Reaperman

Welcome to Meta!

أهلا Reaperman, ومرحبا بك في ويكيميديا ميتا ويكي! يعمل هذا الموقع على تنسيق ومناقشة كل مشاريع ويكيميديا. ربما سيكون مفيدا لك مطالعة صفحة السياسات هنا. إذا كنت مهتما بأمور الترجمة، راجع ميتا:بابلون. يمكنك أيضا ترك ملاحظة في ميتا:بابل (من فضلك راجع أولا التعليمات هناك قبل ترك الملاحظة). إذا أردت الاستفسار عن شئ ،لا تتردد في سؤالي في صفحة نقاشي. تمتع بالتحرير هنا!

Hello Reaperman, and welcome to the Wikimedia Meta-Wiki! This website is for coordinating and discussing all Wikimedia projects. You may find it useful to read our policy page. If you are interested in doing translations, visit Meta:Babylon. You can also leave a note on Meta:Babel (please read the instructions at the top of the page before posting there). If you would like, feel free to ask me questions on my talk page. Happy editing!

Hallo, Reaperman, und Willkommen bei Wikimedia Meta-Wiki! Diese Website ist zur Koordination und Diskussion aller Wikimedia-Projekte gedacht. Vielleicht findest du es nützlich, unsere Regelseite zu lesen. Wenn du daran interessiert bist, etwas zu übersetzen, besuche Meta:Babylon. Du kannst auch eine Notiz auf Meta:Babel hinterlassen (bitte lies die Anleitung am Anfang der Seite, bevor du etwas schreibst). Wenn du möchtest, kannst du mir auf meiner Diskussionseite Fragen stellen. Fröhliches Bearbeiten.

Hei Reaperman, ja tervetuloa Wikimedian Meta-Wikiin! Tämä nettisivusto on kaikkien Wikimedia-säätiön projektien koordinointia ja keskustelua varten. Saattaa olla hyödyllistä lukea käytäntömme. Jos olet kiinnostunut käännöksistä, käy Meta:Babylon-sivulla. Voit myöskin jättää huomautuksen Meta:Babel-sivulle (ole hyvä ja lue ohjeet sivun yläosassa ennenkuin kirjoitat sinne). Jos haluat, saat vapaasti kysyä minulta kysymyksiä keskustelusivullani. Iloisia muokkaushetkiä!

Bonjour Reaperman, et bienvenue sur le Meta-Wiki de Wikimédia ! Ce site a pour but de coordonner et discuter de l’ensemble des projets Wikimédia. Il vous sera utile de consulter notre page sur les règles de Wikimédia. Si vous êtes intéressé par des projets de traduction, visitez Meta:Babylon. Vous pouvez aussi laisser un message sur Meta:Babel (mais veuillez d’abord lire les instructions en haut de cette page avant d’y poster votre message). Si vous le voulez, vous pouvez me poser vos questions sur ma page de discussion. À bientôt !

Hallo Reaperman, en welkom op de Wikimedia Meta-Wiki! Deze website is voor het coördineren en bespreken van alle Wikimedia-projecten. Waarschijnlijk vind je het handig om onze beleidpagina te lezen. Als je geïnteresseerd bent in het vertalen van teksten, ga da naar Meta:Babylon. Je kunt ook een bericht achterlaten op Meta:Babel (lees wel de instructies aan het begin van de pagina voordat je een bericht achterlaat). Als je nog vragen hebt stel ze me dan op mijn overlegpagina. Veel plezier met bewerken!

Olá Reaperman! Seja bem-vindo ao Meta! Este site/sítio é dedicado à discussão e à coordenação de todos os demais projetos da Fundação Wikimedia. Talvez lhe seja útil ler a página contendo a nossa política (em inglês) antes de começar a editar. Se tiver dúvidas, sinta-se à vontade para me fazer perguntas em minha página de discussão, ou deixe uma mensagem para toda a comunidade na Babel, a versão do Meta da Esplanada. Boa sorte!

Hola Reaperman! Bienvenido a la Meta-Wiki de la Fundación Wikimedia! Este sitio es para coordinar y discutir todos los proyectos de la Fundación Wikimedia. Tal vez le sea útil leer nuestra página de políticas (en inglés). Si le interesan las traducciones, visite Meta:Babylon. También puede dejar un mensaje en Meta:Babel (pero antes de hacerlo, por favor lea las instrucciones situadas en lo alto de la página). No dude en preguntar si tiene cualquiera duda, o pregunte en mi página de discusión. Buena suerte!

Ciao Reaperman! Benvenuto sulla Meta-Wiki della Wikimedia Foundation! Questo sito serve a coordinare e discutere di tutti i progetti della Wikimedia Foundation. Potrebbe esserti utile leggere le nostre policy (in inglese). Se sei interessato a fare traduzioni, visita Meta:Babylon. Puoi anche lasciare un messaggio su Meta:Babel (ma per favore, leggi le istruzioni che si trovano all'inizio della pagina prima di scrivere). Se vuoi, puoi lasciarmi un messagio nella mia pagina di discussione. Buona fortuna!

Ciao Reaperman, şi bine aţi venit la Wikimedia Meta-Wiki! Acest website este pentru coordonarea şi discuţiile tuturor proiectelor Wikimedia. Este folositor să citiţi pagina despre politica noastră.. Dacă sunteţi interesaţi de traducere, vizita-ţi Meta:Babylon. De asemenea puteţi lasa o notă pe Meta:Babel (vă rugăm citiţi instrucţiunile de la începutul paginii înainte de a posta acolo). Dacă ai întrebări, nu ezita să mă întrebi pe pagina mea de discuţii talk page. Editare cu succes!

Hej Reaperman, och välkommen till Wikimedia Meta-Wiki! Den här sidan är till för att diskutera och samordna alla Wikimedias projekt. Vill du veta mer om sidan, kan vår policy-sida komma väl till pass. Är du intresserad av att hjälpa till med översättningar, besök Meta:Babylon. Du kan också lämna ett meddelande på Meta:Babel (vänligen läs instruktionerna överst på sidan innan du skriver något där). Om du vill, är du välkommen att ställa frågor på min diskussionssida. Lycka till med redigerandet!

Helló Reaperman, és üdv a Wikimedia Meta-Wikijén! Ez a weboldal az összes Wikimedia projektet érintő ügyek megtárgyalására és koordinálására szolgál. Hasznosnak találhatod elolvasni az irányelveinket (angolul). Ha szeretnél fordításokat végezni, látogasd meg a Meta:Babylon-t, vagy a Meta:Babel oldalon hagyhatsz üzenetet (mielőtt ide írsz kérlek olvasd el a lap tetején található utasításokat). Ha szeretnél, nyugodtan kérdezz tőlem a vitalapomon. Jó szerkesztést és tartalmas szórakozást! Jó szerkesztést és tartalmas szórakozást!

Здравствуйте, Reaperman, и добро пожаловать на Meta-Wiki Фонда Викимедиа! Этот сайт предназначен для координации и обсуждения вопросов, связанных со всеми проектами фонда. Для начала Вы можете ознакомиться с нашими правилами. Если Вы заинтересованы в работе над переводами, посетите Meta:Babylon. Вы также можете обсудить различные вопросы на странице Meta:Babel (пожалуйста, ознакомьтесь с инструкцией сверху, прежде чем писать). Если возникнут вопросы, не бойтесь задавать их мне на моей странице обсуждения. Удачи!

Hola Reaperman! Benvingut a la Meta-Wiki de la Fundació Wikimedia! Aquest lloc està fet per a coordinar i discutir tots els projectes de la Fundació Wikimedia. Potser us serà útil llegir la nostra pàgina de polítiques (en anglès). Si us interessen les traduccions, visiteu Meta:Babylon. També podeu deixar un missatge a Meta:Babel (però abans de fer-ho, llegiu les instruccions situades al principi de la pàgina). No dubteu en preguntar si teniu qualsevol dubte. Si cal ho podeu fer en la meva pàgina de discussió. Bona sort!

Здраво Reaperman, и добро дошли на Викимедијин мета-вики! Овај сајт служи за координацију и дискусију око Викимедијиних пројеката. Вероватно ће Вам бити корисно да прочитате наше странице везане за политику рада. Ако сте заинтересовани за превођење, посетите Meta:Babylon. Можете такође и оставити поруку на страници Meta:Babel (молимо погледајте упутства на врху те странице пре него што пошаљете свој коментар тамо). Ако имате неко питање, можете да ми поставите на мојој страници за разговор. Срећно уређивање!

Reaperman, 你好！歡迎光臨維基媒體元維基！這個網站是為協調和討論所有維基媒體項目而設。我們的政策頁可能對您有用。如果您有興趣協助翻譯工作, 請參觀Meta:Babylon。你可在 Meta:Babel 留下口訊 (張貼之前請先讀該頁上指示)。若有問題, 請在我的討論頁問我 。祝
編安!

வணக்கம் Reaperman, விக்கிமீடியா மேல்விக்கி! இற்கு நல்வரவு. இவ்விணையத்தளமானது கூட்டாகச் சேர்ந்து விடயங்களை விவாதிப்பதற்கென உருவாக்கப் பட்டது. விக்கித்திட்டங்கள். நீங்கள் எங்களின் பாலிசிகளையும் பாலிசி பக்கம் படித்தறியலாம். நீங்கள் மொழிபெயர்பில் ஆர்வமுடையவராகின், Meta:Babylon ஐப் பார்வையிடவும். நீங்கள் Meta:Babel இல் குறிப்பொன்றையும் விட்டுச் செல்லலாம். (பக்கத்தின் மேலேயிருக்கும் அறிவுறுத்தல்களை வாசித்தபின்னரே அங்கே செய்திகளை இடவும்). நீங்கள் விரும்பினால் எனது பக்கத்தில் செய்தியொன்றை விடவும் talk page. உங்கள் ஆக்கங்களை வரவேற்கின்றோம்!

ވިކިމީޑިޔާގެ މީޓާ-ވިކީ އަށް މަރުހަބާ! މިވެބްސައިޓަކީ ވިކިމީޑިޔާގެ ހުރިހާ މަޝްރޫޢުތަކާއި ބެހޭގޮތުން ވާހަކަތައް ދެކެވި އެ މަޝްރޫޢެއް ހިންގައި ހަދާ ވެބް ސައިޓެވެ. އަޅުގަނޑުމެންގެ ޤަވާއިދުތައް ފުރަތަމަ ވިދާޅުވުމަކީ މުހިންމު ކަމެއް ކަމުގައި ދެކެމެވެ. ތަރުޖަމާކުރާ ހިތްޕުޅުވެވަޑައިގަންނަވާ ނަމަ މީޓާ:ބެބިލޯން އަށް ވަޑައިގަންނަވާށެވެ. އަދި ހަމަ އެހެންމެ މިކަމާއި ބެހޭ ލިޔުމެއް މީޓާ:ބޭބެލް ގައި ލިޔުއްވަވާށެވެ. (އެހެންނަމަވެސް އެޞަފްޙާގައި އެއްވެސް އެއްޗެއް އިތުރު ކުރެއްވުމުގެ ކުރިން އެ ޞަފްހާގެ މަތީގައިވާ ޢިބާރާތް ވިދާޅުވެލައްވާށެވެ.) މިއާއި މުދު ހިތްހަމަޖެހިވަޑައިގަންނަވާ ނަމަ އިތުރު އެހީ އަށް އެދުމަށް މި ޞަފްހާ ގައި އެދުމަށް ފަސްޖެހި ވަޑައި ނުގަންނަވާށެވެ. އުނިއިތުރު ގެނައުމުގައި އުފާވެރި ވަގުތުކޮޅެއް ހޭދަ ކޮށްލައްވާށެވެ!!

Reapermanさん、ウィキメディア メタ・ウィキへようこそ！このサイトは、ウィキメディアのプロジェクト間の調整や話し合いを目的としています。もしよろしければ、ポリシーページを是非ご一読下さい。もし翻訳に興味をお持ちなら、Meta:Babylonをご覧下さい。Meta:Babelにメッセージを投稿していただくことも可能です（投稿前にページ上部の説明をお読み下さい）。もしよろしければ私のノートページに質問をお寄せ下さい。

--Thogo (talk) 21:26, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Členství

Nechceš se stát členem WMCZ?--Juandev (talk) 00:45, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

I don't. Mostly because of its privacy policy and the way it acts towards sister projects. --Reaperman (talk) 16:36, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Well, If you dont like the way how it acts towards the sister projects, the best way is to become the member and one of the voicese to change, what you dont like on it.--Juandev (talk) 20:01, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

It is hardly possible to change it if the chapter doesn't want to listen to outside voices and people who belitte sister projects and the work done there are even members of board. --Reaperman (talk) 20:18, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

I think the chapter listen, but it doesnt have a personel to run projects for such support. You have to options. To criticized it or to jump into the work. I know the second will work, the first not.--Juandev (talk) 21:55, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

By the way, what part of WMCZ's privacy policy makes you difficulty to become a part of it?--Juandev (talk) 21:57, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

I'm not talking about any projects here at all. I am talking about interactions, communication etc.

The option to work, that's it. I WORK at several projects – I add new content, enhance the old, look for ways the projects will be more useful for end users... What I CAN do by myself I already DO myself. I don't need to enter organization that will asure me I have a great idea, I should do it and that they are cheering on me (but unfortunately there is nobody who can help me with things I can't do) to actually do something. That's terrible mistake to think, that people from sister projects are just sitting on their thumbs doing nothing only waiting for redemptive chapter.

What do you think? Yes I mean especially that part, that would force me to reveal my personal information to indefinite and practically unlimited number of people who I don't know, who I have never met, who have no reason to know my pesonal information and that all in the situation there is no actually efective safety measure against abuse of that information. --Reaperman (talk) 23:12, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Právě dokončuji letošní druhé číslo bulletinu Wikimedium. Marně přemýšlím, proč veřejné výzvy k tomu, aby se jednotlivé projekty v bulletinu prezentovaly, nevyvolaly žádný ohlas, zvlášť, když se pobočce opakovaně - jak to je vidět i zde - vyčítá nezájem o jiné projekty. Já tedy za svou praxi s pořádáním dřívějších wikikonferencí a za vydávání Wikimedia mám přesně opačnou zkušenost - nezájem jiných projektů, kde jsem vždy musel (až na několik čestných výjimek) o nějakou součinnost úpěnlivě prosit. Mám v plánu se na to otevřeně zeptat na projektech, byť se obávám, že se nedočkám žádné odpovědi. Ale když už jsem narazil na tuto diskusi, která mi tuto palčivou otázku připomněla, tak prosím o odpověď.

Prosím o diskusi v češtině, myslím, že je zbytečné trápit se angličtinou. Pokud se Ti z jakéhokoli mně neznámého důvodu nezdá diskuse v češtině na Metě vhodná, lze ji samozřejmě přesunout na nějaký jiný projekt. Děkuji. --Okino (talk) 00:42, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

Nemůžu hovořit za nikoho jiného, ale jako docela pravděpodobné mi přijde, že těch pár lidí, co se na sesterských projektech vyskytuje, se domnívá, že by to nedokázali dobře napsat, nebo neví o čem konkrétně psát, a tak se do toho necpou. No a když se necpou, tak ani nemají důvod odpovídat na obecný diskusní příspěvek, očekávajíce, že odpoví někdo kvalifikovanější. Samozřejmě, možností je víc a já nikomu do hlavy nevidím. Sám jsem se s tím setkal, že jsem sesterské projekty oslovil bez jakékoli odezvy k věci. Zkrátka je znát rozdíl v počtu přispěvatelů Wikipedie a sesterských projektů. --Reaperman (talk) 23:20, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Tak mě napadá, proč si sám do Wikimedia nepřispěl?--Juandev (talk) 23:26, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Stejná odpověď. --Reaperman (talk) 23:31, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Wiktionary software

You were saying on Lila's user talk (unless I'm confused), that folks on Wiktionary have been getting discouraged because the Foundation won't provide the dictionary-specific software they've been asking for for years.

What sort of software has Wiktionary been asking for? I'm just wondering, because at en.wn we've basically given up on the Foundation doing anything for us, and so about three years ago I started to develop for myself some software I felt would make a major difference to us, and, I hoped, to other sister proejcts. Perhaps there's no overlap between what I've been developing and what Wiktionary has been asking for; but I wondered. --Pi zero (talk) 22:51, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi. I wouldn't say discouraged, at least not in my case, I didn't come in the contact with the Foundation much. In the past there were much more disappointments from Wikipedians and local chapter, but I've been on Wiktionary for almost eight years already so I don't expect anything anymore.

I don't know anything about software you develop. The basic issue with Wiktionary is lot of duplication, if you for example have articles about five synonyms and then find the sixth that still wasn't there, you are sure to have lot of editing. It makes maintenance rather difficult. Another issue would be different languages in one article which makes everything messy. I could continue, for other projects as well, while actually doing something one will always find things that could be improved. There were requests and discussions about how to deal with those issues as far as I remember. We tried to deal with some of them locally but we always hit the MediaWiki boundaries.

Are you sure, that your software will be able to break throught the barrier empowered by new dogma of unacceptality of different settings for different projects (as I understand recent discussions)? --Reaperman (talk) 20:31, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Even without the new stuff I'm writing, forcing English Wikinews to configure itself the same way as other projects would, if taken to enough of an extreme, literally shut us down. Until recently I would have thought the Foundation wouldn't do that because they make a point of respecting local communities, but it now appears they don't care even about massive consensus by huge projects. I'm thinking very seriously about what to do about that situation, but meanwhile I'm also pushing forward on the software front. Rather like living life from day to day during the Cold War, with the threat of nuclear annihilation but meanwhile somebody has to do the ordinary everyday jobs to keep society running. At en.wn our software, which we rely very heavily upon, is peculiar to our project, and was written about five years ago by Bawolff. He's certainly a heck of a lot more connected to the Foundation development community than I am, and at least so far I haven't heard any suggestion from him of impending apocalypse.

In designing my software, I went to a lot of trouble to assume as little as possible about the wiki software, on the assumption that only the most basic functions of the wiki software could be relied on to remain stable, while the fancier or less central stuff might be subject to arbitrary change at any time. However, my software can't possibly be proof against everything, and lately I've started wondering how long it'll take the Foundation to come up with a way to break it. After three years of intensive development already poured into it, though — quite a large pile of money donated, if one considers what it would have cost to hire me to do it — I'm choosing to push forward.

My long term hope for my software has been that once I got my software deployed, and we demonstrated what can be done with it, other projects would want it, ultimately even Wikiepdias would want it, and it would become sufficiently widespread that the Foundation would have to take it into account, either remaining compatible with it or providing their own version of it. I suppose I needn't say that I no longer have any faith that the Foundation will behave sanely; but, who knows, if I can't influence the Foundation, perhaps I can still influence the movement.

Anyway, my software: The idea of my tools is that an ordinary wiki user can put interactive elements on a wiki page by means of some simple templates, with names like {{dialog/textarea}}, to create a multi-line text input box; and {{dialog/button}}, to create a button that does something using the data on the page. The software mediates all this, so that data from these input boxes can be passed, through a button, to another page, where it can be substituted into template parameters, used to initialize input fields on the new page, and also used to inform other actions — notably, modifying the contents of a page. (The central software mediates passing the data from page to page; it's made to allow additional actions to be added, so that different things can be done based on the data at the receiving page.) My hope is that using these tools, it will be possible for the wiki community, using wiki markup, to construct wizards for performing a wide variety of tasks. --Pi zero (talk) 00:11, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

I'll be honest, there's so much controversy going on right now, I haven't been keeping track of it all. I would be surprised if the foundation pushed for total unity of all configuration settings. Our projects serve different users and do different things. Having them all be identically configured seems like a silly idea. However I do think the foundation is going to try to probably push for more unification where it doesn't unduly interfere with the workings of a specific project. There are technical reasons for wanting a more homogenous farm. Less differences tends to mean there are less things breaking in different ways, less weird edge cases, etc. But to be honest I suspect the reasoning for wanting more homogeneity is political. When the wikis use similar configuration, its easier to have a central "group" vision for all of them, and I feel like the WMF likes the idea of having a "vision". As for technical problems wiktionary faces - I would encourage people to make on wiki lists of the things they are trying to do, and how the software is preventing them from doing them. Well it may sometimes seem like the foundation doesn't care what non-wikipedia projects want, half the battle is making people aware of what the problems are. Even if wiktionary is not a priority for the foundation, not every developer works for WMF, and many WMF employees were former volunteers, and sometimes develop software on the side for Wikimedia sites that are not related to whatever they're currently doing for the foundation. Anyways, people never fix a problem they don't know exist, so your best bet is to make sure that people know what the problems are. (Point of note: I currently work for the foundation as a part time contractor. This is all my personal opinion as an ordinary user. I don't really have any special knowledge, so any speculation that I make is probably about as good as the next guy's). Bawolff (talk) 05:27, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

As I said in my first comment on Lila's talk page, Wikidata could make current Wiktionaries obsolete if their content is implemented in the right way. But we even don't know whether it will ever be implemented. Btw it is actually not hard to find pages here on meta created nine ten years ago stating about a need of saving and accessing structured information for Wiktionary in a lot similar way Wikidata do now. Lets see whether Wiktionary will finally get what its users called for for years at least as a byproduct and if it will be actually usable. --Reaperman (talk) 20:44, 4 September 2014 (UTC)