User talk:Dcljr

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Please note: My native language is English. - dcljr


Template:Lang*[edit]

Did you see all the Template:Lang* ? Might be useful in relation to your work. See User:Suruena/i18n (en) as well.

(Note: Above comment from TheDJ. - dcljr)

Lang name templates[edit]

Content moved to Meta talk:Templates for translating language names. - dcljr 10:45, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Wikimedia News dates[edit]

Some dates I get on Wikipedia's press releases for milestones (example: [1]). Others I get by counting the articles created since the milestone, on pages like this, which gives the exact date. -- Mário e Dário 21:17, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Re: Ripuarian[edit]

Thanks for following up. I must've misread the deletion log, thinking it was vandalism, since so many of the pages looked alike. It wouldn't be the first time an article count got broken: some time ago, a couple wikis' counters broke for months at a time. – Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs) 20:19, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Barnstar[edit]

For your work with Wikimedia News

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Przykuta (talk) 22:13, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

1.18[edit]

...counts pages differently it seems Seb az86556 07:33, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

It seems weird that only those wikis were affected (enough to drop below their most recent milestone). Given the amounts that the counts dropped (anywhere from 77 to 4,468 pages), I would have expected many other languages to have also dropped below their milestones. Is it that the article counts were just plain wrong for these wikis, and this change has fixed the problem? Also, do you have a better link (more "user friendly") than this manual page to explain the difference(s) in how articles are counted in 1.18? - dcljr 18:46, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
Unfortunately not. It was just my first guess since that's the only thing that coincided with the change. I've posted the question @talk Seb az86556 01:00, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Protocol relative urls[edit]

Thank you for updating Wiktionary/Table, but could you in the future use mw:MediaWiki 1.18#Protocol-relative_URLs? Ruslik 18:02, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Replied at User talk:Ruslik0#Protocol relative urls. - dcljr 10:20, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Marathi Wikisource[edit]

Dear Friend, May be you are already aware , beginning of February 2012 month the Language Committee and WMF approved new wikisource projects http://mr.wikisource.org which is independent project for Marathi Language.This has been possible with your active contribution , support and best wishes towards Marathi language Wikisource project and we are very much thankful to you for the same.

The new Marathi Wikisource community invites you and requests for same support to http://mr.wikisource.org in times to come.

नमस्कार, आपणास कदाचित कल्पना असेल कि फेब्रुवारी २०१२ च्या सुरवातीस लँग्वेज कमिटी आणि विकिमिडिया फाऊंडेशननने मराठी भाषेकरिता स्वतंत्र http://mr.wikisource.org विकिप्रकल्पास मान्यता दिली आहे. हे केवळ आपल्या शुभेच्छा, सक्रीय योगदान आणि पाठींब्याने शक्य झाले आहे; आणि आपल्या योगदाना बद्दल समस्त मराठी बांधवांतर्फे धन्यवाद.

आपण आपले सक्रीय सहभाग, कार्य, पाठबळ http://mr.wikisource.org या प्रक्ल्पास देऊन मराठी भाषिकांचे हे मुक्त ग्रंथालय सर्व अंगाने समृद्ध करत रहावे म्हणून हे सादर निमंत्रण आणि नम्र विनंती.

आपण कॉमन विकिस्रोत प्रकल्पात,मराठी विकिबुक्स अथवा मराठी विकिपीडीया प्रकल्पात प्रताधिकारमुक्त साहित्याचे केलेले लेखन नवीन मराठी विकिस्रोत प्रकल्पात व्यवस्थीत स्थानांतरीत झाले आहे का हे तपासण्यात कृपया सहाय्य करावे.

आपला नम्र

Mahitgar 06:59, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Wikimedia News[edit]

Hi Dcljr. Just a quick message to let you know that I undid your edit saying that the Wikimania 2011 wiki has been closed, it hasn't quite been closed yet as the bug, <https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=36571> is not marked as resolved fixed as of yet. Thanks. The Helpful One 00:44, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Don't next milestone of Wiktionnary[edit]

Please don't update to the next milestone of Wiktionnary. After until the English Wiktionnary reached 3 900 000 entries. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.227.172.214 (talk) 4 June 2012‎

Replied on your talk page and started a thread at Talk:Wikimedia News#Showing coming milestones?. Please post any followup on this matter there instead of here. Thanks. - dcljr (talk) 10:59, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

25 Millionth articles[edit]

Methink that's quite an achievement, although I don't know what (since it's not in the order of ten), and thus deserves it's own logo: Wikipedia-25-million-articles.svg. Bennylin 16:56, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Sure. - dcljr (talk) 00:05, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

You have new messages
Hello, Dcljr. You have new messages at Meta Talk:Babylon.

by ReviDiscussSUL Info at 08:10, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

You have new messages
Hello, Dcljr. You have new messages at Varnent's talk page.

Revert[edit]

But the status is not "approved" in the page.Requests_for_new_languages/Wikivoyage_Finnish,Requests_for_new_languages/Wikivoyage_Hungarian and Requests_for_new_languages/Wikivoyage_Chinese. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Byfserag (talk) 28 September 2013‎

Replied at User talk:Byfserag#Revert. - dcljr (talk) 00:40, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Fixed date[edit]

Hello there! I've entered improper date and you've fixed it. Thanks so much and nice to meet you. -- Wagino 20100516 (talk) 10:57, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Changes to Wikimedia News page counts[edit]

Hello,

You recently changes the contents of Wikimedia News in a rather grand way. I can't even wrap my head around how it's possible that an article counter could have a 98% inaccuracy. The Signpost has been using this page for a long time now to keep abreast of project milestones, and so it's a significant concern to us that so many of our milestones may be flatly wrong. I wanted to speak with you and ask if you could provide a detailed summary of the issue and how it's been resolved, perhaps one publishable as a short lead story in our pages? I saw your extensive notes from 2012 but am not sure how to interpret them in the context of your most recent changes. Thanks, Resident Mario (talk) 03:28, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Note: I am cross-posting this all over the place because I am never sure, when contacting people on Meta, whether or not they will respond in a timely manner; I know I would not myself. [User:Resident Mario]
Basically, what happened back in May 2012 to Wiktionary and Wikisource (articles recounted after years of being wrong by varying degrees) just happened to the "rest" of the projects (except Wikibooks). The underlying "explanation" is still the same as back then: changes (intentional and otherwise) in the way articles have been counted over time, as well as miscellaneous long-standing bugs that miscounted new articles in various ways. (One notable bug discussion that my 2012 account doesn't link to is this one about the article-importing bug [other reports related to this same bug are in the 2012 account, but this one gives more recent information]). I have not been keeping track of all the bugs that affect article counting, so I don't know how many are still open; searching Phabricator for things like "updateArticleCount.php" and "NUMBEROFARTICLES" might reveal more recent info. You might also want to contact some developers who have been involved in these article-counting issues, if you haven't already: according to this task, "Reedy" is the developer who has been running the updateArticleCount.php script in response to bug requests, and "Nemo_bis" is the one who actually scheduled the monthly automatic recounts. They might know more about known open and recently closed article-counting bugs.
BTW, I should point out that the large changes in article counts are not due to any particular recent bug fix; they are due to the fact that the updateArticleCount.php maintenance script counts articles "from scratch" on each wiki, using the "official" definition of what constitutes an article. Because of server-load issues, this "totally correct" count cannot be done very often (which is why we are only now getting the script run periodically instead of "randomly" in response to individual bug reports). The MediaWiki software therefore relies on accurate tracking of article creation and deletion to keep a correct running total {{NUMBEROFARTICLES}}. As all the evidence I have cited attests, this tracking has never really been completely accurate. (Maybe One Day…)
My recommendation for creating a Signpost article about this would be to carefully read through User:Dcljr/Article counts and check out all the links, as well as the links mentioned at Wikimedia News#demotions (at the very bottom of the March 29 entry, I mean). (See also w:Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Article count jumps by 100,000 in a day... for a very succinct explanation of the article-count change on the English Wikipedia.) Like I said, I think my 2012 account is still relevant for explaining (however verbosely) why the article counts have been wrong for so long. If you have specific questions you think I can clear up for you, please ask them here. (I have e-mail notifications enabled on all my talk pages, as well as "e-mail this user" — although I'd prefer to stay on-wiki with this.) - dcljr (talk) 07:38, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
Thanks both for studying these matters. This conversation would deserve higher exposure by being pasted into Wikimedia Forum#Sudden changes of numbers of articles, I think. As dcljr says, no particular or unexpected inaccuracy was found; milestones are notoriously hard to calculate, because article count shifts continuously in all directions. The recalculation from scratch has to happen every now and then, and it's just yet another time-dependent variable in the milestone calculation. --Nemo 08:29, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
Understood. This reminds me a little of the situation IRL with economics—in particular how Nigeria leapfrogged the rest of the continent last year after it recalculated its GDP and discovered it had nearly two units of value for each one it believed it had before. Of course, seeing as how you have a statistician's degree you probably already know that :). Resident Mario (talk) 20:04, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
I can write in brief about this and point to your data pages. Would you be able to summarize your effort in slightly longer form? We can publish it as part of this week's N&N draft. Alternatively, if you want to go crazy (I encourage all sorts of crazy) you can file it in longer form as a special report. This week's publication deadline is the 8th, we'd want to run the brief note now but if you write a full report (which would be awesome) we can leave a brief note now and defer full coverage for your report, whenever that comes to. Resident Mario (talk) 20:14, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
I have typed up a quick explanation at User:Dcljr/Article count changes and started (well, sort of) a longer one on the same page. (I'll probably eventually move that content to Article counts revisited, which I created back in 2012, as a result of similar article-count changes seen in Wiktionaries and Wikisources on 10 May 2012.) @Resident Mario: I will directly edit en:Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2015-04-08/News and notes#Milestone counts to correct and slightly expand on your note there. (And while I've got your attention, @Nemo bis: can I ask you, why did you chose the 29th of every month rather than a day like the 28th, which every month has?) - dcljr (talk) 00:16, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
Awesome! I fashioned you a ticket at our special desk to keep track of this. Ping us there (or here?) when you're ready. ResMar 01:11, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
I made a few embellishments. Cheers, ResMar 20:21, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

There is no doubt that the Wikibooks counts are mostly wrong as usual. We could add Wikibooks as well, but first we'd need a manual run to see how long it takes and how much it stresses the DB. I can't predict how long it will take to get hold of a shell user to do this, please file the request. --Nemo 14:31, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Seems not: SiteStatsInit::articles() only checks for page_len > 0 so it's hardly different from "any".[2] --Nemo 21:51, 29 April 2015 (UTC)