Ciao Jcwf! Pensavo di già averti dato il benvenuto, ma mi sa che l'altra volta ho scritto sul wiktionary olandese ... quindi: benvenuto sul wiktionary italiano. Ciao! --Sabine 19:35, Lug 14, 2005 (UTC)

Grazie Sabine. Capisco molto ma non posso scrivere italiano. Ciao Jcwf 13:50, Lug 18, 2005 (UTC)


Ciao Jcwf, aggiustavo la traduzione inglese di inserire, può vuol dire enter ma soltanto nei casi tipo "enter in a log" o "enter into a game". E. abu Filumena 18:02, Lug 20, 2005 (UTC)


Dear Jcwf, thank you for the template. For transfer lemmas, ask at the espert, Filnik--WiktioΓΘЯΘΓĨ+1000edit! 15:32, 7 ago 2007 (CEST)

In Italian colors are all nouns, but if you think example: The car is red, then become adjectives. Practical example:
  • Red = noun
  • Noun + red = adjective

--Wim b contattami 19:29, 22 mar 2008 (CET)

Colori RalModifica

Hi! RAL colors are all Nouns but can be used as adjective, like all colours ;) feel free to put noun and adj if you want ;) Arlas !!! 21:33, 27 mar 2008 (CET)

Colori RALModifica

Prego :) The template seems good (and you can put in your page {{it-1}}, your Italian is not so bad ^^ GoodBye,
--Ilaria (disc.) 13:32, 26 mag 2008 (CEST)

nl templateModifica

Hi, based on [1] i've made the template nlclasse, you can use it to put the class of the verb, ex: nlclasse|deb -> Debole; nlclasse|for2 -> Forte 2a classe/A; nlclasse|for5b -> Forte 5a classe/B; instead of nlforte2. ;) Arlas !!! 10:51, 27 mag 2008 (CEST)

Voci di araldicaModifica

Grazie per il controllo che stai facendo sulle voci olandesi di araldica. Ciao --Massimop (disc.) 22:42, 13 mar 2011 (CET)


Ho visto che hai corretto besant in bezant: devo correggere anche zilveren besant ? Ciao --Massimop (disc.) 19:57, 26 apr 2011 (CEST)

Si, pienso Jcwf (disc.) 21:04, 26 apr 2011 (CEST)


dovresti sostituire queste due righe:

  1. (culinaria) testa di maiale o di cinghiale
  2. (araldica) testa di maiale o di cinghiale

Dalle immagini credo che il termine si riferisca sia al maiale che al cinghiale. Ciao --Massimop (disc.) 21:55, 8 mag 2011 (CEST)

aanstotend / aanstotendeModifica

Se la differenza è che aanstotend è il singolare (riferito a una sola voce) e aanstotende è il plurale (riferito a più di una voce) allora lo sbaglio lo ho fatto io che ho male interpretato il sito del traduttore di Heraldica. In questo caso, credo, sarebbe sufficiente eliminare aanstotende come voce araldica, lasciandolo solo come forma flessa del primo. --Massimop (disc.) 22:37, 12 giu 2019 (CEST)

Ciao, so che è un template di 11 anni fa, ma potresti lo stesso scrivere il manuale? --Wim b 19:53, 16 giu 2019 (CEST)

[@ Wim b] Ciao. I can understand what you write, but my Italian is otherwise basically nonexistent. Scusi... I certainly cannot write a manual in it, sorry. If you want me to explain the template I can do that.
All the forms of Dutch verbs -except a handful irregular ones- can be derived from three basic primitive forms. Usually the infinitive, the singular past tense and the participle of the perfect (or: past, but that is less accurate) are given. A full verb has a lot of forms although much of it is compound forms with auxiliaries. You can fight endlessly about what to include in a template and on nl.wikt we decided to do a bare minimum on the main page and the full set on a separate page. see e.g. this for a rather big one If you want I can rewrite/import the template for the complete set.

The Nl-conj template basically has four parameters:

  1. the infinitive
  2. the singular past tense
  3. the participle
  4. a parameter to enter the morphological class (possibly to generate a category) I was thinking of values d,t,cht,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,mix,irr
Dutch verbs can be divided in two main groups by morphology: weak and strong, plus some irregulars
There are 3 groups of weak verbs: forms that take -de in the past, that take -te and a small group that takes -cht and shows some vowel changes
There are 7 classes of strong verbs that all form the past by various vowel changes.
Class 3 has a subgroup that is a kind of hybrid between 3 and 7. Sometimes indicated as 3b
There is a mixed group with weak past but strong participle
There is a group of irregular verbs
There are incomplete verbs

There is more to be said about Dutch verbs. Morphologically they can also be

  1. basic
  2. inseperable
  3. separable

And syntactically they can be

  1. impersonal
  2. transitive
  3. ditransitive
  4. intransitive, but there are clearly two different groups that take different auxiliaries:
    1. inergative
    2. ergative
  5. reflexive
  6. reciprocal, although there are no verbs that are reciprocal-only
  7. absolute

The same verb can be used in more than one way, so we usually add a tag to each definition.

Jcwf (disc.) 22:28, 26 giu 2019 (CEST)

Hi, if that template is meant to display the basic forms of the verb, while the "extendend" conjugation is to be placed elsewhere (in an annex, I assume), maybe it would be better to make it similar to {{En-verb}} or {{Es-verb}}, which display the main inflected forms not in a table, but plainly after the {{Pn}}. See i.e. glorify, Appendice:Coniugazioni/Inglese/glorify or brillar, Appendice:Coniugazioni/Spagnolo/brillar... what do you think of a solution like that? --Barbaking (disc.) 13:22, 27 giu 2019 (CEST)
[@ Wim b], [@ Barbaking]. Since you have decided to code things up in Lua-gobbledigook like Modulo:Es-verb, I categorically refuse any collaboration and will limit myself to adjectives. If that does not suit you, I will be happy to leave this site altogether. You cannot demand from an 68 year old to jump through hoops that you have decided to make impossible for me to jump through. Jcwf (disc.) 02:01, 28 giu 2019 (CEST)
uh, sorry but I was not speaking about code, just about the appearance of the template's output. I didn't mean to force anyone to do anything (much less coding Lua), what I was trying to say is that instead of having a table for the inflected forms, as it is now in spreken, I would personally appreciate an outlook like
spreken classe 4 (infinito spreken, passato sprak, paricipio gesproken)
which is in the same style of that adopted for english and spanish verbs, which could be considered a sort of standard. This can be done without Lua (Template:En-verb does basically the same thing and works with standard wikicode), but if and only if you, and the others, agree; I am not going to work on Dutch words anytime soon, so I'm more than happy to leave the whole matter to you :) --Barbaking (disc.) 09:35, 28 giu 2019 (CEST)