You asked in an edit summary why MF-Warburg reverted your changes to the small table at Requests for new languages#Wikivoyage. The Wikivoyages listed at that table have already been approved by the Language Committee, so wikis will be created for them at some point in the future. The possibility of creating those Wikivoyages is not under discussion, so "approved" is the correct designation for them. The fact that some users have been discussing certain aspects of the future wikis is beside the point. I'm sure MF-Warburg will be by soon to undo your changes a second time, so I'm not going to bother. But in the future, when someone reverts you on a page like that (related to a specialized "official function" of the Foundation or a Committee, like creating or closing wikis), you should probably investigate who it is that reverted you and take the matter to their talk page instead of simply undoing their revert. MF-Warburg is a member of the Language Committee who actively maintains that page. Given those facts, I think we can assume he knew what he was doing. [:-)] - dcljr (talk) 22:48, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
- All I can say about this is, MF-Warburg has just pointed to incubator:Incubator:Community Portal#The Finnish / Chinese / Japanese / Hungarian Wikivoyages (which then points to incubator:Incubator:Wikivoyage import#Additional 8, as well) as an explanation. I don't have any first-hand knowledge about this beyond what I've said here. - dcljr (talk) 00:45, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
Upcoming IdeaLab Events: IEG Proposal Clinics
Superprotect letter update
Along with more hundreds of others, you recently signed Letter to Wikimedia Foundation: Superprotect and Media Viewer, which I wrote.
Today, we have 562 signatures here on Meta, and another 61 on change.org, for a total of 623 signatures. Volunteers have fully translated it into 16 languages, and begun other translations. This far exceeds my most optimistic hopes about how many might sign the letter -- I would have been pleased to gain 200 siguatures -- but new signatures continue to come.
I believe this is a significant moment for Wikimedia and Wikipedia. Very rarely have I seen large numbers of people from multiple language and project communities speak with a unified voice. As I understand it, we are unified in a desire for the Wikimedia Foundation to respect -- in actions, in addition to words -- the will of the community who has built the Wikimedia projects for the benefit of all humanity. I strongly believe it is possible to innovate and improve our software tools, together with the Wikimedia Foundation. But substantial changes are necessary in order for us to work together smoothly and productively. I believe this letter identifies important actions that will strongly support those changes.
Have you been discussing these issues in your local community? If so, I think we would all appreciate an update (on the letter's talk page) about how those discussions have gone, and what people are saying. If not, please be bold and start a discussoin on your Village Pump, or in any other venue your project uses -- and then leave a summary of what kind of response you get on the letter's talk page.
Finally, what do you think is the right time, and the right way, to deliver this letter? We could set a date, or establish a threshold of signatures. I have some ideas, but am open to suggestions.
Should FuzzyBot remove all potentially outdated translations?
Hello, thanks for adding multiple new translations in your language here at Meta-Wiki in recent years. Please join the discussion with your opinion: Should FuzzyBot automatically remove all potentially outdated translations?. Nemo (talk) 12:00, 1 March 2016 (UTC)