Wikipedia:De kroeg/Archief/20151030
Wikilabels localization, final few things bewerken
Hello all, we have concluded the older campaigns for English, Portuguese, Persian and Turkish which have concluded recently which was partially why we had this gap. So we are very close in launching the edit quality campaign for this wiki as well. All we need is the translation of the relevant entry on m:Wiki labels/Interface translation and m:Wiki labels/Interface translation/Edit quality. We are very excited to expand our work to include this wiki and can start the campaign as soon as we have the two pages translated. Thanks! -- とある白い猫 chi? 11 okt 2015 19:18 (CEST)
- Thank you very much, とある白い猫. I have provided translations for the second page but would appreciate it if someone could check them and improve them where necessary. The first page appears to have already been translated. Woodcutterty|(?) 11 okt 2015 19:30 (CEST)
- Thanks! One last thing, one thing we do is we auto label revisions we think are likely good these include revisions that are not reverted in a while and revisions that were made by users with higher access (such as sysop). What user groups aside from sysop are "trusted" on nl.wikipedia? The user groups listed are: abusefilter, arbcom, bot, bureaucrat, checkuser, epcampus, epcoordinator, epinstructor, eponline, flow-bot, ipblock-exempt, rollbacker, sysop. -- とある白い猫 chi? 16 okt 2015 22:38 (CEST)
- All bureaucrats on nl-wiki are also sysops. Aside from those, rollbackers are expected to be able to distinguish between damaging and non-damaging edits and require support for this from the community. I wouldn't say any of the other groups are "trusted" in the sense that you can assume their revisions in the main namespace are "likely good". Woodcutterty|(?) 16 okt 2015 23:43 (CEST)
- You might assume that arbcom-members are trusted enough too: when someone gets at least 75% community support for tackling the most difficult conflicts, that person is not likely to vandalise the main namespace. However, in theory an arbcom-member is not really elected on basis of his encyclopaedic contributions (furthermore, we only have 7 of those, some of which are sysop/bureaucrat, so in numbers it's also not really helping. CaAl (overleg) 16 okt 2015 23:58 (CEST)
- The idea here is that we will auto label the edits of these users as good for the time being and let the community inspect the rest. At some point we can ask the community to process these edits we marked as "good". We believe that if ysops or arbcom members are making bad faith edits or damaging edits the wiki has far bigger problems than bias on the machine learning algorithms we use. For example we consider user groups such as bots and admins on English Wikipedia as good. -- とある白い猫 chi? 17 okt 2015 15:35 (CEST)
- In that case I suggest treating the following groups as "trusted" users: abusefilter, arbcom, bureaucrat (though all bureaucrats on nl-wiki have to be sysops), checkuser, rollbacker and sysop. Woodcutterty|(?) 22 okt 2015 19:17 (CEST)
- The idea here is that we will auto label the edits of these users as good for the time being and let the community inspect the rest. At some point we can ask the community to process these edits we marked as "good". We believe that if ysops or arbcom members are making bad faith edits or damaging edits the wiki has far bigger problems than bias on the machine learning algorithms we use. For example we consider user groups such as bots and admins on English Wikipedia as good. -- とある白い猫 chi? 17 okt 2015 15:35 (CEST)
- You might assume that arbcom-members are trusted enough too: when someone gets at least 75% community support for tackling the most difficult conflicts, that person is not likely to vandalise the main namespace. However, in theory an arbcom-member is not really elected on basis of his encyclopaedic contributions (furthermore, we only have 7 of those, some of which are sysop/bureaucrat, so in numbers it's also not really helping. CaAl (overleg) 16 okt 2015 23:58 (CEST)
- All bureaucrats on nl-wiki are also sysops. Aside from those, rollbackers are expected to be able to distinguish between damaging and non-damaging edits and require support for this from the community. I wouldn't say any of the other groups are "trusted" in the sense that you can assume their revisions in the main namespace are "likely good". Woodcutterty|(?) 16 okt 2015 23:43 (CEST)
- Thanks! One last thing, one thing we do is we auto label revisions we think are likely good these include revisions that are not reverted in a while and revisions that were made by users with higher access (such as sysop). What user groups aside from sysop are "trusted" on nl.wikipedia? The user groups listed are: abusefilter, arbcom, bot, bureaucrat, checkuser, epcampus, epcoordinator, epinstructor, eponline, flow-bot, ipblock-exempt, rollbacker, sysop. -- とある白い猫 chi? 16 okt 2015 22:38 (CEST)
stats.grok.se bewerken
Is down sinds de elfde. Zie evt. de discussie in de Engelstalige kroeg, en:Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Pageview Stats down again. Een oplossing is er vooralsnog niet. Sander1453 (overleg) 22 okt 2015 13:28 (CEST)
- Tjah, volgens mij geeft dat meestal al aan dat de code waarop de tool draait niet meer van vandaag is. En dat is niet alleen hierbij het geval... Sjoerd de Bruin (overleg) 22 okt 2015 13:33 (CEST)
- Statistieken hadden gewoon per default in de MediaWiki-software erbij moeten zitten als extensie. Romaine (overleg) 22 okt 2015 13:35 (CEST)
- Zo te zien werkt alles nu terug. Hoewel er de twaalfde (oktober) geen statistieken waren, maar dat gebeurt zo nu en dan wel eens. Dinosaur918 (vragen of opmerkingen?) 22 okt 2015 21:06 (CEST)
- Statistieken hadden gewoon per default in de MediaWiki-software erbij moeten zitten als extensie. Romaine (overleg) 22 okt 2015 13:35 (CEST)
Train World bewerken
.JPG)
Ik ben net naar de nieuw geopende spoormuseum geweest in Schaerbeek. Het is indrukwekkend en zeker een bezoek waard. Een voordeel is dat je goed foto´s kan maken. Veel visuele effecten maar het is wat minder pretparkachtig dan Utrecht. Ik heb nu de Commons categorie aangevuld maar er is nog veel meer te fotograferen. Laat ons een wedstrijdje van maken.Smiley.toerist (overleg) 23 okt 2015 01:48 (CEST)