Teflpedia:Teachers' room

From Teflpedia
Revision as of 12:37, 5 November 2013 by Technopat (talk | contribs) (IPA symbols: Reply)
Teacher.gif Hi, and welcome to Teflpedia's teachers' room

This is the place for general discussion about the Wiki; questions; chat; moaning about your school; praising your students or anything else that comes to mind.

Newest items are at bottom

To add a topic to bottom of this page: log in (top right) and then click + above

Hi, There's tea or coffee for those who want it. --Bob M


Use enhanced recent changes (requires JavaScript)

Is a helpful "Recent changes" preference setting that tames Recent changes for readability. Try it: click My preferences (top of every pages when you are logged in) which takes you to your Teflpedia Preferences page. Now at top of your Preferences page click the tab titled "Recent changes". Then check the "Use enhanced recent changes" check box and click Save. One helpful thing it does is fold consecutive edits to a page into one "Recent changes" line with a drop down triangle you can click on to see all the edits if you want to. --Roger 12:34, 2 November 2012 (CDT)

thanks. I'll run with that for while.--Bob M 13:47, 2 November 2012 (CDT)


I would love some feedback or suggestions regarding first level category names to use over on Contents (second link in left sidebar). I'm thinking these first level cats might do:

  • Language
  • Teaching English
  • English teaching community
  • Methodology
  • Help

I am pleased with the way I have got category tree working. Click on Contents and poke around a bit to see. The cats unfold when you click on their arrow icon ().

What do you think? Please comment here or over at Talk:Contents. Meow, --Roger 17:15, 7 November 2012 (CST)

Yer cats are cool and trees give 'em something to sharpen their claws on :) Regs., --Technopat 06:07, 2 December 2012 (CST)
Done. I merged category "Language stuff" into category category:Language and category "General stuff" into wherever depending on what the item was. I think this will work out fine. Cheers, --Roger 20:26, 2 December 2012 (CST)

Main page colors

I redid the Main Page Fall colors and merged the last sections, "How is Teflpedia structured," into the section above it, "How can I explore Teflpedia?" I'm thinking maybe do Winter colors in December, maybe snow whites, silvers and golds (maybe using gradients for those). Comments? Suggestions? --Roger 16:38, 15 November 2012 (CST)

I've got no really strong feelings on this - I'm relaxed as long as it looks good. Furthermore my sense of colour coordination is, shall we say, very masculine. In other words non-existent
I've got to say that I'd be intrigued to see your "snow whites, silvers and golds" for Christmas though - sounds most festive!--Bob M 07:40, 2 December 2012 (CST)

Links that go bang

I feel we patronize our valued readers when we link words such as spelling, teacher, and language that our English teachering audience does not lack basic understanding of. I feel links say, "Dear reader, allow me to offer you this link to material that you may not be familiar with which may aid your understanding." Notwithstanding our desire to help folks discover Teflpedia articles, wont we come across as patronizing if we link for example the word spelling within our plagiarism article where it is unlikely such a link aids our audience's understanding of the plagiarism article? Today, while cleaning up a typo in the plagiarism article, I unlinked the word "spelling" there because I felt it patronized our audience. Whether done intentionally or unintentionally, patronizing our audience cannot be good. Maybe links are like exclamation points: use sparingly. I know there is someone here who feels links such as spelling and teacher are a good idea because they help our readers discover those pages. I feel these are overlinking. Wikipedia has a succinct policy on overlinking that may help us think about this. What are your thoughts about linking vs overlinking? Might we find common ground and come to a consensus on this? --Roger 16:53, 29 November 2012 (CST)

As one who devotes much time to de-linking over at WP, I must say that while I agree that your "Dear reader, allow me to offer you this link to material that you may not be familiar with which may aid your understanding." could be misconstrued as somewhat patronising, I get a different take on it and reckon that most people who visit teflpedia are interested in many/most/all aspects of teaching and when they come across a link to some common-or-garden word that would normally be understood in a general context, the fact that a link exists suggests that teflpedia has an interesting article on that very subject, i.e. "Dear reader, allow me to offer you this link to material that you may find of professional/cultural interest." A different matter, of course, is whether the quality of the material available is up-to-scratch and/or warrants an "encyclopaedic" article.
Whereas WP has a major problem in that it attracts a large number of people who have nothing specific to contribute encyclopaedia-wise and have nothing better to do than link and/or think that the page looks somehow prettier if dotted with the blues, teflpedia is aimed at a very specific readership (if not actual active contributors) and doesn't [yet] seem to suffer from WP's intrinsic woes. Personally, I'd take Bob's mindless stats as a sign that teflpedia isn't turning its readers away or off by being patronising. I have mentioned elsewhere that I'm convinced teflpedia would be making a big mistake if it catered only to experienced teachers and/or to native English-speaking English as a foreign/second language teachers, as I'm sure both categories are actually a minority out there in the real world. Not to mention the occasional self-study students who might be popping in at the recommendation of their teachers. By way of example of the first group, oh-so-many-years ago, I was a co-ordinator at a major language school which shall be nameless. Teaching staff consisted of six very experienced teachers and forty-two, mainly well-meaning, youngsters whose only "qualification" was that they were native speakers with a university degree in something, in no cases related to language teaching. I had 14 teachers under my wing, one of whom was an excellent (even better than yours truly) and highly experienced teacher but the others were only capable of going through the coursebook: Unit 1, Exercise 1... and please, dear Lord, don't let 'em ask me no grammar-related questions. I'm sure I'd like to think things have since evolved, but not so sure that I'd put me hand in the whachamacallit.
As for the specific case of links over at the plagiarism article, I really don't see any harm in re-directing folk from what is, in principle, a highly technical issue, to one that is of more general interest to practitioners. Especially one on spelling :) ... I'm outta here! Cheers! --Technopat 11:48, 30 November 2012 (CST)
My feelings are similar to TP's, but I'd like to make the following points - basically because I've been thinking about it all day but TP beat me to the punch.
WP is designed for English native speakers and it's policies are designed so that obvious linking is discouraged. Our readers may or may not be native speakers and may or may not be experienced teachers. In such a case obvious linking is clearly a good idea. (I think that "obvious linking" is probably a better team than the arguably loaded term "overlinking".)--Bob M 12:45, 30 November 2012 (CST)
Just want point out that this modern trend of beating about the bush and being politically correct rather than just getting down to the nitty-gritty does seem to lead to euphemistic and/or unnecessary complications: we's talkin' linking, pure an' simple. Neither "obvious linking" nor "overlinking" is/are necessary. My preferred teflpedia jargon is "blinking" (for any newcomers unfamiliar with the term, that's a portmanteau of "blue linking" / "blue link", as opposed to "redlink"). However, as the issue has been raised, I suggest setting up some sort of convention, i.e. teflpedia help page, where we can explain that although some folks may consider it patronising, that is obviously not the intention of linking blinking here at teflpedia. Will try to set the ball rolling, but everyone is welcome to add of their plenty. Hey! this is a wiki... --Technopat 04:50, 1 December 2012 (CST)
Aha! I knew you two were here somewhere. I was beginning to feel like wallpaper in the Teachers' room and ta coffee past stale. Thx for your fresh replies. The two sections directly above this one await your points of view. I already know Pat would prefer a fluffy cat named "Language stuff" rather than just "Language" and I might just defer to his preference if no one else speaks up, although I don't like the fluff myself anymore than I like overlinking. I don't write much content here so I don't want my opinions to take on guiding weight. Which cat would you prefer, Bob? (please reply in above section regarding cats rather than here) --Roger 20:26, 1 December 2012 (CST)

Site slowdown

I have been experiencing erratic slow page loads at Teflpedia this evening, ranging from erratically from the normal 1 second to load a page to 10, 30, even 50 seconds to load a page. Anyone else experiencing this at Teflpedia? I checked at mediawiki.org and their pages load consistently in 1 second. So it is not simply that I am having a slow connection to the Internet. However, I suspect my problem is that Comcast, my cable Internet provider, has a slow connection the the datacenter in Dalas TX where Teflpedia is hosted. Hard to know for sure what's up. --Roger 21:22, 8 February 2013 (CST)

The connection is very quick here in Peru... --Jameson2000ad 07:47, 9 February 2013 (CST)
No problem here in Spain.--Bob M 08:16, 9 February 2013 (CST)
Solved. Glad to hear no one else is seeing a slowdown. I think it was an issue with my ISP, Comcast. Hi James! Glad to see you did not sail off the edge of the Earth. Please edit a page now and then so we will know you are there. Happy Year of the Snake one and all! :-) Roger 17:51, 9 February 2013 (CST)

MediaWiki 1.20.2 upgrade

I'm upgrading Teflpedia to MediaWiki 1.20.2 today. Site will be read only for about 10 minutes during the upgrade. If you see anything amiss, please let me know here. --Roger 12:37, 10 February 2013 (CST)

Done. (Special:Version). --Roger (talk) 13:31, 10 February 2013 (CST)
That's pretty cool Roger!--Bob M (talk) 15:45, 10 February 2013 (CST)

2013 fund raiser

Okay, the 2013 fund raiser banner went live on February 12. I spent a day and a half adjusting it. Bob, feel free to personalize the messaging in MediaWiki:Sitenotice (the banner itself), in the Teflpedia:Donate page and in the Teflpedia:Treasury page. I'm no Mark Twain with words. I'd like our banner to invite viewers to become part of our community. Not sure I got that into the messaging. I feel the money is not as important as the invitation to be a part of Teflpedia--to click on "Edit" or just "Donate" what you can.

The numbers are a bit mind blowing. We had 27,500 unique visitors last month. That's 900 unique visitors a day. If one person in a thousand donates $5 or $10... we will reach our $188 goal of funding the 2013 hosting costs within 30 days. That would be heart warming community participation to me.

Logged in users can dismiss the banner by clicking the gray [X] at top right of the banner. If you do, and later want to see it again, just remove the teflpedia.com "DismissSiteNite" cookie from your browser, or just log out to see it (it always shows for non-logged in users). :-) Roger (talk) 23:21, 13 February 2013 (CST)

Okay, I got some out of band (email) feedback that the black banner background was too somber. So I've updated it to light blue. What do you think of it.. Come on, a little chatter is good for a fund raiser. Donuts anyone? WHere's the coffee? I've got to run out and buy roses for my wife now--Happy Valentines Day! :-) --Roger (talk) 13:38, 14 February 2013 (CST)
I've played around with the wording a bit but if anybody has any other ideas I'm open. I think blue colour is a bit more fetching. Thanks.--Bob M (talk) 14:14, 14 February 2013 (CST)
I'm just wondering if there is something else we could do for contributors. If thy actually had accounts we could give them blue stars. Another thought occurs to me - could we try allowing IP editing for a while? If might encourage a few more bodies to participate and it's n easy thing to switch back if the spammers turn up.--Bob M (talk) 14:24, 14 February 2013 (CST)
Okay, I have just now commented out the appropriate line in LocalSettings.php so that anonymous editing is now ON. --Roger (talk) 17:51, 14 February 2013 (CST)
Tada! Haven't seen this in a while... -- 18:09, 14 February 2013 (CST)
OK let's see what happens. (Bob)-- 03:09, 15 February 2013 (CST)

I think I saw a leprechaun, erm, um I tweaked the fund raiser banner. Changed to a green progress bar. Valentines day is over. How's it look? Um, no donations have come in since I put up the banner on 12 February. Hmm.. Zilch. The $20 in the pot came before the banner. Maybe we take the banner down on March 12? --Roger (talk) 01:01, 20 February 2013 (CST)

Just declare victory you mean? :-) It's as good a date as any.--Bob M (talk) 12:10, 20 February 2013 (CST)
"Humiliating embarrassment" is not spelled with a "v". If I had spent the time I spent creating the banner mowing lawns up and down the street I would have earned the $188 goal already, or gotten arrested for trespassing since no one hired me to mow lawns. So I'm thinking maybe put the banner away after it has run for 30 days, and call it an "experiment". I do rather like the banner. Don't you? Maybe next time (after I've recovered my gumption) we might run it as a feedback banner, inviting viewers to give us feedback on Teflpedia, and offer that if they like Teflpedia and would like to help us keep it online they could donate a buck or two. But all's not said and done yet--perchance there is still some spare change in some dear sympathetic viewers' pocket waiting to be donated to our server fund? We could use it... :-) Roger (talk) 13:00, 20 February 2013 (CST)
I think it looks great. I must admit that I did not have high hopes of getting lots of donations but I had certainly expected more than have arrived. I can only assume that people are accustomed to getting stuff free on the net.
Maybe we should switch off the site for a day or so with just the banner up? That would be a bit drastic though.--Bob M (talk) 15:23, 20 February 2013 (CST)
I closed the Fund Raiser banner today, March 13. It was up for 29 days and brought in 1 donation, of $10. (Ather $20 came in before the banner went up.) I think we do not have many enthusiastic users. 77% of Teflpedia visits are less than 30 seconds. Maybe most people are not finding what they are looking for. Hard to know. I created a Teflpedia:Feedback link in left sidebar today to see if we can get some feedback. I put many hours into getting the banner working, as it was my first time to try something like that. I left notes on MediaWiki talk:Sitenotice#2013 Fund Raiser. Maybe we should try it again next year, to see if we can outdo ourselves? :-) Roger (talk) 17:44, 13 March 2013 (CDT)
It's shame it wasn't more successful. :-( The feedback thing is a nice idea but I'm not sure that most people will notice it.--Bob M (talk) 03:11, 17 March 2013 (CDT)

Abuse filter

Have you considered installing the AbuseFilter extension? I am just wondering because, on RationalWiki at least, we've found it to be an indispensable tool for combating spam by simply programming the extensions to filter out various spammy patterns. You could set it so that sysops here can edit and program it (it's a small enough site where I assume Bob trusts every sysop not to abuse the privilege), and that way those of us who don't have access to the server can use it during spam waves to block links to spammy sites, disallow certain combinations of language that spam bots tend to use, etc. Gooniepunk2005 (talk) 05:27, 16 February 2013 (CST)

Hi Goonie. Thanks for removing the spam. :-) Was it IP spam? I ask because we've just enabled it again as a test.
The abuse filter could be a good idea - the problem is that after spending a little time looking at it I can't say that I really understand it. Roger?--Bob M (talk) 07:57, 16 February 2013 (CST)
Occam's raiser says disable anonymous editing and the problem goes away. Less is more. We really don't need anonymous editing, and without anonymous editing don't need AbuseFilter. Now, on the other hand, if we can't raise a measly $188 from our user base (we shall see but I suspect we wont), maybe we could move over to the prosperous side of the street, er, to RW's server? I would love to see TP hosted there. Does it have room for tiny little us? The folks running RW are wizards of a higher order than myself and could no doubt run the wiki with anonymous editing ON and find it a piece of cake. Myself, I'm a wizard of modest potions and prefer to operate as simply as possible with tools I can easily understand. I'm with Bob in that Abuse Filter looks a little more complex than may actually be useful to English teachers. We are not as a whole the most wizardly of folk. That may be why we don't see many English teachers participating? (Roger, who wouldn't have faced the complexity of discovering he is writing anonymously here if he had simply left anonymous editing turned OFF; there's another reason to keep it off.)-- 13:38, 16 February 2013 (CST)
Normally RW has no problem with anonymous editing - but there is real battle with a dedicated troll at the moment.
I was just wondering if allowing anonymous here would spark a bit more interest - but it doesn't really seem to have done so, at least not yet. Equally we are not exactly awash with spam.
I did speak to Trent about the possibility of having Teflpedia on RW a few years ago. He seemed open to the idea but we never developed it. Having said that there have been quite a lot of technical changes there since and I guess that between us we've paid a year in advance on this one new.
The cash isn't pouring in with the fund-raiser though. :-(--Bob M (talk) 16:04, 16 February 2013 (CST)
If technical assistance is the problem, I would argue that you should ask Trent himself if can/would host the site at discount instead and vet people on RW like David Gerard or NuttyRoux for back end help. The problem with asking the RWF to host it would be be the bureaucracy involved. Trent, however, has his own discount hosting service that is not RWf affiliated and could serve your purposes well and give you the additional support needed. Of course, you'd have to ask him first. I most certainly cannot and do not speak for him. Gooniepunk2005 (talk) 00:55, 18 February 2013 (CST)
Yes, of course, it's now the RWF which is in charge of RW.--Bob M (talk) 05:49, 18 February 2013 (CST)


I put a box-shadow on the box template which puts boxes on pages, like the box at top of this Teachers' room. What do you think of it? I am fine without it, but there it is now. So... keep it (the shadow), or remove it, or modify it? What do you say? --Roger (talk) 15:34, 10 April 2013 (CDT)

Teachers' Room

Hear ye hear ye! I propose we change "Teachers' room" to "Teachers' Room" so that it is in correct proper-noun case, like "Main Page" already is. --Roger (talk) 22:41, 10 April 2013 (CDT)

I actually answered this one promptly, but obviously didnae save it... So here goes again (more or less): So we'd have to put "Recent Changes", "Random Page", "Guide for Newcomers", "Creating a New Article", "What Links Here", etc.? Nah! Not all that convinced, but neither is it summat that I'm gonna get all fazed about. --Technopat (talk) 18:44, 23 April 2013 (CDT)

Out o' synch.

Greetings, Oh Boffins.

It's just caught my attensh. that there is a problem of synchronising our clocks here, obviously a major setback if we intend to go ahead with my our plan to take over the world. As you can see here, there's a major difference between the time recorded in the article's revision history (which just happens to coincides with my local time) and the time recorded when signing (CDT, a 7-hour diff.). Is there a simple solution to this? I just checked in [my] Preferences and there doesn't seem to be any option (other than selecting the time zone) as the Server time and Local time are fixed, and neither of which coincide with that there CDT. Regs., --Technopat (talk) 10:06, 16 April 2013 (CDT)

Central Daylight Time (CDT) is 5 hours behind (less than) Coordinated Universal Time (UTC). Our Teflpedia server, in Texas, is on CDT in the spring and summer and on Central Standard Time (CST) in the fall and winter, approximately. Not sure about the rest, but will take your word for it. Has it caused a problem? --Roger (talk) 13:24, 16 April 2013 (CDT)
Problem? Not really. Just curiosity 'cos I wasn't sure if Bob's reply on the discussion page was made before or after my edit on the article page. It was, in fact, after but not according to the times recorded :) A beautiful example of how reality can be distorted. And the evidence manipulated.... Your alibi just doesn't hold, Professor Plum. According to our computer records, you had plenty of time bop Colonel Mustard one on the 'ead with that there candelabra. Regs., --Technopat (talk) 00:49, 17 April 2013 (CDT)

Second opinion...

Greetings all you grammar chappies out there. Just in case you missed it, could you check out this link and take whatever action needed? Cheers! --Technopat (talk) 18:34, 23 April 2013 (CDT)

Main page/stubs

Greetings All. I just thought that there's currently no direct way of knowing how "satisfied" a reader is with any given page (Wikipedia has a dedicated template to that end, but I reckon that's out of the question here, for the time being, at least), but it might be interesting to link the stub category on the Main page and "invite" would-be editors to check out the short articles listed there. They might just feel, let's say, qualified, to contribute to something that's there, expanding it or improving it, as opposed to just reading through an article they think is pretty much complete, entertaining or whatever.... Cheers! --Technopat (talk) 07:23, 27 April 2013 (CDT)

Why not? Go for it. --Roger (talk) 22:57, 29 April 2013 (CDT)

Maverick Admin

Today I change "Discussion" tab label back to "Talk" on Teflpedia. It was "Talk" since the beginning of time, and has been reinstated as "Talk" at en.Wikipedia for over a year now, and at Rationalwiki for good heavens almost since forever I guess (for a bit of amusement, walk Rationalwiki's MediaWiki:Talk page diffs by clicking the "Newer revision→" links there, but for exhaustive discussion of why "Talk" makes more sense see this en.Wikipedia talk page archive. So, am I out of line? Do you guys want to discuss all that here, too? If so, let the keyboards rattle. I'm working on the principle of act first, ask forgiveness later. Anyway, what do you guys think? Do you like this rustic return to the basics in the mediawiki:talk value (displayed in the "Talk" tab)? Better rein me in now or I might put a Godzilla image on the Main Page next 8-(). ;) No, I wouldn't do that, would I? Roger (talk) 13:19, 13 May 2013 (CDT)

I've got no problem with "talk".--Bob M (talk) 01:15, 14 May 2013 (CDT)

Needs attensh.

Greetings All. Just back in from well-earned hols., and reviewing random pages (BTW, great stats!) came across a wee hiccough (that's probably hiccup for our friendly neighbourhood Maverick Admin) which, in turn, raised another little thingey that needs looking into.

While checking out How do I find stuff on Teflpedia? (Guide for newcomers) which, BTW, needs to be tweaked so the titles in sidebar and article page concur (and while that's being done, it might be a good idea to add (FAQs) after the title on the sidebar) I noticed that the search funtion in b) is no longer active (seem to remember this being mentioned at some stage) and while I was trying to hide that bit from view, pending confirmation from y'all over at this page, I discovered that the <noinclude>+</noinclude> function doesn't work, either. Just thought I'd give y'all summat to do and not let y'all squash yer laurels from too much sitting around. Regs., --Technopat (talk) 05:06, 6 September 2013 (CDT)

Huh? "<noinclude>+</noinclude>" only works in templates. To hide something from view in regular text, use HTML comment tags, <!-- like this -->. But please use those sparingly. Hiding stuff only sweeps in under the rug. Roger (talk) 14:51, 6 September 2013 (CDT)

OK, so I've been bold and tweaked the FAQs bit I mentioned above, but that search thingey still needs looking into, as does that "noinclude" thingey. --Technopat (talk) 05:30, 6 September 2013 (CDT)
I deleted that 'How do I find stuff on Teflpedia?' section from the FAQ. Go on, put it back if you want it. But honesty, I think deleting it is the best fix, because the basic site "stuff" like "finding stuff" needs to just work without reference to the FAQ. Do we really want to engage in telling folks how to use the 'Search' box and the site left nave bar? It should just work. You mean it doesn't? Argggg (next section). Roger (talk) 14:16, 6 September 2013 (CDT)


(Pat, thanks for bringing this up)


The Search box (top right) takes you to an article instead of to search results when we happen to have an article that exactly matches your search term--searching for "writing" takes you directly to the Writing page instead of showing you search results. This is broken behavior because that page is not necessarily the page you want. You might want one of our other pages that contain the work "writing". This "Go" feature got into the software because it, presumably, was deemed useful on Wikipedia which is the dominant force guiding the features in the MediaWiki software. I think this "Go" feature is not good for Teflpedia. We have lots of pages that someone searching "writing" may want and the Search feature should help him find them, simply and without confusion.


This is the way it is done on Wikipedia and Rationalwiki. I think it actually works. Nothing stays the same on the Web forever. Sometimes we find ourselves relearning how to do something because it has changed, me included...

Note the drop down search suggestions that appear as you type your search terms into the top right search box. Those drop down suggestions are generated from a list of our page titles, not from page texts. The idea is to skip the search results page and take you directly to an article page. So,

  • To go directly to a page listed in the search box drop down list,
    click on the page in the drop down list that you want to go to.
  • To see a search results page, either
    (a) type more search terms into the box till none of our page titles exactly matches your search, or
    (b) click the last item in the search box drop down menu, the one that has the label 'Search our pages for:' above it.

I hadn't realized that last item was there in the drop down search suggestions cuz I hadn't been looking, but it is. :-) It was previously labeled 'containing...' which didn't mean much to me. So I have changed it to 'Search our pages for:' instead. I'd like to put a 'Go to page:' label above the other choices, to make it clear that is what they do, but I haven't figured out how to. And folks will figure it out. Roger (talk) 22:37, 8 September 2013 (CDT)

IPA symbols

I think that articles such as IPA phonetic symbol (vowel) /u:/ should be renamed for several reasons.

My proposition: rename IPA phonetic symbol (vowel) /u:/ to "IPA phoneme /u:/". Ghoti (talk) 15:10, 1 November 2013 (CDT)

I'm fairly relaxed about the matter, but I've had little or nothing to do with most of the phonetics articles. It would probably be best to wait for an opinion from User:Technopat before making wholesale changes though as he is responsible for most of them.--Bob M (talk) 15:31, 1 November 2013 (CDT)
Greetings all. Fine by me. I seem to remember the issue of whether to use "phonemic" or "phonetic" being raised somewhere, at some time, but obviously nothing came of it. My only concern is/was for easy to find/consult article titles for teachers and students alike. By including that simplistic "vowel" or "consonant" in the title I reckoned it would be faster and/or easier to jump to another article page that might tie in nicely with a particular pronunciain aspect, especially when checking out [corresponding category page].
Regarding your intention to write "proper" articles on each symbol, maybe we could find some efficient/effective way of differentiating such articles from the existing pages (which are merely pronunciation wordlistṣ). In other words, with the IPA phonetic symbol [e] article you mention above, maybe we could also have an associated page called IPA phonetic symbol 〚e〛(wordlist). Either way, I'm easy on this, and am unlikely to veto anything :) Cheers!