Wikipedia, déi fräi Enzyklopedie

Wikipedia:De Staminee/Archiv 2017/Januar-Mäerz

< Wikipedia:De Staminee | Archiv 2017

Stammbamschabloun

änneren

Moien,

ech hu gesinn datt et op der en:wiki d'Méiglechkeet gëtt, Arboreszenzen, resp. Stammbeem graphesch unzeweisen; kuckt z.B. (Këscht opklappen) den Artikel Brasseur family.

Weess een, oder huet ee Loscht ze probéieren, wéi een dat och hei aktivéiere kéinnt (an zwar esou, datt een zukünfteg einfach aus existéierende Schemen eriwwerCopy/Pasten kann, ouni missen Coden nei ze nennen)?--Zinneke (Diskussioun) 11:14, 7. Nov. 2016 (UTC)[äntweren]

Ech hunn lo mol eng gebastelt kuck am Artikel Famill Metz --Les Meloures (Diskussioun) 12:01, 4. Feb. 2017 (UTC)[äntweren]
Merci, hunn dat lo eréischt gesinn (däi Bot hat se stoemelings gemaach).--Zinneke (Diskussioun) 00:14, 5. Feb. 2017 (UTC)[äntweren]

Al Kënschtler nei am Domaine public

änneren

Den 1. Januar 2017 sinn zwéi lëtzebuergesch Kënschtler an den Domaine public "gefall", de Pierre Blanc an de Jean-Pierre Beckius. Et goufe schonn e puer Ofbildunge vun hire Molereien/Zeechnungen dorëmmer am Internet zesummegeglannt an op Commons gesat, mee se si bal all an net terribeler Qualitéit. Mataarbecht vu jidderengem, dee mat engem Fotoapparat bei engem Bild vun hinne laangschtkënnt, oder déi eng oder aner Publikatioun duerchbliedert, fir se op Commons ze setzen, ass deemno méi wéi Wëllkomm. --Zinneke (Diskussioun) 09:32, 4. Jan. 2017 (UTC)[äntweren]

Kierzelen an den Infoboxe bei Planzen an Déieren oder net

änneren

Moien, et wier vläicht net schlecht wa mir ons géifen eens ginn, ob mer an den Infoboxen sollen d'Kierzele vun den Auteure gebrauchen oder net. Eng Kéier dat eent an eng Kéier dat anert gesäit net gutt aus. --Les Meloures (Diskussioun) 19:04, 16. Jan. 2017 (UTC)[äntweren]

Ech si fir d'Ofkierzen + Verlinken --Soued031 (Diskussioun) 12:55, 21. Jan. 2017 (UTC)[äntweren]
Ech si fir d'Ausschreiwe vun den Nimm vun den Auteuren - mat Linken natierlech - an de Këschten: et kascht näischt, firwat also net. Oft gëtt an de wëssenschaftelche Publikatiounen de Linné - op deen all d'Klassifikatiounen zréckginn - mat L. ofgekierzt.
Ech hu mech e bëssi an der en-WP ëmgekuckt: do ginn d'Nimm am Prinzip ausgeschriwwen. An de wëssenschafthleche Publikatiounen, besonnesch an der Zoologie, ginn d'Nimm am Prinzip och ausgeschriwwen. --Cayambe (Diskussioun) 14:55, 25. Jan. 2017 (UTC)[äntweren]

Parlamentaresch Fro iwwert d'orthographie officielle vun Uertschaften a Gemengen

änneren

Den 13. Januar 2017 huet d'Deputéiert Tess Burton eng parlamentaresch Ufro iwwert déi 'offiziell Nimm' vun de Gemengen an Uertschaften zu Lëtzebuerg gestallt. Um Site vun der Chamber ass d'Fro esou referenzéiert:

Question écrite n°2671 - Sujet : Discordance entre les noms en luxembourgeois des localités

Auteur(s) : Madame Tess Burton, Députée

Destinataire(s) : Monsieur Xavier Bettel, Ministre de la Culture; Monsieur Claude Meisch, Ministre de l'Education nationale, de l'Enfance et de la Jeunesse

Date limite de réponse à la question : 13-02-2017

An dann hei nach e Link op de Site vun RTl zu deem Thema: Orthografie vun Nimm vun Uertschaften upassen? Leider hunn ech bis elo nach net erausfonnt wéi e permanent Linken op de Site vun der Chamber maache kann.Robby (Diskussioun) 06:54, 17. Jan. 2017 (UTC)[äntweren]


Madame Burton hätt besser dru gedoen fir sech z'infprméieren wien dofir zoustänneg ass. An da wier se gewuer ginn datt déi Leit gutt Aarbecht leeschten an och datt den CPLL zanter op d'mannst 10 Joer näischt Besonnesches geleescht huet, well en deene Leit net gehollef huet, a sträppweis iwwerhaapt net existéiert huet well ëmmer erëm vergiess gouf de Komitee mat Zäiten z'ernennen. Sou sinn da mol dräi oder sechs Méint wann net méi verluer gaangen an deenen iwwerhaapt näischt geschitt ass. Den LOD ass och net amstand Lëschten erauszeginn déi wichteg sinn fir Leit déi all Dag Lëtzebuergesch schreiwen --Melouresbot (Diskussioun) 08:01, 17. Jan. 2017 (UTC)[äntweren]
Hei ass d'Fro 2671 vum Tess Burton als pdf --Sultan Edijingo (Diskussioun) 08:39, 17. Jan. 2017 (UTC)[äntweren]
Den Dan Hardy vun RTL huet nach net matkritt, datt niewent dem Telefonsbuch et och eis Lëscht_vun_de_Lëtzebuerger_Uertschaften,_Häff_a_Lieu-diten gëtt, déi méi komplett ass wéi säin Telefonsbuch... --Sultan Edijingo (Diskussioun) 08:44, 17. Jan. 2017 (UTC)[äntweren]
@Sultan De Witz bei der Saach ass datt en héchstwahrscheinlech de spellchecker.lu benotzt an do ass d'Lëscht vun där s du schwätz integréiert ;). Déi ass definitiv méi komplett. Apropos bravo un all déi, déi un der Lëscht geschafft hunn. --Soued031 (Diskussioun) 21:02, 20. Jan. 2017 (UTC)[äntweren]
Ech menge se hunn alleguer e bësselchen den Zuch verpasst, obschonn d'CFL grouss Ustrengunge gemaach huet   --Les Meloures (Diskussioun) 09:25, 17. Jan. 2017 (UTC)[äntweren]
Jo, richteg op www.cfl.lu kann een och d'Uertschaftsnimm op Lëtzebuergesch fannen... ;) --Sultan Edijingo (Diskussioun) 09:34, 17. Jan. 2017 (UTC)[äntweren]

Onbenotzt Kategorien

änneren

Moien, what should we do with those categories that will never be used? For example nobody notable or even known was born in 421 BC. Greetings, --Wolverène (Diskussioun) 12:42, 24. Jan. 2017 (UTC)[äntweren]

Most of those categories are empty. Should we now loose time to check if they will be used or not. If you want to do this I wish you good luck and much time.   --Les Meloures (Diskussioun) 13:09, 24. Jan. 2017 (UTC)[äntweren]
Somebody spent time and effort to create them. They do no harm, even if unused. I'd propose to just leave them as it is and devote time to creating, not deleting. Greetingd, --Zinneke (Diskussioun) 13:24, 24. Jan. 2017 (UTC)[äntweren]

Machine translation support enabled today for Content Translation

änneren

Hëlleft wgl. fir an Är Sprooch z'iwwersetzen

Hello, machine translation support for Content Translation (beta feature) has now been extended and enabled for users of Luxembourgish Wikipedia using Yandex. It can be used when translating Wikipedia articles into Luxembourgish with Content Translation. To start using this service, please choose ‘’Yandex.Translate’’ from the ‘’Automatic Translation’’ dropdown menu that you see on the sidebar after you start translating an article. Please note, machine translation is available from all the languages that are supported by Yandex.Translate, but Content Translation can still be used in the usual manner for translating from all languages, with or without machine translation support.

Wikimedia Foundation’s Legal team and Yandex had collaborated earlier to work out an agreement that allows the use of Yandex.Translate without compromising Wikipedia’s policy of attribution of rights, privacy of our users and brand representation. Since November 2015, Yandex machine translation has been used for articles translated for Wikipedias in many languages. For more information, we request you to kindly take a look at the details about machine translation services in Content Translation and about Yandex translation services, including a summary of the legal contract. Please note, translations made using Content Translation are also used to improve machine translation services.

We have tested the service for use on the Luxembourgish Wikipedia, but there could be unknown problems that we are not aware of yet. Please do let us know on our Project Talk page or phabricator if you face any problems using Content Translation. This message is only in English and we will be very grateful if it could be translated into Luxembourgish for other users of this Wikipedia. Thank you. On behalf of WMF Language team: --Runa Bhattacharjee (WMF) (Diskussioun) 11:26, 1. Feb. 2017 (UTC)[äntweren]

But that can we something give...*) --Zinneke (Diskussioun) 13:00, 1. Feb. 2017 (UTC)[äntweren]
* Ma dat ka mer eppes ginn...
Do hu schonn anerer wéi d'Wikipedia sech d'Zänn drun ausgebass. --Les Meloures (Diskussioun) 13:18, 1. Feb. 2017 (UTC)[äntweren]
Yandex ënnerstëtzt keng Iwwersetzung op Lëtzebuergesch. A Google Translate produzéiert net onbedingt Brauchbares (Beispill, lo just iwwerpréift: "I am here in Luxembourg and believe that the present translation is crap." - "Ech hei zu Lëtzebuerg a gleewen, datt den haitegen Iwwersetzung egal ass."; de Klassiker "Lëtzebuerg ass mäi Land." - "Ireland is my country." ass och nach ëmmer aktiv.) --Otets 11:20, 2. Feb. 2017 (UTC)[äntweren]
Runa, for this moment Yandex translates Luxembourgish text (at least into Russian) even worse than Google, I guess that translations into Luxembourgish look just incoherent. What's for Content Translation as is, that's a terrible mistake made by Wikimedia, 95 % people use it incorrectly and they often don't even hesitate making harmful translations. --Wolverène (Diskussioun) 16:14, 2. Feb. 2017 (UTC)[äntweren]
I would even add on a more general note: Automatic translation might be "okay" for spam-bots or e-mails from "African widows" with questionable fortunes (or to get a very rough idea what a text might be about), but not for active use in an encyclopaedia which requires drafting in an accurate, unambiguous, factual language. Encouraging the use of automatic translation by non native speakers who think they now can translate their favourite articles in any language available is doing more harm than good, as it requires other users to painfully make sense out of that "mess" and lose more time correcting than writing it themselves. --Zinneke (Diskussioun) 09:51, 3. Feb. 2017 (UTC)[äntweren]
änneren

Hi Wikimedia community in Luxembourg! I am writing to you, because we are in the midst of an EU copyright reform right now and important questions like copyright on digitisations, Freedom of Panorama and the liability of sites like Wikipedia are at stake. We are working hard in Brussels to communicate our issues to the European Parliament, but the second part of the job needs to be done in the EU Member States. In order to let the Council know what we need and what is risky for us, we are sending the national ministries or intellectual property rights offices letters. All of these are sent by the local chapters/user-group/community (even if unregistered) in the native language. I have met the Director of the Luxembourg IP Office at a conference in Milan and he encouraged me that Wikimedia should send them a position paper as well. The full draft that national communities use to localise a version is quite long, but if you decide and have little time, you can also just translate points 1 and 2 and send it in. I have a Dutch-language version and a German-language version of this text, but unfortunately no French, which I believe is the language of choice for government affairs in Luxembourg. Therefore I am looking for volunteers to create a local version and send it in. Thanks! --Dimi z (Diskussioun) 09:14, 13. Feb. 2017 (UTC)[äntweren]

Review of initial updates on Wikimedia movement strategy process

änneren

Note: Apologies for cross-posting and sending in English. Message is available for translation on Meta-Wiki.

The Wikimedia movement is beginning a movement-wide strategy discussion, a process which will run throughout 2017. For 15 years, Wikimedians have worked together to build the largest free knowledge resource in human history. During this time, we've grown from a small group of editors to a diverse network of editors, developers, affiliates, readers, donors, and partners. Today, we are more than a group of websites. We are a movement rooted in values and a powerful vision: all knowledge for all people. As a movement, we have an opportunity to decide where we go from here.

This movement strategy discussion will focus on the future of our movement: where we want to go together, and what we want to achieve. We hope to design an inclusive process that makes space for everyone: editors, community leaders, affiliates, developers, readers, donors, technology platforms, institutional partners, and people we have yet to reach. There will be multiple ways to participate including on-wiki, in private spaces, and in-person meetings. You are warmly invited to join and make your voice heard.

The immediate goal is to have a strategic direction by Wikimania 2017 to help frame a discussion on how we work together toward that strategic direction.

Regular updates are being sent to the Wikimedia-l mailing list, and posted on Meta-Wiki. Beginning with this message, monthly reviews of these updates will be sent to this page as well. Sign up to receive future announcements and monthly highlights of strategy updates on your user talk page.

Here is a review of the updates that have been sent so far:

More information about the movement strategy is available on the Meta-Wiki 2017 Wikimedia movement strategy portal.

Posted by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of the Wikimedia Foundation, 20:32, 15. Feb. 2017 (UTC) • Hëlleft wgl. fir an Är Sprooch z'iwwersetzen • Get help

Overview #2 of updates on Wikimedia movement strategy process

änneren

Note: Apologies for cross-posting and sending in English. This message is available for translation on Meta-Wiki.

As we mentioned last month, the Wikimedia movement is beginning a movement-wide strategy discussion, a process which will run throughout 2017. This movement strategy discussion will focus on the future of our movement: where we want to go together, and what we want to achieve.

Regular updates are being sent to the Wikimedia-l mailing list, and posted on Meta-Wiki. Each month, we are sending overviews of these updates to this page as well. Sign up to receive future announcements and monthly highlights of strategy updates on your user talk page.

Here is a overview of the updates that have been sent since our message last month:

More information about the movement strategy is available on the Meta-Wiki 2017 Wikimedia movement strategy portal.

Posted by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of the Wikimedia Foundation, 19:43, 9. Mäe. 2017 (UTC) • Hëlleft wgl. fir an Är Sprooch z'iwwersetzen • Get help

Vun „https://lb.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:De_Staminee/Archiv_2017/Januar-Mäerz&oldid=2073917“