Khảo sát Mong muốn Cộng đồng 2015/Thể loại

This page is a translated version of the page Community Wishlist Survey 2015/Categories and the translation is 100% complete.

Thêm chức năng danh sách/bộ lọc vào bài viết/thể loại

Xem xét một danh mục, ví dụ en:Category:United States company stubs, bị cản trở với các bài viết spam. Hiện tại không có cách nào để cộng tác (hoặc cho chính mình) đánh dấu bài viết nào đã được xem xét, giả sử, sự đáng chú ý hay như vậy. Nó sẽ dễ dàng hơn nhiều để làm sạch ổ đĩa và như vậy nếu chúng ta sẽ có một cách để nhanh chóng bật và tắt một số bộ lọc. Ví dụ, mỗi bài viết có thể có một danh sách kiểm tra "đã được kiểm tra tính không đáng tin cậy / tính trung lập / v.v." (cộng đồng sẽ có thể tạo các loại đánh giá như vậy, có thể gắn liền với các vấn đề dọn dẹp phổ biến). Một trình soạn thảo với một số cờ / sự cho phép (hoặc chỉ là một trình soạn thảo được tự động xác nhận, có lẽ) có thể kiểm tra bài viết sau khi xem xét. Điều này có thể được hiển thị cho độc giả của bài viết, tăng niềm tin của họ vào đó (xem đề xuất của tôi ở trên), và sẽ rất hữu ích cho các ổ đĩa dọn dẹp, vì tôi có thể lọc danh mục cho các bài viết chưa được xem xét. Nó sẽ là bản chất một tính năng thay đổi không xâm lấn, nhưng nhiều sắc thái hơn. --Piotrus (talk) 05:34, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[]

Phiếu

  1.   Support with a similar implementation to patrolled pages on English Wikipedia. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 16:04, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[]
  2.   Support Tryptofish (talk) 18:14, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[]
  3.   Support Shoiulddefinitely help in trying to find articles that need further looking at. It fills a important gap.
  4.   Support Prof tpms (talk) 23:55, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  5.   Support Casliber (talk) 05:06, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  6.   Oppose This seems overly complicated when we already have New Page Patrol built into MediaWiki and already being used in the English Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects. These patrollers are already supposed to go through a similar checklist to OK an article. What might be really useful is something simpler -- in categories, show new page patrollers which articles/pages haven't been patrolled yet, with some kind of new visible signal. Stevie is the man! TalkWork 15:09, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  7.   Oppose I would support seeing what pages have been pagetriaged in categories. Marking an article for each wikipedia policy on the other hand does not make any sense to me.--Snaevar (talk) 16:39, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
    It would probably be less distracting to see what pages have not been pagetriaged, but I think we're on the same page. I wish others would consider our thoughts instead of opting for a needlessly complicated approach. Stevie is the man! TalkWork 17:21, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  8.   Support --Usien6 (talk) 18:58, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  9.   Support Eman235/talk 21:05, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  10.   Support--Manlleus (talk) 15:05, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  11.   Neutral I believe it would be easy to implement this if each wiki would have local Wikibase Repository for storing articles metadata --AS (talk) 09:27, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  12.   Neutral fr:Catégorie:Article au ton publicitaire/en:Category:Articles with a promotional tone is already a category users could clean.--Sammyday (talk) 07:23, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  13.   Oppose Per Stevie. Support Stevie's simpler alternative - either (1) indicate unpatrolled pages in some way (perhaps only for editors who've opted in) in category listings, (2) have an option to only show unpatrolled pages in a category listing, or (3) change a category intersection tool to have a "Patrolled: either/none/only" setting (like they currently have for hard redirects). The 3rd option (which might be the simplest to implement) would have the advantage of looking in subcategories. DexDor (talk) 18:57, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  14.   Oppose. I could not see how to prevent sockpuppets from trolling the checklist.--MisterSanderson (talk) 01:36, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[]

Đề xuất thể loại dựa trên tên tệp, mô tả và vị trí

Đối với nhiều người dùng và đặc biệt là đối với người mới bắt đầu, thật khó để nhanh chóng tìm thấy các thể loại thích hợp cho các tệp. Để hỗ trợ người dùng tôi đề xuất phát triển thuật toán đề xuất các thể loại như vậy bằng cách kiểm tra tên tệp, mô tả và vị trí của tệp đối với các tệp, thể loại và thư viện sẵn có trong Commons. Ngay cả Wikidata và Wikipedia cũng có thể được đưa vào. Có một thuật toán như vậy, UploadWizard có thể được tăng cường để đề xuất các danh mục cho các tệp được tải lên. Hơn nữa, chúng tôi có thể tạo danh sách bảo trì hoặc thậm chí là một trò chơi để làm giàu các tệp đã tải lên nhưng chưa được phân loại. --Aschroet (talk) 18:56, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[]

Phiếu

  1.   Support Lugnuts (talk) 12:03, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[]
  2.   Support --Arnd (talk) 14:44, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
      Oppose I would rather have the editor do the search and determine the right categories. The problem with suggesting is that it encourages people not to think and not to explore the category system. I'd rather have only people who understands categories adding them. Stevie is the man! TalkWork 15:21, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  3.   Neutral I have decided to soften my vote as this may have some value on Commons (and any damage is limited), but I really don't want to see this on any of the Wikipedias unless there is a community consensus for adding it and if it's limited to only files and not other namespaces. On Wikipedias, it should be piloted narrowly before wide release. Stevie is the man! TalkWork 16:41, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  4.   Support, althrough I would like to know the technical details.--Snaevar (talk) 16:39, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  5.   Support we do need to revamp image categorization process. HotCats is great but some intelligent suggestions based on use on wiki, links, geolocation, filenames, description, other categories, etc. would be great. --Jarekt (talk) 17:21, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  6.   Support Learning the category tree in every project that you work on is really difficult. We should have an algorithm to suggest categories, and tell people to add an appropriate and distinguishing file title along with location and other info, so the user has a first impression of what categories should add. I am really kept away from uploading sometimes with the categorisation of the file being the only reason. -- SucreRouge (talk) 17:46, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
    I would support something that makes learning a project's category tree easier (like some kind of explorer tool), but I think actually suggesting categories could end up being a real mess. Stevie is the man! TalkWork 18:53, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  7.   Oppose --Usien6 (talk) 18:59, 1 December 2015 (UTC) // Not worth the programming effort --Usien6 (talk) 18:59, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  8.   Support I explore the category system, but I think this tool is worth the programming effort. There is too much work to do on commons, newbies and some users too don't use the cat system correctly, we need to speed up the process.--Alexmar983 (talk) 00:18, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  9.   Support Extracting the GPS coordinates from pictures and showing nearby Commons categories (or categories of nearby existing files) would be a huge boost to category accuracy, and would not cost much development. Actually the bulk of the algorithm is currently being developed under my supervision as an Outreachy project at https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T115101 (for Android) Syced (talk) 03:58, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  10.   Oppose, c:User:CategorizationBot is your friend — NickK (talk) 10:09, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  11.   Support--Manlleus (talk) 15:05, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  12.   Support why not ? On Commons it will be usefull.--Sammyday (talk) 07:24, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  13.   Support It seems like it would help - SantiLak (talk) 10:31, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  14.   Support MOs810 (talk) 11:27, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  15.   Support --Urbanecm (talk) 12:32, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  16.   Support - ƬheStrikeΣagle 16:22, 6 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  17.   Support Killmeyle
  18.   Neutral for Commons.   Oppose for Wikipedia - we don't want spammy "articles" (e.g. "His so cool should get nobel prize") being semi-automatically placed in categories based on picking out keywords. DexDor (talk) 19:08, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  19.   Oppose Beagel (talk) 15:06, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[]

Chứa văn bản này nhưng không có trong danh mục này hoặc con cháu (n-level) của nó

Tôi rất muốn có một cách để tìm kiếm các trang tệp (và các trang thể loại) có chứa một đoạn văn bản cụ thể nhưng không nằm trong một thể loại cụ thể hoặc các hậu duệ cấp n của nó. Tất nhiên, những ứng cử viên này có khả năng sẽ thêm vào danh mục đó hoặc một trong các danh mục phụ của nó. Nó sẽ đặc biệt tốt đẹp nếu nó bằng cách nào đó sẽ ăn vào VFC; cho mục đích đó, nếu nó không thể được làm việc từ cuối VFC, nó sẽ có thể thêm một thể loại bảo trì tạm thời vào các trang được tìm thấy trong một tìm kiếm như vậy, và sau đó VFC có thể được kích hoạt ra khỏi thể loại đó.

Điều này sẽ mang lại lợi ích cho những người đang cố gắng phân loại các bức ảnh được phân loại kém. Ngay bây giờ, bạn thường phải xem qua rất nhiều ảnh được phân loại chính xác trong quá trình thực hiện công việc như thế này. - Jmabel (talk) 23:03, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[]

Phiếu

  1.   Neutral This can be done today using AutoWikiBrowser's "List comparer". People should try using that before asking for this to be built into the wiki software. Stevie is the man! TalkWork 15:30, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  2.   Oppose this can (almost) be done today in mediawiki, using the "incategory:" search words, as explained in my long comment above. the only missing piece is the ability to extend it to sub-categories, and it makes zero sense to limit such an extension to "negative filtering" only. adding a new search filtering that will extend "incategory:" to "insubcategory:" will be a very very welcome enhancement, with or without the "to the n-th level" addition. peace - קיפודנחש (talk) 17:12, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  3.   Comment for the category itself, this capability already exists (though, not well advertised), at least for Cirrus search: all the search keywords (and specifically, "incategory") support both positive and negative filtering, so if you want to look for "abra-kadabra" in all pages *except* the ones in category "Magicians", you search -incategory:Magicians "abra-kadabra".
    so this request boils down to "extend existing search negative-filtering of categories, to sub-categories also".
    this does not make sense: search filtering to sub-categories is long-desired feature, but it doesn't make sense to support it for "negative filtering" only.
    i would rephrase this request as "add a new search keyword to search in category and all its sub-categories, and make sure the new keyword supports negative filtering (like any other keyword)". sorry for butting in in an inappropriate place, but this request was not vetted enough, and as it is, makes no sense. peace - קיפודנחש (talk) 17:12, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
    search for sub categories exists as a script, you need to add the following to your common.js and search then with deepcat:Magicians. --CennoxX (talk) 22:58, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[]
    mw.loader.load( "//de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Christoph Fischer (WMDE)/Gadgets/DeepCat.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript" );
    mw.loader.load( "//de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Christoph Fischer (WMDE)/Gadgets/DeepCat.css&action=raw&ctype=text/css" , "text/css" );
    


Tạo công cụ để tự động điền các danh mục thông qua Wikidata/các wiki khác

Hiện tại, khi một danh mục mới được tạo, ngay cả khi nó được liên kết với Wikidata và các loại ngôn ngữ khác, không có cách nào dễ dàng để tạo danh sách các bài viết tồn tại trên một wiki đã cho. Và ngay cả khi ai đó có danh sách các bài viết như vậy, họ phải gắn thẻ chúng theo cách thủ công. Tôi muốn thấy một công cụ tạo ra các danh sách như vậy, và cho phép phổ biến các danh mục dễ dàng như commons:Help:Gadget-Cat-a-lot. Xem thêm một cuộc thảo luận liên quan tại w:Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)/Archive_141#Is_there_a_way_to_auto-populate_categories_through_Wikidata.2Fother_wiki_comparison.3F. --Piotrus (talk) 05:15, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[]

Phiếu

  1.   Support I can see the time-saving value in this. Stevie is the man! TalkWork 15:37, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  2.   Support It would be particularly useful to have a bot that could be summoned to populate categories (or sort big categories), based on structured data, Sadads (talk) 15:46, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  3.   Support --Wesalius (talk) 18:53, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  4.   Support Rhadamante (talk) 19:27, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  5.   Support Trizek from FR 22:03, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  6.   Support--Alexmar983 (talk) 00:20, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  7.   Support, excellent thing. We do need to have a tool for this, and it can be very helpful for a lot of issues (e.g. watching recent deaths that are reported in one wiki but are not in another) — NickK (talk) 10:11, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  8.   Support--Barcelona (talk) 11:51, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  9.   Support--Manlleus (talk) 15:05, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  10.   SupportBeleg Tâl (talk) 17:13, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  11.   Support --AS (talk) 09:28, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  12.   Support.--Sammyday (talk) 07:25, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  13.   Support It would save time - SantiLak (talk) 10:31, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  14.   Support --Jane023 (talk) 16:22, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  15.   Support Halibutt (talk) 00:20, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  16.   Support --Urbanecm (talk) 12:33, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  17.   Support --Yeza (talk) 16:33, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  18.   Support Useful. GenQuest (talk) 17:14, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  19.   Support - ƬheStrikeΣagle 16:22, 6 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  20.   Support Oh, god, yes. I've done this a lot -- create category, create list of articles that should be in that category, then realize it's 1,500 articles. 10 minutes curating the list; three hours+ to finish the tagging. Courcelles 08:19, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  21.   Support --ESM (talk) 16:03, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  22.   Support --Davidpar (talk) 14:23, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  23.   Support -- AshLin (talk) 18:44, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[]

Tạo thể loại thân thiện hơn: bật HotCat, nhưng với các sửa đổi đang chờ

Biên tập viên mới thường, theo kinh nghiệm của tôi, nhận xét rằng việc đánh thẻ (phân loại) những thứ trên Wikipedia so với Facebook và các trang web hiện đại khác là khó khăn như thế nào. Chúng tôi có một công cụ hữu ích, vi: Wikipedia: HotCat , nhưng không có sự đồng thuận từ cộng đồng để kích hoạt nó theo mặc định, vì mọi người sợ người mới làm rối tung lên các danh mục. Do đó, giải pháp tốt nhất mà tôi có là sử dụng một số dạng sửa đổi đang chờ xử lý với HotCat: kích hoạt nó theo mặc định, nhưng với các sửa đổi đang chờ xử lý cho các thành viên mới/vô danh. --Piotrus (talk) 05:11, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[]

Phiếu

  1.   Oppose I am against automated tools for editors who do not know how to use them, even with pending revisions. Debresser (talk) 12:57, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[]
  2.   Oppose I am against pending revisions. Tostarpadius (talk) 14:43, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  3.   Oppose People who don't understand the category system shouldn't have it made easier to fudge up an article's categories, even with pending revisions. Pending revisions are in limited use for a reason -- experienced editors really don't want the additional workload. Stevie is the man! TalkWork 15:48, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  4.   Oppose really it is up to each project wether they want to have default enabled gadgets or not. IMO out of scope.--Snaevar (talk) 16:39, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  5.   Oppose --Usien6 (talk) 19:06, 1 December 2015 (UTC) // Let the projects discuss it by themselves...[]
  6.   Oppose StevenJ81 (talk) 21:53, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  7.   Oppose, not within the scope of this initiative. If a project does not want this, do not ask WMF to impose it. And I do no at least one very experienced user who received a ban on using HotCat as he used it for adding really strange categories, so it definitely should not be mandatory — NickK (talk) 10:13, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  8.   Oppose Per Debresser - SantiLak (talk) 10:32, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  9.   Oppose Easy enough for each community to do as they see fit already. Courcelles 08:20, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  10.   Oppose Beagel (talk) 15:08, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  11.   Oppose. This would require more work, because instead of 1 "expert" categorising, there would be 1 noob categorising and 1 expert doing revisions. And revision of lots of wrong categories.--MisterSanderson (talk) 01:47, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[]

Sắp xếp số

Tracked in Phabricator:
task T8948

Các tên có chứa chữ số (hoặc với các phím sắp xếp số) hiện được sắp xếp theo thứ tự bảng chữ cái / ASCII, dường như được xử lý giống như bất kỳ ký tự nào khác: ví dụ "100" xuất hiện trước "17" nhưng sau "10". Điều này làm cho một mớ hỗn độn của các loại với số serial, như tiểu hành tinh và địa chỉ đường phố, trừ khi họ đang đưa ra các phím sắp xếp với số không đệm - rất tẻ nhạt. Có thể phân tích các tên để sắp xếp bằng cách đọc bất kỳ chữ số liên tiếp nào dưới dạng chữ số của một số thập phân, thay vì chỉ là ký tự-theo-ký tự, để sắp xếp theo giá trị số thay thế không? Ngay cả Finder Mac cổ của tôi cũng làm như thế này với tên tập tin và thư mục, vì vậy nó không thể là khó! ;) Odysseus1479 (talk) 05:12, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[]

Phiếu

  1.   Support Jenks24 (talk) 10:18, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[]
  2.   Support --Tobias1984 (talk) 11:19, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[]
  3.   Support Long overdue. Debresser (talk) 12:58, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[]
  4.   Support TeriEmbrey (talk) 15:56, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[]
  5.   Support - numbers at the beginning of a page name are intended as numbers, not as sequences of digit characters. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 16:06, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[]
  6.   Support Blue Rasberry (talk) 16:33, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[]
  7.   Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:20, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[]
  8.   Support --MGChecker (talk) 19:25, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[]
  9.   Support Dalba 20:10, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[]
  10.   Support Orlodrim (talk) 20:17, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[]
  11.   Support Makes sense. Armbrust (talk) 22:32, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[]
  12.   Support --YodinT 02:02, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  13.   Support Casliber (talk) 05:07, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  14.   Support--Kippelboy (talk) 05:32, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  15.   Support--Gbeckmann (talk) 09:16, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  16.   SupportYnhockey (talk) 09:28, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  17.   Support-- suggesting to do that by auto-suggesting a {{DEFAULTSORT}} key on contents of categories by a bot. --Purodha Blissenbach (talk) 10:27, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  18.   Support --Arnd (talk) 14:44, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  19.   Support --Continua Evoluzione (talk) 15:00, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  20.   Support tufor (talk) 15:21, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  21.   Support JohanahoJ (talk) 15:36, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  22.   Support Sadads (talk) 15:45, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  23.   Support --Andyrom75 (talk) 15:53, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  24.   Support Stevie is the man! TalkWork 15:56, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  25.   Support Cavamos (talk) 11:20 1 December 2015
  26.   Support Just one of those minor annoyances.--Snaevar (talk) 16:39, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  27.   Support Goombiis (talk) 16:40, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  28.   Support Blue Elf (talk) 17:00, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  29.   Support Rupert Clayton (talk) 17:13, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  30.   Support ~ Moheen (talk) 17:15, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  31.   Neutral I do not see it as a big issue. Order of pages in a category is not that essential and if it is than just use "|sortkey" to order them properly. --Jarekt (talk) 17:29, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  32.   Support--SucreRouge (talk) 17:49, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  33.   Support--Calak (talk) 18:22, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  34.   Support --Wesalius (talk) 18:54, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  35.   Support --Usien6 (talk) 19:15, 1 December 2015 (UTC) // Long overdue. Correct sorting is fundamentally important for categories big enough to have their indexes paginated. Placing zeros in the sorting keys is not a solution when you can't predict the length (in decimal digits) of the biggest number possible.[]
  36.   Support Rhadamante (talk) 19:26, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  37.   Support Gap9551 (talk) 19:56, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  38.   Support Eman235/talk 21:10, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  39.   Support Good idea, it would be useful. Regards, Kertraon (talk) 21:39, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  40.   Support StevenJ81 (talk) 21:54, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  41.   Support Trizek from FR 22:03, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  42.   Support --Oriciu (talk) 22:46, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  43.   Support--Alexmar983 (talk) 00:19, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  44.   Support --Chaoborus (talk) 02:20, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  45.   Support --Rosiestep (talk) 02:39, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  46.   Support RoodyAlien (talk) 02:54, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  47.   Support Popcorndude (talk) 03:26, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  48.   Support Risker (talk) 03:42, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  49.   Support Johnbod (talk) 04:02, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  50.   Support - Shubha (talk) 04:53, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  51.   Support Amir (talk) 06:43, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  52.   Support Litlok (talk) 08:12, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  53.   Support, long overdue. It is very difficult to arrange sorting when 1 is categorised under 1, 2 under 2, 9 under 9... and 10 under 1 again, so you have to be creative and add defaultsort:A or something like that for the right order — NickK (talk) 10:15, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  54.   Support This is the way human expects it. ...Aurora... (talk) 10:34, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  55.   Support Juetho (talk) 10:43, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  56.   Support --β16 - (talk) 11:41, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  57.   Support --Renessaince (talk) 14:26, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  58.   Support --Winstonza (talk) 19:55, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  59.   Support Sounds a useful idea. PamD (talk) 21:31, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  60.   Support -- Dave Braunschweig (talk) 21:50, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  61.   Support Thémistocle (talk) 21:58, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  62.   Support Rzuwig 08:18, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  63.   Support -- Peter Flass (talk) 08:34, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  64.   Support surprised this isn't a thing yet. --SuperJew (talk) 14:52, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  65.   Support yes this will help our readers and our editors. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 04:04, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  66.   Support Sounds useful - SantiLak (talk) 10:33, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  67.   Support - Wieralee (talk) 17:09, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  68.   Support Bináris tell me 18:30, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  69.   Support --Urbanecm (talk) 12:34, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  70.   Support Overdue. GenQuest (talk) 17:05, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  71.   Support - ƬheStrikeΣagle 16:22, 6 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  72.   Support - good use of this space - straightforward problem with a straightforward solution (well, conceptually speaking anyway) — Rhododendrites talk \\ 17:21, 6 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  73.   Support --Waldir (talk) 13:00, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  74.   Support - obviously useful. Wbm1058 (talk) 15:58, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  75.   Support beter than present way Mpn (talk) 18:17, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  76.   Support Courcelles 08:22, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  77.   Support Matěj Suchánek (talk) 20:51, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  78.   Support Therud (talk) 09:18, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  79.   Support Abyssal (talk) 16:54, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  80.   Support«« Man77 »» [de] 17:50, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  81.   Support Beagel (talk) 15:09, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  82.   Support --Sphilbrick (talk) 17:46, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  83.   Support --ESM (talk) 16:05, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  84.   Support --Davidpar (talk) 14:24, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  85.   Support -- AshLin (talk) 18:46, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[]

Giao diện người dùng để hiển thị thành viên sửa thể loại theo dòng thời gian

fr.wikipedia.org có hàng trăm trang chứa danh sách các bài báo gần đây bằng cổng thông tin (tất cả các trang này, cộng với một số trang được cập nhật bởi các bot khác). Đây là cách chính mà bài viết mới có thể được xem xét bởi người dùng quan tâm đến một miền cụ thể.

Mỗi cổng có một danh mục theo dõi, vì vậy đây chắc chắn là điều mà MediaWiki có thể hỗ trợ theo cách chung chung. Lý tưởng nhất, sẽ có một trang đặc biệt để liệt kê các thành viên n cuối cùng của một thể loại có thể được đưa vào những người khác (như Special:PrefixIndex).

Lưu ý: MediaWiki đã theo dõi các dấu thời gian này và cung cấp chúng thông qua API, nhưng yêu cầu này không đơn giản như cung cấp giao diện người dùng cho điều này. Dựa trên phản hồi nhận được cho bot, hai ràng buộc bổ sung là:

  • thay đổi defaultsort không nên đặt lại dòng thời gian;
  • loại bỏ nhanh chóng danh mục không được đặt lại dòng thời gian.

Orlodrim (talk) 18:45, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[]

Phiếu

  1.   Comment Timestamp of what? Article creation? Addition to the tracking category? A template might be able to do what you want, plugging in the relevant timestamp as sorting key. --mfb (talk) 12:15, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
    The timestamp of the addition to the tracking category (although article creation was also proposed as an option in "Earlier discussion and endorsements"). Orlodrim (talk) 21:08, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  2.   Comment Assuming you mean the timestamp of when a page is added to a category, a solution of sorts is already in the works. On watchlists and recent changes pages, you'll be able to see when (and what) pages are added (or removed) from categories. Will that fulfill the needs expressed by this proposal? Stevie is the man! TalkWork 16:11, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[]
    I think this is a complementary feature but this may not be the most practical way of doing some maintenance of new articles in the largest projects (see "Earlier discussion and endorsements"). It's hard to know in advance, in fact. Orlodrim (talk) 21:08, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  3.   Support --AS (talk) 09:31, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  4.   Support.--Sammyday (talk) 07:27, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  5.   Support per Orlodrim's reply and further review. The general idea of being able to sort category members in different ways should definitely be explored, and sorting by when they were added to the category sounds very useful. Stevie is the man! TalkWork 18:41, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  6.   Support - ƬheStrikeΣagle 16:22, 6 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  7.   Support if it can be done without complicating category pages for readers (i.e. the new buttons etc are only displayed to editors who've opted in). However, at least one category intersection tool already has an option to select pages in a category (and subcategories) based on when they were created/edited so it might be best to put effort into improving those tools rather than the MediaWiki UI. DexDor (talk) 19:25, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[]
  8.   Support -- Llywrch (talk) 19:02, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[]