals. If you want to discuss it with me or ask anything, feel free to contact me in any way noted in section "Contact me" of my Meta userpage. --Tohaomg (talk) 14:48, 29 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Tohaomg: thanks! I have two questions, though:
  1. Each template appears to have two versions of nominative case (Q131105) forms. Is the second one supposed to be vocative case (Q185077)? Wikipedia tells me that’s the seventh case Ukrainian has.
  2. I’m not sure if I understand the ukrainian-noun-common template correctly. It looks like it’s intended for nouns that can exist in two genders – «професор»/«професорка» looks analogous to German „Professor“/„Professorin“ to me. But as far as I’m aware, other languages usually have two separate lexemes for such cases. Has this approach – one lexeme with twice as many forms and masculine (Q499327)/feminine (Q1775415) in the grammatical features – been discussed anywhere?
--Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 12:36, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Yes, that is a mistake, there should be vocative case (Q185077). I have just corrected it.
  2. You are correct in that «професор»/«професорка» is analogous to „Professor“/„Professorin“. I have not seen any other Ukrainian being interested in lexemes, so unfortunately I have nobody to discuss it with, and thus I have to decide on my own. But if you say that it is a common practice in other languages to make separate lexemes, then let it be. My thoughts were that «Professor» and «Professorin» are actually the same word, but in different gender forms, so they have to be in the same lexeme. And I also wanted to ask you if "one" and "first" should be in one lexeme or in different, because I have strong thoughts in favour of both variants.
--Tohaomg (talk) 13:06, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Tohaomg: I wasn’t sure how they should be handled in German myself, but I’ve seen other people create separate lexemes, mostly Daniel Mietchen. Perhaps he can comment on this? --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 13:18, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Tohaomg: Polish is similar to Ukrainian slavic language and all Polish dictionaries I know makes separate lexemes for feminine versions of nouns. Same is for Ukrainian words in Polish wiktionary https://pl.wiktionary.org/wiki/поляк#uk https://pl.wiktionary.org/wiki/полька#uk KaMan (talk) 14:50, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Tohaomg: существительные не склоняются по родам (по крайней мере, в славянских языках), так что это не словоформы, а отдельные лексемы. Infovarius (talk) 14:45, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Tohaomg: I’ve added the other four templates for now. --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 18:57, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thank you. But it would be more convenient if all those textfields were organized in a table with columns corresponding to singular/plural and rows corresponding to grammatical cases. --Tohaomg (talk) 19:19, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
And, by the way, I am fluent in html+js+php, so I can help you with this tool, maybe. --Tohaomg (talk) 19:21, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Tohaomg: A table form was my first idea for this tool, but then I refined it into the current version – I think it’s a lot easier to fill in the forms with the context of the example sentences. What do you find inconvenient about them? If you don’t need them, you should be able to tab through the inputs fairly quickly… --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 21:02, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Context could be kept. The form being wrapped out of the screen is a bit unconvenient. I meant something like this:
Singular Plural
Nominativ Das ist der Hund Das sind die Hunde
Genitiv Das Eigentum des Hunds/Hundes Das Eigentum der Hunde
Dativ Das gehört dem Hund/Hunde Das gehört den Hunden
--Tohaomg (talk) 21:32, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Tohaomg: ah, I see… I use a pretty large screen at home, I guess that’s affecting my perspective on the tool’s UI :/
There is another problem with the table though, which is that it’s inherently two-dimensional. It works well for German or Ukrainian nouns, where the forms are always a combination of case (Q128234) × grammatical number (Q104083), but not so well in other languages or lexical categories which have more than two grammatical features for some forms, such as Swedish nouns (three dimensions), Russian adjectives (two, three or five dimensions), or German verbs (five dimensions).
But still, perhaps I can, like, arrange the forms into two columns if there’s enough screen space without formally making it a table? --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 22:31, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Russian adjectives still can be fit into a 2D table: ru:wikt:хороший. Infovarius (talk) 14:45, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Infovarius: sure, they can (in a sense, the tool’s list is just a one-column table ;) ), but I don’t think it’s the best way to represent them. (In fact, the ruwiktionary table has two merged cell pairs – representing that in the tool would be even more complicated.) --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 23:21, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Armenian[edit]

Hi @Lucas Werkmeister:, I translated the forms and added templates for Armenian noun, would you please take a look at it? --Emptyfear (talk) 20:07, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Emptyfear: thanks, added! --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 23:21, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Norwegian Bokmål[edit]

@Danmichaelo: I just saw that you created a subpage for Norwegian Bokmål four months ago. Should I add the templates to the tool or are they not ready yet? --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 13:07, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Lucas Werkmeister: I ran into a problem with feminine nouns, since all feminine nouns also have alternative masculine inflections (you can choose if you want to use the masculine or feminine form) and I wasn't sure how to model that. But perhaps something like this can work? That is, removing the gender from the lexeme and adding it to the forms instead. Danmichaelo (talk) 23:59, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Danmichaelo: hm, I’m not sure… if you say they’re “feminine nouns”, then perhaps the grammatical gender statement should still be on the lexeme, in addition to the individual forms? But without knowing the language that’s hard to decide. Do you know any other Norwegian users here who could discuss this? Or perhaps bring it up on Wikidata talk:Lexicographical data? --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 17:25, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Jon Harald Søby: perhaps you could have a look at this? Danmichaelo (talk) 00:59, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hungarian[edit]

@Tobias1984: I just saw that you created a subpage for Hungarian. Should I add the template to the tool or is it not ready yet? --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 13:08, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Finnish noun[edit]

@Lucas Werkmeister: I updated Wikidata:Wikidata Lexeme Forms/Finnish. It can be added to the tool. --Shinnin (talk) 13:54, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Shinnin: thanks! I have two remarks, though:
  1. I don’t like the change of Tämä on [koira/lisää/useampia/muotoja/näin]. In the tool, slashes are used to separate variants of a form, and will result in multiple forms being created; the slashes in the placeholder here mean something different, though, as far as I can tell, and I fear that this could confuse users. Is it okay to revert that part?
  2. Shouldn’t there be a singular (Q110786) instructive case (Q1665275) form as well?
I’ve uploaded the updated translation already, but I’d prefer to resolve these remarks before updating the template in the tool. --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 14:25, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Lucas Werkmeister:
  1. [koira/lisää/useampia/muotoja/näin] translates to [koira/add/more/forms/like/this].
  2. No, there is no singular form of instructive case (Q1665275).
--Shinnin (talk) 14:35, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Shinnin:
  1. Ah, I see :)
  2. Strange that it’s not mentioned on en:Instructive case, but I believe you.
Updated, thanks for your patience! --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 14:49, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

CSRF protection failed[edit]

@Lucas Werkmeister: Hi, Lucas, did you introduced recently some changes around CSRF? I tried this morning work with the same network setup I work every weekend and cannot save forms due CSRF error message. KaMan (talk) 06:12, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It helped when I restarted my webbrowser session (I work in incognito mode). KaMan (talk) 06:23, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@KaMan: I made a minor change to session handling yesterday – I didn’t think it would result in a “CSRF protection failed” error (I hoped it would have no effect, but otherwise I expected that users would have to log in again), but I guess that’s also possible. But if it works after a restart, that’s hopefully okay. --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 10:31, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Wikidata_talk:Wikidata_Lexeme_Forms/Archive_1&oldid=821383769"