Talk:List of Wikipedias/Archive 3

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

This is an archived discussion page. Do not add any new comments to this page. Add them to the current talk page.

← previous archive | current talk page | next archive →


Romani instead of Vlax Romani[edit]

Hi! For the Romani Wikipedia it appears the English name Vlax Romani, which is not correct, since this Wiki is in the generic Romani, not just for a dialect. Thanks, Desiphral 07:56, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Problem solved, Desiphral 13:26, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Why was then the rom code used for tests (which was correct to indicate generic Romani) changed into rmy which is really assigned in ISO 639 only for the Vlax Romany variety?
If the wiki is really generic Romani (like it was during the tests) then the Wiki was created with the wrong rmy code (and the code used during tests was correct... How could the admins at the Wikimedia Foundation make such unbelievable error when assigning the code for the new Wiki, and ignore the comments that were sent during the testsand the desire of controbutors to create a generic Romani wiki, and that proposed the correct rom code? Verdy P 14:53, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think it is better to have a solution earlier than later (when this wiki will grow and it will have stronger consequences to switch from rmy to rom). Which would be the steps required to assign the real code? Desiphral 22:08, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Czech[edit]

The czech local name is subject to complex inflection, "Čeština" is a generic noun used for talking about the language, and "Česky" means "[in] Czech", so it should be used for other lanuage-links, etc. Could this be reflected here as a lot of new wikies seem to take the erroneous "Čeština" from here. (the English Wikipedia even used to use "Česká" which means "Czech [something in the feminine]" (eg. Česká Wikipedie), and is often used exactly as an example of incorrect inflection (Já mluvit česka! instead of Já mluvím česky.)) It could just have an exclamation mark next to the name that links to a foot-note or something. +Hexagon1 (t) 08:47, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Altered the local language template into "Česky" RobiH 23:02, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. +Hexagon1 (t) 12:01, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism against URDU?[edit]

Urdu is reduced to 0 - zero-  ???

Togrim, user of the norwegian wikipedia and frequent upgrader of the wikipedia news page, 2006-06-22

Fixed. RobiH 19:39, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism against NORFOK???[edit]

The advancement of the Norfok wikipedia to 95 articles, appears to be pure vandalism done by a person calling himself Bob Saget?

Shouldnt somebody stamp with a heavy foot on this "funny" creep?

Togrim, 2006-06-26

Tnx for fixing it! Togrim 2006-06-30

Ancient (/Classical) Greek[edit]

Can I propose an Ancient Greek Wikipedia? 82.198.250.77 10:40, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism against Ossetian, Armenian Quechua, Yi and Waray-Waray?[edit]

All are set at Zero, wrongly as I can see.

What is going on here?

Togrim, 2006-28-06

The hosting server was out of order. RobiH 23:23, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Separate wikipedia?[edit]

I'm confused, why is there a separate Uyghur wikipedia here? It currently has 30415 articles. --203.109.218.26 04:24, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Languages around a wiki-globe (logo)[edit]

It is interesting to know the rule for languages to be around the Wikipedia logo on the first page. Is it > 100'000 or this place is only for 10 languages? Mashiah Davidson 21:36, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The current rule is only for the first 10 languages which have the most articles. However, I hope that more languages can be around the Wikipedia logo, since it is ironic that some of the most used languages (e.g. Chinese) are not there. -- Kevinhksouth 13:02, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Would you please to show me the rule as a link. Mashiah Davidson 15:01, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is no rule. Feel free to submit a better design suggestion to Www.wikipedia.org template. RobiH 22:53, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In this case I will rearrange my question. What is the rule for the current design?. Ten languages or it is supposed that there may be 12 or more? Mashiah Davidson 11:47, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, now I understood =) Will ask Russian people, for me the design is a bit more compex than just 10 minutes to smooth out :=) Mashiah Davidson 19:39, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Number format[edit]

This was briefly mentioned above, but can the number formats used on this page be standardised?

  • the table section titles use commas as separators - eg. "10,000+ articles"
  • the numbers in the tables have no separators
  • the numbers in the Grand Total have dots as separators

This is ugly. --David Edgar 10:43, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]


I have changed the format in this way:

table section and grand total use a space as thousands seperator, numbers in the table use no seperators.

I have done this after reading w:ISO_31-0#Numbers "Numbers consisting of long sequences of digits can be made more readable by separating them into groups, preferably groups of three, separated by a small space. ISO 31-0 specifies that such groups of digits should never be separated by a comma or point, as these are reserved for use as the decimal sign. Also see w:Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style_(dates_and_numbers)/archive30#Number_notation.

I didnt put the spaces into the numbers in the tables itself, because i think it would increase the table width too much and using the seperator is optional in the ISO. Fine with this? Mutante 09:42, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

West Flemish, Turkmen, Irish wrongly at ZERO[edit]

Is this the same error that hit Ossetian, Armenian, Quechua, Yi and Waray-Waray recently?

Togrim 2006-07-08

Vandalism at Kashmiri wikipedia[edit]

The following 80 articles should be deleted:[1]. Kashmiri was never written in the Latin script!

--203.109.206.239 03:37, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It depends of who is writing the language. It's well known that using the Hindi script is a problem for Kashmiris in India, and in Pakistan using the Arabic script is also a problem (although they are muslem, it is more the farsi culture that prevails in that region, something that Arabic has wiped out of Pakistan). As they want to escape from both influences, there are tons of references on the web promoting the adoption of a newer script for Kashmiri, that would unify the people living in Pakistan, India and bordering countries in the North.
So there are serious proposals for adopting the Latin script, and books published in Kashmiri with this script, with an immediate enormous advantage: the ease of publication and ease of communication which would really help in improving the litteracy of Kashmiri and would promote this culture. For now, the current split between Arabic and Indian scripts is really a problem for preserving this unique culture. (Some have proposed to unify Kashmiri with Arabic, like with the Urdu language, which also has strong islamic influence). 86.221.101.95 14:42, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Moved from Notes[edit]

I have moved the following comments from the Notes section because they either appear to be no longer valid, or are more discussion than content. GeorgeStepanek 10:23, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hiri Motu has one article, in gibberish about Sex.
  • The raw statistics seem to count pages that have been administratively deleted (see Afar as an example)! Although they are still in the database, not blank and still counted as "good" pages, they can't be reached (not even from public database dumps). So the raw statistics will include many invisible old spam pages... The net effect is that English Wikipedia may in fact include far fewer articles than reported here.
  • Norfolk seems to be totally vandalized. Every link shows pictures of one Bob Saget. It should be canceled. It is not be expected, that a living wikipedia in norfolk will ever exist. It has nearly no native speakers (so far as I know). Ahanta 13:44, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Links in the Language column[edit]

Should the links in the 'Language' column always be for the English Wikipedia? Looking at Template:N en/list I notice around 20 or so aren't... which sort of defeats the purpose of the 'Language (local)' column, surely? --213.107.21.212 00:01, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oops. Seems that the majority link to the language's Wikipedia article in that language — but why the inconsistency? --213.107.21.212 00:05, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not every language wikipedia has an article about its own language. Where not, the link resorted to the english article about that language. RobiH 10:41, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I argee that the 'Language' column should always link to the article in English Wikipedia, while the 'Language (Local)' column should link to the local language Wikipedia, if it has the article of its own language. -- Kevinhksouth 13:13, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Language in English link is fixed. Language in native list needs to be completed. RobiH 08:01, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bosnian Wikipedia reached 10.000[edit]

It should be on big list.

Norwegian Bokmal[edit]

The entry for no: says only Norwegian. Correct title would be Norwegian Bokmål (or Norwegian Bokmal) as in the Norwegian translation. See entry on Norwegian further up on the discussion list for an explanation of Norwegian (ISO:no) vs Norwegian Bokmål (ISO:nb) vs Norwegian Nynorsk (ISO:nn). en:User:Jørgen/84.208.64.221 19:20, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Adding a 250.000 milestone?[edit]

The recent (anonymous) introduction of the 250.000 paragraph is inconsequent and doesn't improve the readibility of the list. I propose to restore the original powers of 10 paragraphstructure. Otto ter Haar 08:41, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Tuf-Kat 18:52, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I agree as well. --FreshFruitsRule 20:54, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I DISAGREE.

  • What do you mean by inconsequent? Breaking the fury of the zeros? Disrespect for "The Zeratic Myth"? Ignoring the redempting powers of 10?
  • For god's sake, we have 1+ and 10+ and 100+ JUST FOR THE ZERATIC FUN and we can't have 250.000+ and 500.000+ (which are way much more relevant) just because it's "(anonymous) introduction" (whatever this fetish may mean) and "inconsequent"??
  • Someday the list will have to become "inconsequent" anyway, as we will have to add a 500.000 milestone, too. It's just natural to "zoom into" the top positions; you know, just like cities are marked on a geographic map (no 10s, no 100s, but many 250ks and 500ks).
  • NOTE we are talking about the number of articles in encyclopedias, not about the "fascination of numbers". The difference between 1 and 10 or 10 and 100, ( although admittedly fascinating :D ) is MUCH LESS relevant than the difference between 250k and 100k. When it comes to the number of articles of an encyclopedia, it is not multiplication by ten that matters, it is the addition by, say, 100.000s that matters. We want these statistics to be sane, relevant, and *useful*, not an elementary school lesson on how to count to ten as many times as it gets.

Bottom line: the list should be functional, not a childplay with the powers of ten.

Now I want my own host of ruling fruits and tough cats that strongly disagree "as well", together with me. I hope you don't mind my style (I am a comedy writer, you know) ;)

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.57.148.76 (talk • contribs) 19:33, 8 August 2006 (UTC).[reply]

I found it odd that you claimed the 250,000+ list was "approved". Except for a very few processes at the various Wikimedia projects, decisions like these are made by consensus on talk pages (like this one), not through approval by some higher power. By the way, your edit was called "anonymous" because you haven't logged in, so all we know about you is your IP address and that you're a comedy writer. Not that you have to give your real name when creating an account, of course. :^) (If you decide to create an account here, please remember to sign your talk-page comments by typing ~~~~.) – Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs) 01:32, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Please restore the original list (without the 250k mark). It breaks the reading of the first languages as it adds empty space. It is not necessary as not enough languages can be seperated that way. It wasn't voted anywhere which is a bit non-logical since every other user will fall on this page and notice the modification. It will clash with the main page's subdivision (see [2]). Lincher 12:29, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Historical[edit]

Is there any way one can find out exactly how many articles a wikipedia had at what time? --FreshFruitsRule 20:38, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

you can go through the version history of this page. This is tediuous and time consumng, and probably not very exact, since you would not catch the times between the variuos (incomplete) updates. You can find quite some data and charts at http://stats.wikimedia.org/ - select Wikipedia, and continue your favourite language, you'll see. -- Purodha Blissenbach 21:47, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. --216.106.103.82 (that is me, FreshFruitsRule), not logged in) 21:54, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What happened?[edit]

I don't know what happened but only the first 35 or so largest wiki are showing up as readable output now. Codex Sinaiticus 23:53, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The following HTML comment:
<!-- WARNING: template omitted, pre-expand include size too large -->
Appears after every template call beyond Nynorsk. This is because the page is transcluding templates that are far too large, namely {{N en}}, {{N local}}, and {{N wiki article}}, and including them so many times. This is a side-effect of Tim Starling's new attempt to prevent denial-of-service attacks. I recommend having Mutante revert the update script to the longer version that was used before (which didn't transclude anything). [3] See also #Native name of czech language.
 – Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs) 02:11, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Me too :( -- Alpha for knowledge (Talk / Contributions) 13:49, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Same problem for me too; and it applies to trying to see old versions, as well. - 198.207.218.1 21:00, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It was only a matter of time untill the page is back. AshrafSS 06:32, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The page is not back. The "fix" was to replace broken code of templates with some data. When the page shall be updated, it will likely be defective again. --84.60.245.132

There is the link 'old' version and the newer version available all the time. Do you still need something different? Tell me and i can provide a changed version. Mutante 20:42, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at the source of html page of a problematic version (like this) you can see after the last template following message:
Pre-expand include size: 1048562 bytes
Post-expand include size: 70717 bytes
Template argument size: 2491 bytes
Maximum: 1048576 bytes
So now there is a limit on the mediawiki software on template inclusion. And since this page is huge, I dont think it is possible to restracture this page with smaller templates without exceeding the limit. And the solution is; generate the page without using templates. --Dbl2010 19:59, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Another possibility is to split the page itself up into multiple pages, so that we get a 1,000+ page and a 10,000+ page etc. But then again, someone might come along later claiming that we desperately need a separate 2,500+ page and so on... – Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs) 07:03, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If you ask me, just switch back to the old version. Using the templates seemed confusing to me in the first place anyways. I'd rather follow KISS instead of saving some lines in the source code that is being pasted anyways. Mutante 18:25, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

English only?[edit]

Why does this page exists in English only? Is it so difficult to translate it to other languages? 83.227.25.202 16:30, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This list in other languages - Crzycheetah 17:55, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

why not use a bot?[edit]

Instead of updating this page manually, why not use a bot to update it atumatically evey some period of time? I dont think it would be hard to write a script to do that. AshrafSS 06:45, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure if you realize this already: Mutante maintains a script off-site that automatically fetches the article counts; we just copy that script's output to this page every now and then. I agree that it would be useful to have a bot automatically synchronize this page as well, but then we might have to lock it to prevent users from changing the page's layout and breaking the bot. – Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs) 07:05, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It would work the other way round - allow people to alter the page, and include the parts that should be left untouched from a template. That would even avoid edit conflicts between humans and the bot. -- Purodha Blissenbach 10:23, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

good idea Purodha except that there has been a problem with templates before, so I'm not sure if it will work. AshrafSS 12:14, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wanting something that pastes automatically is many people's first natural thought, but experience taught me that a lminimum level of human / manual control is a good idea, because things can change (in the pages that we pull stats from, in the destination we are pasting it to, scripts can have bugs etc) and the whole thing must be a 10 times more reliable if we let it post automatically and dont want it to mess up things some day. I'd rather keep it this way, because enough people are willing to paste and i think its a good balance between full-automatic and all-manual, which both have their pros and cons. Mutante 18:31, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Native name for Kazakh[edit]

It should be 'Қазақша' (just with uppercase 1st letter) Please fix it. --AlefZet 13:35, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Adding another column[edit]

Is it possible to add another column with the value of how many words each wikipedia got? AshrafSS 23:52, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mutante's tool pulls data from MediaWiki's Special:Statistics page. [4] Since that page doesn't provide a word count, Mutante would have to get the data by analyzing the database dumps. But we already have Erik Zachte's (public domain) Wikistats, which includes a comparison of total words, among many other things. – Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs) 02:00, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Volapük problem[edit]

In the script-updated wikitext for the table, "Volapük" has been rendered "Volap�k", the second-to-last character of which (�) I don't seem to have a font for. I'm not sure what character it is, but both the English Wikipedia and the Volapük one use "ü". I've changed the latest version of the page, but this needs to be fixed, I assume, in the script itself. - dcljr 03:53, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It looks alright to me. Your browser might be choosing the wrong character encoding when displaying the s23 page – other editors have probably had the same problem, so they ended up copy-pasting the code in the wrong character encoding. Try switching the encoding to Western (Windows-1252) or Western (ISO 8859-1). – Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs) 07:13, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, when looking at the original wikitext in ISO-8859-1, it shows up correctly. But all the "full updates" by User:Dbl2010 seem to have the same problem: the relevant line is being rendered as follows.
126 [[w:Volap�k language|Volap�k]] [[w:Volap�k language|Volapük]] vo 396 1724 1788 3 89 76
In other words, MediaWiki isn't even recognizing the links (I've used "nowiki" tags here to force the behavior I'm seeing). I've updated the table again to fix the problem. - dcljr 06:41, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]


I updated the list using provided link. That page loads as utf-8 by default and i see a Volap?k too. And if i change to iso8859-1 i see "ü". Strange thing is I see the "ü" in word "Türkçe" in both cases correctly. Something specifically wrong with Volapük. Maybe S23 should check that. --Dbl2010 06:54, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I am having the same issue and it seems most people do. Please fix this! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 154.35.1.12 (talk • contribs) 20:51, 28 August 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Job for Bot[edit]

Can someone make bot that will update this big list. I think that shouldn't be so hard to make it. There is already bot on irc that can count number on articles, admins, users and so. Try to go to #wikipedia-sr and type @broj hu and you will see how it works. Thank if you can do this with irc bot, i think it's much easier to make a bot that will update this page. --Sasa Stefanovic 02:57, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We've discussed that many times before, but the problem is that the bot can be so easily broken if someone decides to alter anything on the page. The webpage (not part of Meta) that generates the numbers is already run by a bot, so it would be trivial to get it working here, but keeping it working is the hard part. – Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs) 04:42, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]


This is an archived discussion page. Do not add any new comments to this page. Add them to the current talk page.

← previous archive | current talk page | next archive →

Vandalism![edit]

Italian and Waray-Waray have been switched.

It happened again!

Slovak and Indonesian have been switched!

And it has not been fixed yet!

Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_Wikipedias/Archive_3&oldid=23525279"