[02:04:20] over a third of all abstract wikipedia articles were not connected to wikidata items. I am proud to announce that I have fixed that. [02:08:30] 700+ edits to Wikidata later :p [02:32:54] Thanks so much. I hope one day this burden will be lifted! T421151 (re @feedmepaperr: 700+ edits to Wikidata later :p) [02:49:30] that'd be nice 😌 [02:49:30] one day I suppose [03:20:43] I made a shortcut for this: Z38542 (re @feedmepaperr: bam. you may be interested to know that both the name of the link and the name of the website work in any language) [03:21:40] glad to be of help lol [05:50:02] oh, another good point! (re @u99of9: This also gives the eager translators time to swing into action.) [05:51:59] As per https://www.wikifunctions.org/wiki/Wikifunctions:Type_proposals/Words_with_many_forms Option D I am planning to work on anonymous functions today. This should have a number of fun uses. [06:01:16] if anyone wants to help, holler 🙂 [06:47:38] I've given myself a goal that I think is both attainable and helpful. [06:48:19] I want to create at least a basic article for every level 2 Vital topic [06:48:54] we already have a decent chunk of them but like, we're still missing a shocking amount of foundational knowledge [06:51:47] What's that? Some enwiki thing? (re @feedmepaperr: I want to create at least a basic article for every level 2 Vital topic) [06:52:13] [[en:Wikipedia:Vital articles]] [06:56:19] there's also a list of 1000 articles every Wikipedia should have, but level 2 Vital is only 100 articles and I think that's more achievable for a single person [06:56:56] Yeah, I knew about [[m:List of articles every Wikipedia should have]] [07:12:49] although. I do wonder how many articles on that list we have so far [07:19:09] I'd suggest avoiding any deceased people for now. We don't have many functions that render in the past tense. We should make them soon IMO. [07:22:53] I would rather make one good biography, place etc. than trying to go for wide coverage. That way there is no need to constantly update everything once there is a function that adds a new sentence. When one type is great, it could be copied to an arbitrary number of articles with a bot rather than building them by hand. [07:33:35] I mostly agree, but I know that Ellie goes for quality already. Regarding bots, the first one I want is one that swaps one function for another preserving the arguments. Or swaps a pair of composed functions for a single equivalent. [07:37:54] I noticed earlier when making a page for a dead person lol (re @u99of9: I'd suggest avoiding any deceased people for now. We don't have many functions that render in the past tense. We should make the...) [07:37:58] but that's like. most people. [07:38:52] anyway I did a thing: [[abstract:User:Feedmepaperr/1000]] (re @feedmepaperr: although. I do wonder how many articles on that list we have so far) [07:40:37] we have a decent chunk of them but there's still so many red links to go [07:42:43] Another red link completionist! (re @u99of9: ) [12:40:08] looks like we have just a little bit over half of them (re @feedmepaperr: we have a decent chunk of them but there's still so many red links to go) [12:41:46] I counted 488 red links out of the 1000 articles on the list (re @wikilinksbot: [[abstract:User:Feedmepaperr/1000]]) [17:18:55] I've been exploring some language functions and objects and found Z26934 [17:25:58] Its description says "two-valued grammatical number system (1, >1)" [17:27:48] It's not totally precise in English, for example. In English, it's more like "equals 1" and "not equals 1". So it's definitely "1 degree", "2 degrees", "0 degrees", "-2 degrees". Not sure whether it's "-1 degree" or "-1 degrees". [17:28:07] But pretty much everything else other than 1 and maybe -1 is grammatically plural, including zero. [17:28:17] Does this object handle it well? [17:28:50] (Plural rules are defined nicely and formally for a lot of languages in the CLDR: https://www.unicode.org/cldr/charts/48/supplemental/language_plural_rules.html [17:29:23] (Although they don't seem to handle negative numbers.) [17:32:46] not sure to understand the difference you want to make but the description can always be improved (it's a wiki ;) ) (re @amire80: It's not totally precise in English, for example. In English, it's more like "equals 1" and "not equals 1". So it's definitely "...) [17:35:46] when would you need to make a sentence with negative numbers? "X has -1 brother" don't make sense [17:35:47] plus, if negative numbers are needed, isn't the rule just to look at the absolute value? (-1 behave like 1 and -36 like 36) (re @amire80: (Although they don't seem to handle negative numbers.)) [17:35:48] I don't want to change the description without understanding what the actually does. [17:36:55] "The coldest temperature ever recorded in Rhode Island is -28°F, set on January 11, 1942." [17:37:15] it's a list composed of two objects: singular and plural [17:37:16] which reminds me that plural is already defined in Q146786, no need to encumber the description ;) (re @amire80: I don't want to change the description without understanding what the actually does.) [17:37:24] I mean, here it's written using °, but it could be the word "degrees". [17:38:27] What "plural" means is different in every language. In some languages it includes 0. In others it doesn't. (re @NicolasVIGNERON: it's a list composed of two objects: singular and plural [17:38:28] which reminds me that plural is already defined in Q146786, no need to ...) [17:39:05] ah I see! [17:39:05] you almost never write "degrees" but "almost never" is not "never" (if we have text-to-speech functions for instance it would be relevant) but again wouldn't the absolute value be enough to deal with negative numbers? (re @amire80: I mean, here it's written using °, but it could be the word "degrees".) [17:39:37] If it's defined as "1 and >1", then it may just fail weirdly for negative numbers. [17:39:55] (And maybe also for zero.) [17:40:08] So what I'm asking is how does this code actually work. [17:40:10] it's just a description, not a definition, [17:40:11] but I think I'll just remove it, indeed it's just confusing (re @amire80: If it's defined as "1 and >1", then it may just fail weirdly for negative numbers.) [17:40:29] What I'm asking is what is the real definition. I am failing to understand it. [17:41:12] the definition is "the set comprised of Q110786 and Q146786" nothing less nothing more... (re @amire80: What I'm asking is what is the real definition. I am failing to understand it.) [17:41:13] I'd just use CLDR instead of redefining everything manually in Wikifunctions. In fact, MediaWiki already supports it. But I'm not sure that WikiLambda has access to it. [17:42:01] And what does Q146786 actually mean? Does it include zero? Does it include negative numbers? Or is it just something abstract? How will it actually behave when it encounters 0, -1, -10? [17:42:08] sure but it would be the job of a function not an object... (re @amire80: I'd just use CLDR instead of redefining everything manually in Wikifunctions. In fact, MediaWiki already supports it. But I'm no...) [17:46:37] again the detail of how you use Q146786 is the job of the function that use Z26934... (re @amire80: And what does Q146786 actually mean? Does it include zero? Does it include negative numbers? Or is it just something abstract? H...) [17:47:24] Do you have an example? (re @NicolasVIGNERON: again the detail of how you use Q146786 is the job of the function that use Z26934...) [17:48:41] search for this object, you could find for instance https://www.wikifunctions.org/view/fr/Z29369 (just a simple table, no need to worry about numbers) (re @amire80: Do you have an example?) [17:49:00] see https://www.wikifunctions.org/w/index.php?limit=500&fulltext=1&search=Z26934&title=Special:Search&profile=default&ns0=1 for a full list [17:49:38] and see also https://www.wikifunctions.org/wiki/Talk:Z26934 obviously