Jump to content

User talk:Dcljr

Add topic
From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Latest comment: 4 years ago by Dcljr in topic Proposal to close Old English Wikipedia

Please note: My native language is English. - dcljr



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


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

Wikimedia News dates


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)Reply

Re: Ripuarian


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)Reply


For your work with Wikimedia News

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



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

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)Reply
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)Reply

Protocol relative urls


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)Reply

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

Marathi Wikisource


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)Reply

Wikimedia News


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)Reply

Don't next milestone of Wiktionnary


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 (talk) 4 June 2012 (UTC)

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)Reply

25 Millionth articles


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: . Bennylin 16:56, 21 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

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


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

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


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



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 (UTC)

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

Fixed date


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)Reply

Changes to Wikimedia News page counts



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)Reply

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)Reply
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)Reply
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)Reply
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)Reply
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)Reply
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)Reply
I made a few embellishments. Cheers, ResMar 20:21, 5 April 2015 (UTC)Reply

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)Reply

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)Reply

Missing Wikisources added


I added the missing Wikisources to Wikistats as you requested. I used a Phabricator task at https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T100484 to keep track. Best, Mutante (talk) 01:27, 29 May 2015 (UTC)Reply

Konkani Wikipedia discussion


Hello Dcljr, the Latin script pages were not imported. Please see Requests_for_new_languages/Wikipedia_Goan_Konkani#Request_to_the_community_and_to_LangCom_to_include_the_Latin_script_articles Regards, The Discoverer (talk) 11:39, 24 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

Urdu Wikipedia


"Recommended article-count milestones are ... 10k increments to 100k" or 30k, 40k, 50, 60k, 70k, 80k, 90k and 100k!
Also the milestone 75 000 is not present in the table Wikipedias. --Antonio1952 (talk) 21:57, 16 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

Yes, "Recommended". Milestones aren't strictly limited to that list, it's just that others are generally considered not significant enough to include. If you must remove the item, go ahead. I added it back simply because it was a real milestone, not a fake one and not due to vandalism. - dcljr (talk) 01:33, 17 August 2015 (UTC)Reply
The milestone 75000 has not been used for Malagasy Wikipedia. I remove "Urdu milestone" for uniformity. --Antonio1952 (talk) 10:03, 17 August 2015 (UTC)Reply



There are: 30M on 20 October 2013, 25M on 19 February 2013, 20M on 22 October 2011 and 10M on 26 March 2008. I have only added the last one! --Antonio1952 (talk) 12:50, 14 September 2015 (UTC)Reply



See you next time. Clarence Chuang (talk) 10:28, 23 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

What future IdeaLab campaigns would you like to see?


Hi there,

I’m Jethro, and I’m seeking your help in deciding topics for new IdeaLab campaigns that could be run starting next year. These campaigns aim to bring in proposals and solutions from communities that address a need or problem in Wikimedia projects. I'm interested in hearing your preferences and ideas for campaign topics!

Here’s how to participate:

Take care,

I JethroBT (WMF), Community Resources, Wikimedia Foundation. 03:34, 5 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

Future IdeaLab Campaigns results


Last December, I invited you to help determine future ideaLab campaigns by submitting and voting on different possible topics. I'm happy to announce the results of your participation, and encourage you to review them and our next steps for implementing those campaigns this year. Thank you to everyone who volunteered time to participate and submit ideas.

With great thanks,

I JethroBT (WMF), Community Resources, Wikimedia Foundation. 23:56, 26 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Open Call for Individual Engagement Grants


Greetings! The Individual Engagement Grants (IEG) program is accepting proposals until April 12th to fund new tools, research, outreach efforts, and other experiments that enhance the work of Wikimedia volunteers. Whether you need a small or large amount of funds (up to $30,000 USD), IEGs can support you and your team’s project development time in addition to project expenses such as materials, travel, and rental space.

With thanks, I JethroBT (WMF), Community Resources 15:56, 31 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

Which of two tamplates was used. (just curious )


Hi Dcljr, thank you for your intervention on [3] with explanation of {{Brisanje|{{Neprikladan_sadržaj|datum=}}. But I tried on sh.empty page/sandbox and it seems that on Sh.wiki works this one {{Brisanje|Neprikladan_sadržaj|datum=}} for speedy deletion (without {{). Maybe some one can check which one was used by local admin. 03:09, 14 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

The original poster probably intended to say {{Brisanje|Neprikladan_sadržaj|datum=}}. I wasn't sure, so I just wrapped their wikicode in 'nowiki' tags to prevent any possible problems from having the template-open code with no template-close. The discussion is closed now, anyway, so it doesn't really matter anymore. (Since I'm not an admin nor a steward, I can't check to see what was on that page before it was deleted.) - dcljr (talk) 01:09, 15 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

Fiji Hindi


I am a native speaker of Fiji Hindi. I was born in Fiji. Fiji Hindi is the mother tongue of about a third of the population and is also used as a common language in those areas with a large concentration of Fijians of Indian descent. Within Fiji, the language is simply referred to as Hindi, but to distinguish it from Standard Hindi, native speakers call this language Fiji Hindi. Standard Hindi is also used in Fiji for formal and religious purposes. For your information, I have been a test wiki administrator since 2007 and administrator on Fiji Hindi Wikipedia since 2008. Girmitya (talk) 12:40, 16 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, I thought native Fiji Hindi speakers called the language "Fiji Baat" or "फ़िजी बात" or "Hindustani", as implied at w:Fiji Hindi. - dcljr (talk) 00:18, 17 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

Hello; In this page, is over second closure for Nahuatl Wikipedia. Regards.--Marrovi (talk) 06:18, 9 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

Reason for decrease in number of dewikiversity admins


Hello. In response to your edit, I would like to point out that the relevant log entries can be found here. Best regards, PiRSquared17 (talk) 01:32, 13 March 2019 (UTC)Reply

@PiRSquared17: Ah, thanks. I didn't think to check the user rights log here at Meta… - dcljr (talk) 01:42, 13 March 2019 (UTC)Reply

Barnstar for you

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
For continuously updating Wikimedia News for the past >8 years, and sporadically before that starting with your first edit there 14 years ago. PiRSquared17 (talk) 23:20, 18 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

Project milestones in Wikimedia News


Thanks for providing these. ↠Pine () 20:07, 1 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

Proposal to close Old English Wikipedia


The reason I re-opened was not because I want it closed, (well, I do want it closed, but that's not why I re-opened it), it is because when a closure is rejected, there is usually a notice explaining it, but this time, there's not, so I think it should be re-opened because the rejection is not explained. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 2604:3d08:d180:4500:20ff:b6c0:c7a5:8c18 (talk) 28 April 2020

Then a better approach would probably be to contact the person who closed it. It's kind of pointless to reopen a proposal that has been closed for 8½ years. - dcljr (talk) 03:49, 28 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, I might have fixed the problem, see https://meta.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:SPQRobin. (User:2604:3d08:d180:4500:20ff:b6c0:c7a5:8c18)
—The preceding comment was added by 2604:3D08:D180:4500:802E:A035:2F35:4C33 (talk) 23:57, 28 April 2020

Why are there two IP addresses in the previous reply? 2604:3D08:D180:4500:547E:5CA3:3658:189 18:59, 6 May 2020 (UTC)Reply
Because the same IP editor will sometimes edit under multiple addresses, either as assigned by their internet provider under different sessions or as set up dynamically during the same session by software they are using. The blue links lead to lists of contributions made by the linked address, showing which IP address was in use for which edit. - dcljr (talk) 20:58, 6 May 2020 (UTC)Reply
I know that, but why are there two IP addresses in the same comment?
—The preceding comment was added by 2604:3D08:D180:4500:547E:5CA3:3658:189 (talk)
Because I added the attribution to 2604:3D08:D180:4500:802E:A035:2F35:4C33 afterwards, using the {{unsigned}} template, since the original comment was not signed in the usual way. (I just did the same thing to your last comment, as you can see above.) Sometimes such attribution will be done automatically by a bot (particularly on article talk pages), but these were done "manually" by me. The usual way of signing your own comments is to use four tildes (~~~~), although there may be a button you can press to do the same thing, depending on what user interface you are using when you leave comments. - dcljr (talk) 21:59, 6 May 2020 (UTC)Reply