User talk:Hisagi

Welcome to Meta!

Hello Hisagi, 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 or Meta:Metapub (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!

Hisagi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、基本方針とガイドラインのページを是非ご一読ください。もし翻訳に興味をお持ちなら、Meta:Babylon をご覧ください。Meta:Babel, Metapub 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ください）。お困りの際は、ご遠慮なく私の会話ページに質問をお寄せください。楽しくやっていきましょう。どうぞよろしくお願いします。

--Thogo (talk) 12:50, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Vo:Klad:Klads

Hisagi, Hello. I noticed that you are interested in the wikipedia in Volapuk. A systematic way to browse through the vukiped is to use the categorical system, beginning at vo:klad:klads, which is the root category.Hillgentleman 05:09, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

I used the link in order to refer to the number of articles which belongs to vo:Klad:Zifs. --Hisagi 21:08, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Updating the List of Wikipedias/Table

I saw you revert the Wikipedias Statistics List of Wikipedias/Table. If the version doesn't include 9 new wikipedias you have written on Edit Summary, Please try to contact the generated source, User:mutante, to add it. Best Regards. --Kiensvay 02:39, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

I have thought that the s23.org script will be updated soon and I don't have to ask him to update his script. But I will try to do tonight(JST).

Why did you updated? Do you think the 9 wikipedias are unnecessary? Or, do you think that updating frequently is more important than doing with all wikipedias? It's wrong. I will update once a day until the script is updated, and if someone updates with 255 wikis, I'll revert. --Hisagi 03:47, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Why you undo revision . But I was true..Md. Farhan 11:12, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Umm... You are right, but it is about only two: the Telugu Wikipedia and the Malay Wikipedia. The table shows statistics of all 267 Wikipedias got almost at the same time. Editing only two without renewing all is true...? I don't think so. Please don't do it. I updated the table now. --Hisagi 12:23, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

We should use the s23.org script, even if it doesn't have many metrics and absolutely every Wikipedia. If Mutante neglects the tool for an extended period of time, then we should stop using it. But the reason this page exists is to provide up-to-date statistics and to automate the process as much as possible. Do you know of an alternative script that provides similarly current (i.e., daily) numbers in wiki syntax? If so, it should be publicly available, so that other Wikipedians can keep this page up-to-date. Wikipedia has other sources for thoroughly analyzed, comprehensive statistics, such as stats.wikimedia.org, but the downside is that they're updated much less frequently. The less automation we allow, the more likely the tool will end up like Wikipedia:Multilingual statistics. – Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs) 07:22, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi, Minh Nguyễn. I have no script. But I made partially automated methods and have renewed statistics page in JA-WP for two years.

The s23.org script have many problems. First, the largest is that it can not react new wikis and its output doesn't include them. This is very bad matter. This problem makes the "total" number wrong. Nowadays, newly created wikis are not so small, because they had been incubated. For example, the Meadow Mari Wikipedia is equal to the twenty two small wikis in the number of their artilces. We should not neglect this new Wikipedia. The number of languages is important to the Wikipedia project as "multilingual" project.

Besides, the s23.org script doesn't include "active users" data which are also important data because they are not relative to "users", includes very many redirect and some wrong links, and it takes long time (3~4 min. I can do it within 1 min.) to get all data.

Though I tolerate some problems of above, I think we shouldn't neglect new wikis, and we shouldn't use s23.org data until it will be able to output all wikis data. --Hisagi 14:37, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

When do you want to new update meta. Md. Farhan 07:47, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

I've done it now. Next, I will do on September 1. --Hisagi 10:11, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

how do you update. What is the web site. Maybe I can help you..Md. Farhan 02:32, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

I don't use any web sites or any bots. I update the table on my own. My method is not suited for who want to update easily, because it is constituted of many steps and includes some troublesome steps. In addition, it needs a software which is not issued now.

I undid your edits because your revision is wrong. Why did you rewrite the date of statistics without update all data? The data you didn't edit are not at August 27. Your edits are false. Please don't edit if you can not update all data at one time. But... if you insist that we should update everyday, you can check statistics pages of five new Wikipedias while the s23.org script works (several minutes for a day), and add their data to the s23.org data. (Of course, you must correct numbers of "No" and "Grand total".)

Now, a Japanese wikipedian is making a bot for update of statistics page in JA-WP. Maybe, we will be able to use the bot here several months later. --Hisagi 16:30, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

P.S. The s23.org script is updated for five new Wikipedias. I will not update the table so long as the s23.org script works well. Good bye. --Hisagi 17:09, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

I don't really understand what do you mean by "includes some troublesome steps". I have written a script for Small and large wikis/Statistics which was quite simple. You can get a list of all wikipedias by querying the api [1] (all entries with a language attribute). Perhaps you can add this feature so that new wikipedias are added automatically. Of course making statistics of non wmf wikis is more more difficult because of different software versions. Merlissimo 18:05, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Hello Hisagi, I understand why you reverted, amongst others, my edit on the 'list of Wikipedias'. However, calling it rvv in your edit summary, which is wiki jargon for "Revert of vandalism", implies my edit is vandalism. I find this unnecesarily insulting and moreover, it is not true. "Vandalism is any addition, removal, or change of content in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity..." (en:Wikipedia:Vandalism) Any wrongdoing with my edit was non deliberate. If you look up vandalism om wikimedia it states: "When a reasonable person might be in doubt as to whether something is vandalism, it would be polite not to call it vandalism." (Wikipedia vandalism) and "as a community we should, at least in most cases, be opposed to the labeling of any but the most obvious examples of vandalism as indeed 'vandalism.'" (Wikipedia vandalism) In order not to insult future people of good intent, I ask that you refrain from calling good will edits vandalism and instead explain your revert or give a link to an explanation. For the rest I wish to add it is good work you have updated this page for so long now. I hope we will someday get an automatic system that actually works. Sincerely, Taketa 20:43, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Updating of table

When will the list of wikipedias table be updated?