User talk:StevenJ81

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

Afrikaans | العربية | অসমীয়া | asturianu | azərbaycanca | Boarisch | беларуская | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | বাংলা | བོད་ཡིག | bosanski | català | کوردی | corsu | čeština | Cymraeg | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | ދިވެހިބަސް | Ελληνικά | emiliàn e rumagnòl | English | Esperanto | español | eesti | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | Nordfriisk | Frysk | galego | Alemannisch | ગુજરાતી | עברית | हिन्दी | Fiji Hindi | hrvatski | magyar | հայերեն | interlingua | Bahasa Indonesia | Ido | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | ភាសាខ្មែរ | 한국어 | kar | kurdî | Limburgs | lietuvių | Baso Minangkabau | македонски | മലയാളം | молдовеняскэ | Bahasa Melayu | မြန်မာဘာသာ | مازِرونی | Napulitano | नेपाली | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk | occitan | Kapampangan | polski | português | پښتو | Runa Simi | română | русский | sicilianu | سنڌي | සිංහල | slovenčina | slovenščina | Soomaaliga | shqip | српски / srpski | svenska | ślůnski | தமிழ் | тоҷикӣ | ไทย | Türkmençe | Tagalog | Türkçe | татарча/tatarça | ⵜⴰⵎⴰⵣⵉⵖⵜ  | українська | اردو | oʻzbekcha/ўзбекча | Tiếng Việt | 吴语 | 粵語 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/-

Filing cabinet icon.svg
SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} and sections whose most recent comment is older than 30 days. For the archive overview, see Archives.

Tech News: 2018-35[edit]

16:16, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

Wikipédja Gwiyannen ![edit]

Hi, it's me again, sorry if I was not connected in the last few days, it's because I had big personal problems and I'm probably going to live, at least for a while in Canada. next month, I know you think that I purposely harass you, but that's because this project is really important to me and my community, because the original Guianan Creole is disappearing the fact that it is close and very much like French which is unfortunately the only official language of French Guiana, and I thought that by creating the Guianan Wikipedia, the language would have had a chance to be reborn in some ways, and I wanted to do that with the community and my association before going to live in Canada, but I do not know what we forgot to do so that you did not want to approve this project, please help us, tell us one last time what to do and we promise we will !

Maybe if we delete all the useless pages and we keep only 500 pages that we fill as much as possible with at least 5 paragraphs, you think that it will be enough for a possible activation of the project, or something other than we forgot to do ??! Please help us, help me to realize one of my greatest dreams, especially during this difficult time that I am passing and that I feel that nothing succeeds me if you please help us !!! LeGuyanaisPure (talk) 15:01, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Just because I can't always answer the same day does not mean I'm not willing to answer. We're all volunteers, and you sometimes need to be at least a little patient.
I want to discuss the current status of the project with a couple of people at this point. I want to make sure that I'm not asking more of your page quality than I have a right to ask. I don't think that's true, but in any case it's more than time to have some other eyes looking at this. @MF-Warburg, SPQRobin, and Ooswesthoesbes: Please have a look at incubator:Wp/gcr and let me know if you think the project's pages are still too stubby, or whether it can be considered for approval. (Other requirements are satisfied.) StevenJ81 (talk) 14:52, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
I just did the usual 10 random pages test. My conclusion is the following:
  1. 3 pages of the Gana-type: too short to even be named a stub
  2. 4 year articles, ranging from the type 1792 until 1907
  3. 3 pages of the Kolonyalism-type: stubs, with Son (fyzik) being the longest
For that reason, I would consider this test underdevelopped, because the contents is still very monotone (country, year-based), and rather stubby. However, as there is not necessarily an absence of contents, I would rather advise the community to halt the creation of stubs, and instead focus on expanding the contents that is already there. It is pretty clear that there are many qualitatively good pages, such as Amérik di Sid, so it should be possible to create a set of pages with the same length and contents as that one. When you got enough pages like that, just present them to us, and - as far as I'm concerned (although I'm not the one who has to deal with that) - the test should be good to go. --OosWesThoesBes (talk) 15:04, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
I agreee with your assessment. --MF-W 22:54, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
@LeGuyanaisPure: As you can see, this is pretty consistent with what I've been telling you in recent months.
Still, OosWesThoesBes has a good point that I hadn't quite caught previously: You have a large number of "year" stubs and a large number of "geography" stubs. But what does the rest of the project look like?
I see you have about 2 500 pages now. Figure about 1 000 are year pages. Figure about 500 are geography pages. That leaves about 750 other pages to look at, plus whatever geography pages are not stubs. So I'll try to focus on that a little bit more.
What pages should you and your team focus on? Consider that Guyanais Wikipedia is not likely (any time soon) to become a full substitute for a large Wikipedia (French, in this case) as a general reference source. So what is the best place you can bring value to the Guyanais-speaking community? In my opinion, it would be on subjects of fairly local interest within Guyane:
  • Personalities within Guyane and neighboring places (and France, I imagine)
  • Geographic features of Guyane and neighboring places (and France)
  • Flora and fauna of Guyane and neighboring places
...I think you get the idea. And you should especially focus on items that are notable with respect to local interests, but may not have caught the attention of contributors to French Wikipedia.
Some time in the next few days I will do another "random 10" or "random 20" search, but completely ignoring "year" stubs and geography stubs. And I'll let you know how close I think you are. Hope this is helpful. StevenJ81 (talk) 13:56, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

Oooh, uuuhh, okay, now at least we know what you consider "pretty filled article" like "Amérik di Sid" and okay we don't create more articles, we focus instead on filling existing ones, and above all we are busy filling out articles about Guiana, its neighboring countries and France.

@StevenJ81: you see it, you still give us work, while we could have done it calmly without stress, once the Guianan Wikipedia created, but okay we go back to work !!! LeGuyanaisPure (talk) 20:48, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

There is no need to be stressed. If you show us your good will to expand the short articles and present us with a decent list of articles, LangCom will be more willing to accept the new subdomain :) --OosWesThoesBes (talk) 08:46, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

Shortened form for simple.wiki[edit]

Hello, thanks for your work in the LangCom. I just noticed on Proposals for closing projects/Closure of Simple English Wikipedia (3) that the shortening "SEWP" was used. It confused me, because se.wikipedia is the Northern Sami Wikipedia. Out of respect for the Sami projects, I'd prefer the "SE" code not be used for English. Thanks, Nemo 15:09, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

@Nemo bis: I am happy to change the formal closure, and will do so. However, please understand that such shortening is not uncommon within the communities of the Simple English projects. Accordingly, besides changing the formal closure:
  • I am not going to change all of the appearances of "SE" below that on the page. By context, it is clear that it refers to Simple English, and not Northern Sami. (And it appears in capitals, which ordinary language codes do not.)
  • I will do what I can going forward to make sure that at least on Meta, SE is not used further to refer to Simple English.
  • If you want to try to get the communities at Simple English Wikipedia and Simple English Wiktionary to change their practices even on their own projects, that is up to you; I am not going to go there. StevenJ81 (talk) 15:21, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Western Armenian translation[edit]

You are doing admirable work and this is very much appreciated. I have now translated for you the rules and regulations of the Western Armenian Wikipedia that you had created on incubator:Template:Wp/hyw Here is my Western Armenian translation of your text that you can use on the same page Check my translation at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Werldwayd/Articles-Test1001 I trust you to post it yourself as this will show your posting data whereas had I posted it myself my user name would have appeared... Werldwayd (talk) 20:30, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Tech News: 2018-36[edit]

16:48, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Archive notice[edit]

For anyone looking for archived discussions here: I just reorganized things a little bit. So please look at the archive index if you want to find something, rather than depending on the bot's edit summary. Thanks. StevenJ81 (talk) 20:28, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia Ottoman Turkish 4[edit]

Some days ago, you converted the status of this request from "verification ongoing" back to "discussion".

After that, I started a survey under "General comments" section that if those users are still supporting or opposing it, none of supporters responsed, and two opposers said that those supporters are political harasses only, and the entire project is just machine transliterated from trwiki, I've also sent an ombudsman privately to run a Checkuser and they said that contributors of incubator:Wp/ota are Likely Likely sockpuppets, so in my opinion we should reject this. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:45, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

As for the test project, as per above, this should even not be migrated to Wikia or Miraheze, that should be deleted immediately, and for Wp/ota itself, it should mention that a non-Wikimedia project in this language should be created on Wikia or Miraheze from scratch. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:50, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

  • @Liuxinyu970226: Neither you nor the ombudsman had any business privately running a Checkuser. If there was reason to believe there was a violation warranting a checkuser, it should have been stated publicly and put in as a steward request. If not, it shouldn't have happened at all. Please do not ever do that again.
  • Moving on, I moved this back to "discussion" because I couldn't get anyone on LangCom to comment one way or the other. I figured I'd circle back to it in a couple of months. That said ...
  • I think what you're telling me is that (a) there is no substantial quantity of original content at Wp/ota, and that (b) the content that exists there has been copied in (transliterated) from trwiki without proper attribution. Is that correct? If so, then please put in a deletion request at incubator:I:RFD. Thanks.
  • Finally, in theory someone can create an ota project on Incubator and it can live there indefinitely; that's the normal policy on substantial historical languages, and there are several tests in incubator:Category:Incubator:Test wikis/code/history of that type. (We can encourage people to work on such things outside, but by policy they are allowable on Incubator.) StevenJ81 (talk) 17:21, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  • About the first point: Liuxinyu, what the heck are you claiming? Ombudsmen are not allowed to run checks and they surely won't be stupid enough to do so. I just checked the checkuser logs on Meta, Incubator and Loginwiki and see nothing at all that supports your claim that such a check happened. Please refrain from spreading such lies immediately. --MF-W 18:12, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
I endorse MF-Warburg request to @Liuxinyu970226:, also I think further clarifications are needed, this is -definitely- a serious matter. --Vituzzu (talk) 18:34, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

@MF-Warburg and Vituzzu: How the two of you, as stewards, wish to follow up with Liuxinyu is for you to decide. I will admit that I was pretty shocked when I read that, but I think my response above was about as far as I could go on my own.

MF-W, that said, we probably should at least look into the question of whether the content of the Wp/ota test is simply unattributed, transliterated copying. There are a couple of Turkish speakers around the community whom I trust, though I don't know if they could read it in Arabic script. Unless you have a better suggestion, I'm going to ask them to have a look. StevenJ81 (talk) 13:35, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
Sure, it makes sense to investigate that. Please ask whom you have in mind. Maybe also User:HakanIST can help. --MF-W 14:49, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

@HakanIST, Universal Life, and Vito Genovese: I wonder if any or all of you could help us with this question. There is content written in the "Ottoman Turkish Wikipedia test" (at incubator:Wp/ota). In principle, of course, there are differences between Ottoman Turkish and modern Turkish besides the fact of the conversion of Perso-Arabic script to Latin script. In practice, someone has alleged that the content in the test project is effectively nothing more than content copied from Turkish Wikipedia and transliterated. If any of you is capable of reading Turkish in Arabic script, can you tell us if this is true?

  • The practical consequence of this is that if the content is actually meaningfully different from that of Turkish Wikipedia, the project can remain in place at Incubator. If it is copied, then it constitutes a copyvio and should be deleted.

Thanks in advance for any help you can provide. StevenJ81 (talk) 14:57, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello StevenJ81 , thanks for the ping and summarizing the issue. Unfortunately I cannot read Arabic script. I've left a message to 2 wikipedians who can read Arabic script. I'm also pinging them here @Turgut46 and Akay Çelebi: ,in case they might respond here.--HakanIST (talk) 20:31, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Tech News: 2018-37[edit]

22:35, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

Requests for new languages/Wikisource Neapolitan[edit]

Dear Steven,

My last read page was on january 2017. There are 10024 pages tagged as nap.source (huge!). We worked traditionally only with backing scans, so we are offering high quality proofreads of Public Domain works. The request is this: Requests_for_new_languages/Wikisource_Neapolitan. Is there any possibility that we open the nap.wikisource? We have been working since 2013 reading works for the good of the oldwikisource and we stopped in 2017 due to lack of support from the langcom. We could resurrect easily, but at this point the support/incentivation must come from the langcom itself. Itwikisource was aware already of the works and they gently helped us to transfer all of them. I think we have been forgotten somehow by this world of spreading free (sourced) knowledge in all languages. Thanks team for all the good work at wikisource and at the translatewiki @Candalua: @Alex brollo: @Chelin: @Silvio Gallio: @Stefano mariucci: @Ruthven: <3. --C.R. (talk) 21:25, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

@C.R. and Ooswesthoesbes: (Calling OWTB for assistance for Multilingual Wikisource project)
C.R., you make a compelling case. And I have to admit that I have been quite frustrated with LangCom at times, because they were letting the ball drop on things quite a lot. But I am now watching closely, and I will promise you support if you can resurrect.
Do understand that part of the reason for LangCom's concern about activity is that it doesn't want to approve a project, and then have nobody working on it after approval. And that's also a reasonable concern. But if your team comes back together to work regularly on the project, and will continue to do so after approval, then I will work to get you approved. So here is what I need you to do:
  • Get a team back together—at least three registered accounts.
  • Have the team be sure to make at least ten edits each over two (not three) calendar months: there is still time in September, and then October.
  • Then I will take your case to LangCom for action, and I will argue the two-month-activity point on the grounds you have stated, provided that you and your team commit to me that you will stay with it after approval.
Fair? StevenJ81 (talk) 13:04, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
The Neapolitan collection at Oldwikisource is one of the largest and qualitively the best, therefore I highly support the ideas put forth by Steven to get it to an own subdomain. Candalua is still active, so it shouldn't be too hard to get three active contributors. --OosWesThoesBes (talk) 13:44, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
Here I am, just the time to revive my js edit tools if needed.... --Alex brollo (talk) 21:55, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Tech News: 2018-38[edit]

21:58, 17 September 2018 (UTC)