how could I attribute pages using new attribution?Edit
Our bot has... taken a holiday? I heard you might be able to help give it a swift kick. I'm not sure if you'll be able to help, but I wanted to check with you first. Operator873talkconnect 04:03, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
Help with editing an article about the composerEdit
Hello!I ask for help in editing an article about the composer Rudolf Schumann, help me to make the article good and help with a good translation. I took information from other Wikipedia in other languages. Thank you! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shumann_Rudolf 188.8.131.52 (talk) 10:06, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
May I ask why, when you import pages from the English Wikipedia, you often import only the most recent change? This, especially when done more than once to the same page, tends to make a mess of the history. Pppery (talk) 02:31, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
- That is how we import here, for precisely that reason. Importing the entire history can cause mixing of edit histories from here and en which can make a much larger mess, so we only import the most recent edit history for attribution. This is especially true when importing templates because they often require importing other templates at the same time and the risk of too much edit history spam is much higher. -DJSasso (talk) 03:15, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
An editor has requested deletion of Template:Tfm/dated, an article you created. We appreciate your changes, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").
Please comment on the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2019/Template:Tfm/dated and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).
You may also change the article during the discussion to address the nominator's concerns. But you should not remove the requests for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you very much. Pppery (talk) 02:41, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
Your comment on Simple TalkEdit
I know that, among my strengths, despite what Auntof6 once said, eloquence is not present. Occasionally, and much to my dismay, my fellow Wikipedians and friends have come to me and asked why I was upset or may have mentioned I was a bit harsh in a response. I've never meant to be flat out rude or mean to anyone on any project. Indeed, I have taken a hardline a few times and stood for something, but being flat out mean is just not me. Perhaps that is the case here with your statement too... but the result is still that I feel deflated and a bit hurt by being made to fit into your "this is what you are" box. My mother seemed to sound like a broken record when I was growing up. She always had an anecdote or wise proverb to pass on. One that sticks with me to this day is, "It takes all different kinds." Naturally, you'll have to forgive her "Texas-ifying" the Queen's English. Of course, she was referring to different personalities, but I've found this powerful statement applies to just about every situation. It's great you and others are dedicated to 90% content, 10% sysop actions. (No, I didn't calculate the actual percentage.) I also think it's fantastic there is a small group of very dedicated editors bent on expanding and improving the encyclopedia. If we have transient accounts which come to simple and want to play whack-a-mole, that's great too! Net positive to the project because we are fighting vandalism. Perhaps someone finds IRC and decides to bring their talents to a much smaller project because they can really make a difference here. I welcome and encourage them to join us. Occasionally, we may find ourselves lucky enough to gain an editor with a powerful talent for writing code, be it for interface projects, bots, or off-wiki support of on-wiki missions. These are the few editors I honestly wish we could pay. Our Twinkle hasn't even been updated in about 5 years.
Regardless of my musings, the point is this project is not a club. You shouldn't pre-judge someone because they show up here from enwiki and do this or do that. It takes all different kinds and we need all different kinds. You may be interested to know the bot framework which I have offered to simple.wiki began when I was another drop in the ocean of en.wiki. I have been off and on various IRC servers for the last 16 years. I created my Wikipedia account in December of 2008. For many years, I was only a reader. Then I started clicking undo more and more. I discovered I enjoyed protecting the content which wasn't a big surprise considering my life's work in Law Enforcement. But, let's be honest for a moment, an API query I performed a moment ago informs me there are 140,448 active accounts out of nearly 36,000,000 total accounts on en.wiki. What is another grain of sand on a beach?
I was languishing on en.wiki and actually took a several month wiki-break. In my mind, I knew whether I edited or not, the beast grew. Whether I volunteered to help, the beast grew. My input didn't affect much and didn't mean much. Of course, this was my point of view then... and I'm not trying to disparage the flagship project. But one day, I was brought to simple by Vermont. 19:24 UTC, 10 June 2018 I made my first edit on this project. Yes, I play whack-a-mole and spambot combat. Yes, I RfA'd too early. Yes, I'm eager to help build the project with my skill in writing code. No, I do not contribute to content because I'm not good at creating content. Why is that a negative?
I did not come seeking approval for an IRC bot. Nor do I plan to seek any type of approval for what any of my 4 currently running bots are doing for various projects on IRC. I came here to obtain ideas about how I could help the project using the framework I have spent months of time developing, asking nothing in return. I'm building an on-wiki bot that has taken a few breaths of life, but is not fully formed yet. Once it's completed, it will (hopefully) compliment the IRC bots and together, they will be greater than the sum of their parts. It's a strange analogy for this project, incidentally.
Lastly, I agree with one thing you said. We see far too many established or otherwise good editors come to simple, then abruptly leave. I will take this opportunity to suggest the more tenured editors of this project take a moment to consider the situation. Everyone was once an IP editor. Everyone's account was once new. Every sysop's mop was once clean and unsoiled. Perhaps the issue isn't people disappearing without cause, but they leave because of the unwelcoming atmosphere. I'll even hazard a suggestion that being blatantly ignored would be more welcoming at times to some editors. Maybe there was an IRC incident that pre-dates me being active on freenode with Wikipedians from this project. If there was, I certainly don't know about it. Maybe your personal experience wasn't very good. I'm not sure and it's not relevant in this moment. What is relevant is that off-wiki work to support on-wiki results is crucial and equally as important as content. A vandal fighter is equally as important as a Good Article writer. And I think we, as a community, can improve how we receive new editors, especially from other projects. I have personally observed our project lose great editors and others refuse to even venture here from other projects because of our lack of hospitality and warmth. I'm not saying you are the cause, Djsasso, nor am I intending to be disrespectful of you or anyone else on this project. All I mean to say is please let me be the last person you pre-judge and cram into a previously defined box. There's very little that would make me leave this project. But being told you're a passing phase, not ultimately a serious member of this community, and you will eventually leave the project will definitely push anyone in that direction which is so sad because, well... we need all different kinds. Operator873talkconnect 06:40, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
- Unfortunately I disagree with a chunk of this. A vandal fighter is not as important as an article writer. I would go so far to say that people that only focus on vandal fighting and treat it like a game (which most vandal fighters do) actually harm more than help. But you are following a very well trodden path, doing all the things that those trying to collect hats and feel super important do without actually helping the purpose of the wiki which is to write wiki articles. The problem with IRC is that chatting on IRC causes drama spill over onto the wiki which causes bad decisions and bad editing. There was a time believe it or not where probably 90% of the regulars on the wiki were on IRC. And it caused so much damage to the wiki that most people stopped using it. The only people that use it now tend to be those that didn't really understand the purpose of the wiki and treated it more like a social media or a club and were in it for the adulation. Your comment of "Whether I volunteered to help, the beast grew. My input didn't affect much and didn't mean much." is precisely the point, you shouldn't expect your input to mean much. In the large scheme of things even on simple.wiki it won't. No ones does. You are right this project isn't a club, but expecting adulation for what you do and using IRC which by its very definition acts like a club is making the wiki out to be a club. The excuse that you aren't good at doing content is just that an excuse, if you speak english you can take what someone else wrote on en.wiki in a subject you are interested in and convert it to simple. You don't even need to be creative to do that. To be honest, we very much need people to stop coming here just to be vandal fighters. We don't at all need those. And to be honest they contribute to the bad reputation here as a wiki where people just come to fight vandals. It scares off people who would come here to do content. I have had many many people on en tell me they don't come here to do content because of all the people that just come here to play wack a vandal and treat vandal fighting like a video game where getting flags etc is akin to leveling up. It is a serious problem here. We currently have maybe 4 editors that do actual content work. Not busy work like re-categorizing or vandal fighting. It is a serious issue here. And I should point out before someone thinks I am being hypocritical, I include myself as someone who isn't really doing much here anymore, though that is due to the fact I can only log on from work these days now that I have a kid I have no time to be on during other parts of the day. And I would point out I specifically commented in my comment that what I said wasn't throwing any shade your way, we take what we can get as we are all volunteers. But that doesn't mean I am not going to keep hammering home to people that everyone needs to focus less on the "busy" work and more on the content, myself included. -DJSasso (talk) 12:00, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
- On an unrelated note our twinkle hasn't been updated because this wiki doesn't really have the same infrastructure in the background that is needed for it. It is actually why I started going crazy recently trying to get templates and modules matching en.wiki. Twinkle on this wiki was never actually meant to be something we advertised for people to use. But at some point someone added it to the actual tool list. But for all intents and purposes it is in Alpha here. We did just enough to sort of make it work here because those vandal fighters I mention above here kept bitching about how we didn't have it here. Every now and then I think about trying to update it a bit, but it would take rewriting almost everything from templates to css to make it capable of matching en.wiki and that just really isn't a priority when we can barely keep the important stuff going. -DJSasso (talk) 12:41, 22 February 2019 (UTC)