Wikipedia talk:Userboxes/Language/Written: Difference between revisions
Emk~enwiki (talk | contribs) |
Emk~enwiki (talk | contribs) →Request for new writing-system category: runes (ISO code runr): Added to iso15924 template |
||
Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
: If there were a runic userbox, I'd probably display it on my user page. But how should I choose between -1, -2, etc.? :-) -[[User:Emk|emk]] 00:10, 14 September 2006 (UTC) |
: If there were a runic userbox, I'd probably display it on my user page. But how should I choose between -1, -2, etc.? :-) -[[User:Emk|emk]] 00:10, 14 September 2006 (UTC) |
||
OK, I took the liberty of adding "Runr" support to [[Template:User iso15924]]. (That is a ''seriously'' esoteric template.) To use it, type something like <nowiki>{{User iso15924|Runr|1}}</nowiki> on your user page. There's no codes for the individual Futharks, but I suppose we could put some sort of specialized userboxes together in the User namespace. |
|||
I still have no idea what the -1, -2, ..., or -N modifiers ought to mean for writing systems, either. :-) -[[User:Emk|emk]] 17:16, 14 September 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== User iso15924 == |
== User iso15924 == |
Revision as of 17:16, 14 September 2006
Request for new writing-system category: runes (ISO code runr)
Although I've previously discussed adding a userbox for runic literacy (in the Babelbox section), it seems more logical to list that skill under writing systems instead of languages. I see only a few problems with adding "runr-n" userboxes:
- No native level would apply, because almost nobody consistently uses runes (an ancient script) to write their native language.
- Some distinction between variants of the runic alphabet (Primitive Germanic vs. Saxon vs. Norse) might be useful. The ISO system, however, treats all runic scripts as a single block of Unicode: what kind of modifier should be added to "runr-n" to specify a variant alphabet?
--Ingeborg S. Nordén 00:25, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
ISO 15924 is Runr not runr. About variants you may ask User:Evertype who makes the codes. (nice to have him in WP). That currently nobody has Runr-N does not matter. I support the creation. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 01:16, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
- I'm assuming the four historical runic systems are the Elder Fuþark, the Anglo-Saxon Fuþorc, the Younger Fuþąrk (long and short twig), and the medieval Scandanavian runes. Is this correct, or would you suggest a different breakdown?
- If there were a runic userbox, I'd probably display it on my user page. But how should I choose between -1, -2, etc.? :-) -emk 00:10, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
OK, I took the liberty of adding "Runr" support to Template:User iso15924. (That is a seriously esoteric template.) To use it, type something like {{User iso15924|Runr|1}} on your user page. There's no codes for the individual Futharks, but I suppose we could put some sort of specialized userboxes together in the User namespace.
I still have no idea what the -1, -2, ..., or -N modifiers ought to mean for writing systems, either. :-) -emk 17:16, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
User iso15924
instead of creating 100 userboxes we could make Template:User iso15924 and then let people simply pass parameters. "{User iso15924|-ISO 15924-|-level-}" e.g. "{User iso15924|Cyrl|4}". Maybe an advanced template coder could do this. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 13:35, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
IMO the old boxes should than be only aliases. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 13:39, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
TfD and CfD
Level N and 5 are up for deletion Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_August_26#Category:Writing_systems_categories Tobias Conradi (Talk) 04:39, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
ipa-0
Can an admin state whether this was properly deleted, i.e. according to WP policies? was it marked for deletion? http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/delete&page=Template:User_ipa-0
I think ipa-0 can in fact be usefull since it is used in en:WP, as en-0 is usefull for languages in en:WP. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 14:13, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
- There was a TfD discussion about this and other 'level 0' templates, but the template itself was never tagged for deletion and thus the ~50 people using it were likely unaware of the discussion. That is out of process so I have restored this template for now. --CBD 14:54, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
- Thank you. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 15:19, 3 September 2006 (UTC)