Meta:Babel/Archives/2010-08

Seeking conditions for proper and civil dialog

The following discussion is closed: Matter is at RFC

Could someone be kind enough to restore some order on the repeated nominations for speedy deletion made by a couple of disgruntled users? Messages have already been left on their talk pages [1] and [2] kindly asking for an end to such behavior and better observance of the project procedures. Naturally such disruptive edits have prevented me from initiating any kind discussion in the appropriate talk pages:

Sincerely,

Virgilio A. P. Machado

Vapmachado 03:29, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

It is quite unfortunate that an unkown user, apparently at the request of one of the interested parties[3] has posted unfounded statements and unjustified threats on my user page[4] and elsewhere[5]. It's difficult to engage in constructive dialog when that is refused outright in the most outlandish terms.[6]

Sincerely,

Virgilio A. P. Machado

Vapmachado 04:16, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Unresolved matters concerning this section are being pursued at RFH. Vapmachado 00:22, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Problem of references to researches

Whether can Wikipedija delete references to researches in Wikiversitete? SergeyJ 18:21, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Obviously Wikipedia can have its policies. It can be sensible to non consider Wikiversity a good source because otherwise it could be a workaround to add original researches to Wikipedia. But it depends on what Wikiversity page we're talking about, Wikiversiy policies etc. Anyway, this is not something to be discussed on Meta, it's only a metter of Wikipedia policy. --Nemo 11:38, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

active translation facilitators

If you want to ask somebody for a translation (= no mincing machine), it´s much easier when you see all inactive users at a single glance, e.g. in de:Kategorie:User sv-M. Is there a way to pick out & show active users – let´s say, selectable with 1, 3, 6 months – only for babel cats? --Hæggis 12:08, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

This is a recurring request. We could categorize active users and then intersect each language category with that category (using DynamicPageList, easily addible to {{user language category}}), but not everybody would like to have his user page modified and categorized and we would always need a bot to do that, unless Special:ActiveUsers (recently introduced) will be expanded to automatically categorize those users... --Nemo 21:23, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for quick feedback :-)

Language-Babels already categorize every userpage (example), doesn´t they?

Yeah, the holy bot way of solutions... after first cat on many userpages the bot only would have to check every change of the list of active users. We could entitle this category "aft" (addressable for translation), or, more carefully, "paft" (potentially ___). In this sense every babel-cat would include a link to active babel users cat, which is sorted out by

• user in this (de)WP?
• user in (sv-M/sv)babel-cat?
• user in aft-cat?

Of course there should be a hint on aft-cat-page which includes a template to deactivate this categorization. But I think most people who use this babels want to help, and this way make it much easier. Maybe I´m wrong, in case of technical feasibility there should be i.e. a poll, which is singular sent to all (active ;-) language-babel-users by bot with a link to feedback page. --Hæggis 22:37, 8 August 2010 (UTC)