Wikipedia talk:Babel/Archive 4

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Academic proficiency" vs. Everyday use?

I went through a couple of grad degrees in history and the social sciences at a time (many years ago) when "academic proficiency" in at least two foreign languages was a requirement. I became proficient in reading French & German (and sometimes Latin) academic texts, a bit less so in writing them, and much less so in face-to-face conversation -- what an English-speaker needs for conducting research in original sources, but not much use on a vacation, in other words. Poring over the definitions and discussions for the five Babel levels tells me they don't really apply to my case. Anyone else think this might be a parallel classification issue? Or something? --Michael K. Smith (talk) 01:14, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Babel boxes for Norwegian

I think the nb Babel boxes should display nb, and not no (which they, incdredibly, do). The no boxes that contain a mention of Bokmål should lose it; we have the nb boxes for that. Just like the nn boxes for Nynorsk. no is a generic reference to Norwegian. See also Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2009_February_4 --Gamlevegen (talk) 19:56, 3 February 2009 (UTC) Edited to fix link.--Gamlevegen (talk) 02:55, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

I have been reminded that because some of the Wikimedia projecs in the no. sub-domain are in Bokmål without any Nynorsk, it might be useful to let the nb boxes continue to display no. On the other hand, we could just all use an no box in addition to our nb box. We can be displayed in Category:User_no in both cases, or even without doing either.--Gamlevegen (talk) 12:59, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Although I haven't quite finished, I have now made even more changes than I had thought I would at this stage. They are all direct or indirect consequences of the decision you can read about if you click on the deletion review link above. This does not mean we have to keep it like it is now. It is rather an opportunity to start over, having corrected a mistake from the past. As an example, I am no fundamentalist about such things as nb-3 boxes pointing to the no-3 category in addition to nb-3, and I don't know the wishes of the very few no-5 users yet. I'll still see if I missed something, to make it more consistent. If you have ideas or corrections, they can be discussed here.--Gamlevegen (talk) 18:59, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Template:User language at Meta

I found out today that {{babel}} is depreciated at Meta and they are switching to m:Template:User language. If this template is imported to Wikipedia (en) I would suggest that it be modified to indicate that the language is the users primary language if the fluency level is omitted. -- allen四names 23:23, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

south]brabantian

hasno box:(--i'v[[RSI]]>typin=v.v.hard4me!!>contactme thruMSNpl[sven70=alias (talk) 05:29, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

nl-4 has"foutloos"=erorfre i/as 'tr-lat'

=not proper!--i'v[[RSI]]>typin=v.v.hard4me!!>contactme thruMSNpl[sven70=alias (talk) 05:36, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Color of xx-3 level

On this page (Wikipedia:Babel), he-3 is bright green but en-3 is dark blue. Any reason why this is inconsistent? I find that the green makes more sense, but which one is correct? Iketsi (talk) 00:54, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Dunno. I gave up trying to suggest a decent colour scheme and started "rolling my own". A. di M. (talk) 10:34, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

{{Userboxtop|toptext=[[Wikipedia:Babel]]}} {{User:A. di M./Babelbox|en|N|English language|This user is able to contribute with a '''[[:Category:User en-3|advanced]]''' level of '''[[:Category:User en|English]]'''.}} {{User:A. di M./Babelbox|en|5|English language|This user is able to contribute with a '''[[:Category:User en-3|advanced]]''' level of '''[[:Category:User en|English]]'''.}} {{User:A. di M./Babelbox|en|4|English language|This user is able to contribute with a '''[[:Category:User en-3|advanced]]''' level of '''[[:Category:User en|English]]'''.}} {{User:A. di M./Babelbox|en|3|English language|This user is able to contribute with a '''[[:Category:User en-3|advanced]]''' level of '''[[:Category:User en|English]]'''.}} {{User:A. di M./Babelbox|en|2|English language|This user is able to contribute with a '''[[:Category:User en-3|advanced]]''' level of '''[[:Category:User en|English]]'''.}} {{User:A. di M./Babelbox|en|1|English language|This user is able to contribute with a '''[[:Category:User en-3|advanced]]''' level of '''[[:Category:User en|English]]'''.}} {{User:A. di M./Babelbox|en|0|English language|This user is able to contribute with a '''[[:Category:User en-3|advanced]]''' level of '''[[:Category:User en|English]]'''.}} {{userboxbottom}}

table of codes for each language

so, we have to guess the code of each Babel... nice.

Elvenmuse (talk) 10:55, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

About English templates

What about:

  • YLE Flyers/KET = 1
  • PET = 2
  • First certificate = 3
  • CAE/CPE = 4
  • IELTS = 5

Kayau Voting IS evil 16:29, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Latin Wikipedia

In Latina lingua Wikipediam desidero habere. Sum Latina-3 JoshE3 (talk) 00:00, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia in Latina lingua la.wikipedia.org est. Vanisaac (talk) 22:38, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Tibetan templates

Is there any particular reason that the templates for Tibetan are all written in English and in the Latin alphabet? If the issue is just a lack of a translation, I'd be more than glad to get a native speaker to render all of the different levels in (Lhasa) Tibetan. Just figured I would ask here before plowing into that. Vaaarr (talk) 09:09, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

purpose of Babel

Hi, I think Babel must contain other infos than languages, because it couldn't be easy to use a lot of templates. Thanks for support and relevance. + Emroski (my wall) (what I did) + 15:09, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Jamaican Patois

Hello! You use the letter code jm for Jamaican Patois (see here), but the letter code by ISO 639 ist jam (see here). As there are only two people using Jamaican Patois templates, it is easy to change. Is it allowed to change the letter code in jam? Stefan Knauf (talk) 23:41, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

As nobody seems to know, I just changed the letter code for Jamaican Patois from jm to jam. Stefan Knauf (talk) 19:27, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

de-2 fortgeschrittene?

My understanding (and that of my Oxford-Duden German Desk Dictionary 1997) is that "fortgeschrittene" means "advanced". However, de-2 is meant to be an intermediate level of understanding. Is there a better term for "intermediate level of German" in German? The same dictionary only has the prefix "zwischen-" listed for "intermediate". Perhaps "Zwischenniveau von Deutschkentniss"?--Wikimedes (talk) 16:31, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Ah - In German the levels go basic, advanced, fluent, rather than basic, intermediate, advanced as in other languages.--Wikimedes (talk) 19:50, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

i feel dizzy about a lot of babel

Archived from Wikipedia talk:Babel/List.

apologize about my tinglish
hi i am a thai user and i feel dizzy about a lot of babel, because it's lot of
can admin continent partition? --KLL Joe (talk) 15:35, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Manchu (mnc)

mnc-1 ᠣᠮᠪᡳ
ᠠᡳᠰᡳᠯᠠᠴᡳ
ᠪᠠᡳᡨᠠᠮᡝ
ᠮᠠᠨᠵᡠ ᡤᡳᠰᡠᠨ ᠪᡝ
ᡧᠣᠯᠣᡴᠣᠨ
ᠨᡳᠶᠠᠯᠮᠠ
ᠪᠠᡳᡨᠠᠯᠠᡵᠠ
ᡝᡵᡝ

Hello! Does anybody know if it is possible to write the words side by side in the Manchu-template? I asked this in German Wikipedia two months ago, but nobody seems to know. --Stefan Knauf (talk) 20:46, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

zh-classical and lzh

Hello! Your categories User zh-classical and User lzh are for the same. --Stefan Knauf (talk) 22:39, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Babel parser function

Since the Babel extension, which provides the {{#babel:}} parser function, was enabled here, users now have the option of using, say, {{#babel:en}} instead of {{babel|en}}. Both methods categorize such users into the main language categories (in this case, Category:User en), but the template approach also uses Category:User en-1, ..., Category:User en-5, and Category:User en-N to indicate comprehension level, whereas the parser function approach puts everyone in the main language category but uses the sortkeys 1, ..., N. This creates unnecessary confusion, since users whose names start with "N" of any comprehension level are mixed with users of any name who are native speakers (and similarly for "1" through "5"). What are we going to do about this? - dcljr (talk) 00:35, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Hmm... Looks like the parser function also uses the Category:User en-1, etc., subcategories, but the thing about it using sortkeys in the main language categories is still true. This feature should probably be disabled, if possible. - dcljr (talk) 00:40, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
I think that the babel extension should be described on this page. It's probably worth noting that Babel AutoCreate (talk · contribs) will create missing categories as required. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:58, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Again about IELTS

What about making few new additional Userboxes with results of some proficiency tests in English, German, French, etc? Something like "This user overall band score is 0 in IELTS Academic" or something else? --Divega (talk) 07:10, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Revising Babel templates according to IELTS scale

I propose that we redo the Babel templates to (mostly) conform to the IELTS scale.

  • language-1: User conveys and understands only general meaning in very familiar situations.
  • language-2: User has partial command of the language, coping with overall meaning in most situations, though is likely to make many mistakes. Should be able to handle basic communication in their own field.
  • language-3: User has generally effective command of the language despite some inaccuracies, inappropriacies and misunderstandings. Can use and understand fairly complex language, particularly in familiar situations.
  • language-4: User has full operational command of the language with only occasional unsystematic inaccuracies and inappropriacies. Misunderstandings may occur in unfamiliar situations. Handles complex detailed argumentation well.
  • language-5: User has full operational command of the language: appropriate, accurate and fluent with complete understanding.

As you may notice, I've excluded the Native Speaker designation. Whether or not someone is a native speaker in a particular language is irrelevant to their skill in the language.

I'm open to any proposed rewordings of the proposed scale. —Yutsi Talk/ Contributions ( 偉特 ) 19:31, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Discussion

Whatever is done needs to harmonise with the Babel extension. If the latter is unalterable, any discrepancies can only be ironed out by amending the babel templates. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:00, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm a little confused about the Babel extension. What exactly does it do? I was under the impression that the babel system was entirely based on templates. I started this RfC with concern to the templates.—Yutsi Talk/ Contributions ( 偉特 ) 04:35, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
Under the old way, you could indicate your language knowledge either by means of separate userboxes - {{user en-N}}{{user fr-2}}{{user de-1}} for example - or by the babel template {{babel|en-N|fr-2|de-1}} which wraps the same templates in a box. Since the babel extension was added, you may do essentially the same thing using {{#babel:en-N|fr-2|de-1}} which does not use templates (unless you attempt to use a language code which it doesn't recognise). The categorisation is the same: whichever of the three techniques is chosen, these examples will categorise a user page into Category:User en; Category:User en-N; Category:User fr; Category:User fr-2; Category:User de; Category:User de-1. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:36, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
Why was it enabled in the first place? I'm quite concerned with the fact that it deprives me (and all of us) from any control over the particular content of the messages. Eg., compare these messages:

Materinski jezik ovoga korisnika je srpskohrvatski.
Матерњи језик овога корисника је хрватскосрпски.

— {{babel|sh}}

Ovaj korisnik razumije srpskohrvatski kao maternji jezik.

— {{#babel:sh}}
For obvious reason the users who chose to list themselves as speakers of Serbo-Croatian (as opposed to Bosnian, Croatian, Montenegrin or Serbian) would prefer the template-based (on the top) version. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 23:20, 31 July 2012 (UTC) — updated 13:35, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Support

  • Provided that the actual labels of the templates would be of the sane length. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 23:23, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Conditional support

I think it's basically a good idea. However, the definitions are too long to fit into a standard userbox and would necessitate a key for people to refer to, making more work for the reader; the beauty of uboxen is that they permit a rapid overview of a user's CV. Because the definitions are text, I do not see how it affects the software extension or the template code. There are, cross-Wiki, well over 1,000 permutations though, and some Wikis still haven't correctly translated their userbox texts (I corrected one yesterday that was claiming Level 4 French to be Elémentaire). It would be a lot of work - is it something that really needs to be done now? --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 21:42, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

The translation is the only real work that would need to be done, and it doesn't have to completed within a deadline; we'd just do it one userbox at a time. And Babel templates are transcluded, so we wouldn't have to go through every user page and change the template.—Yutsi Talk/ Contributions ( 偉特 ) 23:38, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Oppose

  • For use here, proposed levels 4 and 5 are essentially equivalent. Also, being a native speaker does occasionally make a difference (such as for idioms and the like). If the name of the language in question is an issue, I am not against changing it (or creating useable alternative boxes that would still use the established categories), but I do not see a benefit in changing the templates to this scale. --Nouniquenames (talk) 12:48, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
  • The European Language Portfolio (ELP) would be a better choice and reference: http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/Portfolio_en.asp — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.254.74.133 (talk) 02:10, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

tr-4 misspelling

In the Babil template tr-4, there is a misspelling I do not know how to correct. It is written: "Bu kullanıcı Türkçe'yi ana dili gibi anlıyor." The apostrophe should be removed. Sae1962 (talk) 08:19, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Since I don't know Turkish, I'd rather not make the edit myself, but you can make it by following this link. Cheers, Ynhockey (Talk) 14:49, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
I also know no Turkish, but the error was purely in the markup, so I was able to fix it. PJTraill (talk) 23:22, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

what is this template for

if you use the {{#babel}} template, it comes up differently, where can you find it and what is it for when there is already a {{babel}} template
Example:
{{#babel:ja|en-4|pl-3|ru-2|zh-1|ko-0|nonexsistent-0|Mac Pro }}

See the Babel extension: {{#babel:}} is a newer method which is intended to behave similarly on all versions of Wikipedia, whereas the older {{babel}} method does not. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:12, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
Something seems to muddled, I certainly am! I received a bot message on my Spanish talk page telling me to migrate to {{#babel}} as instructed here. I saw there a language link the English version, Wikipedia:Babel, so I followed that, where I was told to use {{Babel}}. I later noticed that the Spanish instructions had told me to use {{#babel}}! Surely there should at the least be an indication at Wikipedia:Babel of the status of {{#Babel}}, an indication of a timeline for migration and the status of other languages? PJTraill (talk) 23:40, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

"Professional" level (xx-5)

Hello all- I don't understand what the word "professional" is meant to indicate in the Babel level 5 category. To me, calling yourself a "professional" user would indicate that your profession involves teaching that language, publishing in it, or translating it; or that your job requires some knowledge of the language, say if you regularly need to interact with speakers of the language at your workplace. I would not necessarily assume that "professional" knowledge of a language is a higher level than Babel level 4 (comparable to native speaker). A couple examples of my take on this:

  • I can think of a few high school language teachers I knew whom I would not consider near-native speakers, though they were technically professionals and fully knowledgeable within their curriculum.
  • I have worked as a translator of French and German into English. I took translation courses at universities and have been paid to translate books, making me a professional as I understand the general term, but I would not consider myself a near-native speaker on most days.

Under the 0-1-2-3-4-N system, I designated myself a 3 (3.5 if it were available); now, with the 5 thrown in there, I don't know what to think. Can anyone clarify the definition of level 5 for me? -Eric (talk) 14:47, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Personally I interpret "professional" as "writes in that language for a living" or at least "writes in that language for business or other professional purposes". So a professional translator would fit (if a skilled one); a technical writer, or novelist, or journalist. One observation is that people who use a language professionally are more skilled in the language than average natives, so it makes sense to say that level 4 is "near native" and "professional" is a level above that.
Then again, this whole thing is self-described. If you feel that, even though you have training in English, and have done translation to (or from) English, your skills aren't that polished, then it certainly makes sense to pick a different designation.
Incidentally, the reasoning above is why I've always objected to the -6 "professorial" designation. Quite apart from the fact that it was tossed in haphazardly and without discussion, it makes no logical sense. The use of numbers implies an ordering of skill level (a total order, in fact), and it's very obvious by examination that the language skills of professors aren't necessarily anywhere near as good as those of natives, let alone writing professionals. Yes, sometimes you meed professors who write skillfully -- but only sometimes.
Paul Koning (talk) 16:38, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
I think the level xx-5 should be deleted. I do not understand why "professional" is supposed to be better than "near native". It should be the other way around, which makes it quite confusing. Note, that in other languages they sometimes go up to xx-4 only, and this makes sense.--Afluegel (talk) 10:57, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Paul, I agree with your interpretation of "professional"--but remember, we should avoid using the word itself in a definition--and I agree with your take on xx-6. However, taking into consideration both our interpretations of the term's meaning, I don't think we can say that a "professional" user will in every case be more advanced overall than a "near-native" one. I think you would find plenty of instances where Afluegel's take on the relationship between the two categories is the case. Of course, this all depends on how we define "near-native" as well (to me, "near-native" means that a native user would notice only occasional irregularities in the near-native's writing). I agree with Afluegel that xx-5 is more confusing than helpful, and should be abandoned. What is relevant in the context of Wikipedia is having a reference indicating at what level the user can contribute. For example, I find fr-3's description is worded well and covers many users, including many professional ones: Cet utilisateur peut contribuer avec un niveau avancé de français (this user can contribute at an advanced level of French). If professional users believe their knowledge to be so advanced as to be nearly that of a native, they can designate themselves xx-4, and give more detail if they want on their user pages. -Eric (talk) 15:50, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
In case you really want go up to xx-5 then the description on all levels should be improved, e.g., 1-basic, 2-advanced basic, 3-intermediate, 4-advanced, 5-professional (or near native). In this way the differences of the levels are clearly understandable. - By the way, in the German wikipedia "near native" is defined as follows: This user is able to speak in the language comparable to a native speaker. "I am able to write sophisticated stories and even books in the language." This is exactly what a "professional" speaker can do as well. -- Afluegel (talk) 16:40, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Both being a professional writer/translator and being a native imply nothing on one's language proficiency. I've seen poorly written Italian books, bad "professional" translators and many natives unable to spell correctly. This is why I think that xx-N and xx-5 give little information on the user's ability and should be removed.
Why can't we follow a simpler notation like: xx-1 Basic, xx-2 Intermediate, xx-3 Advanced, xx-4 Excellent? -- M4gnum0n (talk) 15:07, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
M4, if you change the word "imply" to "prove", you are certainly correct on your first point. As for the native user category, I think it can be helpful to know that a user is a native speaker, whatever his or her level of proficiency. Whether you are eloquent in your mother tongue or not, you can still recognize subtleties in your language that might elude most non-native speakers. That could be relevant to us--for example in a translating collaboration on WP--even if the user's spelling needs to be checked. -Eric (talk) 16:00, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
I've worked as an English tutor for native English speakers in college level courses and there's absolutely nothing special about being a native. Simply because you've used a language your whole life doesn't magically give you a good working grasp of the subtleties of that language, let alone an advanced understanding of those subtleties, unless one is either well read or well educated, either of which can be adequately represented by the different levels of proficiency. I think we should use the following levels of classification: [[1]] I've heard some people decry that list's mention of "survival needs" but I fell that survival needs in this context aren't necessarily related to communicating how to build a shelter in the forest or how to find water in the desert but rather are things such as asking how much something costs, asking how to find one's home again, etc. Those are the basic things that one needs to know in that language to "survive" in a daily life and are just as essential to translating your average Wikipedia page as they are to negotiating the hazards of a normal life. Banaticus (talk) 17:32, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi Banaticus- I like that sil.org proficiency scale--never seen it before. I agree it should be considered in any re-examination of the WP Babel user categories. If your above comment about magical grasp is in response to my preceding one about subtleties, that's why I used the word "can" instead of "will". -Eric (talk) 17:48, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
OK, time for me to wade in, methinks ;) (thanks, Eric, for directing me here BTW). Firstly, I agree that there is a lot of ambiguity with the "professional" and "professorial" levels and that this should be addressed. I like the look of Banaticus's table, and think that it should, indeed, be used on Wikipedia, although it might make more sense to have a scale going from 0-10 instead of using pluses and minuses! This, however, should only be used to indicate a user's skill level in a language, and the current "professional", "professorial" and "native" levels should be separated into their own categories.
What do I mean by this? Well, I think that, seeing as we seem to have reached a consensus that "professional" and "professorial" levels are really about someone's profession (namely, that of a translator for xx-5 and that of a university lecturer for xx-6), they should become separate, job-related userboxes, similar to "This user is an accountant" (see the full list here). As for the xx or xx-N template, I feel that there is also some ambiguity in that respect, namely whether it is supposed to only be used for one's mother tongue, or for any language that one is sufficiently proficient at. What would happen, for instance, if one had emigrated to another country and become better at a 'foreign' language than at their native language after a certain period of time? Even though Wikipedia:Babel/Levels does try and clear these sorts of issues up, it appears that few people have ever heard of it or visited it, and it still leaves some grey areas, in my opinion. Thus, as well as moving xx-5 and xx-6 to Wikipedia:Userboxes/Profession, we should create another separate category which is about which language is a user's first language, which language is a user's second language etc. and does not say anything about their proficiency in those languages. An alternative, and perhaps more practical solution, might be to introduce a second category to the current xx-y categories; that of the numerical position, as it were, of a given language for a given user. Thus, modifying the current template code to be something like...
{{user-en-1-3}}
... that might produce something like...
3rd
en-1		This user is able to contribute with a basic level of English.
...that.
Also, I feel that even the current xx-0 → xx-4 (or, in future, possibly the xx-0 → xx-10) levels could do with some qualification. If you will let me quote myself from another talk page, I would like to say that, despite some pages such as Wikipedia:Babel/Levels, I feel that something more concrete would help people decide which template to use. Namely, a series of if-you-can-read-this-you're-in pages (see this for an example of what I mean; more here) seems the most obvious option.
Those links seem to have been replaced by https://www.sis.gov.uk/careers/roles/language-specialists/test-your-skills.html now PJTraill (talk) 22:36, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
Similarly, a timeline-shaped diagram going from no knowledge of to fluency in a language would be helpful, with various milestones placed in-between. Therefore, people would be able to find the answer to questions such as "Where does my A at GCSE (French) and my B at A-Level put me?". It Is Me Here (talk) 11:00, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
These all sound like good ideas to me, especially classifying proficiency level separately from the way in which one acquired or uses a language. Thanks for presenting this, IIMH. As a side project, someday I'd like to devise a graph showing the curve of first rising, then falling fluency as a function of beer consumption (at least in my case). Cheers. -Eric talk 13:34, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
Good points. The emigrant case you mention is one that I have run into, and the current system doesn't have a clean solution. Separating skill level from profession and place of birth is clearly the right thing to do. Paul Koning (talk) 16:05, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Level 5 is ridiculous and should be removed. --LA2 (talk) 03:02, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Note: The external link to sil.org discussed above in this section is no longer working. However, as of the time I'm posting this, there's a copy in Google's cache. - dcljr (talk) 05:42, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Languages in Bable template

The Bable templates are used to describe proficiency of a user in a certian language. Such a wonderful idea to find out a user who can help you when you are stuck with some unknown language. But then why are these templates written only in those languages? Clearly one is unable to read that language and hence is looking for someone who does. Why cant we add a line in English as well in those templates? This is English Wikipedia after all. I refer to all the templates under the category Category:Language user templates. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 10:23, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

See my reply to a similar question at Category talk:Language user templates#Language for text in boxes. - dcljr (talk) 06:40, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Gendered forms

On Wiktionary, we've included gendered forms into the message, because in some languages it is rather strange for certain words to be used for the other gender. For example in French, "cet utilisateur" seems a bit strange for a woman I think as they use many gender-specific words there. Should this be included here? CodeCat (talk) 14:40, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Would say it's not really a problem (French tends to use masculine pronouns generically when the gender is mixed or unknown, so it should be OK analogically to use the masculine form here). Double sharp (talk) 03:49, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Userbox Set Formatting

Anyone know how to override the default formatting in the {{Babel|EN}} type construct? As you can see on my user page, it's listing a little to starboard (to the right) - I'd like to have it centered. If you drill down to the actual HTML, it's parsing as "float:right" and "margin-left:1em" - both of which I'd like to do away, on my user page - not on the box "set" as a whole. Jarod (talk) 02:58, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

By default, {{babel}} has the styling margin-left: 1em; - you can alter that with the |left= parameter, like this. --Redrose64 (talk) 08:40, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

French ?

I can't find French.24.89.95.149 (talk) 02:41, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

never mind i found it.24.89.95.149 (talk) 02:45, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Babel templates

Hi. What's the difference between the local babel template, and using something like {{#babel:en-N}}? Also, is there an option to enable or disable the header and/or border? Rehman 02:50, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

{{#Babel}} is the Babel extension, which was designed to be consistent across all of the WikiMedia projects - that is, {{#Babel:de-1|en-N|fr-2}} should work exactly the same at English Wikipedia, French Wikipedia, German Wikipedia, English Wiktionary, etc. - unfortunately, it's not completely consistent, compare commons:User:Redrose64 with meta:User:Redrose64. It was introduced in September 2011, and was supposed to replace all the locally-created {{Babel}} templates which exhibited considerable variation in syntax, appearance and effects. See m:Babel extension, several threads at Wikipedia talk:Babel/Archive 4 and (I think) the archives of WP:VPT. I don't think you can hide the header and footer - after all, that would go against the idea of consistency. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:08, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the detailed reply. Too bad that it doesn't allow basic customizations such as headers and borders, if it does, it would only make people want to use it more. Also, what about categories? Local babel puts the user in user-language categories, what about the extension? Rehman 16:05, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
The categories should be the same. However, {{#Babel:de-1|en-N|fr-2}} with three languages puts the page into six categories - Category:User de Category:User de-1 Category:User en Category:User en-N Category:User fr Category:User fr-2 - a general cat for the language and a cat for the specific level as well; this behaviour should match with categories used in other Wikipedia languages and Wikimedia projects. By contrast, {{Babel|de-1|en-N|fr-2}} with the same three languages omits the three general categories and emits only the three for the specific levels: Category:User de-1 Category:User en-N Category:User fr-2. Some language codes produce discrepancies from this pattern. The reasons for these discrepancies vary, but in some cases a category went through WP:CFD. For example, {{#babel:simple-3}} puts the page into Category:User simple and Category:User simple-3 as you might expect, whereas {{babel|simple-3}} puts the page into the general category Category:User simple and ignores the language level - notice that Category:User simple-3 that I just mentioned is redlinked, so it doesn't exist. A CfD from six years ago was used several times an excuse to WP:CSD#G4 each of these categories whenever they got recreated, most recently in September 2012, a whole year after the introduction of {{#Babel}}. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:21, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Capitalisation of categories

Please can editors familiar with the Babel comment at Template talk:Babel#Capitalisation_of_categories?

I have been trying to sort of the capitalisation of some categories, but have realised that the issues are a little more complex than first appeared. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 08:15, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Russian;Belarus - Cyrillic?

Archived from Wikipedia talk:Babel/List.

Perhaps Russia's international speech marking the Cyrillic? The brackets write Russia. It's the same with Belarus. --L.ukas lt 13 --Talk 15:40, 5 January 2016 (UTC)Lukaslt13

xx-0 template suite MfD notice

It looks like the entire suite of xx-0 babel templates (including ones like {{User es-0}}, {{User st-0}}) have been nominated for deletion on the grounds that the categories they were formerly used to populate were deleted long ago. Also affected are {{User cu-N}}, {{User fb-3}} and {{User fb-4}}. See Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Templates for deleted categories. —/Mendaliv/2¢/Δ's/ 13:46, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

There's also a separate discussion about Template:User en-0 at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Template:User en-0. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 18:52, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Suggesting an additional 'level': 'L' for Learners.

Dear fellow editors interested in userboxes,
I am in the process of learning (European) Portuguese, and created the following userbox to include on my user page:

pt-LThis user is Learning
European Portuguese.

Although the 'L' is obviously not one of the accepted ILR scale levels ('0' to '5'), the 'learner' symbol is used in many countries to identify people learning to drive. So, I thought it would be fun to apply it for the purpose of enabling Wikipedians to declare that they're currently learning a language; that is to say, Wikipedians with an ILR scale higher than '0' but lower than '1' in that language. After a while, the learner would feel s/he has attained a level higher than '0', and could therefore adopt one of the other, standard userboxes.

I am offering the idea here, for consideration. However, since it is highly improbable that this new level of proficiency would ever be adopted as part of Wikipedia's Babel project, I have not bothered to create a category for 'Wikipedians learning European Portuguese', which would be required otherwise. (And it is highly likely that such a category would be nominated immediately for speedy deletion, if I had).

In any case, if anyone wishes to re-use the above userbox and modify it for the language(s) they're learning, then please be my guest.

With kind regards;
Patrick. ツ Pdebee.(talk)(guestbook) 18:36, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

The babel system is intended to be the same for all Wikimedia projects - if a user has e.g. {{#babel:en-N|fr-1}} on their user page at English Wikipedia, they should be able to use exactly the same code on their user pages at all other Wikipedia languages, at the various languages for wiktionary, Wikisource etc., at Commons, Meta, Wikidata and anything else that I've omitted. This means that this is the wrong place to propose it. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:09, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
@Redrose64: Dear Redrose64,
Thank you for your helpful comment; I am honoured by your intervention, although somewhat contrite also at causing a micro-waste of your precious time. Seriously, though: I am sure I should learn more about the whole Foundation project, beyond en.Wikipedia, as I know very little about the whole edifice. I occasionally visit Commons or the fr.wiki, but that's about it. Basically, I just enjoy fixing typos, copy-editing and adding citations, here at the en.wiki. And having fun with userboxes, of course. I am therefore grateful to you for this pointer and, if I ever decide that this idea of 'L' should ever stand a chance, which I doubt, then I will try and find out at which talk page I should post the above proposal. In any case, it was good to communicate with you, as I've seen your username around, and thank you very much, once again, for intervening as you have, to point me in the right direction.
With kind regards;
Patrick. ツ Pdebee.(talk)(guestbook) 10:09, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
@Pdebee: The problem with that is that learning is a "process", whereas 0-5 represent a "capability" and you shouldn't mix them up. Even if you are a pt-3, you could still be "learning" to become a pt-4. From the Wiki perspective, it doesn't matter if you're a pt-1 because you learnt from your Portuguese grandmother and have now "unlearnt" 75% of what she taught you or because you're in the middle of taking night classes and learning new stuff every week. All that matters is what you can offer the encyclopedia right now. So I'd continue to restrict Babel boxes to 0-5, but maybe have a separate box for learning a language in the "hobby" userbox hierarchy, if you wanted one. JMO. Le Deluge (talk) 15:22, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
@Le Deluge: Dear Le Deluge,
Thank you for taking the time to comment so cogently. You are, of course, entirely correct in pointing out the difference between the 0-5 skill levels in their direct usefulness to our encyclopedia, with my idea of offering a userbox to Wikipedians who might simply wish to declare an interest in learning a given language for its own sake. Your suggestion to include such a learning userbox in the hobby userbox hierarchy is most excellent and I am thankful to you for making this suggestion, as it fits perfectly with the spirit of my original idea.
On the other hand, I can see a danger in overloading that hobby hierarchy with a very large number of userboxes (potentially: one for each language/dialect), unless I came up with a generic userbox to which the language being learned would be passed as a parameter.
I will think some more about this idea and, in the meantime, I want to thank you once again for taking the trouble of offering your most helpful suggestion, and for all your other contributions to our encyclopedia.
With kind regards;
Patrick. ツ Pdebee.(talk)(guestbook) 21:23, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
Yes. I had wondered about maybe an addition symbol to bolt on to the Babel boxes but on reflection I think it's best to keep their "purity" and have language learning as a hobby. Definitely the way to go would be to have a generic {{User lang learner}} where xx was a replaceable parameter - there's obviously code floating around the place to extract all sorts of information from language codes, so it makes sense to reuse it. You might want to ask over on Wikipedia:Requested templates. Le Deluge (talk) 23:05, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

User apa

I thought I'd flag this one up. You'd expect Category:User apa and friends to refer to the Apache language, per ISO 639-2. In fact it's a hierarchy for the Americanist Phonetic Alphabet. I've adjusted the text to reflect that it's now changed name to Americanist phonetic notation, but didn't know what the procedure was beyond that, other than assuming 639 names should be protected.Le Deluge (talk) 01:56, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Simplification of User xx-x template sources

Hello, I would like to propose the use of {{User language box}} in the User xx-x templates to simplify their code without changing their functionality and to facilitate their migration to other wikis. For example, the current {{User en-3}} template's code 

{{userbox-level
| level         = 3
| id            = [[English language|en]]
| info          = This user can contribute with an '''[[:Category:User en-3|advanced]]''' level of '''[[:Category:User en|English]]'''.
| usercategory  = User en-3
| nocat         = {{{nocat|}}}
}}

will simplify to 

{{User language box
| id    = en
| level = 3
| info  = This user can contribute with an {level:advanced} level of {lang:English}.
| nocat = {{{nocat|}}}
}}

Note that the manual specification of categories is no longer needed, which is a big advantage when porting to wikis with differently named categories. Petr Matas 12:05, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Other wikis shouldn't have differently named categories. The point about the babel system is that the code is the same everywhere, so if I put {{#babel:de-1|en-N|fr-1|simple-2}} on my user page, I should not need to alter that if copying to any of my other user pages, and the result will be exactly the same. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:09, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
You are right when speaking about the template titles and codes passed to {{babel}} and {{#babel}}, but it is up to the community of a given wiki to decide which categories are populated using the given template. For example, wikis with no two-letter code for their language tend to use three-letter codes in the category names (pms:Categorìa:User eng), some wikis translate the category name (lb:Kategorie:Benotzer en), and some translate even the language name (es:Categoría:Wikipedia:Wikipedistas con conocimientos de inglés) and level (es:Categoría:Wikipedia:Wikipedistas con nivel intermedio de inglés). My proposal makes the info parameter independent of these conditions. Petr Matas 21:25, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Patent Nonsense

(only works for babel nonsense 3) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Charizardmewtwo (talk • contribs) 16:58, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

It's transcluding {{User nonsense-3}}. What is the problem here? --Redrose64 (talk) 21:58, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Category redirects

Can someone who understands this system have a look at Category:User kmr & Category:User lrc and see if they can work out how to clear these category redirects? They've been hanging around for months and it would be good to finally clear them. Timrollpickering (talk) 08:58, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

If you use {{#Babel:kmr-2|lrc-2}}, as Hamid Hassani (talk · contribs) has essentially done, the page will be placed in four categories: Category:User kmr Category:User kmr-2 Category:User lrc Category:User lrc-2. These four occur because the global babel system expects to use a particular category setup, which has not been respected locally. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:42, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
@Redrose64: A couple of days ago, Tomrollpickering left a message on my talk page on the subject. I will revise these babel categories redirects on my user page at least, as soon as possible. Hamid Hassani (talk) 20:37, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

This one was solved by converting the redirects into base categories as the global system seems to expect. However other redirected categories do show up from time to time in Category:Wikipedia non-empty soft redirected categories - can I ask for some experts from here to regularly check that category and sort out anything that gets stuck in the redirect system? Timrollpickering (talk) 22:21, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

en-4 compared to de-4

Maybe this has been discussed elsewhere, but there is a small but significant anomaly between the en-4 and de-4 descriptions:

en-4 = This user can contribute with a near-native level of English. de-4 = Dieser Benutzer hat Deutschkenntnisse auf muttersprachlichem Niveau.

The difference is therefore between "near-native" and "native". My mother tongue is English, I also have a near-native level of German, but the German description lacks this important distinction. The nuance could be added by translating the sentence thus: Dieser Benutzer hat Deutschkenntnisse auf fast muttersprachlichem Niveau.

Any thoughts? I know it's of minor importance to the majority, but it seems that there is a discrepancy here.

Mowerbyte (talk) 13:57, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Try {{#babel:en-4|en-N|de-4|de-N}} and compare the results:
I don't know enough German to decide if it's correct or not; but I'm certain that level 4 is not intended to be unqualified "native", that is why we provide level N. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 15:06, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
Well, en-N and de-N are crystal clear: both describe native speakers, no ifs, no buts, no confusion whatsoever!
However, as I already pointed out, there is a clear discrepancy between en-4 and de-4.
The former (en-4) uses the word "near" (meaning almost, close to); whereas de-4 is essentially the same as de-N inasmuch as it states that the user speaks at the level of a native speaker - there is no qualifying "near", "almost", "close to". The English translation for de-4 would be This user speaks German at the level of a native speaker; the translation for de-N would be This user is a native speaker of German. To summarise: if level 4 is not intended to be unqualified "native", then the German translation (de-4) is not accurate as it states that the speaker has a native speaker's command of the language, rather than a near native speaker. There is, perhaps, a hint in the German that the user was not originally "born into" the language; but my feeling is that this should be made clearer.
Basically I am asking whether there would be sufficient consensus to modify de-4 to include a qualifying word such as "near" (in German) to correspond to the English version in en-4 (I've made a specific suggestion above).
It's a subtle, but to my mind important distinction. It would be interesting to hear some thoughts from German (native) speakers... Mowerbyte (talk) 20:47, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
I've just looked at the equivalent page on German Wikipedia de:Wikipedia:Babel where there is a different example given for de-4 In German: Diese Person beherrscht Deutsch auf annähernd muttersprachlichem Niveau. meaning "This person has a near-native command of German" - the word annähernd (near) is what I was missing. However, if I add de-4 this small but essential qualifier that differentiates de-4 from de-N is absent'. Confusing.Mowerbyte (talk) 23:09, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
That page uses the template {{babel|de-4}}, not the parser function {{#babel:de-4}}. They have different effects:
The only significant difference is the presence or absence of "annähernd". It is important to compare like with like. So a comparison of {{babel|de-4}} used on English Wikipedia with the same syntax used on German Wikipedia is valid, as is a comparison of {{#babel:de-4}} used on English Wikipedia with the same syntax used on German Wikipedia; but a comparison of {{#babel:de-4}} used on English Wikipedia with {{babel|de-4}} used on German Wikipedia is not valid. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 07:49, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

That's a very comprehensive explanation of the difference between templates and parsers, thank you for that User:Redrose64. I'm not at all clear where is the best forum to pursue this query, but as it's essentially an issue in German, I suspect the Babel page on German Wikipedia would be more appropriate? Mowerbyte (talk) 22:35, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Native German speaker: I recommend to address the Babel page in German, because it's the German wording that is inconsistent. Why "beherrscht" (masters) here, but "speaks" (speaks) there? - while an equivalent to "contributes" would be nice: written language rather than spoken. Why "annähernd" instead of a simple "fast"? Just an example. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:47, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Good call, Gerda - thanks for your suggestion, I'll follow up there (when I have a moment!). It does seem to be the German side that needs attention. Mowerbyte (talk) 17:43, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

Old Norse

Is there a way I could make one for Old Norse, or do I have to request it made?Schwiiz (talk) 02:54, 9 July 2017 (UTC) {{#babel:non-0|non-1|non-2|non-3|non-4|non-5|non}}

@Schwiiz: Yes, there is: note that you should use the parser function method, because the old {{babel}} template doesn't provide all of the levels. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 07:11, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
@Redrose64: Thank you, I'll keep that in mind for future reference as my Norse gets better. Schwiiz (talk) 21:17, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Userbox for the Gaddang language (ISO-639-3: gad)

As the title states, I wish to make a userbox for speakers of the Gaddang language, such as myself. My problem with using the ISO-639-3 code is, Template:User gad is for Generalized Anxiety Disorder. Of course there are considerably more people with GAD than there are people who speak Gaddang, but I still want to make a template for it. For the time being, I have it in a sandboxed page under my userspace using User gaddang as a category, so as not to overlap with the user category for GAD.

What alternatives do I have for the language codes I can use for the template? Should I create the template as Template:User gaddang or just confine it to my userspace for now? Thank you very much! --a u t a c o i d (stalk) 13:32, 18 August 2017 (UTC) {{#babel:gad-0|gad-1|gad-2|gad-3|gad-4|gad-5|gad}}

@Autacoid: You don't need to set anything up, it's already been done. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 05:53, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
@Redrose64: Thank you very much! How do I edit the templates so that the text is in the language, though? I also need to fix the redlink, since there is an article about the language on en Wikipedia. --a u t a c o i d (stalk) 12:41, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
EDIT: Apparently using the parser means the userbox no longer has a link to the language in question from the ISO code. I still have no idea how to edit the text, though. --a u t a c o i d (stalk) 12:48, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
The {{#babel:}} system is supposed to be the same on all Wikipedias, Wiktionaries, Wikiquotes etc. (full list). Hence changes need to be centrally agreed, so a ticket at phab: is required. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:54, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

Red Categories

Would you mind taking the red categories User non-5User non-NUser gadUser gad-1User gad-2User gad-3User gad-4User gad-5User gad-N off this page? Or alternatively, can you create the categories? Rathfelder (talk) 22:34, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

@Rathfelder: it was a demo in the two threads immediately above. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:56, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

Do I qualify for en-5?

Hi! I have a question as to whether or not I would qualify for en-5. Here it is:

While I think that I qualify for almost all of the en-5 requirements, I do not work in a field that requires me to be especially proficient in speaking English. I am part of the Wikipedia Guild of Copy Editors, and I regularly try to improve prose in Wikipedia articles; however, this is not officially my job, and I don't get paid for it. So the question is: Do I count as en-5, due to being good enough at speaking it and willing enough to assist in helping others with it; or do I not count as en-5, because I don't work in a field where I need to be that good at English?

If anyone can help me figure out the answer to this question, I would greatly appreciate that!

Thanks!

Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 08:09, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

@Noah Kastin: Why do you ask, is someone questioning your proficiency? Your contributions exceed level 4.   — Jeff G. ツ 14:28, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
I believe the greater point is: Babel relies entirely on self-quantification! If you feel you speak en-5, then you do! If you are unsure you master en-5, then you should probably present yourself as en-4. There's no judges coming to your page to correct your grade :-) At worst, if you get entangled in a discussion where language deficiency becomes an issue (such as this very sentence, written in an obtuse way on purpose!), you might want to consider changing en-5 into en-4, if you think that helps visitors to your page gauge your ability more accurately. Cheers CapnZapp (talk) 15:47, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
To my knowledge, in the last three or four years, there have been two cases of users who had used one of the top-level templates ({{user en-N}}, or {{user en-5}}, don't recall which) on their user page, although their writing - both in article content and in discussion pages - was so poor that we questioned them about their true understanding of written English. One of them persistently failed to appreciate the significance of the word "not" in phrases such as "please do not make changes like these". Both users were eventually blocked for a combination of reasons that included WP:CIR. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 17:46, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
@Jeff G., CapnZapp, and Redrose64: Thanks for all the advice! With that in mind, I think I'll add Template:User en-5 to my user page, since I feel fairly confident that I qualify as en-5 now. Thanks again, everyone! Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 01:14, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

I believe the specific issue is resolved, but for posterity: I personally think it's worth clarifying User:Redrose64s response - what, if any, Babel boxes you put on your talk page does not have any influence at all over any possible warnings or bannings you might get over "incompetent" edits. Again, the bigger picture is that Babel is an entirely informal service to readers of your talk page. Nobody will hold you accountable for misrepresenting your language ability. At worst, you will be asked to lower your indicated proficiency, if even that. The original question suggests it is possible to interpret the Babel project as something formally binding (akin to how you are supposed to indicate competencies truthfully when applying for a job); perhaps we should sharpen the way we present the project to make its purpose (even more) clear? Cheers CapnZapp (talk) 10:56, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

Comment: As others here have said, these "ratings" are decided by each user individually. Ideally you want it to be useful to others who may want to contact you, but it's up to you. However, this discussion made me realize that over the years something changed in the ratings and xx-5 was mistakenly sorted "below" xx-N. Having been around this page for many years and helping draft it, the whole point of xx-5 (it was created later than all the other ratings) was that it was "more than just native", i.e. professional. I have corrected the order in some places to reflect this. IMO this is one of the most practically useful distinctions in Babel ratings on Wikipedia, because it lets one talk to a smaller group of people if they have language usage questions. —Ynhockey (Talk) 07:50, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

I resorted the expanded levels explanations accordingly. Cheers CapnZapp (talk) 14:53, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Standard provençal

So, if I understand well, here is the place to get a language added to the global Babel system? So, would it be possible to add the literary provençal language (code prv), whose templates you can find here? Thanks in advance. -- Яданапя (talk) 15:11, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

@Яданапя: No, the global Babel system is not controlled from here. You would need to submit a request at phab: asking for it to be added to https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/diffusion/EBAB/browse/master/codes.txt They might refuse, because prv is not a recognised ISO 639 language code. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:13, 10 March 2018 (UTC)
@Redrose64: Actually, it is. It was redacted in 2007, because the occitan hegemonistic propaganda is strong but, hey, I’ll try whatsoever. Thanks for your help. -- Яданапя (talk) 15:26, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Programming?

What are the programming languages supported by this? Thanks, qwerty6811 :-) Chat Ping me 16:42, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Any language. If you don't find it, feel free to create the template(s) yourself. The current programming languages templates that exist are here: Category:Computer language user templates. —Ynhockey (Talk) 08:08, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
@Qwerty6811: None. The babel system is for spoken/written languages of communication (English, French, German etc.). You may be thinking of userboxes, which are different. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 17:22, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Request: a way to say "i know this language" but WITHOUT implied invitation to discuss in that language

Hi,

I found Babel intriguing and so added a template to my own user page per instructions.

But I don't want to have discussions on this English-language wikipedia in any other language than English!

My impression is that by listing other languages, there's an implicit invitation to actually carry discussions in those languages. I don't want that.

Is there (or can you add a request to create) a way to indicate fluency without this implied invitation?

To be clear, something like:

"This user can contribute with an intermediate level of Esperanto but please don't take that as an invitation to start discussions in that language! Please start any discussions in English here on English-language Wikipedia."

CapnZapp (talk) 18:35, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

Crosstalk: c:commons talk:Babel#separate proficiency from preference CapnZapp (talk) 11:52, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
@CapnZapp: My reply there applies here too.   — Jeff G. ツ 14:39, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
Any other "coders" around, or is Jeff G "the man" to fix Babel issues? Cheers, CapnZapp (talk) 10:46, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
Hello, I noticed this had been posted not too long ago, so I thought I would chime in. It is quite possible to customise the infobox, if you are willing to skip babel. This is simply a modification of "info" parameter of Template:Userbox-level . As an example of such a modification, I have done it to the code posted to Template:User sv on the right:
svDen här användaren talar svenska som modersmål. Men snälla ta inte det som en inbjudan att starta diskussioner på det språket! Please start any discussions in English here on English-language Wikipedia."
So you can copy the Template:Userbox-level code and paste it to your talk page as it is. I think that is the simplest way to get the desired effect, if you are still interested in doing so. Unfortunately it will not fit into the babel format directly, and may look silly (when making the standardised language template series from the original Template:userbox, was not designed for so much text).
However, it is a way to indicate your knowledge of the language, while adding a condition ontop of the indication of skill. (I have opted not to ping for this and will deliver a link to their talk page myself, as the discussion is somewhat dated) -Techhead7890 (talk) 03:26, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Category redirects

For quite some time now Category:Wikipedia non-empty soft redirected categories has contained a number of category redirects populated by the Babel template. Nobody seems to know how to fix them. Is anyone able to sort out the following:

Timrollpickering 16:49, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

They're populated because people are using those language codes and levels, explicitly or implicitly (in {{#babel:}}, if no level is given, -N is assumed). Also in {{#babel:}}, if a level (0 to 5 plus N) is given, it populates the categories for that level and for the language overall. See for example User:Cosmopolitanist which has {{#babel:en-N|en-gb|en-ca|ang-4|sco-N|la-N|grc-N}} - in this instance the |en-gb populates both Category:User en-GB and Category:User en-GB-N; similarly |en-ca populates both Category:User en-CA and Category:User en-CA-N; |ang-4 populates both Category:User ang and Category:User ang-4. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:08, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
So what codes should they be changed to to fix this? Timrollpickering 14:58, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
Instead of this Use this
|en-CA |en
|en-CA-N |en-N
|en-GB |en
|en-GB-N |en-N
|pt-BR |pt
|zh-Hans |zh
As regards Category:User simple-2 and Category:User simple-N, I think these may have been redirected because of a misundestanding of how the babel system is intended to work. These categories have been created and deleted several times each, most of the deletions were on the grounds of WP:CSD#G4 with the implication that Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/User/Archive/February 2008#Category:User simple and all subcategories was a permanent conclusive decision. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:27, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
So recreate them or adjust the entries again? Timrollpickering 13:08, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

I've listed them at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2018 December 13#Category:User simple-N to try to sort out the problem. Timrollpickering (Talk) 14:35, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Thank you --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 10:29, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
The DRV was closed by RoySmith (talk · contribs) with the verdict Allow re-creation. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 10:09, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

YIKES! No, you don’t want to completely remove the dialect identifier from the Babel Code. It’s just a matter of switching it from uppercase to lower case (which can be accomplished via the templateMediaWiki extensión or template itself). Yes, sometimes it’s possible to still communicate effectively between dialects. However, it’s also very possible for 2 people using different dialects to be completely incomprehensible to each other. There’s a huge difference between being fluent in American English, British English, and Australian English...or regional Spanish (Mexico vs Spain), regional Portuguese (Portugal vs Brazil), etc. And seriously, don’t even think about stating that Gaelic speakers are comprehensible to all of their dialects. If you must make changes, I suggest:

Instead of this Use this
|en-CA |en-ca
|en-CA-N |en-ca-N
|en-GB |en-gb
|en-GB-N |en-gb-N
|pt-BR |pt-br
|zh-Hans |zh-hans

Vandraedha (talk|contribs) 18:22, 2 June 2019 (UTC) (edited for accuracy) Vandraedha (talk|contribs) 18:51, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

The upper/lower case switch trick doesn't work - see how Category:User en-CA and Category:User en-GB are getting populated again - and before the switches above were made just about every alteration was experimented with to try to fix the problems. Bringing them back is not an answer. Timrollpickering (Talk) 19:58, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
As I have explained before, the allowed language codes and the categories that they populate are set by the Babel extension of the MediaWiki software. These codes are designed to be exactly the same across several hundred Wikimedia projects - 287 Wikipedias, 172 Wiktionaries, and so on. We cannot make local changes with the intention of overriding the system defaults, that would defeat the object of having a common system. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:48, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

Equivalence between Common European Framework of Reference for Languages and Babel

Hi, I would like to know whether it is possible some sort of equivalence between Common European Framework of Reference and Babel. This is my opinion:

CEFoR Babel
A1 (breakthrough or beginner) xx-0 (does not understand/understands it with great difficulty)
A2 (waystage or elementary) xx-1 (basic)
B1 (threshold or intermediate) xx-2 (intermediate)
B2 (vantage or upper intermediate) xx-3 (advanced)
C1 (effective operational proficiency or advanced) xx-4 (near-native)
C2 (mastery or proficiency) xx-5 (professional)

What do you think about?--Carnby (talk) 14:43, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

CEFoR Babel
<A1 xx-0 (does not understand/understands it with great difficulty)
A1 (breakthrough or beginner) xx-0.5 (learning at a basic level)
A2 (waystage or elementary) xx-1 (basic)
B1 (threshold or intermediate) xx-2 (intermediate)
B2 (vantage or upper intermediate) xx-2.5 (upper intermediate)
C1 (effective operational proficiency or advanced) xx-3 (advanced)
C2 (mastery or proficiency) xx-4 (near-native)
>C2 xx-5 (professional)
A user with C2-level means his language ability is close to a native speaker (i.e. xx-4). And in my opinion, xx-N is corresponded to xx-4.5 or C2+, while xx-5 is beyond the index of CEFR.--Esiogh (talk) 08:43, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
The babel system is not that finely-grained. Moreover, the same system is used for all Wikimedia projects - that is, Wikipedia in various languages, also Wiktionary, Wikiquote, Wikisource ditto, plus commons, meta and a whole bunch of others. Since several hundred projects use the same system, we must not vary the system locally. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 11:00, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
Redrose64: I don't think the intention was to change the Babel system, neither locally nor globally, but to assist users more familiar with CEFR to find a proper Babel level. As such I think Esiogh has it fairly well calibrated. It also hints that the match is not perfect, allowing room for personal interpretation.
Nevertheless, I believe the common system is in Commons Extension:Babel. Commons also links to ILR scale which has another translation from CEFR, so referring to that should be enough Carnby. JAGulin (talk) 10:22, 27 June 2019 (UTC)
@Jagulin: Your link Extension:Babel is to a deleted page. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:12, 27 June 2019 (UTC)
Thanks. Fixed it. JAGulin (talk) 18:32, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

Suggestion for a new system for Babel

This is a suggestion for a change to the system for Babel. The following tables have been based on the Spanish and French Wikipedias' article evaluation tables (as seen here and here), and somewhat inspired by WP:ASSESSMENT. One of the below options shall be effective if it is approved:

Suggested new level system for Babel (option 1)
Level Understanding needed of given language for level Learning suggestions for this level
7 Professional and outstanding No further learning of new skills needed unless necessary; practice is often acceptable
6 Essentially complete Grammar may need further learning
5 Approaching (but not equaling) a professional understanding Some further learning of grammar, as well as spelling and punctuation practice, is often helpful
4 Mostly complete and without spelling errors A few aspects of punctuation and grammar need further learning; spelling practice is also acceptable
3 Substantially complete but still with few spelling errors made Considerable further learning needed to prevent spelling errors
2 Developing, but still quite incomplete Spelling and punctuation learning should come first, followed by grammar learning
1 Very basic understanding of language Any additional learning is helpful
Suggested new level system for Babel (option 2)
Level Understanding needed of given language for level Learning suggestions for this level
A+
Outstanding/native understanding 		Language learned in its entirety; free of spelling, grammar or typographical errors Practice language in time intervals; new words should be learnt in case of their appearance
A
Excellent understanding 		Sufficient and necessary knowledge for translating other-language articles into English without obvious errors (if the set ISO 639-1 code is any other than 'en'); neutral and encyclopedic editing of English articles Correct the points that can be improved and then raise level of understanding to A+
B
Good understanding 		Advanced understanding of the language and text in it well-written; very good spelling and grammar Check and proofread any errors in the given language and then raise level of understanding to A
C
Satisfying understanding 		Important skills understood and learnt; no obvious language errors Clarify and enrich spelling; complete grammatical learning and check typography
D
Sufficient understanding 		Main understanding present, but several skills fragmented or absent; grammar, typography and spelling correct but perfectible Develop, improve and correct any skills
F
Unsatisfactory understanding 		New language for the user, but not enough of an understanding of it Develop useful skills

--69.160.29.109 (talk) 12:33, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

You're suggesting this in the wrong place. As I mentioned in my reply of 20:48, 2 June 2019 (UTC) in the section immediately before this one, the Babel system is shared by several hundred Wikimedia projects, of which the English Wikipedia is just one component. If you want to change the way things work across the board, please make your suggestions at meta:, not here. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:41, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Language without its own Wikipedia version

I have a basic level of a language which is not on this list (Bribri). How can I add it to my Babel template? Haakon K (talk) 22:21, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Like this: {{#babel:bzd-1}} or if you already have some language codes in there, such as English and French, you can use e.g. {{#babel:en-N|fr-3|bzd-1}} --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:54, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Clean up of Template:User language subcategory and introducing Template:Category User iso-n

To those few people who look at user language subcategories, a headsup that I've got rid of that awful WP:REDNOT non-compliant list of sibling categories on {{User language subcategory}} and made it look more like {{navseasoncats}}. It's not perfect, but it's better. I've also created {{Category User iso-n}} which aims to be a "one-stop-shop" for those categories, filling in the parameters of {{User language subcategory}} automagically based on the name of the category. It checks that it's in category space, that the name is of the form User xxx-n and that xxx is a valid ISO639 code, but I'm sure there's cases I've not thought of so feedback welcome. You can see it in action at eg Category:User awa-1 Le Deluge (talk) 18:07, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

Western Apache

I am studying my ancestors language and have a basic understanding of Ndee biyátiʼ or Western Apache (apw) can someone create a user box for this language? I would like to add some important terms from my dictionary to Wiktionary.2600:1700:9758:7D90:404E:FB70:D8A6:5477 (talk) 06:18, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Levels

Can somebody say what years of the English curriculum each level roughly equates to? Crystalpalace6810 (talk) 16:10, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

It's not defined that way. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:24, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Babel/Archive_4&oldid=1169752810"