Talk:Wp/enm/Mayne Page

1
Moved from "Talk:Wp/enm/" --Kaganer 18:16, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

very cool. But how do we know what time period the text should be from and geographical location?


 * What do you qualify as "Middle English"? The Middle English of "Sir Gawain and the Green Knight" was contemporary with Chaucer's middle English, except they look nothing the same (Sir Gawain is written in a much more conservative, northern dialect). Perhaps you should say something like "All English used by Chaucer and Monmoth (sp?) is acceptable ME". Also, maybe, you should outline certain sound changes, spelling rules etc for people who want to contribute to this test wiki. All the best, Bryan BryanAJParry


 * I think it shouldn't matter what dialect you write in. On the Modern English Wikipedia, people post in British as well as American English so if you are reading an article, it might switch between American and British English. So in the Middle English Wikipedia, there could be different dialects, however different, even in the same article. -- Wikitiki89 23:55, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Hallo. It is trewe, as Briane haþ seyde, when ðæt man sholde scryven as in ðis cas in middel anglise, þat suiche a nam is brodre than man wolde ðinken, for it refereð to a period of foure hundred yaren, in which many different scrives manneren. Peradventure 'twere bettre þæt we formed some sort of concordat on ðis, but I fere þæt ðis coulde forfenden and demarken forcome contributiouns. IINAG

Hi. I started this wiki, but I've been a bit behind in keeping up with it. I'd say early middle English, using þ and yogh, with the full verb declension (ich stande, þou standest, he standeþ, we/ye/þey standeþ). We should probably decide on acceptable variations on OE for the wiki. --JamesR1701E 08:00, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

I think that multiple varieties should be accepted, as that is part of the rich heritage of ME. However, perhaps each article should include a note of which variety it is in, and various standards for each variety could be adopted? I think this is a good idea, but I'm unsure how it will pan out. I would contribute, but I fear I do not adequately know how to write Middle English (as opposed to reading it). Jade Knight 00:30, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Let's just use the most well known variation of Middle English (I believe it's Chaucer's English?). It doesn't make sense to use multiple variations as articles shall be edited by many different persons.

Having dealt with the Old English wiki, it seems that having a standard dialect for articles would be a great idea. The Chancery Standard would probably be the most appropriate, but let's face it, that would be boring. AlmightyTim 21:04, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Excellent idea creating a Middle English language wikipedia. I am very interested in the language and also like the Anglo Saxon wikipedia. I would like to see this expanded further. --Ted-m 14:23, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Excellent idea. I'll certainly contribute to this. --Gray Porpoise 19:23, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Shan't Wikipaedia pages beeþ in a Wikipaedia namespace? --Gray Porpoise 14:55, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

No, thae donot have to arte there (excuseth me, ich haven not thy owlder version of ye "th"). Ich thinke, that owlso a Middle Engerlish Wikisourca wuld be more attractive, as it arteth lichter, to finde middle engerlish scriptaes than fionding ye correct wurds fore scribing newe. And, it is wirkily a probleme withe ye Middle Engerlish, becors, for exampul, my middle engerlish goes thru a mixty of gaidhlg and cumrae. And I musseth scribe that there, as thee certainerly can see, were more dialecterly spoken or scribben ME's than wirkily a standard ME. And thenne, it wuld be useful, owlso in the Angle-Saxn Wikipaedia, to placeer a transerlation into Moderne Engerlish beneeth ye Article. Hoping that at leest a fiuw of my ideas wille be userd, --195.14.223.201 09:48, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Hwie spriekt noch Old-Engelsh!? --195.14.223.201

It's really easier said than done to create a standard. It would certainly be simple to fix those pages already created, but since spelling wasn't quite standardized even at that time (the Pearl-poet would use different spellings within one work), one could be writing in what is technically a mixture of different dialects and not know it, and it would be difficult to clean up. I don't like the Chancery Standard, not because of difficulty, because it is probably the easiest dialect used and was standardized, but because it's from a very late period within Middle English usage and, as mentioned earlier, is boring. I would not be against using it. I just think that an earlier version would probably be more truly Middle English. --Qmwne235 22:34, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I second JamesR1701E's statement. Also, I believe based on the example of the (Modern) English Wikipedia that consistency within an article (Commonwealth vs. American English) is much more important than consistency over the entire Wikipedia, and that dialects should be accepted as long as they are very similar to the set standard, whatever that is. --Qmwne235 22:39, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Wow, you know there's something wrong when you've replied to yourself twice. Anyway, I retract my previous comment. We probably shouldn't use early Middle English. A handful of editors have already set a precedent that I believe would be more convenient to follow, even though it's really a mix of words from various points in the evolution of the language.


 * P.S. Most of us speak Modern English, and since this isn't an article it isn't necessary to write in Middle English here. --Qmwne235 00:37, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Okay, honestly, I'd like to see this move forward and become a wiki. The dialect, although important, probably not that important in the long run. I propose that instead of worrying about dialect, we let people do whatever dialect, and we create a dictionary that has the varied forms. Also if a particular part is brought into question, then the author presents a defense of it. I don't care what dialect of Middle English, so long as it's Middle English. (We could also have varied dialect pages, such as a Kentish or Midlands dialect variation of a page). Otherwise I say we got to get ahead with this. I want to help as much as I can.--Blackkdark 21:44, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Certaynly it is hard to playse every man, by-cause of dyversite and chaunge of langage. - 76.69.250.213 15:24, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

2
Heh, the paragraph under "Purpose" is actually modern English with all the ths replaced by þ. The rest of the page looks more legitimately Middle though. – Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs) 19:03, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

except how can you control that? I'm not sure. --69.244.123.182 06:58, 10 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, we'd need to figure outhow to say words such as "appreciate" in Middle English. I'll work on finding synonyms that would work. --Qmwne235 22:07, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Ok, I did the best I could, feel free to rip it to shreds. I know my use of "ialloued" is questionable, but it has the connotation of appreciated, and I couldn't find an exact synonym. --Qmwne235 00:39, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Ars-Metrike
Will this be included as an article? if so, will it be modern knowledge written in Middle English? or the knowledge of the time? Kittybriton (Kittybriton's home page--64.9.120.91 03:10, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Þe lore shalt beeþ of newe tyme. Looken at þe Latin Wikipaedia, which haþ a page on a wepne of þe grot! --Gray Porpoise 01:12, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree. I included a little bit on the armour article about modern armour, and we shouldn't have to act Middle English to speak it. --Qmwne235 00:46, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Special:Allpages
Special:Allpages

þat costeþ noght
"þat costeþ noght" - I don't know Middle English, but since I know German I guess this means "that costs nothing"? You know, Wikipedia is free as in freedom, not as in free beer... -- MF-W {a, b} Visit IRC! 17:00, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I speak Proto-Mediaevel-Limburgish very good (to be honest; I wrote over 40 words! Yes, really 40 out of 9000) and it sounds and looks like Old/Middle English. Dat kostč nōgt is Plātter (Proto-Mediaevel-Limburgish) for which doesn't have a price/that costs nothing. So, yes you're right and it isn't a good translation. Maybe something like þat frē is is better. --Ooswesthoesbes 17:10, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I think the point is that it doesn't cost anything to use it. "Frē" is not a good translation; it more closely refers to freedom than cost. I support the current translation, as there is no other alternative I can think of. --Qmwne235 00:39, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't speak Middle English, but I can speak Old Limburgish. It seems to me that þat costeþ noght is an error. In Plātteren (Old Limburgish) maybe something like dēn frē an-wōrkedan wisdōmbōk. Translation: the encyclopedia everbybody can work on. Maybe this is an optional for Middle English too? --Ooswesthoesbes 06:09, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh, I see what you mean - freedom is the desired connotation. Using Ooswesthoesbes's idea, that would be "on whiche everychoun/alle can worke", roughly. Well, we'll need more input, and be the traffic on this test, that'll take a long time to get. --Qmwne235 00:30, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Interwiki
It seems that many other test projects are using interwiki links, whereas Middle English largely is not. Should we be using them? --Qmwne235 00:37, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Main Page
Hello! Please move "Wp/enm" to a subpage "Wp/enm/Main_Page" with "Main Page" translated. And note that you need to request a wiki at RFL, though I think it will probably be rejected... SPQRobin 00:19, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

where to learn middle english?
i want to contribuite but i cant find a middle english course or lessons, any help? --190.250.43.104 19:46, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I know it's difficult to find sites that provide material to learn Middle English, if you don't know ask me ;) I know Middle English because I learnt Old English it helps, I also searched on the internet but it's hard to find. --Stardsen (talk) 00:55, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Piers Ploughman
I am certainly no authority, but this Everyman paperback sitting on my desk beside the teamug is helpful:

The Vision of Piers Plowman: A Complete Edition of the B-Text, ed. A.V.C. Schmidt, Balliol, Oxford.

Dent, 1978, 1987; Everyman, 1978, 1987.

It has a 26-page glossary in fine print, e.g.
 * wortes, vegetables

and a single page of Latin and French terms.

The poem itself is 263 pages of Middle English, glossed down the right-hand side.

In my limited experience, similarly glossed editions of The Canterbury Tales are easier to find than this book, which is why I bought Piers for 25c.

Good luck, Varlaam (talk) 16:27, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

But...
You know enm.wikipedia cannot be created, right?--Seonookim (talk) 04:22, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Contributors to this test will sooner or later get aware of it, probably. But we have an extra section for such wikis on I:Featured wikis. One can never know if policy won't change in the future, and the Incubator community has made no decision to disallow test-wikis in extinct languages. -- MF-W {a, b} 05:01, 9 June 2013 (UTC)


 * If the policy can be changed for Wp/grc, then enm might be made to follow.
 * There has certainly been no shortage of aborted Wikipedia projects for living languages that had less life to them than the "dead" languages often do.
 * Varlaam (talk) 16:45, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

"Ðe list below"
The project tends to use thorn in "the", hence Þe. Is eth valid? Varlaam (talk) 15:23, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
 * And shouldn't that list be a "liste"? Varlaam (talk)
 * It doesn't have to be a "liste", although the s in list should probably be long, so "li&#383;t" or "li&#383;te". "&ETH;e" is valid, but it probably be "&THORN;e" because the rest of the phrase isn't super-archaic like the spelling "&ETH;e" is.  JustinCB (talk) 00:27, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

project deletion request?
--Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 14:49, 12 September 2017 (UTC)


 * It appears that this project will stay for the time being. 66.210.249.135 22:17, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

Not including "ſ" in page titles?
I have notices in some pages, such as Wp/enm/Scottish langage an "s" is being used in page titles instead of "ſ", is there any reasoning for this? — The preceding unsigned comment was added by GoodClover (User talk:GoodClover • Special:Contributions/GoodClover).


 * Looks like I forgot to put the "ſ". Feel free to fix any other ones you find. --CanadianToast (talk) 16:01, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
 * @GoodClover, if you are still active, can you explain when should I use ſ, and when s? Thanks in advance, -Gifnk dlm 2020 (talk) 21:57, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
 * @Gifnk dlm 2020 I've just followed the rules listed at Long s, they may not always be correct, but they're generally ok to follow. --GoodClover (talk) 09:23, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
 * @GoodClover, sorry for the late reply, but this article refers to the rules used in the 17th and 18th century. I didn’t find any info about the use of long s in Middle English (11th-15th century). -Gifnk dlm 2020 (talk) 08:52, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Completely redesign the main page
It doesn’t make sense to put a list of all the articles in the main page especially since it’s possible to see the same list either using the category or by looking all the pages with the prefix wp/enm/. I think that we should list articles of things relevant to the Middle English, sort of like in Norfolk Wikipedia], they wrote a list of things relevant for the Norfolks. I think that their main page is very good and maybe we can even directly translate it to Middle English. Also we can take inspiration from Norman Wikipedia and Old English Wikipedia. I would like to hear your thoughts about this. -Gifnk dlm 2020 (talk) 16:18, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
 * By a direct translation I mean of everything except things about Norfolk and Pitcairn. Those should be replaced with things relevant for the Middle English. -Gifnk dlm 2020 (talk) 06:58, 10 February 2021 (UTC)


 * I think it's a good idea. --CanadianToast (talk) 00:18, 11 February 2021 (UTC)


 * @CanadianToast, I copied it and changed. Can you please check if the new main page is ok? Also feel free to add or remove subjects - This is Middle English Wikipedia nor Norfolk Wikipedia, the title pages don’t have to look the same. -Gifnk dlm 2020 (talk) 19:00, 11 February 2021 (UTC)


 * @Gifnk dlm 2020 It looks fine to me. --CanadianToast (talk) 22:30, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

logo on the front page
the "wikipaedia" logo is rendered like this as of feb 26, 2021: W IKIPAEDI A the small caps text uses the HTML small tag. this poorly replicates the wikipedia logo's proportions, and fails to display in the mobile view. by removing the small tag, changing the text to say WikipaediA (yes, the capitals are important) and using appending  will display it like this: WikipaediA this way, it looks better, and renders on mobile. the only problem i can find is that it might look strange seeing WikipaediA for anyone using screen readers.

here's the full logo with the new code: Jkrosado (talk) 18:22, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
 * @Jkrosado Thanks very much. --CanadianToast (talk) 21:51, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Citations?
Should wp/enm pages have citations and references? 184.13.87.238 16:35, 27 February 2021 (UTC)


 * I tried to put citations in Wp/enm/Texas, but the problem is that I don’t think that option currently exists. I simple English Wikipedia which I use as a reference point before editing in Wp/enm, if I edit using visual editing, I see the option “Cite”, but in Wp/enm I don’t. Does anybody know why is it so or should we contact the admins? -Gifnk dlm 2020 (talk) 21:21, 3 March 2021 (UTC)


 * @Ebe123, do you know why can’t I cite sources and how to fix this? Thanks in advance, -Gifnk dlm 2020 (talk) 18:45, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Spelling of “will”
Would it be possible to change “will” on the main page to an older spelling such as “wvll” or “wole”? I would like your opinions on this. 184.13.63.239 16:45, 27 February 2021 (UTC)


 * I think it’s a very good idea, but I haven’t found any info in the internet to verify that the forms wvll and wole were used. I found in wiktionary the form wille, is this what you meant? Also, you can sign a message by typing ~ . -Gifnk dlm 2020 (talk) 09:02, 28 February 2021 (UTC)


 * I found several quotes of the usage of “wull” on the Middle English Dictionary by the University of Michigan. “We wull late in yow and youre”. 184.13.63.239 12:06, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Milestone - more than 200 articles
I would like to announce that this test wiki now has more than 200 articles. -Gifnk dlm 2020 (talk) 18:40, 28 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Btw, the main page says there are 202 pages, while the Category says there are 198 pages. Why do they say different things, and who to believe? Thanks in advance, -Gifnk dlm 2020 (talk) 19:30, 28 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Test. --OWTB (talk) 12:08, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Roman or Arabic numbers?
, pinging all the users who contributed in March. Btw, now you can use the ping template in this test wiki without it showing an error by typing Wp/enm/Ping. Back to topic, do you think that we should use Roman numbers like people in Medieval times did or use more conviennent Arabic numbers? You can see a page with Arabic numbers here and one with Roman numbers here. I personally think Roman numbers can be used from time to time for small numbers only but I would love to hear other opinions as well. -Gifnk dlm 2020 (talk) 14:11, 21 March 2021 (UTC)


 * I pinged much more users, but fro some reason only some of them show up. -Gifnk dlm 2020 (talk) 14:12, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
 * @Gifnk dlm 2020 I added support for up to 20 users in the Template:Wp/enm/Ping, though a module might be the better solution in the long term. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 14:22, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much! -Gifnk dlm 2020 (talk) 15:27, 21 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Anyways, back to topic. Do you think we should use Roman numbers or Arabic numbers? -Gifnk dlm 2020 (talk) 11:12, 22 March 2021 (UTC)


 * I've used the Arabic numerals for simplicity, but now that I think about it, I guess whatever was used by Middle English speakers back in the day should be used. However, as I was writing this, I did a quick Google search, and I just found out that this is easier said than done, because apparently they used Roman numerals, but there were some rare instances of Arabic numerals in the 15th century. I guess Roman numerals should be used since their Middle English use was more common, but I also have some bias towards Arabic numerals because of their simplicity. Nevertheless, I will use Roman numerals in this test wiki from now on, no matter how much pain it will cause me. NASAPeepo (talk) 17:16, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
 * A problem that I see is that for mathematical articles, we would still need to use Arabic numerals: Representing fractions, negative numbers, and even indices with Roman numerals is awkward. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 17:45, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
 * , to begin, I would like to say that I admire your willingness to write in this test wiki in a way that is as similar as possible to what was common during medieval times. I did a bit research myself, and in Arabic numerals. I think that in mathematical articles we can maybe still tolerate Arabic numerals. It’s written that they became “widely known” in Britain in the 15th century, however there is even early evidence of use of those numerals. Middle English was spoken between the 12th to 15th century so using Roman numerals makes sense., it’s important to remember that Middle English had many dialects and many different spellings, and I think that this wiki should reflect that. That’s why I use different spellings in different articles- and sometimes even in the same article. Maybe this kind of diversity can apply also to numerals. However, it is possible to write fractions in Roman numbers - despite the fact that it is truly awkward as 1234qwer1234qwer4 noted, it’s still possible. Middle English Wikipedia should in my opinion represent how people in medieval spoke and wrote - not what is easier - that’s why I copy paste those thorns. I think we can use this discussion to create an official policy that new users in the future will be able to follow. We can also use the policy page as a tutorial to teach people Roman numerals.
 * TL;DR I think we should use Roman numerals but I recognize that there are valid reasons to use Arabic numerals so I would love to here other opinions as well. -Gifnk dlm 2020 (talk) 18:12, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
 * So in the article I started on the state of Michigan, would it still be appropiate to depict the state's population in the 2010 census as "9,883,640" as opposed to "MMMDCCXXIV"?NASAPeepo (talk) 19:45, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
 * , that’s exactly the point of the discussion. I think that we have reached consensus that small number should be written using Roman Numerals. Also I see that you started replacing Arabic numerals with Roman ones in some articles, so thank you very much! About large numbers like populations, years, and ares - short answer is idk. Long answer is that I can understand both positions - the first one saying that in Middle English Wikipedia we should strive to write as similar as possible to how people wrote in medieval times and limit ourselves only to a Roman Numbers even for very large numbers and fractions. The second opinion is that we should use Arabic numbers for large numbers because they are much simpler. After this discussion, I’m leaning towards the first option but since Arabic numbers became accepted in Britain during the time when Middle English was still spoken maybe we can try to write such large numbers both by Arabic numerals and by Roman numerals? Just a suggestion. If not that we must create a page Wikipaedia:Use Roman numerals to teach people since the majority of people only know I, V, and X. Also it would be an extra hassle for new users who want to join Middle English Wikipedia. But it would make the text in this wiki more similar to how people in Medieval times would have written it. I would accept both options - we should decide which one is best by discussing and reaching consensus. Btw, I will greatly appreciate it if you ping me in your reply (type -Gifnk dlm 2020 (talk) 21:48, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
 * You are welcome! By the way, I have seen years represented by Roman numerals before, at least in modern English. Mostly in the end credits of TV shows and movies, so I have began using them for years. As for ordinals, I wrote out "seventeneþ century" on the Alaska page since I'm not entirely sure how Roman numeral ordinals work. Would it be something like "XVIIeþ century", "XVIIþ century", perhaps even simply "XVII century"? NASAPeepo (talk) 22:55, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
 * , I researched this a bit, and I found this discussion. Their point makes sense - just like you write Napoleon III and say it Napoleon the third, it makes sense to write XVII century. About years, I think we should also use Roman numerals just create a page to teach new users that might not know them. -Gifnk dlm 2020 (talk) 09:11, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Another important thing to discuss is articles about area codes (for phone numbers). Should they be written in Roman or Arabic numerals? -Gifnk dlm 2020 (talk) 09:34, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I left a comment at Old English Wikipedia inviting people to join this discussion. I find it interesting that they chose to use Arabic numerals despite the fact that they were introducing after Old English evolved into Middle English (they probably never thought about this and used the, out of instinct like we all did but I still find it interesting). -Gifnk dlm 2020 (talk) 11:22, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * @NASAPeepo "MMMDCCXXIV" is "3724", not sure where you got that from. "9,883,640" would be something like "I̿X̿D̅C̅C̅C̅L̅X̅X̅X̅MMMDCXL" or "I̿X̿D̅C̅C̅C̅L̅X̅X̅X̅I̅I̅I̅DCXL". 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 12:45, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * , Can you explain how you got I̿X̿D̅C̅C̅C̅L̅X̅X̅X̅I̅I̅I̅DCXL? According to this chart that I found, it should be M̄M̄M̄M̄M̄M̄M̄M̄M̄D̄C̄C̄C̄L̄X̄X̄X̄MMMDCXL. Correct me if I’m wrong. I suggest we create a template that automatically converts Arabic numerals to Roman ones as that will save a ton of human errror. -Gifnk dlm 2020 (talk) 13:12, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Maybe. I'm not sure writing nine Ms in a row makes that much sense. Possibly also M̅X̿D̅C̅C̅C̅L̅X̅X̅X̅I̅I̅I̅DCXL. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 13:16, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * , What do the 2 lines above the X mean? Also, if there’s a letter that means 10 million it’s probably better to write M̅ and then that letter. -Gifnk dlm 2020 (talk) 13:32, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * The two lines are just like a line above another. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 13:34, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I see thank you very much! Is I̿X̿ the accepted way to write 9 million? Is it allowed to add the lines above a combination of letters or only above one letter? I think M̅X̿D̅C̅C̅C̅L̅X̅X̅X̅I̅I̅I̅DCXL (like you wrote above) makes more sense. Also, I think it would be better if we made a template that converts numbers to aRoman numerals that way if in the future we decide to use another convention, we will only need to change the template and not all the articles. -Gifnk dlm 2020 (talk) 13:40, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * This would probably require a module, and unfortunately, I don't know any Lua. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 13:42, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * , such template exists in English Wikipedia, so we can request to import it (maybe ping an admin in this chat). I tested it in w:User:Gifnk dlm 2020/sandbox but the problem is that it doesn’t work for numbers larger than 4999999. I also don’t know lua, for some reason I thought it would be written in python which I know a bit of but since it’s lua it will be more challenging. Maybe we can ping the users who created w:Module:Roman and ask them if they can maybe increase the limit? From what I see, it knows to add lines above letters -14:07, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * pinging all the users that edited w:module:Roman (I hope this isn’t spam). Hi, here I’m Middle English Wikipedia we decided to use Roman numerals instead of Arabic numerals and in order to avoid human mistakes we started exploring the idea of using a template that will automatically convert numbers to Roman numerals. I decided to check if such template exists in English Wikipedia and I found w:Template:Roman to be very useful. However, we run into a problem - this template doesn’t support numbers larger than 4999999 so I was wandering: why such an arbitrary limitation? 4999999 isn’t a power of two and 4 byte integer variables can store numbers up to 4,294,967,295. Also, you are aware that adding lines above a number is the same that multiplying it by 1000, and btw two lines = multiplying by a million so I don’t see what’s the problem to do at least till 800 million. Thanks in advance, and I really hope this isn’t spam. -Gifnk dlm 2020 (talk) 16:02, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I suspect it is because there was no agreement on how to represent 5 million or higher. Roman_numerals suggests there is not a "standard". Xaosflux (talk) 16:07, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * , thank you very much for the reply! It’s written that both systems were in simultaneous use so here is my suggestion: add an additional parameter that will decide which syste to use. It will look like that: or . However, if this is too much work I honestly think that Vinculum is better. However, my suggestion will solve the problem that you write above. Thanks in advance, -Gifnk dlm 2020 (talk) 16:21, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * , I reviewed the code in w:Module:Roman and I honestly don’t see the problem. You can multiply by a million by adding two lines above. Doesn’t the function you use support adding two lines (by running this function twice). If not, isn’t there a possibility to create a function that adds two lines? If not, then isn’t it possible to just copy paste the Unicode characters to the code. I think it’s possible to ignore the comment directly above this because you use Vinculum for smaller numbers. -Gifnk dlm 2020 (talk) 19:47, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * If you want to propose a change to the module an the English Wikipedia, then open an edit request on its talk page. I'm not sure how that is going to help you on any other project, where you can simply update the project local module to whatever it is you need.  As far as your core issue, how to write roman numbers on a wiki that is in the roman language -- well why not just use the natural characters, they are available in unicode.  On other projects that don't use arabic they just use their native integer symbols, not wrap them in some template (e.g. pswiki has an article on  ۳ not on "3", so wouldn't your article be on "III"? Xaosflux (talk) 21:25, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * , thank you very much for your reply! After thinking about it, I think it will be easier to create a page teaching people Roman Numbers than to use a template. The link you listed doesn’t have vinculums (the line above the letters) that was used to indicate multiplication by 1,000. what do you think about the creation of Wp/enm/Wikipaedia:Use Roman numerals that will also include a tutorial and possibly also a quiz? Also, how do you type the letters with the 2 lines above? -Gifnk dlm 2020 (talk) 21:43, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * User:Gifnk dlm 2020 you can use unicode and combining characters, such as the unicode Ⅿ̅ which MAY appear correctly depending on your browser. Some of this may depend on how you want your source to be stored. Xaosflux (talk) 22:06, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I suggest we not use the Unicode "Roman numeral" characters. As you said, it "MAY appear correctly", while using regular Latin letters will work for everyone. Or is there a problem with that I'm not seeing? 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 09:07, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
 * thank you very much! yeah it’s a problem but if we want to write large numbers we kinda need to use Unicode characters (unless you know another way of typing letters with those lines above I’m open for suggestions). -Gifnk dlm 2020 (talk) 09:22, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
 * A large factor in this is likely going to be how you want this to work for editors / how you want the source stored. Keep in mind your readers as well of course. Overline is going to be hard, it is likely a very bad idea to have every single number on your project wrapped in a template and there is not a single unicode character for roman numberals with overline (in my example above I used a combining unicode).  CSS hacks to put overlines should certainly not be used for accessibility reasons.  There are lots of ways to go about this, and the long term direction is going to depend on what your use cases need to be. Xaosflux (talk) 10:18, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
 * , thank you very much! The way I use to type characters that don’t appear on my iPads keyboard (like thorns - the Middle English alternative for th) is by copying and pasting from a page where someone else used it. That’s also how I typed lettes with overlines in this discussion (I also copied from Macron (diacritics) Maybe we will offer a tutorial page where users will be able to copy and paste characters from? Just a suggestion. -Gifnk dlm 2020 (talk) 11:26, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Various editing bars are available your interface could use as well, (look for an "insert" menu in the editing window - and these can be customized - a project could get an insert window of these number symbols. Xaosflux (talk) 13:09, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
 * , thank you very much! I tried your advice in Wp/enm/Austin, Texas. Can you check did I do it properly? Also, the letters with the over line appear in a different font than the letters without. How to fix this? Thanks in advance, -Gifnk dlm 2020 (talk) 13:44, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Well, you made some of them using math markup, and some are just basic latin letters. The math markup is rendering for me as a picture - so this all goes back to the question I was asking before, how do you want your information to actually be stored, and how do you want your readers to be able to access it?  The semantic model can be very important if your goal is to make information accessible to the most number of people; if your priamry goal is visual presentation to a limited audience (for example humans reading your page visually with modern browsers) you can go a different direction. Xaosflux (talk) 13:58, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
 * , I see. Also for me it renders as an image. I would like this to be accessible to as many people as possible. Will typing C̄M̄L̄X̄X̄V̄MMM instead of that solve the problem? Btw, I replaced ĪĪĪ with MMM since there is a Roman numeral for 1,000 no point multiplying 1 by 1000. Also, I see that you don’t ping me in your replies. Here we created Template:Wp/enm/Ping. Will making Template:Wp/enm/ping as a redirect page solve the problem? Thanks in advance, -Gifnk dlm 2020 (talk) 14:30, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
 * , I created a policy page asking people to use Roman numerals. It can be seen at Wp/enm/Wikipaedia:Use Roman numerals. Feel free to improve it. -Gifnk dlm 2020 (talk) 13:22, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

this may sound random, but can you type a letter v with 2 lines above here? I want to write a page about Arizona, and it’s population is 7,278,717 so I will need a 5 with two lines above (5 million) in order to type this number. Thanks in advance, -Gifnk dlm 2020 (talk) 18:40, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
 * , btw the message that I posted in Old English Wikipedia was archived because it’s more than 30 days old. I posted a message in Latin Wikipedia which is much more active. It’s just a message informing that we decided to use Roman numerals suggesting them to also think in that discussion and inviting them to help replace Arabic numerals with Roman ones in this wiki. -Gifnk dlm 2020 (talk) 20:29, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Btw, on our main page we list the number of articles using Arabic numerals so I think we should still request to import the template that converts numbers to Roman numerals and wrap this number with this template in Template:Wp/enm/NUMBEROFARTICLES. By the day we get to 5 million articles I’m sure someone will increase the max number. I don’t think we will be able to change the numbers in the categories to Roman numerals though. -Gifnk dlm 2020 (talk) 20:39, 9 April 2021 (UTC)


 * , pinging an importer. Can you please import w:Template:Roman so that we can change the number of articles in the main page to Roman Numerals? -Gifnk dlm 2020 (talk) 14:56, 11 April 2021 (UTC)


 * - unfortunately, I am not familiar with the modules which seem to be required to make the current version work. Would this version from 2013 be good enough for you?
 * Btw, Incubator has a page for handling these requests - if that version would not suffice, I will make a note there, so that more experienced importers could take a look at it. - Xbspiro (talk) 05:50, 13 April 2021 (UTC)