Template talk:Wikipedialang/archive3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Fix esperanto link.. 2 The Slovenian Wikipedia has reached 10,000 articles. PLEASE adjust the international page. 3 English 4 new layout? 5 Interesting 6 100,000 article mark 7 Language displays 8 Latvian Wikipedia is 1000+ 9 Order of Languages 10 Belarusian is >1000 11 Thai 12 sr: = 10 000 articles 13 Midpoints 14 Vietnamese Wikipedia 15 Polish Wikipedia 16 Javanese Wikipedia 17 Estonian Wikipedia 18 Czech wikipedia 19 Wikipedia Indonesia 20 Marathi > 1000 21 Low German 22 Hungarian 23 Irish 24 ¼ million articles 25 Italian 26 Norwegian (Nynorsk) has reached 10,000 articles 27 Vietnamese Wikipedia still 1,000+ 28 Tamil wikipedia > 1000 articles 29 Sanskrit demoted 30 Nynorsk is Norwegian too 31 Faeroese > 1,000 32 Croatian > 10,000 33 100,000 article mark again 34 Chuvash, Alemannic > 1,000 35 alphabetical order 36 how about linking language articles? 37 Ido > 10,000; Corsican > 1,000 38 Neapolitan > 1,000 39 Turkish > 10,000 40 Local names of other wikipedias 41 Galician > 10,000 42 suomi, not Suomi 43 Lithuanian > 10,000 44 Malay - 10,000 45 Arabic > 10,000 46 Spanish 47 Sinugboanon not Sugbuanon 48 Azerbaijani > 2000 49 Persian > 10,000 50 Alphabetic ordering 51 Thai Wikipedia > 10000 52 It's back again to Sugbuanon 53 Azerbaijani has been deleted 54 Interwiki link to vi: 55 Icelandic Wikipedia at 10.000+ 56 Kapampangan Wikipedia 57 Ripuarian/Kölsch Wikipedia 58 How about a tag cloud?

[edit] Fix esperanto link..

Thats nasty..

[edit] The Slovenian Wikipedia has reached 10,000 articles. PLEASE adjust the international page.

sl: has reached 10,000! Can someone please change the thing on the international page? The link's here for you. Scott Gall 05:54, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

The international page (www.wikipedia.org) really needs updating. What needs updating is the fact that sl: has reached 10,000; ja: has nearly 100,000 articles (NOT 97,000.) Thank you, Scott, for pointing out that sl: is in the 10,000-50,000 on the main page, but in the 1000-10,000 range on www.wikipedia.org. PLEASE will someone change it? 210.55.81.3 18:51, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for that, 210.55.81.3. All it takes for people to note that sl: has reached 10,000 is get a developer, and ask them to move the link. I have proof that sl: has reached the 10K mark. I copied it from sl:'s main page, known in Slovenian as 'Glavna stran.'

Dobrodošli na strani Wikipedije v slovenščini! Vabimo vse, ki jih zanima izdelava spletne enciklopedije, da se nam pridružite in nam pomagate izdelati celotno enciklopedijo. Angleška različica Wikipedije je od 15. januarja 2001 zbrala prek 470.000 člankov, v slovenski pa je od 8. marca 2002 nastalo 10194 člankov. Vsebina Wikipedije je zaščitena z dovoljenjem GNU za rabo proste dokumentacije. Izdelava takšne enciklopedije vzame veliko časa, a je zabavna in nam tudi veliko povrne. Preskusite se v sestavljanju. Če se še niste srečali s področjem strežnikov Wiki, si lahko preberete kratek opis zamisli, zgodovine in izdelkov WikiWiki (http://www.lugos.si/~peterlin/besedila/wiki.html), ki ga je napisal eden od naših uporabnikov. 20. septembra 2004 je Wikipedija je dosegla 1 milijon člankov v več kot 100 jezikih.

The 10194 is the number of articles in Slovenian. It's been done on the English main page, now please change it on the international page. It's not fair that our demands for developer assistance are not being met. Scott Gall 07:08, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] English

Can you tell me why English Wikipedia is listed here? It makes no sense (on main page): "Wikipedia in other languages...English...". Other language to English is English? 81.168.225.212

good point -- I think this at least should be uncontroversial. let's remove this non-link to self. dab (ᛏ) 10:57, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] new layout?

I know this has had a long history of discussion but what do you think of this layout? It's a little larger but it's more consistant with the main .org page. violet/riga (t) 12:54, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I agree it looks nice, but it creates an artificial gap between 6th and 7th, which may be 10 articles apart for all we know (this is of course also my gripe with the portal page). dab (ᛏ) 11:00, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Interesting

Right after GeorgeStepanek bashes me for having no respect for the democratic process here on Wikipedia, he encourages Raul654 to take actions that are explicitly the opposite of what was decided by the majority in the illegitimate poll started by GeorgeStepanek.

There was clearly more support for starting at 1000+ than for starting at 10000+, but of course as Raul654 has demonstrated elsewhere in the past he doesn't care what the majority thinks, only what he thinks of the majority. --Node 21:45, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Starting at 10,000 - particularly without any other listing on the main page! - is both a bad idea, and something that should be discussed for more than one or two days before implementation. I restored the Jan 27 layout. +sj + 08:04, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] 100,000 article mark

There has been discussion on a 100,000 article mark in the past. It was rejected for two reasons:

1. Only English and German had 100,000 articles
2. It took up to much space

The first is no longer true: Japanese also has 100,000 articles, and soon French will. The latter is no longer true: the 1,000-10,000 article heading has been dropped. We should have a 100,000 article mark. Gerritholl 15:31, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Hmm. I think that we should have three sets chosen on a half-magnitude scales: 100k+, 20k+, 4k+, and that we only allow increasing the top one (and hence all the others) when there are at least four Wikipedian language versions in each set. Thus, in this case, we should wait until French reaches 100k before making the change.

James F. (talk) 16:15, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Language displays

Firstly, we should display more languages than we have in the past. We should not be limiting the number of languages listed on the main page; we should be imposing quality standards on the editions we link to. If every language suddenly became a perfect translation / parallel edition, we should show all 200 of them on the main page.

[Whether as interlang links on the side, or at the bottom of the main page, I don't know. These are issues we have to figure out, and they are no less serious for widely-translated articles than they are for the main page.]

Secondly, WWW portals aside, the en wikipedia continues to represent the project as a whole to at least 80% of our visitors, and to the world at large (including many of the multilingual people who visit both en and other language editions, and other WM projects). And the display of multilingual breadth is currently the most impressive part of the main page.

Finally, I think 1k/10k/100k is the right way to plan ahead. Simple, sensible, self-symmetric, unchanging.

Some strawman arguments:

• "Taking up space at the bottom of the page" is not an issue here, as there is nothing else to scroll down to see.
  • The extra 500 characters is likewise not significantly increasing the size of this 30+k page.
• "No other main pages show all these languages"
  • Including 1000+ languages, we still show fewer languages than both fr: and ja:. And many wikipedians, not simply node and myself, like the way the main page looked when it included 100+ languages as ja: currently does.

Other arguments:

• There's a multilingual portal! Everyone can go there!

  I care about how en: looks, not about how the portal looks. The portal's design is in many ways inferior to that of this page. And its languages aren't presnted in English, since it is trying to be maximally language-neutral. And adding an extra intermediate click and load-time isn't good interface design at all.

+sj + 08:26, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

my strawman would be that an "encyclopedia" of 900 articles (600 of which will be stubs) is a fun project, but utterly worthless as an "encyclopedia", and therefore, while interesting for some editors, not really a good showcase for readers. At "10k" you begin to have a remote chance of actually finding an article on the subject you're interested in. This is not a strong objection, though, since I'm objecting to the red herring of article-counting anyway (word count is more meaningful) dab (ᛏ) 10:47, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I disagree strongly. First of all, not all small Wikipedias are made up mostly of stubs. Second of all, shame on you for passing judgement on Wikipedias you aren't even able to read. It is very arrogant of you to make these judgements - I, for one, know from first-hand experience that as long as a Wikipedia has more than a couple hundred articles, it can still be very useful (unless they're mostly stubs). Having all blue links isn't what makes it useful. --Node

I agree - but I feel a bit more strongly in my agreement. That said, this isn't worth fighting over until the 1000+ list gets 2 or 3 times the size it is now. --mav 00:23, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I don't have a stong opinion either way. My peference would be to remove them entirely from the front page, and make them available in a page linked from the "other languages" image and label. I don't feel that those links are any more important than the ones on the Community portal, for example. But it does make sense now to change the top bracket to 100k+. (By the way, according to Alexa en is the destination for 65% of our vistors, not 80%, to pick a nit.) GeorgeStepanek\^talk 03:21, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Of course it would be. You're GeorgeStepanek, hater of all language templates on en mainpages!

[edit] Latvian Wikipedia is 1000+

The Latvian Wikipedia has reached the 1,000 article mark. Could someone with admin rights please add this line

[[:lv:|Latviešu (Latvian)]] – 

under Wikipedia encyclopedia languages with over 1,000 articles? Thanks in advance. --Juzeris 20:12, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Done.—Ëzhiki (erinaceus europeaus) 20:32, Mar 3, 2005 (UTC)

Thank you! --Juzeris 23:46, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Order of Languages

Japanese (Nih...) should come after Dutch (Ned...). 203.122.228.212 12:03, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

No, it should not.

Fair enough, but even if you assume English language order, Dutch should come before German. Either way it's wrong. (Nitpick :) 203.122.228.212 06:30, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Belarusian is >1000

someone could update this on front page [1]? Thanks. --Monkbel 00:44, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)

And Latvian as well, please. --Juzeris 22:20, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Breton (a Brythonic Celtic language spoken in north-western France) is >100. I have a reward of ψ15 for the admin who is so bold as to go and fix it up on [2] (the actual link is m:Www.wikipedia.org template, an HTML page.) Scott Gall 07:56, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Thai

we should add th:, but the native spelling looks messed up in my browser, "Thai (ไทย)". What do you think, should we add it like that regardless, or shall we transliterate, "phasa thai (Thai)"? dab (ᛏ) 09:04, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

"Thai (ไทย)" looks OK in Thai-enabled browsers. Maybe you don't have Thai font in your system. Since Thai is my native tongue, I suggest that the text link should be "ภาษาไทย (Thai)". Thanks for your suggestion to add th: to this template --Phisite 09:50, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I am aware that this is the problem. And if you want to make use of the th: 'pedia, obviously you'll have to Thai-enable your browser. However, it would seem many browsers are not so enabled by default, and to many people looking at the en: Main page, the Thai spelling will look mangled. Anyway, I suppose we can add it like it is, and react to complaints later. dab (ᛏ) 10:49, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

My browser should be Thai-enabled. I use Code2000 and Code2001, and it seems to work in some places and not in others. Thai is the only script that does appear right. On the th.wikipedia main page, nothing displays right except the title of the page (the part that's displayed in the tab when the window is hidden not the text on the page). Tuf-Kat 22:19, Mar 11, 2005 (UTC)

the strange thing is that normally, browsers will display unknown glyphs as question marks or little rectangles. I'm using Firefox on OS X right now, for example, and the Devanagari (Hindi, Sanskrit) appears as question marks. In the case of Thai, however, the wrong symbols are displayed, among them š, Σ. I'm not sure why, is this only a macintosh issue? Thai Unicode is U+0Exx (3584–3839), and we seem to be encoding it correctly, so I don't know what's wrong. dab (ᛏ) 08:29, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I use OSX too. Tuf-Kat

[edit] sr: = 10 000 articles

Serbian Wikipedia has just reached 10,000 articles. Since Main page is locked for editing, may someone please put link to sr: into above 10 k section. --M. Pokrajac 23:32, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Done.—Ëzhiki (erinaceus europeaus) 21:45, Mar 25, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Midpoints

In a fit of unilateralism, I recently converted many of Wikipedia's en dashes to middle dots or midpoints. Normally, en dashes and midpoints are not fungible, because en dashes are most often used to indicate range, as in 2001–2005, while midpoints, when they're not being used as punctuation in languages like Georgian, are used as separators between items in a flat list, as in Cats · Dogs · Hippopotami. However, in many cases, en dashes are used frequently on (at least) the English Wikipedia to differentiate list items – where midpoints would be more appropriate, typographically speaking. In addition, I replaced a few hyphens with midpoints. By no means, of course, can my few edits be considered exhaustive; several sets of dashes and hyphens were left unconverted (notably in the 'Selected anniversaries' and, it would appear, 'Today's featured article' templates, in which hundreds of separate pages would need to be edited to effect a consistent change) and the quiet precedent established when I myself converted lots of hyphens to en dashes spurred other people to make changes of their own, unbeknown to me.

Here's an example of an en dash to midpoint conversion:

to

Most of my edits, in fact, were made to transcluded templates.

The conversion is beneficial because of the typographic reason mentioned above (besides, there is no historical justification for using en dashes or hyphens instead). Also, midpoints are smaller – thus more economical – than en dashes. And a more technical reason: according to Meta, the middle dot (·) is an extended ASCII character that is 'safe for use in all Wiki pages'. En dashes, on the other hand, are described as 'possibly unsafe'.

There remains at least one question, viz., how shall we enter this character? I favor using the 'named character entity reference' for a few reasons:

• No keyboard that I know of has a · key, so direct input is infeasible. If we were to simply copy and paste the character in order to reproduce it, as it seems to have been done under the 'Content' header at the Commons main page, then people wouldn't know how to write a new one if a copyable specimen were not available. They could always open up a character map, but...oh, forget it! I should stop rambling.
• The numeric character identity reference, in this case ·, is apparently unloved by some older browsers, which 'incorrectly interpret [numeric references] as references to the native character set'. I find it difficult to care about older browsers (last month, for example, 0.2% of W3Schools visitors used Netscape 4), but some people, of course, do care. What concerns me more is the difficulty in remembering to write · when a midpoint is called for, compared to ·, which can be recalled far more readily.

What remains? As I edit, now, I see that below the text box there's the word 'Insert:' followed by a bunch of clickable special characters; clicking one causes it to be inserted. Presumably, this rash of JavaScript is part of the 'edit toolbar' and thus part of the software; I can't find a template anywhere with which I could edit it. It already includes the useful and wondrous – and —, but · is absent, likely because the character isn't (hitherto, provided my edits are not quickly reverted in disgust) used much in Wikipedia. The midpoint would be a useful addition to this toolbar if the character becomes standard WP practise for separating list items when commas are inappropriate.

Thank you for your time. Chris Roy 01:22, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

MediaWiki:Copyrightwarning is where the javascript lives. -- ALoan (Talk) 23:19, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Vietnamese Wikipedia

The Vietnamese Wikipedia now has more than 1,000 articles. Could a sysop please find the following code in this template:

[[:tt:|Tatarça (Tatar)]] · 

And add the following code after it:

[[:vi:Trang Chính|Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)]] · 

Thanks. – Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs, blog) 00:30, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Polish Wikipedia

Somehow the Polish Wikipedia got lost from this list. I've restored it now. - Mark 12:32, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Oh... oops, sorry about that. -- ran (talk) 13:37, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Javanese Wikipedia

Wikipedia in Javanese or Basa Jawa now has more than 1,000 article. Can someone please update this please? Thank you! Meursault2004 17:33, 7 May 2005 (UTC)

Done. — mark ✎ 16:54, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Estonian Wikipedia

I was surfing around, and I noticed the Estonian (Eesti) Wikipedia is now over 10K. I'm just posting this as a heads-up; since I'm an admin, I can make the change myself (I think). Dale Arnett 00:29, 18 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Czech wikipedia

Czech (Česky) Wikipedia reached 10K articles. I just post it here to let know. --Dodo78 11:42, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

I moved it up the list. Congratulations!—Ëzhiki (erinaceus amurensis) 12:48, May 25, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia Indonesia

Indonesian Wikipedia now has more than 10000 articles, please update. kandar 07:30, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

Done.—Ëzhiki (erinaceus amurensis) 11:38, May 31, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Marathi > 1000

Marathi Wikipedia has crossed 1000 articles.

Can you please add Marathi (मराठी) in the list of wikipedias having more than 1000 articles

Thank you

Wces423

Done.—Ëzhiki (erinaceus amurensis) 15:08, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)

Thank you - Wces423 07:04, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Low German

Should Low German be in the list? -- ran (talk) 15:53, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)

I would say yes. I cannot add it myself, though, because I do not know how to write the name of the language in that language.—Ëzhiki (erinaceus amurensis) 16:07, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)

The name in Low German is "Plattdüütsch"; thus, someone should add

[[:nds:|Plattdüütsch (Low German)]] · 

[edit] Hungarian

Hungarian Wikipedia is now over 10k. Wouldn't you mind adding it in the list of Wikipedia encyclopedia languages with over 10,000 articles?

--Strapontin 00:54, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I've just checked and it shows 9,982 articles. Maybe tomorrow or soon after then. I'll keep an eye on it.—Ëzhiki (erinaceus amurensis) 01:29, Jun 4, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Irish

Irish is now hirgher that 1000 please update ps does any one know how to shang the page on [[3]] --Happy ga 12:17, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Please add [[:ga:|Gaeilge (Irish)]] to the 1000+ articles section. The m:Www.wikipedia.org_template has been updated. --Gabriel Beecham/Kwekubo 13:21, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC) --

Added, thank you. silsor 19:14, Jun 17, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] ¼ million articles

The german Wikipedia has reached 250,000 articles! Please update this page, I think it needs a new group :-) Ilja Lorek 28 June 2005 13:27 (UTC)

It was previously decided that no new groups with less than three languages would be created. But please accept my sincere congratulations on the occasion!—Ëzhiki (erinaceus amurensis) June 28, 2005 15:28 (UTC)

[edit] Italian

The italian Wikipedia has reached 50,000 articles, so it should moved to the proper section.

[edit] Norwegian (Nynorsk) has reached 10,000 articles

Norwegian (nynorsk) has reached 10,000 articles. Please move it up to the proper section («Wikipedia encyclopedia languages with over 10,000 articles»). -- Olve 06:01, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

Done. - BanyanTree 06:05, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

Thanks! :-) Olve 07:47, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Vietnamese Wikipedia still 1,000+

David Cannon apparently noticed that the Vietnamese Wikipedia had reached 2,000 articles and mistakenly promoted it to the 10,000+ article section on this template. Please return it to the 1,000+ section. Thanks. – Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs, blog) 23:57, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Tamil wikipedia > 1000 articles

Tamil Wikipedia has crossed 1000 articles.

Can you please add Tamil (தமிழ்) in the list of wikipedias having more than 1000 articles ? Thank you--Ravishankar 12:35, August 15, 2005 (UTC)

Done. Thanks, BanyanTree 14:49, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. But after the word Tamil there is a small bubble (?) which is not supposed to be there. could u erase it ? Thanks again--Ravishankar 08:53, August 16, 2005 (UTC)

Ravi, the small bubble is actually the overdot diacritic that was supposed to be on "ழ". I've fixed it. :-) -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 09:12, August 16, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Sanskrit demoted

The Sanskrit wikipedia was recently demoted to well under 1000 articles with the deletion of around half its number... are you going to delist it? Codex Sinaiticus 18:05, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

Done. Rje 13:02, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Nynorsk is Norwegian too

There's "Norsk (Norwegian)" and "Nynorsk". If you look at Norwegian language you'll find that "Nynorsk" is just as "Norwegian" as the other "Norsk" (which should be renamed to show what "Norsk" is meant). I propose these changes to better show what is meant:

• Norsk (Norwegian) > Norsk bokmål (Norwegian)
• Nynorsk > Norsk nynorsk (Norwegian)

Note that language names (such as bokmål and nynorsk) are written in lower case in Norwegian. --Dittaeva 18:11, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

• Done (a few days ago).--Pharos 13:06, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Faeroese > 1,000

Faeroese has been over 1,000 articles for quite some time now...is there some reason why it hasn't been added to the template? –Swid 21:04, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

• Thanks, I've added it.--Pharos 01:30, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Croatian > 10,000

Croatian passed the 10.000 mark. :-) Please move it to the corresponding section. Thanks. --Elephantus 11:05, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

• Done. Congratulations on the milestone! :)--Pharos 11:25, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] 100,000 article mark again

Since the last time this was brought up, a whole bunch of the 50,000+ wikipedias have broken the 100,000 article mark. At the point that I wrote this, the Polish, German, French, Japanese, Swedish, and Italian Wikipedias have all gone over 100,000. And the Dutch Wikipedia is about to (I'd say in about 1 day). Do we need a new category? Or do we prefer to keep the Spanish and Portuguese in the same category as the other big Wikipedias are now? --Codemonkey 00:25, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

so, in other words, introducing the 'decimal' threshold at this point would amount to putting Spanish and Portuguese WPs to second tier. I'll do that, experimentally, to see how long it will last. dab (ᛏ) 12:26, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

In my opinion, it's much better now. Gerrit ^CUTEDH 09:48, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Chuvash, Alemannic > 1,000

The Chuvash (Чăваш чěлхи) and Alemannic (Alemannisch) Wikipedias have passed the 1,000 article mark. –Swid 19:57, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

added them dab (ᛏ) 12:32, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] alphabetical order

so, how are we to order the list? there is still the same confusion, Suomi/Finnish appears under F, Ivrit/Hebrew under H, but Farsi/Persian under F and Hrvatski/Croatian under H. what gives? dab (ᛏ) 12:32, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

It doesn't really matter to me which way it is ordered, just as long as it's consistent. (That being said, ordering the list by the name of the language in English makes *slightly* more sense than by applying English alphabetization order rules to the list for the name each language has for itself (especially for languages written in non-Latin scripts). –Swid 18:19, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

I agree, and I have no preference myself. It is just badly inconsistent at the moment. dab (ᛏ) 08:10, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Well, I think it's "supposed" to be by native name alphabetization as far as is possible, like the interwiki links. I think I'll change Suomi/Finnish now.--Pharos 08:23, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

well, Chinese appears to be ordered as Zhongwen; but Korean under K, not Hangungmal. Japanese (Nihongo) should be after Dutch (Netherlands). Apart from that, it looks pretty consistent now; Simple English could conceivably be listed under E, not S. 130.60.142.65 06:22, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

Sorting languages by local name is bound to be somewhat arbitrary, since some use scripts other than latin, which have different sorting orders. Another thing that bothers me is that the text starts in English (Wikipedia encyclopedia languages with more than 100,000 articles - btw., that wording is weird), and then continues in other languages, with English translations in brackets. What I would rather see is this format:

Dutch (Nederlands) · German (Deutsch) · Italian (Italiano) · Japanese (日本語) · Polish (Polski) · Swedish (Svenska)

or even

Dutch (Nederlands) · German (Deutsch) · Italian (Italiano) · Japanese (日本語) · Polish (Polski) · Swedish (Svenska)

Zocky 02:44, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] how about linking language articles?

meaning, making the English name for the language a wikilink, e.g. instead of Deutsch (German), we would have Deutsch (German). 83.77.208.46 12:46, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

Or even Deutsch (German), linking to the Wikipedia article on the German Wikipedia instead of the article on the German language? Gerrit ^CUTEDH 09:52, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

for those with >100,000 articles, fair enough; we probably don't have (and shouldn't have) articles on the minor projects. 81.63.63.37 10:24, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Ido > 10,000; Corsican > 1,000

Ido reached the 10,000-article mark today; Corsu (Corsican) reached the 1,000-article mark last week. –Swid 19:57, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

• Thanks; posted. Be careful with the links though- we don't want to confuse Ido with Indonesian :)--Pharos 03:48, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

Hahaha, oops; I guess that's one of the reasons why you get to change the templates and I don't. (At least it's fixed now.) :-) –Swid 05:17, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Neapolitan > 1,000

Just to let you know that Neapolitan has reached more than 1000 articles (it now has about 3600). Thanks, Ronline 02:23, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Turkish > 10,000

Turkish has reached more than 10,000 articles. Tebrik ederiz! -- Murtasa 20:36, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Local names of other wikipedias

(moved from Talk:Main Page)

Can we standardize the grammatical form used for the local names of Wikipedias in other languages as they are listed on the main page of this Wikipedia? For many languages (e.g. English, French, German) it does not matter, but in e.g. the slavic languages it is currently a hodge podge. 123

The Czech title is an adjective feminine nominative, translating as [the] Czech [Wikipedia].

The Slovak title is a nominative noun, translating as the Slovak language.

Some of the other Slavic names are adverbs, more or less translating as [Wikipedia] in Russian, etc.

Martinp 19:04, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

• I don't think we can. What it says there is probably what Wikipedia is referred to locally in that language. Changing it here won't make much sense. - Mgm|^(talk) 20:01, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

• are you saying the czechs refer to their wikipedia as 'czech' and not 'wikipedia'? --81.154.236.221 19:25, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

• Yes, it would be a good idea to standardise. Many English speakers are not aware of this issue, because we use the same spelling of "English" in "the English language" (nominative noun), "the English Wikipedia" (adjective), and many other contexts. In languages where the spelling of the name of the language changes according to the part of speech, I think that the nominative noun form would be most appropriate (that's the form used in "the XYZ language"). —AlanBarrett 06:53, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

I think it's important to standardise, to the adjectival form that says "[xx] language" - i.e. "Czech language" etc, not the [the] Czech [Wikipedia] or the adverbs. For Romanian, the caption says "Română", from "limba română" (although it can also mean "Wikipedia română"), since both Wikipedia and limba are female nouns. But, the adjectival form should agree with the gender of "language" rather than "Wikipedia". For Czech, the correct form (i.e. the adjective relating to language) is, I think, čeština (the article in Czech about the language is located there) For Slovak, slovenčina (the correct form). Ronline 11:58, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Generally agree, but with a suggested modification. If there is a noun which means "the X language", should use that ('čeština and slovenčina as well as Deutsch are examples of that, actually). If there is no such noun, should use adjectival form which would apply (in the nominative) to the noun for "language". In many cases (e.g., English, français) the two are identical. Based on my knowledge of Czech, if someone prefers to propose it, I would also support using the adverb form (česky) in lieu of the above (but let's be consistent), but the adjectival form matching the noun Wikipedia (česká) just feels weird. Martinp 03:49, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Galician > 10,000

Galician Wikipedia has reached more than 10,000 articles.--Rocastelo 09:52, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] suomi, not Suomi

moved from Talk:Main Page. 18:02, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Finnish is suomi at finnish, Finland is Suomi, so make it correct.. --80.186.247.111 15:10, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Even at the start of a sentence / in a "menu"? — David Remahl 22:48, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Lithuanian > 10,000

Lithuanian Wikipedia has reached more than 10,000 articles, please update a list.Knutux 11:48, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Done. Congratulations on your progress!—Ëzhiki (erinaceus amurensis) 13:20, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Malay - 10,000

Malay Wikipedia has reached 10,000 articles. Can any admin please update it? Thanks! Hayabusa future 07:31, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Done. Thanks, BanyanTree 09:27, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Arabic > 10,000

Arabic Wikipedia has reached 10,000 article, can anyone update it here and on the main portal of Wikipedia.org?? Thanks in advance... --62.135.105.39 16:47, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

• Glad to do it. Coongratulaions!--Pharos 16:50, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Spanish

On the main portal of Wikipedia.org for the Spanish link it says La enciclopedia libre. This means the free encyclopedia as in freedom not as in you don't have to pay to use it. it should say La enciclopedia gratis. Can anyone change this? Tennis Dynamite 17:19, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Please see the archived discussion at Talk:Main Page/Archive 46#Mistake in the Spanish Main Page for an explanation. Thanks, BanyanTree 23:18, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks I understand now.Tennis Dynamite 17:19, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sinugboanon not Sugbuanon

Hello. Please change the Cebuano version of "Cebuano" to Sinugboanon. Sugboanon is the person, not the language. And the generally accepted spelling is Sugbo, not Sugbu, in Sinugboanon. Sugbu (the place) and Sugbuanon (language and person) are the Tagalog versions. Thanks!--Nino Gonzales 05:29, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for telling us about this. Updated now. Ronline ✉ 06:01, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Azerbaijani > 2000

Azerbaijani Wikipedia has reached 2,000 articles. Can any admin please update it?

There is no category for Wikipedias over 2,000 articles. All Wikipedias listed in the section "Wikipedia encyclopedia languages with over 1,000 articles" have between 1,000 and 9,999 articles. This includes Azerbaijani. So, until the Wikipedia will reach 10,000 articles, it will remain in that section. Sorry about that! I didn't realise that az.wiki wasn't listed at all. So, I have added it. Thanks, Ronline ✉ 06:03, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Persian > 10,000

Persian Wikipedia has reached the 10k mark. Please update its status. Kaveh 00:32, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Done. Congratulations! You really only have four admins? - BanyanTree 00:55, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. In reality, we only have 1 active sysop and three long absent bureaucrats! Kaveh 01:01, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Alphabetic ordering

Alemannic and Afrikaans seem to be ordered the wrong way round. Perhaps it was introduced with the midpoint conversion. --07:45, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thai Wikipedia > 10000

Please insert Thai's Wikipedia are over 10000--61.91.243.109 06:15, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Thank for changed--AkiAkira 10:41, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] It's back again to Sugbuanon

Hello, it's back to Sugbuanon again... it's supposed to be Sinugboanon... please see explanation a few headers above--Nino Gonzales 10:22, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Fixed. It looks like there was a cut and paste from an earlier history for the new main page design and this change wasn't caught. Cheers, BanyanTree 16:09, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Azerbaijani has been deleted

Azerbaijani Wikipedia with more than 2800 articles have been deleted by User:David Levy on March 19, 2006. Why ? Worrying ! Please restore. md 18:14, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

He didn't delete it; he added it. [4] – Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs) 22:00, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Interwiki link to vi:

Please add an interwiki link to the Vietnamese version of this template:

<noinclude>[[vi:Tiêu bản:Ngôn ngữ Wikipedia]]</noinclude>

Thanks.

– Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs) 22:01, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Done. Petros471 12:56, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Icelandic Wikipedia at 10.000+

Just now, the Icelandic Wikipedia reached article no. 10.000! If someone with system administration rights could change the template, it would be great. Thanks ;) --Friðrik Bragi Dýrfjörð 22:15, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Kapampangan Wikipedia

The Kapampangan Wikipedia has reached 1,000 articles, but the admins at Meta haven't updated the portal for it yet. – Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs) 20:03, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ripuarian/Kölsch Wikipedia

The Ripuarian/Kölsch Wikipedia has recently been created and is having some 3200+ Articles. (Currently @ #64 in this list) -- Purodha Blissenbach 03:34, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] How about a tag cloud?

Please comment on this proposal.

Hi. Can we replace the list of other languages [with something] similar to a tag cloud based on the number of articles? -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 09:45, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

That looks like a great idea. At the moment searching for a particular language requires looking through three separate lists. One list with the major languages emphasised by larger, bolder fonts would get around that problem. Enchanter 13:02, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. If more people endorse this idea, we'll file a feature request. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 04:07, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Afrikaans · Albanian · Alemannic · Arabic · Aragonese · Arpitan / Franco-Provençal · Asturian · Azeri · Basque · Belarusian · Bengali · Bosnian · Breton · Bulgarian · Catalan · Cebuano · Chinese · Chuvash · Cornish · Corsican · Croatian · Czech · Danish · Dutch · Esperanto · Estonian · Faroese · Finnish · French · Galician · Georgian · German · Greek · Haitian · Hebrew · Hindi · Hungarian · Icelandic · Ido · Ilokano · Indonesian · Interlingua · Irish · Italian · Japanese · Javanese · Kannada · Kapampangan · Korean · Kurdish · Latin · Latvian · Limburgian · Lithuanian · Low German / Low Saxon · Luxembourgish · Macedonian · Malay · Marathi · Minnan · Neapolitan · Norwegian · Norwegian Nynorsk · Occitan · Ossetian / Ossetic · Persian · Polish · Portuguese · Ripuarian · Romanian · Russian · Scots · Scottish Gaelic · Serbian · Serbo-Croatian · Sicilian · Simple English · Slovak · Slovenian · Spanish · Swedish · Tagalog / Filipino · Tamil · Tatar · Telugu · Thai · Turkish · Ukrainian · Vietnamese · Walloon · Waray-Waray / Samar-Leyte Visayan · Welsh · West Frisian · Yiddish —Ruud 03:05, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

I've created a better version. —Ruud 03:46, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Perfect. Once consensus is reached, we should replace the current list with this cloud. May be, it's asking for too much, but, can this be made to update automatically? :-) -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 08:12, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

This looks quite interesting, though it is also quite a departure from typical straight-lines Wikipedia style. I notice that you've omitted the native names in favor of the English ones, which might not be the best idea considering who we are trying to attract to these projects (people who can actually use them). Using both English and native names might spoil the aesthetic effect, but if we are to use only one the native names would be more useful to readers with a potential interest. Also German should be knocked down a notch, as it's just too prominent by itself.--Pharos 08:59, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

I think I need to experiment with the font size a bit, yes. Regarding the native names, I left them out here because it made the list look cluttered and to show that this setup leaves enough room to include smaller wikis. There are several option, however: do not include the native names (anyone ending up at en.wikipedia.org probably can read enough English to recognize his native language in this list), inlcude the native names in parenthesis behind the English name, inlcude the native names with the English name in parenthesis (and sort names in non-latin scripts in the order Hebrew, Arabic, Sanskrit, Korean, Chinese, Japanese; this might confuse English readers looking for the Finnish Wikipedia though), use two lists (one for the English names, one for the native names), also use interwiki links (which show up in the native name). —Ruud 10:20, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

What's the next step, a strw poll? -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 06:11, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I would support that. Maybe we should put something up on Village Pump:Proposals. Anyway, here's the native languages version of the tag cloud (if you look at the coding, I used a neat new feature to display the language names).--Pharos 22:35, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Afrikaans · Shqip · Alemannisch · العربية · Aragonés · Arpitan · Asturianu · Azərbaycan · Euskara · Беларуская · বাংলা · Bosanski · Brezhoneg · Български · Català · Cebuano · 中文 · Чăвашла · Kernewek · Corsu · Hrvatski · Česky · Dansk · Nederlands · Esperanto · Eesti · Føroyskt · Suomi · Français · Galego · ქართული · Deutsch · Ελληνικά · Krèyol ayisyen · עברית · हिन्दी · Magyar · Íslenska · Ido · Ilokano · Bahasa Indonesia · Interlingua · Gaeilge · Italiano · 日本語 · Basa Jawa · ಕನ್ನಡ · Kapampangan · 한국어 · Kurdî / كوردي · Latina · Latviešu · Limburgs · Lietuvių · Plattdüütsch · Lëtzebuergesch · Македонски · Bahasa Melayu · मराठी · Bân-lâm-gú · Nnapulitano · Norsk (bokmål) · Norsk (nynorsk) · Occitan · Иронау · فارسی · Polski · Português · Ripoarisch · Română · Русский · Scots · Gàidhlig · Српски / Srpski · Srpskohrvatski / Српскохрватски · Sicilianu · Simple English · Slovenčina · Slovenščina · Español · Svenska · Tagalog · தமிழ் · Tatarça · తెలుగు · ไทย · Türkçe · Українська · Tiếng Việt · Walon · Winaray · Cymraeg · Frysk · ייִדיש

I am afraid I am not too thrilled with this. I loathe the concept of "tag clouds" in general as a typographical crime. Just my personal opinion, of course, de gustibus non est disputandum. dab (ᛏ) 14:28, 7 July 2006 (UTC)