![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 |
This category page should include definitions of basic, intermediate, and advanced. — msh210 15:09, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
What if I know a "foreign" language (English) better than my "native" language (Chinese)? Perhaps "native" and "level-3" should be merged together, the same that's done on Commons. -- ran ( talk) 19:46, Apr 16, 2005 (UTC)
I think we need to clarify what "Native speaker" means, since a lot of people (children of immigrants, for example) know "foreign" languages much better than their "maternal" or "native" languages. Simply asking if a language is "native" to someone may not be a good gauge of how proficient they are in it.
I'm going to change the descriptions of the "native" label on Wikipedia:Babel. All comments are welcome. :) -- ran ( talk) 13:44, Apr 17, 2005 (UTC)
I guess it should be obvious, but the article talks about spoken language and we are of course reading and writing, not speaking here. I might almost get away with 'th-1' when speaking to someone and with some time when reading, but I can't write. Similarly I may be no-2 for reading and speaking but I wouldn't trust my spelling. I guess that what we're interested in is written performance in the language. — KayEss | talk 06:50, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I'm thinking more on similar questions - are the levels primarilly about reading or writing? The question is important, as there are quite a lot of languages that are so similar, that if you know one of them, you might understand all of them, even at a very-close-to-native-level, but you might not be able to write a single sentence (caused by non-existent grammar and spelling knowledges) - you'd just use your own language, and hope whoever you're writing to is okay with that too.
For an example - I'm myself Swede - take the scandinavian wikipedias. There is quite a lot of flow of information even between them - even if you perhaps can't really write in the article, you might be able to check facts etc, and help with images etc. Sometimes content is copied over in the 'wrong' language and translated afterwards. Another example is plattdütsch - as I am a de-3 (living and studying in northern Germany at the moment, and platt being similar to both german and the scandinavian languages) I can understand it at level 1 too. But I would answer in german...
What is the right level to indicate? Right now, the answer is "none". I expect norwegians and danes to understand me, just because I know swedish natively...
TERdON 03:25, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
Well, since I'm better at the language I wasn't raised in (in this case, the language I was raised in was Malay, and I speak and write fluent, almost-native English), I'm going to put myself as en-4 (not a native speaker, but damn well as fluent as one) and ms-3 (oh, the spirits of my ancestors are rolling, they are...). Tell me if I'm wrong ;)-- T-Boy 08:22, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
-- See also "Two native languages?" here at bottom. -- Tonymec 16:54, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
It doesn't work for me. I speak good Japanese and can write the language, yet I would consider myself able 'to modify articles and to participate in discussions'. I'm not sure I'd be happy to write articles myself. Yet when I chose this option I came out as someone who 'knew a certain amount of Japanese'. This is ridiculous. When I went one up the the scale, I became a 'fluent speaker'. But I rather shudder at this characterisation: 'or advanced or fluent understanding (the ability to write articles in this language without difficulties, minor errors may occur'. There is a mismatch between the description on which the numbering is based and the way that is expressed on the user page.
Bathrobe 08:02, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
Proposal: What about introducing few more templates? :o) Namely language box template, so it's just one template to call in user page and all user languages are ready formatted. I copied the idea from spanish wiki and here how it would look: User talk:TarmoK/Babel-5 (for 5 languages). So by calling template (template number will define how many languages) user inserts as parameters the language codes.
this approach will require to make n-number templates, one template for every number of languages, i.e. "Babel-1", "Babel-2" etc. I think up to 10 should be more than sufficient. -- TarmoK 09:37, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I should be en-5 because I'm better than just a native speaker. I know how to use the Subjunctive mood correctly. My spelling is usually correct. There, I am better at writing English than 80% of all native English speakers. Iopq 23:44, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
Proposal: I think there should be also in English what language is in question. As this is wikpedia in English, I think we should have also english "translation" in language categories introductions. It's not much useful for example for non-French speaker to "read" in French that "these users speak French". s/he won't understand it. (s/he can figure out the language from the language code, though.) I made "example" in Estonian main category: Category:User et. -- TarmoK 09:52, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Does this project not duplicate Wikipedia:Translators available? — msh210 16:06, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Has it been decided:
Maybe the Dictators Administrators can come up with some kind of system and vote on it? (Maybe that will distract them from nominating my pages for deletion, hmmm...) --
Jpbrenna 18:41, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I have created {{ User en-0}} and its category. This is for people that don't speak English but are contributing in other ways, like with maps or photos, and must depend on machine translation. I did something similar (manually) on my German user page. -- SPUI ( talk) 02:52, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Do we really need User-0 templates for languages other than English? For example, I could just as well put every one of those on my user page other than English and Spanish, creating unnessary clutter. I think it should be assumed that if a language is missing from a user's babel, it should be assumed that they cannot communicate in that language. You 20:44, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)
It certainly is ridiculous to have templates like Template:User ja-0. It's like those people who get tattoos in foreign languages because they think it looks cool, and then find out weeks later that what the tattoo really says is "Ha ha, this idiot can't read his own tattoo," or something. The whole point of the template, currently, is that nobody who uses it actually understands it!
Besides, I don't speak Basque or Scots Gaelic. Let's hurry up and create those templates so I can add them to my vanity (I mean, user) page! -- Quuxplusone 17:20, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
I feel that the xx-0 template is actually quite useful for things such as Salleman stated, or the Babel page itself such as a Canadian from British Columbia who doesn't speak any French. I also like the idea for the second use as stated in the Babel page, e.g., I have studied the phonology and grammar of Old English, but wouldn't really be able to understand it without considerable searching through a dictionary. But I would still say zero and not non-existant (e.g., Cherokee) because I could understand it using a dictionary, and wouldn't also have to try to decipher the grammar. (It would be like asking someone who knew absolutely nothing about English to look up the word 'went' in an English-Native Tongue dinctionary. They would have to know that 'went' was the preterite of 'to go' to get anywhere with their translation.) Of course, I have been unsuccessful in making the Old English-Zero template work--perphaps it's not been created? I think the xx-0 would be especially useful for dead languages. Kaibab 03:22, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
May I suggest a Wikipedia:Knowledge?, that indicate our level of knowledege as babel the languages we know
I added the templates to Wikipedia:Template_messages/User_namespace (not all of them, though). -- grm_wnr Esc 18:20, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
I was going to add no-2's template but realised that I wasn't sure what the correct format was. There seems to be some colour coding going on, but I'm not sure what the colours mean and if the other templates use them properly. Can somebody write about the colour coding and what should be in the template so we have some instruction to mark their correctness against? — KayEss | talk 03:03, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
I've put the recommended bit of typing on my Userpage here, where it shows a coloured box as expected, and on my Userpages at de:, eo:, and mi:, where it doesn't. What do I do to get it displaying properly on those too? (I have read all of the instructions, I think, but something is evidently not evident enough) Robin Patterson 22:11, 11 May 2005 (UTC)
(Starting back at left-hand margin so as not to overdo the indenting)
Thanks for coming back and explaining more! With encouragement and guidance from you and my friend
Klemen_Kocjancic, we are making progress. GERMAN sems to be OK! But on "fr" my 5-language code displayed only the first three last time I looked. Doubtless someone who knows more French than you or I will fix that soon. Nothing showing on "la", so maybe I'll sort that out if nobody else does. Must first go carefully through my new
mi:Wikipedia:Babel to see what must be changed soon and what ought to be improved one day...
I hope this discussion will help others who were wondering as I was but didn't know how or where to ask. Kind regards - Robin Patterson 06:39, 13 May 2005 (UTC)
Instead of saying "This user is...", shouldn't the templates say "I am a..." (since they will be used primarily on user pages)? тəzєті 16:13, May 15, 2005 (UTC)
Before I go changing most of the templates: is there any specific reason why many of the templates do not capitalise the initial letter of the languages mentioned? I understand why the two letter codes are in lower-case, but not the actual text itself. Rje 18:02, May 15, 2005 (UTC)
People have created new language templates with colours reflecting country flags. I think this is a bad idea, because the language and the country don't always match. Several languages are used in many countries, many coutries use several languages etc. By using flag colours you tell Swiss Wikipedians speaking French as their native language that they are French! - Hapsiainen 13:35, May 17, 2005 (UTC)
Specifically for English, and possibly for other languages, I think the templates and categories should allow for dialects. I'm thinking primarily of English here: I might some time need to contact someone fluent in, e.g., New Zealand English, and these templates and categories should allow for that. We'd thus have en-US, en-GB, en-NZ, etc. What think you all? — msh210 17:18, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
I agree with your slippery-slope argument. Including en-NZ may well lead to en-x-California-surfer-dude. So perhaps you're right that it's better not to include any such. Otoh, I wish there were some way to identify those who might be able to help me "translate" (quotation marks indicating that the word is used reservedly and knowingly incorrectly) from NZ English. Any alternative ideas? — msh210 19:08, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
Hawaiian Pidgin stay plenny difren from da kine normal English. I tink you goin need fo change da rules skosh.-- Endroit 04:17, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
i. The languages list is currently divided into "natural languages," "language-related," and "other." A number of the languages listed as 'natural' are in fact creoles:
--I propose that either the languages list be reorganized: 1. natural languages, 2. creoles, 3. related, 4. other; or that "natural languages" be replaced with "languages."
ii. While the list of dialects of a given language cannot be set, there are some dialects --not too encompassing and not too narrow-- that can be said to be useful in situations like this. The "Selected list of articles on dialects" at the bottom of the " dialects" page has a useful list of such dialects for Arabic, Catalan, Chinese, English, Flemish, French, German, Greek, Irish, Japanese, Korean, Norwegian, Persian, Portugese, Serbo-Croatian, Sicilian, Slovenian, Spanish, Swedish. Given those suggestions, it should be possible to choose some dialects to include. Should this be done?
--I propose that major dialects be added to the list (1. nat's, 1.b. dialects, 2. creoles...) with the inclusion of a reminder that users list not those (many) dialects which they could understand, and not those they might pretend to speak in when joking around with friends, but those which they actually run across regularly. Dialects could be incorporated into the Babel box as a sub-entry below the standard language. As the opinions voiced thus far are primarily anti-dialects, another option would be to let a "spoken languages" userbox ("Who would have thought? 407 users of wikipedia speak Manx English!") grow out of the Babel project, with Babel remaining as a strictly-standard-language "languages I can field questions in" tool. Eitch 13:25, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
In Japanese Babel, some templates are used for showing of many languages in the Babel page( Template:Babels), category pages for each languages( Template:Category user language, 1, 2, 3, N), templates for each languages( Template:User language-1, 2, 3, N), and designed to simplify the editing and to save size of pages.(Examples of use: ja:Wikipedia:バベル, Category:User en, Template:User en-1.) How about introducing these in English Wikipedia? Enirac Sum 13:31, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
Tagalog has ceased to be the national language of the Philippines albeit being spoken as a dialect in Southern Luzon. It is generally accepted by Filipinos (as supported by academics from major universities such as Ateneo, La Salle and UP) that Filipino is based on Tagalog. Loan words from various languages and dialects (ex. siomai {dumpling, Chinese}; imam {muslim cleric, Tausug}; gahum {hegemony, Cebuano}) make Filipino distinct from Tagalog.
In practice, these terms are used interchangably here in Manila. I am a Tagalog myself and really don't mind. It is a fact however that Filipinos in other provinces (such as those in Cebu, Davao and even nearby Pampanga) refer to our lingua franca as Filipino, and NOT simply Tagalog. That is to add that it is the official stand of the state, in accordance with our basic law (1987 Constitution states that Filipino, and not Tagalog, nor Pilipino, is the national language).
You may also find the article Languages_of_the_Philippines useful. Thanks!
I just happened to see another discussion about this in the [ Tagalog Wikipedia] and see their point (some of which you also share, I believe). Though I have reservations on some of the points you have made in your reply, you have convinced me that Filipino and Tagalog ought to remain in their own articles. Thanks a lot for your help Wng :) -- Mark 10:57, 28 May 2005 (UTC)
The project page instructs me to put "xx if you're a native speaker or have a grasp of the language comparable to a native speaker", so I put xx for the relevant languages. However, what appears on my page is text saying that I am actually a native speaker in all those languages. That's not quite right. If I try putting xx-4, it doesn't work for all languages. — Chameleon 19:07, 28 May 2005 (UTC)
I may be alone on this one, but I think it could be handy to be able to extend this template model to other skills outside spoken language. For example, ability to use computer programming languages or to play musical instruments. While this might not be as directly 'useful' as the current system is in facilitating multilingual communication between users, it would allow people to set out their non-lingual skills in a concise way on personal pages. Perhaps it could also be extended to subjects in which people feel they have a particular expertise or interest? Obviously for the sake of practicality the interest/expertise categories would have to be reasonably broad to avoid having a separate tag for every article! This would probably be better as a project distinct from Babel - I'd be happy to do some groundwork if people think it's a good idea. Hit my talk page if you like. -- Yummifruitbat 01:44, 29 May 2005 (UTC)
Computer skills, yes, maybe, but piano skills have no obvious relevance to the interaction between WP users. Isn't the Wikipedia:Wikipedians area the best for that sort of thing? (Caution - its "Other listings" section says: "... We encourage you to spend your time categorizing our encyclopedic content, rather than categorizing yourself!") Robin Patterson 23:06, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I know this sounds extremely odd, but I would like the green colour of the babel (which is on many user pages) modified. There are three/four colours which make me sick (slightly nauseous infact, and I have no clue why...) Would anyone have any objections if the HTML colour code is modified slightly? = Nichalp ( Talk)= 07:47, Jun 1, 2005 (UTC)
Olive gree, dark green, light green, any other green other than this will do. = Nichalp ( Talk)= 10:32, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)
How about this:?
<div style="float:left;border:solid #CAF850 1px;margin:1px"> <table cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#B9E855"><tr > <td style="width:45px;height:45px;background:#A3D76B;text-align:center; font-size:14pt">'''en'''</td > <td style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em"> These users are '''[[:Category:User en-N|native]]''' speakers of '''[[:Category:User en|English]]'''.</td > </tr ></table ></div >
= Nichalp ( Talk)= 13:55, Jun 3, 2005 (UTC)
We are still told that "subst" helps the servers. But when I faithfully followed the instruction, some of my templates didn't work; and my knowledgeable colleagues have made them work by removing the "subst". Would the people concerned for the servers please explain exactly what a good alternative would have been? Then maybe I can follow the server-saving method in the many more templates I may have to create. Robin Patterson 23:16, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Recently I've seen a few questions on the VP and reference desk regarding translations to or from English. To deal with this it would be handy to have a noticeboard as a central reference point for e.g. German speakers, rather than picking on a random e.g. German speaker. Indeed the latest one is someone wanting to know the names of different components of an atomic bomb - I'd be very lucky to pick someone who knows this first time. Thryduulf 15:39, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I'm quite proficient in 3 indian languages, unfortunately only hindi has the appropriate category and the corresponding graphical sign. for tamil and telugu and many other languages they are missing. how does it get created and if it's easy enough can someone elucidate me on the process so that i can create the suitable images for them. also what color structures should be used?
If no one responds to this fine, but remember this isn't the last time no one is responding to obscure information request. i've tried to get information on other topics but the systemic bias is continuing for some reason.-- Idleguy 03:30, Jun 5, 2005 (UTC)
<div style="float:left;border:solid #99B3FF 1px;margin:1px"> {| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#E0E8FF" | style="width:45px;height:45px;background:#99B3FF;text-align:center;font-size:14pt" | '''ta-1''' | style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em" | This user is able to contribute with a '''[[:Category:User ta-1|basic]]''' level of '''[[:Category:User ta|Tamil]]''' . |}</div>
<div style="float:left;border:solid #6ef7a7 1px;margin:1px;"> {| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#c5fcdc;" | style="width:45px;height:45px;background:#6ef7a7;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | '''ta''' | style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a '''[[:Category:User ta-N|native]]''' speaker of '''[[:Category:User ta|Tamil]]''' . |}</div>
I'm a native English speaker with a fair amount of experience in French (2 years receiving credit and 4 years of basics prior plus extra-curricular independent study). However, there's a big of ambiguity here... at least from my perspective. I considered using the intermediate level for French; however, the criteria for advanced states that one must be able to correct spelling and grammatical errors. I can do this too, though I'm hardly fluent. Should I just stick with the safe bet of intermediate French until further education, or should I be technical about it and put advanced? -- Thorns Among Our Leaves 20:30, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I'm sure the intent was honourable, in order to separate the levels, however, the new color scheme is rather grating. Can we change them back, or choose more subtle differenes? ℬastique▼ talk 15:15, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
How about:
| ||
That is much better!-- Jpbrenna 01:44, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
For the love of God, change them back...Or at least, use pale colors...I feel like my userpage has gone to Vegas for the weekend. -- Essjay · talk 02:15, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)
I think that proposing the template without 'subst:' should be the 'standard policy'. I understand that expanding eases the load on servers, but it has some drawbacks: if the template is changed in the future, it will lead to different results between pages that used the same template. Of course, it allows for more 'personalisable' pages, and it's ok if that was the intent. But I think this ois an encyclopedia, not a homepage hosting service, and uniformity allows the reader to have quick visual references. Anyway, is this load increase considerable, can it be measured? Couldn't it be managed buying more servers or optimizing the code? Akiss 22:42, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
{{MetaBabelLevel2|Spanish|Nivel intermedio en español}}
For the levels of proficiency in each language, is it relating to the level of proficiency in speaking the languages or to the level of proficiency at writing each language? For example, if it was just the general language, I might have an es-1 or possibly es-2, but if it was referring to writing in particular, I would not even have an es-1. Bart133 (t) 23:32, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I see another problem: competence levels for various languages may differ according to common expectations about the average learner of a particular language. For English expectations are usually very high, whereas I doubt if Japanese-3 of most users could be compared with English-3 of others. Unless we do not introduce accredited unified proficiency tests for the various levels, the distinctions will stay somewhat blurred. I plea for intuitive self-rating accompanied by some explanatory notes about the rough meanings of the levels. HV 08:41, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I guess my question is mostly answered; xx-1, which is the most confusing to me, means that you can answer simple questions. Bart133 (t) 20:37, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I agree with Bart133 to define xx-1 like he wrote as a bottom-line for multilingual Wikipedia participation. The most difficult problem for me, however, is to define level-3. (After that level-2 becomes clear: everything below xx-3 and above xx-1) Any proposals? HV 08:25, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
We just had the same discussion at the German Babel and came to the following conclusion:
Sounds quite straightforward and pragmatic to me. What do you think? If you agree, I would put this classification onto the front page. HV 18:56, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I have jumped around some of the Category pages and I noticed that some of them (like Category:User_de-1) do not have the small boxes like the ones in Category:User_en. And more, even inside Category:User_en, the boxes in the individual knowledge levels aren't following the color code, as you can see green on Category:User_en-N but the same shade of blue on Category:User_en-1, Category:User_en-2 and Category:User_en-3.
I think it would be a nice idea to get boxes on all the levels and have the different knowledge levels follow the colors and shades of the respective User_xx-y templates, so colors would be more uniform.
Is there some reason why this should not be done?
Thanks!- Poli 2005 July 7 04:04 (UTC)
Is there some reason why this should not be done? Not at all.
If the question were, "Is there any reason why the person who did the templates didn't do the Categories?" then the answer is, "Because it took a ridiculous amount of time just to do the templates." Therefore, feel free to do it! Be brave! Have at it! ℬastique▼ talk 7 July 2005 16:28 (UTC)
Okay, I think I have the templates for the category pages... Could someone please take a look at User:Poli/Language templates and change/give opinions about it? Thanks.- Poli 2005 July 9 08:43 (UTC)
Although I believe my grasp of English is native-like, and certainly better than my grasp of my first and family language, it feels very wrong to call it my "native" language, so I have created {{ user 0}}. — Pekinensis 7 July 2005 19:01 (UTC)
I agree with you, but my point is to protest that the current system conflates linguistic ability with some esoteric concept of "nativeness", thus excluding many people and giving them no way to accurately describe themselves. This esoteric concept of nativeness is irrelevant to my ability to contribute to Wikipedia, and I could describe myself as a native English speaker (and I have made similar claims in the past when it was professionally convenient to me as an English teacher), but since English is not my first language and not the language I speak with many of my family, the description grates on me. — Pekinensis 7 July 2005 19:41 (UTC)
We are not talking about the article space, we are talking about individual user pages.
I don't think it's a difficult question; to be accurate for a wider range of users and to be closer to its purpose, the template should read "This user is able to contribute with a native level of English". However I didn't feel like stirring up a hornet's nest by making that change, so I chose to create a template which would not affect any who do not choose to be affected.
As a side point, I believe that "first language" and "maternal language" are worse than "native language" for my purpose, because they make more concrete false claims. — Pekinensis 7 July 2005 20:43 (UTC)
I agree; we should keep them in these 4 levels, and if somebody wants to more precisely define their language level, they can feel free to do it on their homepage, for example, by adding the template {{ user 0}}, which does not clutter or interact with the system here. — Pekinensis 8 July 2005 14:06 (UTC)
The question may grate on some; but I believe the distinction between "native language" and "spoken almost like a native" has some usefulness, especially for display on user pages, where a user will probably want to communicate things about him/herself beyond just "of what use can I be to the Wikipedia?". I don't feel awkward when writing in English, and I believe that maybe I talk better English than "some" natives, but I would never call myself a native speaker of English. I speak Esperanto just as well as any other, but Esperanto has very few native speakers and it is not they who set the language norm. So I listed en-4 and eo-4 on my user page; only French got the "honour" of being listed as "my native language".
The concept of people without a native language may seem strange but it is not meaningless, not only in the case mentioned, but also e.g. for adopted children who have forgotten their biological parents' language, etc.
I know people with several "native" languages, such as father's language, mother's language, language of kindergarten and grade school schoolmates, etc. This may sound off-topic for the thread, but it has bearing on what the ??-N template should say: In French, for instance, it says literally "French is this person's mother language". That seems to imply that no-one has more than one native language, and also, it reflects on the fact that French has no
neutral term for "native language" as distinct from "mother language". Indeed when one of my friends says, in French, "My father language is Arabic and my mother language is French", it makes people smile. And two isn't the limit: I have met people whose children could say "My mother language is Dutch, my father language is Danish and my family language is Esperanto". So I prefer the more neutral text in the en-N template: "This user is a native speaker of English"; but how to say that accurately and neutrally in (for instance) French? Even though French is my mother native language, I am at a loss. --
Tonymec
03:07, 30 July 2005 (UTC)
Ok, I give up. I noticed that on my user page, that there were two problems with the the Babel categories. First tl-N wouldn't show up. I got to the bottom of that. Second, when I clicked on tl-N it would take me to the page where it's supposed to show me Wikipedians whose native language is Tagalog. However, it only shows
Template:User tl. I'm not even on there. I've looked at the source of other languages and it looks like everything is good. But obviously I am missing an important step. Could anyone help? Thanks. --
Chris
09:52, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
When was this level created and why isn't it mentioned on the Wikipedia: page?
Acegikmo1 01:02, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
I noticed that on the esperanto wikipedia, the syntax for the Babel templates was not exactly the same - for a native speaker, you write "en-D" (D for "denaske", native) and not "en". I partially solved the problem by making copies of the "en-D" template into a corresponding "en" template.
I think that it's important for users to easily copy and paste babel templates between languages - if there's a template whose syntax shouldn't vary across wikipedialand, it's this one, since it's users overlaps with those most likely to have multiple user pages.
I'm just putting this here for the record in case this problem reccurs :) Flammifer 14:48, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
Would someone with more knowledge of the code required be so kind as to create a Babel template for Ancient Greek? Thanks in advance! Nightstallion 08:28, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
There has been some discussions about the addition of Babel tags in Wu dialect (吴语, aka Shanghaiese 上海话) in Chinese Wikipedia. Also see IANA registration.-- Hello World! 04:00, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
Hello - I created a new template for " other languages" - ie, languages with very few speakers or with no widely used written form (such as deaf sign languages). Contributors writing about such languages may wish to identify themselves as users of the language, even though they are only writing about it in English. It's not perfect and doesn't work in the Babel template (as it has a nested variable which allows you to specify the 'other language' in question). Here are two examples of how it might look:
Another example of it in use is on my user page (I can't get the table to format properly - I don't know much about wiki syntax/HTML, so suggestions are of course welcome!). Cheers :) ntennis 07:06, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
Thanks all for your input! I agree we should ditch the "ol" code. I like the suggestion of a seperate template for sign languages coded as "sgn" — partly because the template can use a phrase like "native signer" rather than "speaker", and partly because it fits best with this project's convention of using codes from ISO 639. I will go ahead and make it now.
There is still a problem though: if I leave the "language" variable in the template (so the user can specify which particular language they sign), it breaks the Babel template. Anyone more code-savvy than me got any ideas for fixing this?
By the way, according to clause 4.4 of ISO 639-2, other codes can be appended to the "sgn" code to specify different Sign Languages, but there is as yet no widely agreed-upon system in place. I'd prefer to have one template for all sign languages (with a "language" variable in the template). ntennis 06:39, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
Now done. Here's a sample:
ntennis
08:10, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
1. I will leave it up to somebody else to make the "mis" template (easy enough to convert from the "ol" template above). The discussion on the "sgn" template will continue on Category talk:User sgn; there are some problems to be ironed out. I encourage everyone to have a look! I'll paste the above discussion in there.
2. I agree with Aranel ("Sarah"), there is no need to include the phrase "a miscellaneous language" - however, there was a reason I put it in there. When clicking on the phrase "other language" in the template above, you are taken to the category:User ol page, which explains the category and has links to all the users using the template (following the format of the existing user language templates). -- ntennis 06:17, 30 July 2005 (UTC)
p.s One problem is that the word Warlpiri in the example above should properly link to Warlpiri language but the template doesn't accomodate this. Will be trying to resolve this with the sgn template too. ntennis 06:34, 30 July 2005 (UTC)
No matter how minor the language, if you speak it you can create a template for it. If it doesn't have an ISO 639-2 code, use the ISO/DIS 639-3 code (usually the ethnologue code). If it doesn't have one of those, use an arbitrary 4- or more-letter code, or the whole language name. How am I supposed to indicate, for example, that I am Singlish 2? By writing {{user singlish-2}}, of course. -- Node 17:59, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
This is a bit O/T, but it made me think that maybe we could expand on this concept to add other user-competency/familiarity tags.
Thoughts? - Keith D. Tyler ¶ 17:53, July 28, 2005 (UTC)
I was just wondering about this...
Would it be possible to map the definitions of the Babel templates to the language proficiency levels used by the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages and the Association of Language Testers in Europe?
Under this scheme, Lang-0 would be the ALTE 'Breakthrough' level, when basic concepts have just been learned. Lang-1 would be ALTE level 1, Lang-2 would be ALTE level 2, and so on and so forth. (It would be assumed that ALTE level 5, which represents 'complete native command' of a language, would be the same as Wikipedia's Lang-N level.)
The CEF/ALTE ranking levels have been used by multiple bodies (not just in Europe, here in the US too) to compare language ability, and I think it'd be a good idea for the Babel templates to link to them. I don't think it would involve too much work, since the levels more or less map up already (ALTE 3 / CEF B2 matches up to Babel-3 nicely, and so on and so forth) -- it would just be a way of standardizing what each level means. Almafeta 01:58, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
In the body of the Babel page, "Aramaic" and "Assamese" display the same name in national script. One of them is obviously in error, but which one? If you know one of those languages, please check that its name is correctly written. -- Tonymec 02:17, 30 July 2005 (UTC)
Shouldn't the messages be in English as this is the English Wikipedia? -- Just my 2 cents -- Hemanshu 19:34, 1 August 2005 (UTC)
Why do the French templates use the phrase cette personne (this person) instead of this user as is used in the corresponding place in all the other templates (well, all the ones I've checked anyway)? Was a conscious decision made at some point to have a different standard for the French templates? - EDM 20:05, 4 August 2005 (UTC)
Examples:
fr | Cette personne a pour langue maternelle le français. |
de | Dieser Benutzer spricht Deutsch als Muttersprache. |
fi | Tämä käyttäjä puhuu suomea äidinkielenään. |
it | Questo utente è un madrelingua italiano. |
he | משתמש זה דובר עברית כ שפת האם שלו |
eo-4 | Ĉi tiu uzulo parolas Esperanton preskaŭ kiel denaskulo. |
nl-3 | Deze gebruiker spreekt uitstekend Nederlands. |
es-2 | Este usuario puede contribuir con un nivel intermedio de español. |
ru-1 | Этот участник владеет русским языком на начальном уровне. |
I've gone ahead and changed the fr, fr-0, fr-1, fr-2, and fr-3 templates to read cet utilisateur in place of cette personne. The fr-4 template seems to have been created with utilisateur in the first place. - EDM 06:04, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
Should this category be renamed to fit in with the overall categ Wikipedians structure? Thanks, Ian Cairns 17:15, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
Hello,
one thing that bothered me when I began on wikipedia is that user account on different languages seems to be totally deconneced. You have to create an account on all wikipedia which are on a language you know. Everytime with the same username. And then everybody creates his user page and says "hello, you can find me on w:fr w:eo, ..."
Why not automate this a bit ?
We have interwiki links on articles, why don't we user them on user's page ?
See my home page : http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utilisateur:Jmfayard If i am {{Babel|fr|de-3|en-2|eo-3|es-1}} It seems quite logical to add in the model [[eo:Vikipediisto:Jmfayard]][[de:Benutzer:Jmfayard]][[en:User:Jmfayard]][[es:Usuario:Jmfayard]]
You may notice that I'm not yet registred on w:es. I will have a red link on the "spanish" page (oups, does not work), and if I click
on the spanish link, es.wikipedia.org notes would allow me to register for this username.
Just my 2 cents, but they seems to be a logical extension to the Babel and interwiki systems.
It's just for fun. I'm suggesting the creation of user language templates for Constructed languages (like Languages of Middle-earth or Gibberish). See User:BlankVerse for an example. What do you think? CG 17:14, August 13, 2005 (UTC)
These particular templates (such as Klingon...) shouldn't be listed with the other templates (french...). There should listed separatly on another section. CG 10:24, August 14, 2005 (UTC)
I was just thinking about this, as I was editing my user page. (I wanted Pig_Latin) Evil Vin 02:17, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
I'm going to create templates for Simple English without simple-N (nobody is a native speaker of Simple English).
SFGiants 23:24, August 14, 2005 (UTC)
Any suggestions, comments, discussion or questions about how best to set up the Hindi language tags are most welcomed here.
Scott P. 16:06:59, 2005-08-18 (UTC)
Under "Hindi", the "national language" title has just been changed from nagari script to Latin. Why? I thought nagari was used to write Hindi? -- Tonymec 16:17, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
I've created Template:User_tpi-1 and Template:User_tpi-2. As my Tok Pisin is rather poor, I would appreciate any assistance in correcting my translations. -- WurdBendur 20:12, August 18, 2005 (UTC)
Scott,
Don't you think that your edits on the template are a bit vulgar. The language sounds a bit Lalu Prasad Yadav type. I have reverted it for now but please get back to me before you edit it again.--May the Force be with you!
- Shreshth91 ($ |-| r 3 $ |-| t |-|) 14:18, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
Dear Shreesth,
Thanks for putting up with my abominable Hindi. It has been almost 20 years since I used it to any extent. It would appear that your Hindi is probably 'less abominable' than mine, which in my humble opinion, is better than nothing, and is certainly better than what the tags look like now. So, here is a list of things that need translation from english into 'Hinglish', I suppose. If you translate, I'll be happy to set the tags.
Any chance you might be able to take a crack at it?
Namaste Mera Dhost?,
- Scott P. 17:43:45, 2005-08-19 (UTC)
PS: Maybe a bit of it is coming back to me.....
On Shreesth's talk page you wrote:
Delhiwala asking a Bombaywalla on correct Hindi?! I had the impression that Delhi people speak shuddh Hindi. We speak a really corrupted version -- the bollywood style, not the hi-funda Shushma Swaraj style. I'm not sure what to write for the missing hi-4 tag, though I corrected a minor error in the rest.
Your browser/comp is at fault; not the internet or WP servers. You'd need to have a unicode compatible Hindi font first. Then set up your browser to autodetect the encoding. Lastly ensure that you're seeing the correct rendering. (Read: Wikipedia:Enabling complex text support for Indic scripts). =Nichalp «Talk»= 18:56, August 20, 2005 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Babel |
---|
Search user languages |
For those interested, the current colors used on the various templates are displayed on the right. – AB C D ✉ 23:33, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
Wiki Comment section volunteers, please leave your observation comments here regarding how successful your computer is at showing Hindi script. Do you see Hindi language characters of question marks as inquired about at: The request for comment section? Thanks:
As a result of the recent findings and collaborations, I have gone ahead and corrected the format of the hi-4 tag, I have upgraded all category headers to show the recent improvements to the tag texts, and I have also taken the liberty of inserting English subtexts into each of the tags. I apologize for having the character conversion problems at my end, however it would look as though this entire process has been for the better for all tags.
The hi-4 tag still needs to have the correct Devanagari characters added, from my end I cannot yet do this, (but am hoping to upgrade my computer soon, now that I know this). I will message to Nichalp to request for this, now that the structural format for tag hi-4 is fixed. Any comments, questions or suggestions about any of the other changes (hopefully these changes are upgrades) would also be very much appreciated here.
Thanks to each and all for your kindly assistance here.
- Scott P. 12:44:22, 2005-08-21 (UTC)
I saw we add Binary to the Babel entries, but with only 3 categories. Such as:
- RPharazon 17:06, August 23, 2005 (UTC)
Binary is not a language, it is a representation. What about "Can speak ASCII", "Can speak Cyrillic", "Can speak decimal"? -- Tonymec 18:05, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
Is it possible for someone to have two native languages? Or will one always have precedece over the other? I ask because Spanish is my first, but I speak English much more fluently than Spanish (it's gotten to almost non-native level from lack of practice/use). What should I do? Go by fluency, first learned, or both? Jigen III 11:50, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
Yet, those three people with Latin as their native language --- hm, I dunno, but somehow I don't really trust them... [User:Turukano|Turukano]
|
Just an idea. lol. -- —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jigen III ( talk • contribs) 08:02, August 27, 2005 (UTC) diff
Why on Earth do we have a category for 1337? It isn't even a language, FCOL! It's just a nerdy way of writing English. Shouldn't we have categories for Smurf-speak and Yoda-speak while we're at it? — JIP | Talk 15:18, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
| ||
| ||
|
Or how about a more gradual color scheme? Below is GREEN-AQUA-BLUE-VIOLET-PURPLE-RED. Jigen III 09:46, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
| ||
| ||
|
My( MarSch 14:26, 2 September 2005 (UTC)) contribution:
Wikipedia:Babel | ||
| ||
| ||
Search user languages |
My previous contrib seems very dark compared to the old one, so I made some modifications --
MarSch
14:35, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Babel | ||
| ||
| ||
Search user languages |
The current color scheme makes no sense. Why on Earth is en-4 yellow, when en-3 is purplish blue, en-2 is aqua, en-1 is some light-violetish color I don't ever dare to try to name, en-0 is red and en-N is some strange shade of green? IMO a better thing would be light red (#FF3333) for en-0, light yellow (#FFFF33) for en-1, light green (#33FF33) for en-2, light cyan (#33FFFF) for en-3, light blue (#3333FF) for en-4, and white for en-N.
| ||
| ||
|
-- Army1987 20:31, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
I think the second scheme (green->aqua->blue->purple->violet->pink) is the best so far. -- Tito xd 04:52, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
How 'bout this one?
| ||
| ||
|
-- Army1987 20:31, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
Why do we have to have seperate categories for native (xx-N) and near-native (xx-4)? As many users have noted above, some people speak a second language better than they know their mother tongue. Surely the purpose of the babel templates is to identify someone's competence in a language, not the order in which they learn them. Have a look at some xx-4 users; their contributions are indistinguishable from native speakers. Many of the languages don't use an xx-4 category, and it seems to me like an unneccesary complication and an unfair segregation. Would anyone support merging these two categories into a "native or native-like" single category? ntennis 02:25, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
Tonymec: If you feel your English isn't 'native-like', then put en-3 ("advanced"). It's really a matter of how many gradations we need — some scales of language proficiency have 10 levels. My argument was that, as many users have noted above in this discussion page, the concept of 'nativeness' doesn't always correlate with proficiency. I worked with an interpreter in India who (by her own admission) spoke Hindi and English better than her 'mother tongue' Gujarati. Most deaf people encounter a spoken language first, but develop proficiency in a sign language that far exceeds that of the spoken language. Some wikipedians on this talk page have been confused about whether they are truly 'native speakers' or not, whether they can have two mother tongues, etc. If 'native' and 'native-like' were conflated, it would avoid these confusions. Furthermore, if ability to "argue for or against a legal text or a philosophical thesis" is a test of nativeness, then most people I know have no native language! ntennis 23:38, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
I had a feeling the tide of opinion would be against me on this one. I agree with EDM that people are getting confused by finicky definitions — that's precisely why I proposed a simpler system! (And hopefully before xx-4 becomes too entrenched). I guess I don't feel anyone has justified the need for a distinction between xx-N and xx-4.
Anyway, for the record, here's the system I like, which was suggested by user:HV above:
ntennis 04:59, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
Babel code "zh" is ambiguous. Does it refer to the spoken language, or the written language? Officially it is supposed to mean the spoken language, but within the context of Wikipedia, using "zh" to mean the spoken language is rather pointless.
This shows up as an inconsistency in the text that is displayed. On the user page, the Babel code would be displayed as
這個用戶的母語是中文。 这个用户的母语是中文。
which means "this user's native language is written Chinese"; however, if you click the "native language" link, the page that is shown says
这些用户的母语是汉语。 這些用戶的母語是漢語。
which means "these users' native language is spoken Chinese (and Mandarin in particular)".
To illustrate the vast difference between the two meanings, for the former meaning of zh I would claim "zh" (native "speaker") status, but for the latter I would only be able to claim a "zh-1" (elementary level). For the purpose of reading and writing in Wikipedia, the former meaning would be a useful meaning, while the latter (being able to "speak Mandarin") would be a plus but would not be necessary.
Also, with the existence of code "zh-yue", ability to speak Mandarin should be indicated by code "zh-guoyu".
I would really like to help. Now, I'm a gora too and have read this all. My humble suggestions are: to keep it in Devanagari. Only an extended Roman font can represent all the sounds, and this provides the same viewing problems (btw Mac OSX Tiger + Safari browser बढ़िया है!) for people without unicode compatability. Everybody needs to figure it out sooner later, its the future. The Indian, Pakistani and state of Tamil Nadu's governments are all members [3]. My second observation is that even at first glance it looked too "purified," like the artificial attempts of nationalist groups. I'm sure this wasn't conscious, but things are too "Sanskritized" IMHO. I'm just wondering what resources you use? My level of Hindi is probably best seen on the page I largely created and need more help with here. In addition, I'll ask my Hindi teacher what she thinks. She would know if it sounds natural or not. Maybe it does work. But an example of what I'm talking about is सभ्य (or sabhya if you see ???). Especially when it comes to the internet. I think यूसर (yūsar) would work just as well, though I'm sure there are other ways to express it without using Hinglish. Leave me a message if I can help. फिर मिलेंगे! Khirad 13:33, 15 September 2005 (UTC)
Wiktionary has just begun implementing the Babel templates ( Wiktionary:Wiktionary:Babel) and categories - simply copy-pasting all the stuff in here and Wiktionarifying it. Arguably it is more useful there than here, due to its nature as a language-based wiki. So if one needs to know a foreign word, you could ask the Wiktionarians too if there's no pedians there to answer. -- Wonderfool t (c) 09:58, 16 September 2005 (UTC)
Whose bright idea was this!? The babel box looks like crap now! If you necessarily need a link to the language in question, make it where the supercategory Category:User_xx currently is. -- Salleman 16:59, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
I noticed that some people have a list of silly languages in their bable, such as CyberSkull. Is there a list of these things? TIA! -- The Minister of War 13:21, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
Can someone create a link between "sk" and " Slovak language" in the babel script? PBS
Ok someone already talked about this in the past, but it seems that the language level descriptions on the main page are still hopelessly unclear.
First of all, right now there is no clear difference between levels 3, 4, and native. Level 3 says fluent but with a few occasional errors, which is exactly what native is. Level 4 also says 'like native, only not native', which brings up the question: Why do we need a level 4?
In any case, I think the ratings should go something like:
The wording may need to be changed slightly, but this is the basic idea. It retains lvl 4 as similar to native, but makes a clear distinction between 3 and 4/native.
However, if the majority hear is up for it, I suggest a slight revamp, to make a real difference between level 4 and native. That is, IMO, level 4 should be above regular native. Either that or remove level 4 and make a 'native plus' category - basically a person who has special education or interest in a language which enables them to recognize tiny grammar, style and semantic quirks, and 'high' vocabulary which isn't known to most native speakers (i.e. word spadix in English). But again, this last proposal is only if everyone feels up to it, my way of being bold basically. A lot of user pages would have to be changed (and many users would be better alerted) if this came to pass.
-- Ynhockey 22:41, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
These are not good ideas. The levels as they are now, with the slightly fluid definitions for them that are given way above somewhere, are working fine and there is no need for the radical revamps these two contributors are discussing. Native speaker has a meaning; we all know what it means; to say "some native speakers are better than others" misconceives what the term is intended to convey. Attorneys or technical engineers should classify at a higher level than other native speakers, because they are familiar with some technical terms as part of their job? Please. - EDM 13:58, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
In learning your native language you pick up an enormous number of idiomatic expressions automatically because you normally use that language every day of the year during sixteen waking hours as well as your hours spent dreaming in it at night. The daytime use alone works out to nearly 6000 hours a year or, in twenty years, some 120,000 hours. During this time you are constantly practicing your native language. You think in it, read in it, speak in it, hear it, and you are constantly updating and perfecting your knowledge of all of its distinctive features.
http://members.aol.com/sylvanz/gv10.htm
I didn't mean to ridicule the proposals; sorry if it came across that way. What I was trying to say was that I think these proposals are trying to make too finely graded distinctions, without consideration of what the purpose of these templates is. In that sense, these proposals run the danger of being feature creep. I don't believe that these levels are (or should be) intended to act as certifications or licenses or warranties by a user as to some level of competence, as though they were applying for a translator position or something. They're merely intended to signify, generally, that a user is a native speaker of a language (=mother tongue, =raised in it, etc.) with the "feel" for the language that the term "native speaker" implies; or that the user falls somewhere else on the sliding scale of fluency in a language that categories 0/1/2/3/4 suggest.
A linguist's "metafluency" is a completely separate parameter, one that I would suggest is inappropriate for capturing in a template. As I believe most linguists will confirm, knowledge of the structure of a language or group of languages - its syntax, phonology, historical development, and so forth - does not necessarily correlate to competence in the language, though of course often it will.
I disagree that English is "somewhat clear" in all contexts in a way that German or any other language is not. Every language has its noted stylists that the vast bulk of the speaking population can only vainly hope to emulate. German laymen may not write like Kant; most native English-speaking laymen don't write like Shakespeare or Joyce or Hemingway either. That doesn't mean they ought to be classified as less "native" or "fluent" in the language, and certainly not for purposes of contributing to this encyclopedia.
As I understand the current consensus usage of 1/2/3/4 levels, (or at least as I use them) they correspond roughly to (1) "I can read an article okay, but I wouldn't want to try to contribute much" (put another way, "decent passive knowledge, little active knowledge") / (2) "I can read and contribute at a level that I won't get laughed at too much" / (3) "Essentially fluent (maybe book-learnt)" / (4) "Fluent though not technically native." (Level 0 is a different matter and we might as well leave that undefined without adverse consequences.) I think those definitions are working well enough for the purpose the templates are needed for, and I'm just trying to caution against too much definitional fussiness. - EDM 16:50, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
I guess I just don't see what the big deal is, and maybe that is my own personal failing. What is the actual, real-world consequence of somebody's categorizing themself as, say, level 3 vs. level 4? Do they get some Wikibonus for being level 4? Do they miss out on the cool people's discussions if they call themselves level 2? If someone is sitting at their computer agonizing over whether they are level 2 or level 3, then (with respect and sympathy to Ynhockey) they need to get out more. My personal practice is to put the lower level if I think it could be one or the other, but I really think it's inconsequential if someone else with the identical fluency level puts the higher one.
Think of it like a movie or restaurant review in the paper. Different reviewers assign different meanings to 1 star, 2 stars, 3 stars, etc., but you don't need to know the precise definitions to make a comparative evaluation. - EDM 18:34, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
Well, I'll say below how I understand the various levels — and, therefore, how I used them in the Babel template on my user page:
- Tonymec 04:49, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
OK, I've changed the main page to reflect what seems to be the consensus here. Please edit if you disagree, but don't revert since a clarification is needed - simply insert a more correct clarification, but keep in mind what the users in this discussion have said. -- Ynhockey 04:51, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
Ynhockey, I strongly suggest you don't go changing templates yet. Particularly, don't change the limited group of templates that happen to be the languages you know, thereby rendering the whole system inconsistent. Many, many Wikipedia users use the Babel templates; only a handful of us have commented here on the rejiggering of the levels and I suspect that most people who use Babel templates aren't even aware that this discussion is going on. Until this discussion has been publicized to the general population who don't have the Babel page watchlisted, and there is broader acceptance of these changes than the four or five people who have posted comments here, you would be altering something that many people have adopted in its existing form and they are very likely not going to notice the change.
What you are trying to accomplish is a clearer definition of the meaning of the various levels. I've stated above that I'm not sure that is necessary, and that this process risks being misinterpreted as a set of requirements rather than guidelines (you keep writing things like if a user qualifies for the others but not for this one, they can't consider themselves a lvl 2); but if I lose that argument, I lose, and that's how it is. Regardless, I think you will achieve your goal by rewriting the description of the levels that appears at the top of the Babel page, as you have done. To go on and fiddle with a small subset of the templates themselves is a bad idea. Someone wanting to know another user's fluency in a particular language is almost certainly just going to check if the user has self-categorized as 1, 2, 3 etc., not rely on the particular wording of the template text. - EDM 17:12, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
First of all, nobody is changing the templates. I said I would if no one objected, but kind of expected people to object.
That aside, I think you're missing the point regarding the 'native' level. The point is that it's ambiguous: some may interpret it as the language they were born with (but not necessarily spoke a lot), while others may consider it as some high literary level above xx-4. My clarification (and I thought the others agreed on this) aims to define the native level as clearly as possible in the shortest possible amount of words. If you want to paste your above 3-paragraph definition, go ahead, but it won't help anyone.
Regarding the precise definition of 'native', I don't think we agree here either. Using myself as an example: I moved to Israel at the age of 5 from the Soviet Union (Russia), and have spoken Russian relatively little since then. Until about the age of 10 my parents spoke Russian and taught me 'advanced grammar' and things like that, but then switched to English upon our move to Canada. I don't think in Russian, dream in Russian, or any of the other things you listed. Also, my level of expertise in Russian has dropped since then - I rarely use complicated phrases anymore, unless the complicated words are taken from English. However, I can probably never lose my fluency in Russian. Even after 10 years of hardly speaking it at all, I have no trouble talking or writing in Russian. Basically, my level has dropped from xx-4 to xx-3, but it has not prevented me from speaking like a native, including the slang. There are things you just don't forget.
However, we do agree that a native template is only useful as long as it tells something about the user. If the actual level is completely hidden under a 'native' tag, then it doesn't help. This is why I (and several other users at least, read the conversation :)) agree that 'native' is superfluous. But since removing all 'native' templates would cause an unprecedented Wikipedia disaster, there should at least be a clarification of what a native speaker is. I think most people will realize that it means having a 'feel' for the language and being able to express yourself in it, but many will also assume that it's a higher level than xx-4, which it isn't. If you're disagreeing that xx-2 can be native, then feel free to just write 'xx-3 or xx-4' instead of the current explanation. That's not so important.
-- Ynhockey 04:08, 2 November 2005 (UTC) Another thing. In very few case, one can have a passive xx-N level but an active xx-2 or even xx-1 level. For example, my parents (with whom I live) are from Campania and almost always speak Neapolitan to each other and to family (including me). I can understand Neapolitan in almost any situation, even if I am very sleepy, and I have watched many movies in Neapolitan with no problem, with almost the same ease as it were Italian. I have some troubles in understanding the most old-fashioned idioms, like some of the ones my grandparents use, but I think that even young people living in Naples would have this problem. However, I very seldom speak in it (mainly jokingly, I can't remember ever having had a real conversation wholly in Neapolitan), and I'm very very little fluent in it (very much less than in English, and more-or-less as much as in French). If there were nap-x templates, I would maybe classify myself as both nap-1 and nap-N, but I would obviously need to explain what I mean on my user page. -- Army1987 22:10, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
How about CRS-4 : "This Geezer rabbits David." ? I'd do it myself, but don't have the time right now...! Codex Sinaiticus 19:03, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
OK, here's what I've got so far... Any improvements?
CRS-4 | This geezer well rabbits Chitty Chitty Bang Bang nearly as if 'e were a right David 'Ockney. |
- Codex Sinaiticus 17:50, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
How can I make a box that will nicely fit inside the Babel template when passed as a parameter? - ElAmericano 22:14, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
Anyone want to make a template like Template:User_fox for Opera? -- Jtalledo (talk) 23:45, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
Creation of the Udmurt wikipedia seems to be a good cause to create also the Babel-templates for Udmurt-speaking people.
Удмурт ( Udmurt)
1. Со адями удмурт кылын ӧжыт вераськыны быгатэ
2. Со адями удмурт кылын гожъяны но лыдӟыны быгатэ
3. Со адями удмурт кылэз туж ӟеч тодэ
4. Со адями удмурт кылэз анай кылэз кадь тодэ
N. Со адямилы удмурт кыл – анай кыл
Word-by-word translation of sentences:
1. This human_being Udmurt in_language a_few speak can 2. This human_being Udmurt in_language write and read can 3. This human_being Udmurt language_it very good knows 4. This human_being Udmurt language_it mother language_it as knows N. This for_human_being Udmurt language – mother language
-- Denis Sacharnych 07:16, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
See
This model, inspired by Babel, seems to me to be far less complex than the current Wikipedia:Translators available and Wikipedia:Translation into English, and would also work much better especially on smaller wikipedias and with small languages.
fr:User:Jmfayard 17:17, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
Isn't that the whole point of Babel, that it shows that a person can understand the indicated languages? Wouldn't translation be the logical benefit of that to WP? - Keith D. Tyler ¶ 18:17, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
I've been bold and changed the level descriptions by myself. They are like in my previous proposal, but with five levels instead of four. Here they are, in case they are reverted:
- xx-0 if you might be expected to understand the language (e.g. if you often contribute to articles about it), but you actually don't. You should not use it for every language you do not know.
- xx-1 if you can understand that language well enough to use an article as a source for writings in your own language, but you are unable to significantly contribute to an article in that language.
- xx-2 if you can contribute to articles in that language to some extent, but you are not confident in writing in it and therefore you are likely to make many mistakes.
- xx-3 if you are confident in writing that language, but often minor errors occour.
- xx-4 if you can write articles in that language at the level of an averagely educated native speaker.
- proposed — not yet implemented xx-5 if you have a 'professional' proficiency in that language (e.g. if are a teacher of it, or a professional writer in it), i.e. if you can confidently tell wheter a sentence is correct, find the most appropriate word for a given concept, understand literary and technical words and phrases, etc.
- xx if you are a native speaker, i.e. if you are used to use that language in all everyday situations, and you have a perfect grasp of it, including colloquialisms. (This means that if you moved from an xx-speaking country to a yy-speaking country at the age of 12, and have never spoke xx language again, you should classify yourself as a native speaker of yy and not of xx, even if you used to speak nothing else as a child. In the case that you moved as an adult, you should decide by yourself, according to your 'feel', and in rare cases you might even have several native languages.) Used alone, it means that your proficiency in written language is xx-4, if it isn't you should use both xx and xx-5 (when it gets implemented) or xx-3 or whatever. (If it is much lower than xx-4, however, it would be a good idea to explain the reason in your user page.)
These, except xx-N, are mainly focused about writing. This is consistent with the texts of the boxes, "This user is able to contribute with a xxxx level of yyyy" vs "This user is a native speaker of yyyy". This system is completely compatible with the old one (nobody will have to recategorise themself, unless they want to be categorised as xx-5); there is no need to rename level 4 (the definition of level xx-N makes it clear that no-one is supposed to have both xx-N and xx-4 in the same language in their BabelBox); it uses a decent definition of "native language"; and it fulfills the request for a "professional" level. Since none of the other proposals so far has all these features, I decided to use this one. The definition of xx-3 is somewhat vague and could be improved (I can't find how, as I'm not en-5...). Now we just need to create xx-5 templates "This user can contribute with a professional level of xxxxx". Army1987 13:37, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
What a mess these descriptions are now. What a poorly worded, amateurish explanation of xx-N. What a shame that this benign, potentially helpful set of templates has been massaged by committee into something incomprehensible and meaningless. - EDM 22:23, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
I also created a template for en-5 since no-one objected. However there is something wrong with its category.
en-5 | This user can contribute with a professional level of English. |
-- Army1987 14:44, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
I think that there should also be a template which says that "This user can use (insert language here) as a second language. Tarret 00:39, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
I say we forget about the gradual escalation and jump straight to the final result:
Bo Lindbergh
21:11, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
I've created some new templates for Babel:
Enjoy! -- Ixfd64 07:42, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
I've made some more specific templates for Babel:
There's more on the way! :-D -- Ixfd64 07:54, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
I've made a template for Wikipedia bureaucrats:
I've also made some templates for those people in choir:
All right, I've made enough templates for now. :) -- Ixfd64 08:12, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
What about one for us baritones? — User:ACupOfCoffee @ 06:56, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
I've tried to backport Babel as it's implemented on fy:. The advantage is that there's no need to name the number of arguments in advance. This does require one extra Template that will dissolve unspecified arguments into emptyness. The equivalent or the choice on Fy: would be Template:User. However, that template was already taken, so I implemented the backport with:
These are the results of the templates {{babellist|en}} and {{babellist|en-0|en-1|en-2|en-3|fr|fr-0|fr-1|fr-2|fr-3}}:
I know the actual entries don't make much sense; I only used them to demonstrate the template.
To implement this system:
Don't use the test versions of the language bars, as some were converted from fy: and hence are coded slightly differently. Aliter 01:00, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
Following the Wikipedia:Featured articles in other languages, I've created here some templates to replace Template:FAOL which were used to point out to articles that are featured in other language (see Talk:World War II). These new templates are Babel-like to be less space-comsuming. But I need your help to create a template like {{Babel-x}} to add multiple boxes. And also, do you think we should write them in the language of the article they're pointing to? CG 20:35, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
I notice that when a person uses a Babel template on their user page, a Category link is automatically added to the bottom of the page as well. This is a nice feature but it seems unfortunate that the Category links are named after the Wikipedia node for that language -- i.e. "User en", "User es-1", etc. I think it would be helpful if these links were made "English speakers", "Spanish speakers" and so on.
I see that the templates implement this by making the links say things like [[Category:en-N|{{PAGENAME}}]]. Does this mean that what I want could be achieved by passing a PAGENAME parameter to the {{User en}} template? I'm still trying to understand how to use parameters with templates (and in any case I would prefer that this was the default behavior for the Babel templates).
Any thoughts? I'm sure I'm misunderstanding something fundamental about Wikipedia templates. :-) Tim Pierce 15:50, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
Why don't we change the title of the user language categories to more comprehensible ones. For example "French speaking users" instead of "User fr"? It poses when searching for a language I don't know its code. CG 21:23, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
I'm a complete newbie to Babel templates and I'm trying to get the Tongan (Faka Tonga or To) category organized. I'm failing utterly. Need experienced help. You supply the template, I'll supply the Tongan. 'O kapau te u lava! (if I can) Zora 21:38, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
"This user is able to contribute on an advanced level of English," for example. "On an advanced level" sounds extremely awkward. How about "using" instead of "on"? -- YixilTesiphon Say hello 21:13, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
It's possible that I am incorrect on this, but the Wikipedia:Babel translation for Latin is wrong.
This is the Latin that is found, for example, in the template on the profile of a user who has classified himself as la-1:
Hic usor simplice latinitate contribuere potest.
This was translated as:
This user is able to contribute with a basic level of Latin.
Potest is not, in fact, the present 3rd singular active indicative form of the Latin for 'to be able (to)'. That word's principle parts are as follows: possum, posse, potui, --. The correct form in this instance would be possit.
Also, the word Latinate is not, in fact, a Latin word. The Latin word for Latin is Latinus, -a, -um, so the correct form for the ablative singular would be Latino for a masculine user, and Latina for a feminine user. The reason for the case in this sentence is because simplice Latina is ablative of means (by which something is done).
The singular of this sentence would thus be:
Hic usor simplice Latino contribuere possit.
The plural would be:
Hi usores simplice Latino contribuere possunt.
Moved from Category_talk:User_la
Shinimitsukai 13:49, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
{{Babel|iso15924{{!}}Cyrl{{!}}5|iso15924{{!}}Cyrl{{!}}4|iso15924{{!}}Cyrl{{!}}3|iso15924{{!}}Cyrl{{!}}2|iso15924{{!}}Cyrl{{!}}1}}
It's not a language, but I think it's still pretty cool. Just felt like making it. And it does deserve a place here, right? Maybe we can even make more of these alphabet things.
If you want to revert this change, go ahead, but I'm taking the languages that don't actually have an ISO character set OFF of the babel page and moving them to
Wikipedia:Userboxes/Non-ISO_Languages. As a self-professed userbox addict, I'd really like to feel contributory, and as such am endeavoring to make the userbox space as happy as can be. (After all, does the ISO have a code for Klingon? for Quenya? for 1337speak?)
Cernen
14:01, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 |
This category page should include definitions of basic, intermediate, and advanced. — msh210 15:09, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
What if I know a "foreign" language (English) better than my "native" language (Chinese)? Perhaps "native" and "level-3" should be merged together, the same that's done on Commons. -- ran ( talk) 19:46, Apr 16, 2005 (UTC)
I think we need to clarify what "Native speaker" means, since a lot of people (children of immigrants, for example) know "foreign" languages much better than their "maternal" or "native" languages. Simply asking if a language is "native" to someone may not be a good gauge of how proficient they are in it.
I'm going to change the descriptions of the "native" label on Wikipedia:Babel. All comments are welcome. :) -- ran ( talk) 13:44, Apr 17, 2005 (UTC)
I guess it should be obvious, but the article talks about spoken language and we are of course reading and writing, not speaking here. I might almost get away with 'th-1' when speaking to someone and with some time when reading, but I can't write. Similarly I may be no-2 for reading and speaking but I wouldn't trust my spelling. I guess that what we're interested in is written performance in the language. — KayEss | talk 06:50, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I'm thinking more on similar questions - are the levels primarilly about reading or writing? The question is important, as there are quite a lot of languages that are so similar, that if you know one of them, you might understand all of them, even at a very-close-to-native-level, but you might not be able to write a single sentence (caused by non-existent grammar and spelling knowledges) - you'd just use your own language, and hope whoever you're writing to is okay with that too.
For an example - I'm myself Swede - take the scandinavian wikipedias. There is quite a lot of flow of information even between them - even if you perhaps can't really write in the article, you might be able to check facts etc, and help with images etc. Sometimes content is copied over in the 'wrong' language and translated afterwards. Another example is plattdütsch - as I am a de-3 (living and studying in northern Germany at the moment, and platt being similar to both german and the scandinavian languages) I can understand it at level 1 too. But I would answer in german...
What is the right level to indicate? Right now, the answer is "none". I expect norwegians and danes to understand me, just because I know swedish natively...
TERdON 03:25, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
Well, since I'm better at the language I wasn't raised in (in this case, the language I was raised in was Malay, and I speak and write fluent, almost-native English), I'm going to put myself as en-4 (not a native speaker, but damn well as fluent as one) and ms-3 (oh, the spirits of my ancestors are rolling, they are...). Tell me if I'm wrong ;)-- T-Boy 08:22, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
-- See also "Two native languages?" here at bottom. -- Tonymec 16:54, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
It doesn't work for me. I speak good Japanese and can write the language, yet I would consider myself able 'to modify articles and to participate in discussions'. I'm not sure I'd be happy to write articles myself. Yet when I chose this option I came out as someone who 'knew a certain amount of Japanese'. This is ridiculous. When I went one up the the scale, I became a 'fluent speaker'. But I rather shudder at this characterisation: 'or advanced or fluent understanding (the ability to write articles in this language without difficulties, minor errors may occur'. There is a mismatch between the description on which the numbering is based and the way that is expressed on the user page.
Bathrobe 08:02, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
Proposal: What about introducing few more templates? :o) Namely language box template, so it's just one template to call in user page and all user languages are ready formatted. I copied the idea from spanish wiki and here how it would look: User talk:TarmoK/Babel-5 (for 5 languages). So by calling template (template number will define how many languages) user inserts as parameters the language codes.
this approach will require to make n-number templates, one template for every number of languages, i.e. "Babel-1", "Babel-2" etc. I think up to 10 should be more than sufficient. -- TarmoK 09:37, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I should be en-5 because I'm better than just a native speaker. I know how to use the Subjunctive mood correctly. My spelling is usually correct. There, I am better at writing English than 80% of all native English speakers. Iopq 23:44, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
Proposal: I think there should be also in English what language is in question. As this is wikpedia in English, I think we should have also english "translation" in language categories introductions. It's not much useful for example for non-French speaker to "read" in French that "these users speak French". s/he won't understand it. (s/he can figure out the language from the language code, though.) I made "example" in Estonian main category: Category:User et. -- TarmoK 09:52, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Does this project not duplicate Wikipedia:Translators available? — msh210 16:06, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Has it been decided:
Maybe the Dictators Administrators can come up with some kind of system and vote on it? (Maybe that will distract them from nominating my pages for deletion, hmmm...) --
Jpbrenna 18:41, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I have created {{ User en-0}} and its category. This is for people that don't speak English but are contributing in other ways, like with maps or photos, and must depend on machine translation. I did something similar (manually) on my German user page. -- SPUI ( talk) 02:52, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Do we really need User-0 templates for languages other than English? For example, I could just as well put every one of those on my user page other than English and Spanish, creating unnessary clutter. I think it should be assumed that if a language is missing from a user's babel, it should be assumed that they cannot communicate in that language. You 20:44, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)
It certainly is ridiculous to have templates like Template:User ja-0. It's like those people who get tattoos in foreign languages because they think it looks cool, and then find out weeks later that what the tattoo really says is "Ha ha, this idiot can't read his own tattoo," or something. The whole point of the template, currently, is that nobody who uses it actually understands it!
Besides, I don't speak Basque or Scots Gaelic. Let's hurry up and create those templates so I can add them to my vanity (I mean, user) page! -- Quuxplusone 17:20, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
I feel that the xx-0 template is actually quite useful for things such as Salleman stated, or the Babel page itself such as a Canadian from British Columbia who doesn't speak any French. I also like the idea for the second use as stated in the Babel page, e.g., I have studied the phonology and grammar of Old English, but wouldn't really be able to understand it without considerable searching through a dictionary. But I would still say zero and not non-existant (e.g., Cherokee) because I could understand it using a dictionary, and wouldn't also have to try to decipher the grammar. (It would be like asking someone who knew absolutely nothing about English to look up the word 'went' in an English-Native Tongue dinctionary. They would have to know that 'went' was the preterite of 'to go' to get anywhere with their translation.) Of course, I have been unsuccessful in making the Old English-Zero template work--perphaps it's not been created? I think the xx-0 would be especially useful for dead languages. Kaibab 03:22, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
May I suggest a Wikipedia:Knowledge?, that indicate our level of knowledege as babel the languages we know
I added the templates to Wikipedia:Template_messages/User_namespace (not all of them, though). -- grm_wnr Esc 18:20, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
I was going to add no-2's template but realised that I wasn't sure what the correct format was. There seems to be some colour coding going on, but I'm not sure what the colours mean and if the other templates use them properly. Can somebody write about the colour coding and what should be in the template so we have some instruction to mark their correctness against? — KayEss | talk 03:03, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
I've put the recommended bit of typing on my Userpage here, where it shows a coloured box as expected, and on my Userpages at de:, eo:, and mi:, where it doesn't. What do I do to get it displaying properly on those too? (I have read all of the instructions, I think, but something is evidently not evident enough) Robin Patterson 22:11, 11 May 2005 (UTC)
(Starting back at left-hand margin so as not to overdo the indenting)
Thanks for coming back and explaining more! With encouragement and guidance from you and my friend
Klemen_Kocjancic, we are making progress. GERMAN sems to be OK! But on "fr" my 5-language code displayed only the first three last time I looked. Doubtless someone who knows more French than you or I will fix that soon. Nothing showing on "la", so maybe I'll sort that out if nobody else does. Must first go carefully through my new
mi:Wikipedia:Babel to see what must be changed soon and what ought to be improved one day...
I hope this discussion will help others who were wondering as I was but didn't know how or where to ask. Kind regards - Robin Patterson 06:39, 13 May 2005 (UTC)
Instead of saying "This user is...", shouldn't the templates say "I am a..." (since they will be used primarily on user pages)? тəzєті 16:13, May 15, 2005 (UTC)
Before I go changing most of the templates: is there any specific reason why many of the templates do not capitalise the initial letter of the languages mentioned? I understand why the two letter codes are in lower-case, but not the actual text itself. Rje 18:02, May 15, 2005 (UTC)
People have created new language templates with colours reflecting country flags. I think this is a bad idea, because the language and the country don't always match. Several languages are used in many countries, many coutries use several languages etc. By using flag colours you tell Swiss Wikipedians speaking French as their native language that they are French! - Hapsiainen 13:35, May 17, 2005 (UTC)
Specifically for English, and possibly for other languages, I think the templates and categories should allow for dialects. I'm thinking primarily of English here: I might some time need to contact someone fluent in, e.g., New Zealand English, and these templates and categories should allow for that. We'd thus have en-US, en-GB, en-NZ, etc. What think you all? — msh210 17:18, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
I agree with your slippery-slope argument. Including en-NZ may well lead to en-x-California-surfer-dude. So perhaps you're right that it's better not to include any such. Otoh, I wish there were some way to identify those who might be able to help me "translate" (quotation marks indicating that the word is used reservedly and knowingly incorrectly) from NZ English. Any alternative ideas? — msh210 19:08, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
Hawaiian Pidgin stay plenny difren from da kine normal English. I tink you goin need fo change da rules skosh.-- Endroit 04:17, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
i. The languages list is currently divided into "natural languages," "language-related," and "other." A number of the languages listed as 'natural' are in fact creoles:
--I propose that either the languages list be reorganized: 1. natural languages, 2. creoles, 3. related, 4. other; or that "natural languages" be replaced with "languages."
ii. While the list of dialects of a given language cannot be set, there are some dialects --not too encompassing and not too narrow-- that can be said to be useful in situations like this. The "Selected list of articles on dialects" at the bottom of the " dialects" page has a useful list of such dialects for Arabic, Catalan, Chinese, English, Flemish, French, German, Greek, Irish, Japanese, Korean, Norwegian, Persian, Portugese, Serbo-Croatian, Sicilian, Slovenian, Spanish, Swedish. Given those suggestions, it should be possible to choose some dialects to include. Should this be done?
--I propose that major dialects be added to the list (1. nat's, 1.b. dialects, 2. creoles...) with the inclusion of a reminder that users list not those (many) dialects which they could understand, and not those they might pretend to speak in when joking around with friends, but those which they actually run across regularly. Dialects could be incorporated into the Babel box as a sub-entry below the standard language. As the opinions voiced thus far are primarily anti-dialects, another option would be to let a "spoken languages" userbox ("Who would have thought? 407 users of wikipedia speak Manx English!") grow out of the Babel project, with Babel remaining as a strictly-standard-language "languages I can field questions in" tool. Eitch 13:25, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
In Japanese Babel, some templates are used for showing of many languages in the Babel page( Template:Babels), category pages for each languages( Template:Category user language, 1, 2, 3, N), templates for each languages( Template:User language-1, 2, 3, N), and designed to simplify the editing and to save size of pages.(Examples of use: ja:Wikipedia:バベル, Category:User en, Template:User en-1.) How about introducing these in English Wikipedia? Enirac Sum 13:31, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
Tagalog has ceased to be the national language of the Philippines albeit being spoken as a dialect in Southern Luzon. It is generally accepted by Filipinos (as supported by academics from major universities such as Ateneo, La Salle and UP) that Filipino is based on Tagalog. Loan words from various languages and dialects (ex. siomai {dumpling, Chinese}; imam {muslim cleric, Tausug}; gahum {hegemony, Cebuano}) make Filipino distinct from Tagalog.
In practice, these terms are used interchangably here in Manila. I am a Tagalog myself and really don't mind. It is a fact however that Filipinos in other provinces (such as those in Cebu, Davao and even nearby Pampanga) refer to our lingua franca as Filipino, and NOT simply Tagalog. That is to add that it is the official stand of the state, in accordance with our basic law (1987 Constitution states that Filipino, and not Tagalog, nor Pilipino, is the national language).
You may also find the article Languages_of_the_Philippines useful. Thanks!
I just happened to see another discussion about this in the [ Tagalog Wikipedia] and see their point (some of which you also share, I believe). Though I have reservations on some of the points you have made in your reply, you have convinced me that Filipino and Tagalog ought to remain in their own articles. Thanks a lot for your help Wng :) -- Mark 10:57, 28 May 2005 (UTC)
The project page instructs me to put "xx if you're a native speaker or have a grasp of the language comparable to a native speaker", so I put xx for the relevant languages. However, what appears on my page is text saying that I am actually a native speaker in all those languages. That's not quite right. If I try putting xx-4, it doesn't work for all languages. — Chameleon 19:07, 28 May 2005 (UTC)
I may be alone on this one, but I think it could be handy to be able to extend this template model to other skills outside spoken language. For example, ability to use computer programming languages or to play musical instruments. While this might not be as directly 'useful' as the current system is in facilitating multilingual communication between users, it would allow people to set out their non-lingual skills in a concise way on personal pages. Perhaps it could also be extended to subjects in which people feel they have a particular expertise or interest? Obviously for the sake of practicality the interest/expertise categories would have to be reasonably broad to avoid having a separate tag for every article! This would probably be better as a project distinct from Babel - I'd be happy to do some groundwork if people think it's a good idea. Hit my talk page if you like. -- Yummifruitbat 01:44, 29 May 2005 (UTC)
Computer skills, yes, maybe, but piano skills have no obvious relevance to the interaction between WP users. Isn't the Wikipedia:Wikipedians area the best for that sort of thing? (Caution - its "Other listings" section says: "... We encourage you to spend your time categorizing our encyclopedic content, rather than categorizing yourself!") Robin Patterson 23:06, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I know this sounds extremely odd, but I would like the green colour of the babel (which is on many user pages) modified. There are three/four colours which make me sick (slightly nauseous infact, and I have no clue why...) Would anyone have any objections if the HTML colour code is modified slightly? = Nichalp ( Talk)= 07:47, Jun 1, 2005 (UTC)
Olive gree, dark green, light green, any other green other than this will do. = Nichalp ( Talk)= 10:32, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)
How about this:?
<div style="float:left;border:solid #CAF850 1px;margin:1px"> <table cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#B9E855"><tr > <td style="width:45px;height:45px;background:#A3D76B;text-align:center; font-size:14pt">'''en'''</td > <td style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em"> These users are '''[[:Category:User en-N|native]]''' speakers of '''[[:Category:User en|English]]'''.</td > </tr ></table ></div >
= Nichalp ( Talk)= 13:55, Jun 3, 2005 (UTC)
We are still told that "subst" helps the servers. But when I faithfully followed the instruction, some of my templates didn't work; and my knowledgeable colleagues have made them work by removing the "subst". Would the people concerned for the servers please explain exactly what a good alternative would have been? Then maybe I can follow the server-saving method in the many more templates I may have to create. Robin Patterson 23:16, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Recently I've seen a few questions on the VP and reference desk regarding translations to or from English. To deal with this it would be handy to have a noticeboard as a central reference point for e.g. German speakers, rather than picking on a random e.g. German speaker. Indeed the latest one is someone wanting to know the names of different components of an atomic bomb - I'd be very lucky to pick someone who knows this first time. Thryduulf 15:39, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I'm quite proficient in 3 indian languages, unfortunately only hindi has the appropriate category and the corresponding graphical sign. for tamil and telugu and many other languages they are missing. how does it get created and if it's easy enough can someone elucidate me on the process so that i can create the suitable images for them. also what color structures should be used?
If no one responds to this fine, but remember this isn't the last time no one is responding to obscure information request. i've tried to get information on other topics but the systemic bias is continuing for some reason.-- Idleguy 03:30, Jun 5, 2005 (UTC)
<div style="float:left;border:solid #99B3FF 1px;margin:1px"> {| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#E0E8FF" | style="width:45px;height:45px;background:#99B3FF;text-align:center;font-size:14pt" | '''ta-1''' | style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em" | This user is able to contribute with a '''[[:Category:User ta-1|basic]]''' level of '''[[:Category:User ta|Tamil]]''' . |}</div>
<div style="float:left;border:solid #6ef7a7 1px;margin:1px;"> {| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#c5fcdc;" | style="width:45px;height:45px;background:#6ef7a7;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | '''ta''' | style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a '''[[:Category:User ta-N|native]]''' speaker of '''[[:Category:User ta|Tamil]]''' . |}</div>
I'm a native English speaker with a fair amount of experience in French (2 years receiving credit and 4 years of basics prior plus extra-curricular independent study). However, there's a big of ambiguity here... at least from my perspective. I considered using the intermediate level for French; however, the criteria for advanced states that one must be able to correct spelling and grammatical errors. I can do this too, though I'm hardly fluent. Should I just stick with the safe bet of intermediate French until further education, or should I be technical about it and put advanced? -- Thorns Among Our Leaves 20:30, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I'm sure the intent was honourable, in order to separate the levels, however, the new color scheme is rather grating. Can we change them back, or choose more subtle differenes? ℬastique▼ talk 15:15, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
How about:
| ||
That is much better!-- Jpbrenna 01:44, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
For the love of God, change them back...Or at least, use pale colors...I feel like my userpage has gone to Vegas for the weekend. -- Essjay · talk 02:15, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)
I think that proposing the template without 'subst:' should be the 'standard policy'. I understand that expanding eases the load on servers, but it has some drawbacks: if the template is changed in the future, it will lead to different results between pages that used the same template. Of course, it allows for more 'personalisable' pages, and it's ok if that was the intent. But I think this ois an encyclopedia, not a homepage hosting service, and uniformity allows the reader to have quick visual references. Anyway, is this load increase considerable, can it be measured? Couldn't it be managed buying more servers or optimizing the code? Akiss 22:42, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
{{MetaBabelLevel2|Spanish|Nivel intermedio en español}}
For the levels of proficiency in each language, is it relating to the level of proficiency in speaking the languages or to the level of proficiency at writing each language? For example, if it was just the general language, I might have an es-1 or possibly es-2, but if it was referring to writing in particular, I would not even have an es-1. Bart133 (t) 23:32, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I see another problem: competence levels for various languages may differ according to common expectations about the average learner of a particular language. For English expectations are usually very high, whereas I doubt if Japanese-3 of most users could be compared with English-3 of others. Unless we do not introduce accredited unified proficiency tests for the various levels, the distinctions will stay somewhat blurred. I plea for intuitive self-rating accompanied by some explanatory notes about the rough meanings of the levels. HV 08:41, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I guess my question is mostly answered; xx-1, which is the most confusing to me, means that you can answer simple questions. Bart133 (t) 20:37, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I agree with Bart133 to define xx-1 like he wrote as a bottom-line for multilingual Wikipedia participation. The most difficult problem for me, however, is to define level-3. (After that level-2 becomes clear: everything below xx-3 and above xx-1) Any proposals? HV 08:25, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
We just had the same discussion at the German Babel and came to the following conclusion:
Sounds quite straightforward and pragmatic to me. What do you think? If you agree, I would put this classification onto the front page. HV 18:56, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I have jumped around some of the Category pages and I noticed that some of them (like Category:User_de-1) do not have the small boxes like the ones in Category:User_en. And more, even inside Category:User_en, the boxes in the individual knowledge levels aren't following the color code, as you can see green on Category:User_en-N but the same shade of blue on Category:User_en-1, Category:User_en-2 and Category:User_en-3.
I think it would be a nice idea to get boxes on all the levels and have the different knowledge levels follow the colors and shades of the respective User_xx-y templates, so colors would be more uniform.
Is there some reason why this should not be done?
Thanks!- Poli 2005 July 7 04:04 (UTC)
Is there some reason why this should not be done? Not at all.
If the question were, "Is there any reason why the person who did the templates didn't do the Categories?" then the answer is, "Because it took a ridiculous amount of time just to do the templates." Therefore, feel free to do it! Be brave! Have at it! ℬastique▼ talk 7 July 2005 16:28 (UTC)
Okay, I think I have the templates for the category pages... Could someone please take a look at User:Poli/Language templates and change/give opinions about it? Thanks.- Poli 2005 July 9 08:43 (UTC)
Although I believe my grasp of English is native-like, and certainly better than my grasp of my first and family language, it feels very wrong to call it my "native" language, so I have created {{ user 0}}. — Pekinensis 7 July 2005 19:01 (UTC)
I agree with you, but my point is to protest that the current system conflates linguistic ability with some esoteric concept of "nativeness", thus excluding many people and giving them no way to accurately describe themselves. This esoteric concept of nativeness is irrelevant to my ability to contribute to Wikipedia, and I could describe myself as a native English speaker (and I have made similar claims in the past when it was professionally convenient to me as an English teacher), but since English is not my first language and not the language I speak with many of my family, the description grates on me. — Pekinensis 7 July 2005 19:41 (UTC)
We are not talking about the article space, we are talking about individual user pages.
I don't think it's a difficult question; to be accurate for a wider range of users and to be closer to its purpose, the template should read "This user is able to contribute with a native level of English". However I didn't feel like stirring up a hornet's nest by making that change, so I chose to create a template which would not affect any who do not choose to be affected.
As a side point, I believe that "first language" and "maternal language" are worse than "native language" for my purpose, because they make more concrete false claims. — Pekinensis 7 July 2005 20:43 (UTC)
I agree; we should keep them in these 4 levels, and if somebody wants to more precisely define their language level, they can feel free to do it on their homepage, for example, by adding the template {{ user 0}}, which does not clutter or interact with the system here. — Pekinensis 8 July 2005 14:06 (UTC)
The question may grate on some; but I believe the distinction between "native language" and "spoken almost like a native" has some usefulness, especially for display on user pages, where a user will probably want to communicate things about him/herself beyond just "of what use can I be to the Wikipedia?". I don't feel awkward when writing in English, and I believe that maybe I talk better English than "some" natives, but I would never call myself a native speaker of English. I speak Esperanto just as well as any other, but Esperanto has very few native speakers and it is not they who set the language norm. So I listed en-4 and eo-4 on my user page; only French got the "honour" of being listed as "my native language".
The concept of people without a native language may seem strange but it is not meaningless, not only in the case mentioned, but also e.g. for adopted children who have forgotten their biological parents' language, etc.
I know people with several "native" languages, such as father's language, mother's language, language of kindergarten and grade school schoolmates, etc. This may sound off-topic for the thread, but it has bearing on what the ??-N template should say: In French, for instance, it says literally "French is this person's mother language". That seems to imply that no-one has more than one native language, and also, it reflects on the fact that French has no
neutral term for "native language" as distinct from "mother language". Indeed when one of my friends says, in French, "My father language is Arabic and my mother language is French", it makes people smile. And two isn't the limit: I have met people whose children could say "My mother language is Dutch, my father language is Danish and my family language is Esperanto". So I prefer the more neutral text in the en-N template: "This user is a native speaker of English"; but how to say that accurately and neutrally in (for instance) French? Even though French is my mother native language, I am at a loss. --
Tonymec
03:07, 30 July 2005 (UTC)
Ok, I give up. I noticed that on my user page, that there were two problems with the the Babel categories. First tl-N wouldn't show up. I got to the bottom of that. Second, when I clicked on tl-N it would take me to the page where it's supposed to show me Wikipedians whose native language is Tagalog. However, it only shows
Template:User tl. I'm not even on there. I've looked at the source of other languages and it looks like everything is good. But obviously I am missing an important step. Could anyone help? Thanks. --
Chris
09:52, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
When was this level created and why isn't it mentioned on the Wikipedia: page?
Acegikmo1 01:02, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
I noticed that on the esperanto wikipedia, the syntax for the Babel templates was not exactly the same - for a native speaker, you write "en-D" (D for "denaske", native) and not "en". I partially solved the problem by making copies of the "en-D" template into a corresponding "en" template.
I think that it's important for users to easily copy and paste babel templates between languages - if there's a template whose syntax shouldn't vary across wikipedialand, it's this one, since it's users overlaps with those most likely to have multiple user pages.
I'm just putting this here for the record in case this problem reccurs :) Flammifer 14:48, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
Would someone with more knowledge of the code required be so kind as to create a Babel template for Ancient Greek? Thanks in advance! Nightstallion 08:28, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
There has been some discussions about the addition of Babel tags in Wu dialect (吴语, aka Shanghaiese 上海话) in Chinese Wikipedia. Also see IANA registration.-- Hello World! 04:00, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
Hello - I created a new template for " other languages" - ie, languages with very few speakers or with no widely used written form (such as deaf sign languages). Contributors writing about such languages may wish to identify themselves as users of the language, even though they are only writing about it in English. It's not perfect and doesn't work in the Babel template (as it has a nested variable which allows you to specify the 'other language' in question). Here are two examples of how it might look:
Another example of it in use is on my user page (I can't get the table to format properly - I don't know much about wiki syntax/HTML, so suggestions are of course welcome!). Cheers :) ntennis 07:06, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
Thanks all for your input! I agree we should ditch the "ol" code. I like the suggestion of a seperate template for sign languages coded as "sgn" — partly because the template can use a phrase like "native signer" rather than "speaker", and partly because it fits best with this project's convention of using codes from ISO 639. I will go ahead and make it now.
There is still a problem though: if I leave the "language" variable in the template (so the user can specify which particular language they sign), it breaks the Babel template. Anyone more code-savvy than me got any ideas for fixing this?
By the way, according to clause 4.4 of ISO 639-2, other codes can be appended to the "sgn" code to specify different Sign Languages, but there is as yet no widely agreed-upon system in place. I'd prefer to have one template for all sign languages (with a "language" variable in the template). ntennis 06:39, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
Now done. Here's a sample:
ntennis
08:10, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
1. I will leave it up to somebody else to make the "mis" template (easy enough to convert from the "ol" template above). The discussion on the "sgn" template will continue on Category talk:User sgn; there are some problems to be ironed out. I encourage everyone to have a look! I'll paste the above discussion in there.
2. I agree with Aranel ("Sarah"), there is no need to include the phrase "a miscellaneous language" - however, there was a reason I put it in there. When clicking on the phrase "other language" in the template above, you are taken to the category:User ol page, which explains the category and has links to all the users using the template (following the format of the existing user language templates). -- ntennis 06:17, 30 July 2005 (UTC)
p.s One problem is that the word Warlpiri in the example above should properly link to Warlpiri language but the template doesn't accomodate this. Will be trying to resolve this with the sgn template too. ntennis 06:34, 30 July 2005 (UTC)
No matter how minor the language, if you speak it you can create a template for it. If it doesn't have an ISO 639-2 code, use the ISO/DIS 639-3 code (usually the ethnologue code). If it doesn't have one of those, use an arbitrary 4- or more-letter code, or the whole language name. How am I supposed to indicate, for example, that I am Singlish 2? By writing {{user singlish-2}}, of course. -- Node 17:59, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
This is a bit O/T, but it made me think that maybe we could expand on this concept to add other user-competency/familiarity tags.
Thoughts? - Keith D. Tyler ¶ 17:53, July 28, 2005 (UTC)
I was just wondering about this...
Would it be possible to map the definitions of the Babel templates to the language proficiency levels used by the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages and the Association of Language Testers in Europe?
Under this scheme, Lang-0 would be the ALTE 'Breakthrough' level, when basic concepts have just been learned. Lang-1 would be ALTE level 1, Lang-2 would be ALTE level 2, and so on and so forth. (It would be assumed that ALTE level 5, which represents 'complete native command' of a language, would be the same as Wikipedia's Lang-N level.)
The CEF/ALTE ranking levels have been used by multiple bodies (not just in Europe, here in the US too) to compare language ability, and I think it'd be a good idea for the Babel templates to link to them. I don't think it would involve too much work, since the levels more or less map up already (ALTE 3 / CEF B2 matches up to Babel-3 nicely, and so on and so forth) -- it would just be a way of standardizing what each level means. Almafeta 01:58, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
In the body of the Babel page, "Aramaic" and "Assamese" display the same name in national script. One of them is obviously in error, but which one? If you know one of those languages, please check that its name is correctly written. -- Tonymec 02:17, 30 July 2005 (UTC)
Shouldn't the messages be in English as this is the English Wikipedia? -- Just my 2 cents -- Hemanshu 19:34, 1 August 2005 (UTC)
Why do the French templates use the phrase cette personne (this person) instead of this user as is used in the corresponding place in all the other templates (well, all the ones I've checked anyway)? Was a conscious decision made at some point to have a different standard for the French templates? - EDM 20:05, 4 August 2005 (UTC)
Examples:
fr | Cette personne a pour langue maternelle le français. |
de | Dieser Benutzer spricht Deutsch als Muttersprache. |
fi | Tämä käyttäjä puhuu suomea äidinkielenään. |
it | Questo utente è un madrelingua italiano. |
he | משתמש זה דובר עברית כ שפת האם שלו |
eo-4 | Ĉi tiu uzulo parolas Esperanton preskaŭ kiel denaskulo. |
nl-3 | Deze gebruiker spreekt uitstekend Nederlands. |
es-2 | Este usuario puede contribuir con un nivel intermedio de español. |
ru-1 | Этот участник владеет русским языком на начальном уровне. |
I've gone ahead and changed the fr, fr-0, fr-1, fr-2, and fr-3 templates to read cet utilisateur in place of cette personne. The fr-4 template seems to have been created with utilisateur in the first place. - EDM 06:04, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
Should this category be renamed to fit in with the overall categ Wikipedians structure? Thanks, Ian Cairns 17:15, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
Hello,
one thing that bothered me when I began on wikipedia is that user account on different languages seems to be totally deconneced. You have to create an account on all wikipedia which are on a language you know. Everytime with the same username. And then everybody creates his user page and says "hello, you can find me on w:fr w:eo, ..."
Why not automate this a bit ?
We have interwiki links on articles, why don't we user them on user's page ?
See my home page : http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utilisateur:Jmfayard If i am {{Babel|fr|de-3|en-2|eo-3|es-1}} It seems quite logical to add in the model [[eo:Vikipediisto:Jmfayard]][[de:Benutzer:Jmfayard]][[en:User:Jmfayard]][[es:Usuario:Jmfayard]]
You may notice that I'm not yet registred on w:es. I will have a red link on the "spanish" page (oups, does not work), and if I click
on the spanish link, es.wikipedia.org notes would allow me to register for this username.
Just my 2 cents, but they seems to be a logical extension to the Babel and interwiki systems.
It's just for fun. I'm suggesting the creation of user language templates for Constructed languages (like Languages of Middle-earth or Gibberish). See User:BlankVerse for an example. What do you think? CG 17:14, August 13, 2005 (UTC)
These particular templates (such as Klingon...) shouldn't be listed with the other templates (french...). There should listed separatly on another section. CG 10:24, August 14, 2005 (UTC)
I was just thinking about this, as I was editing my user page. (I wanted Pig_Latin) Evil Vin 02:17, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
I'm going to create templates for Simple English without simple-N (nobody is a native speaker of Simple English).
SFGiants 23:24, August 14, 2005 (UTC)
Any suggestions, comments, discussion or questions about how best to set up the Hindi language tags are most welcomed here.
Scott P. 16:06:59, 2005-08-18 (UTC)
Under "Hindi", the "national language" title has just been changed from nagari script to Latin. Why? I thought nagari was used to write Hindi? -- Tonymec 16:17, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
I've created Template:User_tpi-1 and Template:User_tpi-2. As my Tok Pisin is rather poor, I would appreciate any assistance in correcting my translations. -- WurdBendur 20:12, August 18, 2005 (UTC)
Scott,
Don't you think that your edits on the template are a bit vulgar. The language sounds a bit Lalu Prasad Yadav type. I have reverted it for now but please get back to me before you edit it again.--May the Force be with you!
- Shreshth91 ($ |-| r 3 $ |-| t |-|) 14:18, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
Dear Shreesth,
Thanks for putting up with my abominable Hindi. It has been almost 20 years since I used it to any extent. It would appear that your Hindi is probably 'less abominable' than mine, which in my humble opinion, is better than nothing, and is certainly better than what the tags look like now. So, here is a list of things that need translation from english into 'Hinglish', I suppose. If you translate, I'll be happy to set the tags.
Any chance you might be able to take a crack at it?
Namaste Mera Dhost?,
- Scott P. 17:43:45, 2005-08-19 (UTC)
PS: Maybe a bit of it is coming back to me.....
On Shreesth's talk page you wrote:
Delhiwala asking a Bombaywalla on correct Hindi?! I had the impression that Delhi people speak shuddh Hindi. We speak a really corrupted version -- the bollywood style, not the hi-funda Shushma Swaraj style. I'm not sure what to write for the missing hi-4 tag, though I corrected a minor error in the rest.
Your browser/comp is at fault; not the internet or WP servers. You'd need to have a unicode compatible Hindi font first. Then set up your browser to autodetect the encoding. Lastly ensure that you're seeing the correct rendering. (Read: Wikipedia:Enabling complex text support for Indic scripts). =Nichalp «Talk»= 18:56, August 20, 2005 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Babel |
---|
Search user languages |
For those interested, the current colors used on the various templates are displayed on the right. – AB C D ✉ 23:33, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
Wiki Comment section volunteers, please leave your observation comments here regarding how successful your computer is at showing Hindi script. Do you see Hindi language characters of question marks as inquired about at: The request for comment section? Thanks:
As a result of the recent findings and collaborations, I have gone ahead and corrected the format of the hi-4 tag, I have upgraded all category headers to show the recent improvements to the tag texts, and I have also taken the liberty of inserting English subtexts into each of the tags. I apologize for having the character conversion problems at my end, however it would look as though this entire process has been for the better for all tags.
The hi-4 tag still needs to have the correct Devanagari characters added, from my end I cannot yet do this, (but am hoping to upgrade my computer soon, now that I know this). I will message to Nichalp to request for this, now that the structural format for tag hi-4 is fixed. Any comments, questions or suggestions about any of the other changes (hopefully these changes are upgrades) would also be very much appreciated here.
Thanks to each and all for your kindly assistance here.
- Scott P. 12:44:22, 2005-08-21 (UTC)
I saw we add Binary to the Babel entries, but with only 3 categories. Such as:
- RPharazon 17:06, August 23, 2005 (UTC)
Binary is not a language, it is a representation. What about "Can speak ASCII", "Can speak Cyrillic", "Can speak decimal"? -- Tonymec 18:05, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
Is it possible for someone to have two native languages? Or will one always have precedece over the other? I ask because Spanish is my first, but I speak English much more fluently than Spanish (it's gotten to almost non-native level from lack of practice/use). What should I do? Go by fluency, first learned, or both? Jigen III 11:50, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
Yet, those three people with Latin as their native language --- hm, I dunno, but somehow I don't really trust them... [User:Turukano|Turukano]
|
Just an idea. lol. -- —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jigen III ( talk • contribs) 08:02, August 27, 2005 (UTC) diff
Why on Earth do we have a category for 1337? It isn't even a language, FCOL! It's just a nerdy way of writing English. Shouldn't we have categories for Smurf-speak and Yoda-speak while we're at it? — JIP | Talk 15:18, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
| ||
| ||
|
Or how about a more gradual color scheme? Below is GREEN-AQUA-BLUE-VIOLET-PURPLE-RED. Jigen III 09:46, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
| ||
| ||
|
My( MarSch 14:26, 2 September 2005 (UTC)) contribution:
Wikipedia:Babel | ||
| ||
| ||
Search user languages |
My previous contrib seems very dark compared to the old one, so I made some modifications --
MarSch
14:35, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Babel | ||
| ||
| ||
Search user languages |
The current color scheme makes no sense. Why on Earth is en-4 yellow, when en-3 is purplish blue, en-2 is aqua, en-1 is some light-violetish color I don't ever dare to try to name, en-0 is red and en-N is some strange shade of green? IMO a better thing would be light red (#FF3333) for en-0, light yellow (#FFFF33) for en-1, light green (#33FF33) for en-2, light cyan (#33FFFF) for en-3, light blue (#3333FF) for en-4, and white for en-N.
| ||
| ||
|
-- Army1987 20:31, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
I think the second scheme (green->aqua->blue->purple->violet->pink) is the best so far. -- Tito xd 04:52, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
How 'bout this one?
| ||
| ||
|
-- Army1987 20:31, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
Why do we have to have seperate categories for native (xx-N) and near-native (xx-4)? As many users have noted above, some people speak a second language better than they know their mother tongue. Surely the purpose of the babel templates is to identify someone's competence in a language, not the order in which they learn them. Have a look at some xx-4 users; their contributions are indistinguishable from native speakers. Many of the languages don't use an xx-4 category, and it seems to me like an unneccesary complication and an unfair segregation. Would anyone support merging these two categories into a "native or native-like" single category? ntennis 02:25, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
Tonymec: If you feel your English isn't 'native-like', then put en-3 ("advanced"). It's really a matter of how many gradations we need — some scales of language proficiency have 10 levels. My argument was that, as many users have noted above in this discussion page, the concept of 'nativeness' doesn't always correlate with proficiency. I worked with an interpreter in India who (by her own admission) spoke Hindi and English better than her 'mother tongue' Gujarati. Most deaf people encounter a spoken language first, but develop proficiency in a sign language that far exceeds that of the spoken language. Some wikipedians on this talk page have been confused about whether they are truly 'native speakers' or not, whether they can have two mother tongues, etc. If 'native' and 'native-like' were conflated, it would avoid these confusions. Furthermore, if ability to "argue for or against a legal text or a philosophical thesis" is a test of nativeness, then most people I know have no native language! ntennis 23:38, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
I had a feeling the tide of opinion would be against me on this one. I agree with EDM that people are getting confused by finicky definitions — that's precisely why I proposed a simpler system! (And hopefully before xx-4 becomes too entrenched). I guess I don't feel anyone has justified the need for a distinction between xx-N and xx-4.
Anyway, for the record, here's the system I like, which was suggested by user:HV above:
ntennis 04:59, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
Babel code "zh" is ambiguous. Does it refer to the spoken language, or the written language? Officially it is supposed to mean the spoken language, but within the context of Wikipedia, using "zh" to mean the spoken language is rather pointless.
This shows up as an inconsistency in the text that is displayed. On the user page, the Babel code would be displayed as
這個用戶的母語是中文。 这个用户的母语是中文。
which means "this user's native language is written Chinese"; however, if you click the "native language" link, the page that is shown says
这些用户的母语是汉语。 這些用戶的母語是漢語。
which means "these users' native language is spoken Chinese (and Mandarin in particular)".
To illustrate the vast difference between the two meanings, for the former meaning of zh I would claim "zh" (native "speaker") status, but for the latter I would only be able to claim a "zh-1" (elementary level). For the purpose of reading and writing in Wikipedia, the former meaning would be a useful meaning, while the latter (being able to "speak Mandarin") would be a plus but would not be necessary.
Also, with the existence of code "zh-yue", ability to speak Mandarin should be indicated by code "zh-guoyu".
I would really like to help. Now, I'm a gora too and have read this all. My humble suggestions are: to keep it in Devanagari. Only an extended Roman font can represent all the sounds, and this provides the same viewing problems (btw Mac OSX Tiger + Safari browser बढ़िया है!) for people without unicode compatability. Everybody needs to figure it out sooner later, its the future. The Indian, Pakistani and state of Tamil Nadu's governments are all members [3]. My second observation is that even at first glance it looked too "purified," like the artificial attempts of nationalist groups. I'm sure this wasn't conscious, but things are too "Sanskritized" IMHO. I'm just wondering what resources you use? My level of Hindi is probably best seen on the page I largely created and need more help with here. In addition, I'll ask my Hindi teacher what she thinks. She would know if it sounds natural or not. Maybe it does work. But an example of what I'm talking about is सभ्य (or sabhya if you see ???). Especially when it comes to the internet. I think यूसर (yūsar) would work just as well, though I'm sure there are other ways to express it without using Hinglish. Leave me a message if I can help. फिर मिलेंगे! Khirad 13:33, 15 September 2005 (UTC)
Wiktionary has just begun implementing the Babel templates ( Wiktionary:Wiktionary:Babel) and categories - simply copy-pasting all the stuff in here and Wiktionarifying it. Arguably it is more useful there than here, due to its nature as a language-based wiki. So if one needs to know a foreign word, you could ask the Wiktionarians too if there's no pedians there to answer. -- Wonderfool t (c) 09:58, 16 September 2005 (UTC)
Whose bright idea was this!? The babel box looks like crap now! If you necessarily need a link to the language in question, make it where the supercategory Category:User_xx currently is. -- Salleman 16:59, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
I noticed that some people have a list of silly languages in their bable, such as CyberSkull. Is there a list of these things? TIA! -- The Minister of War 13:21, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
Can someone create a link between "sk" and " Slovak language" in the babel script? PBS
Ok someone already talked about this in the past, but it seems that the language level descriptions on the main page are still hopelessly unclear.
First of all, right now there is no clear difference between levels 3, 4, and native. Level 3 says fluent but with a few occasional errors, which is exactly what native is. Level 4 also says 'like native, only not native', which brings up the question: Why do we need a level 4?
In any case, I think the ratings should go something like:
The wording may need to be changed slightly, but this is the basic idea. It retains lvl 4 as similar to native, but makes a clear distinction between 3 and 4/native.
However, if the majority hear is up for it, I suggest a slight revamp, to make a real difference between level 4 and native. That is, IMO, level 4 should be above regular native. Either that or remove level 4 and make a 'native plus' category - basically a person who has special education or interest in a language which enables them to recognize tiny grammar, style and semantic quirks, and 'high' vocabulary which isn't known to most native speakers (i.e. word spadix in English). But again, this last proposal is only if everyone feels up to it, my way of being bold basically. A lot of user pages would have to be changed (and many users would be better alerted) if this came to pass.
-- Ynhockey 22:41, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
These are not good ideas. The levels as they are now, with the slightly fluid definitions for them that are given way above somewhere, are working fine and there is no need for the radical revamps these two contributors are discussing. Native speaker has a meaning; we all know what it means; to say "some native speakers are better than others" misconceives what the term is intended to convey. Attorneys or technical engineers should classify at a higher level than other native speakers, because they are familiar with some technical terms as part of their job? Please. - EDM 13:58, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
In learning your native language you pick up an enormous number of idiomatic expressions automatically because you normally use that language every day of the year during sixteen waking hours as well as your hours spent dreaming in it at night. The daytime use alone works out to nearly 6000 hours a year or, in twenty years, some 120,000 hours. During this time you are constantly practicing your native language. You think in it, read in it, speak in it, hear it, and you are constantly updating and perfecting your knowledge of all of its distinctive features.
http://members.aol.com/sylvanz/gv10.htm
I didn't mean to ridicule the proposals; sorry if it came across that way. What I was trying to say was that I think these proposals are trying to make too finely graded distinctions, without consideration of what the purpose of these templates is. In that sense, these proposals run the danger of being feature creep. I don't believe that these levels are (or should be) intended to act as certifications or licenses or warranties by a user as to some level of competence, as though they were applying for a translator position or something. They're merely intended to signify, generally, that a user is a native speaker of a language (=mother tongue, =raised in it, etc.) with the "feel" for the language that the term "native speaker" implies; or that the user falls somewhere else on the sliding scale of fluency in a language that categories 0/1/2/3/4 suggest.
A linguist's "metafluency" is a completely separate parameter, one that I would suggest is inappropriate for capturing in a template. As I believe most linguists will confirm, knowledge of the structure of a language or group of languages - its syntax, phonology, historical development, and so forth - does not necessarily correlate to competence in the language, though of course often it will.
I disagree that English is "somewhat clear" in all contexts in a way that German or any other language is not. Every language has its noted stylists that the vast bulk of the speaking population can only vainly hope to emulate. German laymen may not write like Kant; most native English-speaking laymen don't write like Shakespeare or Joyce or Hemingway either. That doesn't mean they ought to be classified as less "native" or "fluent" in the language, and certainly not for purposes of contributing to this encyclopedia.
As I understand the current consensus usage of 1/2/3/4 levels, (or at least as I use them) they correspond roughly to (1) "I can read an article okay, but I wouldn't want to try to contribute much" (put another way, "decent passive knowledge, little active knowledge") / (2) "I can read and contribute at a level that I won't get laughed at too much" / (3) "Essentially fluent (maybe book-learnt)" / (4) "Fluent though not technically native." (Level 0 is a different matter and we might as well leave that undefined without adverse consequences.) I think those definitions are working well enough for the purpose the templates are needed for, and I'm just trying to caution against too much definitional fussiness. - EDM 16:50, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
I guess I just don't see what the big deal is, and maybe that is my own personal failing. What is the actual, real-world consequence of somebody's categorizing themself as, say, level 3 vs. level 4? Do they get some Wikibonus for being level 4? Do they miss out on the cool people's discussions if they call themselves level 2? If someone is sitting at their computer agonizing over whether they are level 2 or level 3, then (with respect and sympathy to Ynhockey) they need to get out more. My personal practice is to put the lower level if I think it could be one or the other, but I really think it's inconsequential if someone else with the identical fluency level puts the higher one.
Think of it like a movie or restaurant review in the paper. Different reviewers assign different meanings to 1 star, 2 stars, 3 stars, etc., but you don't need to know the precise definitions to make a comparative evaluation. - EDM 18:34, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
Well, I'll say below how I understand the various levels — and, therefore, how I used them in the Babel template on my user page:
- Tonymec 04:49, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
OK, I've changed the main page to reflect what seems to be the consensus here. Please edit if you disagree, but don't revert since a clarification is needed - simply insert a more correct clarification, but keep in mind what the users in this discussion have said. -- Ynhockey 04:51, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
Ynhockey, I strongly suggest you don't go changing templates yet. Particularly, don't change the limited group of templates that happen to be the languages you know, thereby rendering the whole system inconsistent. Many, many Wikipedia users use the Babel templates; only a handful of us have commented here on the rejiggering of the levels and I suspect that most people who use Babel templates aren't even aware that this discussion is going on. Until this discussion has been publicized to the general population who don't have the Babel page watchlisted, and there is broader acceptance of these changes than the four or five people who have posted comments here, you would be altering something that many people have adopted in its existing form and they are very likely not going to notice the change.
What you are trying to accomplish is a clearer definition of the meaning of the various levels. I've stated above that I'm not sure that is necessary, and that this process risks being misinterpreted as a set of requirements rather than guidelines (you keep writing things like if a user qualifies for the others but not for this one, they can't consider themselves a lvl 2); but if I lose that argument, I lose, and that's how it is. Regardless, I think you will achieve your goal by rewriting the description of the levels that appears at the top of the Babel page, as you have done. To go on and fiddle with a small subset of the templates themselves is a bad idea. Someone wanting to know another user's fluency in a particular language is almost certainly just going to check if the user has self-categorized as 1, 2, 3 etc., not rely on the particular wording of the template text. - EDM 17:12, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
First of all, nobody is changing the templates. I said I would if no one objected, but kind of expected people to object.
That aside, I think you're missing the point regarding the 'native' level. The point is that it's ambiguous: some may interpret it as the language they were born with (but not necessarily spoke a lot), while others may consider it as some high literary level above xx-4. My clarification (and I thought the others agreed on this) aims to define the native level as clearly as possible in the shortest possible amount of words. If you want to paste your above 3-paragraph definition, go ahead, but it won't help anyone.
Regarding the precise definition of 'native', I don't think we agree here either. Using myself as an example: I moved to Israel at the age of 5 from the Soviet Union (Russia), and have spoken Russian relatively little since then. Until about the age of 10 my parents spoke Russian and taught me 'advanced grammar' and things like that, but then switched to English upon our move to Canada. I don't think in Russian, dream in Russian, or any of the other things you listed. Also, my level of expertise in Russian has dropped since then - I rarely use complicated phrases anymore, unless the complicated words are taken from English. However, I can probably never lose my fluency in Russian. Even after 10 years of hardly speaking it at all, I have no trouble talking or writing in Russian. Basically, my level has dropped from xx-4 to xx-3, but it has not prevented me from speaking like a native, including the slang. There are things you just don't forget.
However, we do agree that a native template is only useful as long as it tells something about the user. If the actual level is completely hidden under a 'native' tag, then it doesn't help. This is why I (and several other users at least, read the conversation :)) agree that 'native' is superfluous. But since removing all 'native' templates would cause an unprecedented Wikipedia disaster, there should at least be a clarification of what a native speaker is. I think most people will realize that it means having a 'feel' for the language and being able to express yourself in it, but many will also assume that it's a higher level than xx-4, which it isn't. If you're disagreeing that xx-2 can be native, then feel free to just write 'xx-3 or xx-4' instead of the current explanation. That's not so important.
-- Ynhockey 04:08, 2 November 2005 (UTC) Another thing. In very few case, one can have a passive xx-N level but an active xx-2 or even xx-1 level. For example, my parents (with whom I live) are from Campania and almost always speak Neapolitan to each other and to family (including me). I can understand Neapolitan in almost any situation, even if I am very sleepy, and I have watched many movies in Neapolitan with no problem, with almost the same ease as it were Italian. I have some troubles in understanding the most old-fashioned idioms, like some of the ones my grandparents use, but I think that even young people living in Naples would have this problem. However, I very seldom speak in it (mainly jokingly, I can't remember ever having had a real conversation wholly in Neapolitan), and I'm very very little fluent in it (very much less than in English, and more-or-less as much as in French). If there were nap-x templates, I would maybe classify myself as both nap-1 and nap-N, but I would obviously need to explain what I mean on my user page. -- Army1987 22:10, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
How about CRS-4 : "This Geezer rabbits David." ? I'd do it myself, but don't have the time right now...! Codex Sinaiticus 19:03, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
OK, here's what I've got so far... Any improvements?
CRS-4 | This geezer well rabbits Chitty Chitty Bang Bang nearly as if 'e were a right David 'Ockney. |
- Codex Sinaiticus 17:50, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
How can I make a box that will nicely fit inside the Babel template when passed as a parameter? - ElAmericano 22:14, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
Anyone want to make a template like Template:User_fox for Opera? -- Jtalledo (talk) 23:45, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
Creation of the Udmurt wikipedia seems to be a good cause to create also the Babel-templates for Udmurt-speaking people.
Удмурт ( Udmurt)
1. Со адями удмурт кылын ӧжыт вераськыны быгатэ
2. Со адями удмурт кылын гожъяны но лыдӟыны быгатэ
3. Со адями удмурт кылэз туж ӟеч тодэ
4. Со адями удмурт кылэз анай кылэз кадь тодэ
N. Со адямилы удмурт кыл – анай кыл
Word-by-word translation of sentences:
1. This human_being Udmurt in_language a_few speak can 2. This human_being Udmurt in_language write and read can 3. This human_being Udmurt language_it very good knows 4. This human_being Udmurt language_it mother language_it as knows N. This for_human_being Udmurt language – mother language
-- Denis Sacharnych 07:16, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
See
This model, inspired by Babel, seems to me to be far less complex than the current Wikipedia:Translators available and Wikipedia:Translation into English, and would also work much better especially on smaller wikipedias and with small languages.
fr:User:Jmfayard 17:17, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
Isn't that the whole point of Babel, that it shows that a person can understand the indicated languages? Wouldn't translation be the logical benefit of that to WP? - Keith D. Tyler ¶ 18:17, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
I've been bold and changed the level descriptions by myself. They are like in my previous proposal, but with five levels instead of four. Here they are, in case they are reverted:
- xx-0 if you might be expected to understand the language (e.g. if you often contribute to articles about it), but you actually don't. You should not use it for every language you do not know.
- xx-1 if you can understand that language well enough to use an article as a source for writings in your own language, but you are unable to significantly contribute to an article in that language.
- xx-2 if you can contribute to articles in that language to some extent, but you are not confident in writing in it and therefore you are likely to make many mistakes.
- xx-3 if you are confident in writing that language, but often minor errors occour.
- xx-4 if you can write articles in that language at the level of an averagely educated native speaker.
- proposed — not yet implemented xx-5 if you have a 'professional' proficiency in that language (e.g. if are a teacher of it, or a professional writer in it), i.e. if you can confidently tell wheter a sentence is correct, find the most appropriate word for a given concept, understand literary and technical words and phrases, etc.
- xx if you are a native speaker, i.e. if you are used to use that language in all everyday situations, and you have a perfect grasp of it, including colloquialisms. (This means that if you moved from an xx-speaking country to a yy-speaking country at the age of 12, and have never spoke xx language again, you should classify yourself as a native speaker of yy and not of xx, even if you used to speak nothing else as a child. In the case that you moved as an adult, you should decide by yourself, according to your 'feel', and in rare cases you might even have several native languages.) Used alone, it means that your proficiency in written language is xx-4, if it isn't you should use both xx and xx-5 (when it gets implemented) or xx-3 or whatever. (If it is much lower than xx-4, however, it would be a good idea to explain the reason in your user page.)
These, except xx-N, are mainly focused about writing. This is consistent with the texts of the boxes, "This user is able to contribute with a xxxx level of yyyy" vs "This user is a native speaker of yyyy". This system is completely compatible with the old one (nobody will have to recategorise themself, unless they want to be categorised as xx-5); there is no need to rename level 4 (the definition of level xx-N makes it clear that no-one is supposed to have both xx-N and xx-4 in the same language in their BabelBox); it uses a decent definition of "native language"; and it fulfills the request for a "professional" level. Since none of the other proposals so far has all these features, I decided to use this one. The definition of xx-3 is somewhat vague and could be improved (I can't find how, as I'm not en-5...). Now we just need to create xx-5 templates "This user can contribute with a professional level of xxxxx". Army1987 13:37, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
What a mess these descriptions are now. What a poorly worded, amateurish explanation of xx-N. What a shame that this benign, potentially helpful set of templates has been massaged by committee into something incomprehensible and meaningless. - EDM 22:23, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
I also created a template for en-5 since no-one objected. However there is something wrong with its category.
en-5 | This user can contribute with a professional level of English. |
-- Army1987 14:44, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
I think that there should also be a template which says that "This user can use (insert language here) as a second language. Tarret 00:39, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
I say we forget about the gradual escalation and jump straight to the final result:
Bo Lindbergh
21:11, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
I've created some new templates for Babel:
Enjoy! -- Ixfd64 07:42, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
I've made some more specific templates for Babel:
There's more on the way! :-D -- Ixfd64 07:54, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
I've made a template for Wikipedia bureaucrats:
I've also made some templates for those people in choir:
All right, I've made enough templates for now. :) -- Ixfd64 08:12, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
What about one for us baritones? — User:ACupOfCoffee @ 06:56, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
I've tried to backport Babel as it's implemented on fy:. The advantage is that there's no need to name the number of arguments in advance. This does require one extra Template that will dissolve unspecified arguments into emptyness. The equivalent or the choice on Fy: would be Template:User. However, that template was already taken, so I implemented the backport with:
These are the results of the templates {{babellist|en}} and {{babellist|en-0|en-1|en-2|en-3|fr|fr-0|fr-1|fr-2|fr-3}}:
I know the actual entries don't make much sense; I only used them to demonstrate the template.
To implement this system:
Don't use the test versions of the language bars, as some were converted from fy: and hence are coded slightly differently. Aliter 01:00, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
Following the Wikipedia:Featured articles in other languages, I've created here some templates to replace Template:FAOL which were used to point out to articles that are featured in other language (see Talk:World War II). These new templates are Babel-like to be less space-comsuming. But I need your help to create a template like {{Babel-x}} to add multiple boxes. And also, do you think we should write them in the language of the article they're pointing to? CG 20:35, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
I notice that when a person uses a Babel template on their user page, a Category link is automatically added to the bottom of the page as well. This is a nice feature but it seems unfortunate that the Category links are named after the Wikipedia node for that language -- i.e. "User en", "User es-1", etc. I think it would be helpful if these links were made "English speakers", "Spanish speakers" and so on.
I see that the templates implement this by making the links say things like [[Category:en-N|{{PAGENAME}}]]. Does this mean that what I want could be achieved by passing a PAGENAME parameter to the {{User en}} template? I'm still trying to understand how to use parameters with templates (and in any case I would prefer that this was the default behavior for the Babel templates).
Any thoughts? I'm sure I'm misunderstanding something fundamental about Wikipedia templates. :-) Tim Pierce 15:50, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
Why don't we change the title of the user language categories to more comprehensible ones. For example "French speaking users" instead of "User fr"? It poses when searching for a language I don't know its code. CG 21:23, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
I'm a complete newbie to Babel templates and I'm trying to get the Tongan (Faka Tonga or To) category organized. I'm failing utterly. Need experienced help. You supply the template, I'll supply the Tongan. 'O kapau te u lava! (if I can) Zora 21:38, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
"This user is able to contribute on an advanced level of English," for example. "On an advanced level" sounds extremely awkward. How about "using" instead of "on"? -- YixilTesiphon Say hello 21:13, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
It's possible that I am incorrect on this, but the Wikipedia:Babel translation for Latin is wrong.
This is the Latin that is found, for example, in the template on the profile of a user who has classified himself as la-1:
Hic usor simplice latinitate contribuere potest.
This was translated as:
This user is able to contribute with a basic level of Latin.
Potest is not, in fact, the present 3rd singular active indicative form of the Latin for 'to be able (to)'. That word's principle parts are as follows: possum, posse, potui, --. The correct form in this instance would be possit.
Also, the word Latinate is not, in fact, a Latin word. The Latin word for Latin is Latinus, -a, -um, so the correct form for the ablative singular would be Latino for a masculine user, and Latina for a feminine user. The reason for the case in this sentence is because simplice Latina is ablative of means (by which something is done).
The singular of this sentence would thus be:
Hic usor simplice Latino contribuere possit.
The plural would be:
Hi usores simplice Latino contribuere possunt.
Moved from Category_talk:User_la
Shinimitsukai 13:49, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
{{Babel|iso15924{{!}}Cyrl{{!}}5|iso15924{{!}}Cyrl{{!}}4|iso15924{{!}}Cyrl{{!}}3|iso15924{{!}}Cyrl{{!}}2|iso15924{{!}}Cyrl{{!}}1}}
It's not a language, but I think it's still pretty cool. Just felt like making it. And it does deserve a place here, right? Maybe we can even make more of these alphabet things.
If you want to revert this change, go ahead, but I'm taking the languages that don't actually have an ISO character set OFF of the babel page and moving them to
Wikipedia:Userboxes/Non-ISO_Languages. As a self-professed userbox addict, I'd really like to feel contributory, and as such am endeavoring to make the userbox space as happy as can be. (After all, does the ISO have a code for Klingon? for Quenya? for 1337speak?)
Cernen
14:01, 18 December 2005 (UTC)