Faan Wikipedia
Zur Navigation springen Zur Suche springen
Oudere wichtie keere - Ööder wichtag kroom

Ferschäälie keere



Wikipedia Administrator.svg



... än gramatik


Ferschäälie keere







Filing cabinet icon.svg

Üülj krouf
Archiif 2009-15

Crystal Clear action exit.svg

Tut hoodsid

Sü as önj ark iinj krouf gungt dåt heer am politiik, tächnik än goue toochte. Di färschääl as bloot, dat huum heer ouer't Nordfriisk Wikipedia snååke koone.
Ferjees ei tu unerschriwen (ma ~~~~ unti aw dåt unerschrafts-tiiken klike).

2017[Kweltekst bewerke]

Hi from me, and an idea about the Krouf[Kweltekst bewerke]

Hi everyone on the Nordfriisk Wikipedia! I'm new here :) I do apologize for writing in English, but I hope most of you understand anyway. I'm interested in languages, and with the Frisian languages being small and interesting languages relatively close to me (I live in Sweden), I find it interesting. And somehow, on a whim, I got inspired and decided to try to contribute here the other day. Unfortunately I don't really speak any Nordfriisk, but I've still got ideas for what I could do here.

One of those ideas are to do some further archiving of the Krouf-pages. With your permission (if no-one protests), I'll start to do that.

And then, in relation to that, another idea would be to merge the Toochte section of the Krouf with this one. As a place for communication, a page like the Krouf is important also for beginners – it's a communication medium both internally between contributors already active in this project, and externally with people not yet active here.

Fewer pages to select from makes it more accessable for newcomers (and everyone, I'd argue), by giving less to choose from, and giving a better overwiev of the activity. The Toochte section seems to be fairly inactive (and maybe the whole Krouf is quite inactive? If so, a more active one could perhaps be of use for the project?), and this is a small project that I think should take as well care as possible of all humans willing to contribute :)

What would you think of that? (I posted this in the Politiik section, because it seems most active, and so that you will actually see it. Please move the post if the placing is problematic.) (Oh, I couldn't do that! Toochte it is then :)) (I thought it was only IP-adresses that were blocked.)

Btw, I've also seen the Politiik being open only for registered users (even before I discovered the above). My thought in other words would be to keep all of the Krouf open to all users, as long as there aren't large problems with spam or something else keeping us from doing that? The simpler it is contacting and communicating with the community, the better the chances are of newcomers succeeding in joining the project, I think. Again, whats's your thoughts?

With regards, Flinga (Diskuschuun) 15:36, 2. Apr. 2017 (CEST)

Hello @Flinga:, thank you for your ideas re the Krouf/Village pump! You should be able also to edit the politics section after a couple of days (4 days? not sure). Please try again. As you are speaking about general questions, I invited users to participate in this discussion, who were active within the last months or made considerable contributions to this wiki. --Murma174 (Diskuschuun) 17:37, 2. Apr. 2017 (CEST)
(I see, about the days limit! I noticed that it seemed that I could edit some other locked pages yesterday, and today it seems like I can edit Politiik.) Flinga (Diskuschuun) 13:57, 3. Apr. 2017 (CEST)
Hi @Flinga: fell free to merge the Krouf sections. The technics section should be kept because of the countless "tech news" of WMF. --Holder (Diskuschuun) 06:26, 3. Apr. 2017 (CEST)
I'd love to see the Krouf sections kept as is.
The 'Politiik' section is good for announcements, elections, requests for comment, and these for registered users only. The mass messages into this section should be redirected into the 'Toochte' section.
The 'Tächnik' should be kept because of the mass of messages. And be open to everyone, not only to registered users.
The 'Toochte' section should be kept as the main discussion forum for everyone.
So far some arguments in favor of the Krouf sections. The 'Toochte' section should get a more prominent location on the main page. --Murma174 (Diskuschuun) 09:08, 3. Apr. 2017 (CEST)
I'd just love to see some simplification :) lower barrier for participation, and more focused communication. But naturally I only want a solution that we could agree on.
In my view, the mass messages coming from WMF/externally is a problem for the Krouf in itself – I don't know whether anybody reads them, and it makes all other communication drown on a wiki like this. It's countraproductive, and therefore stupid – maybe suitable for a large wiki like enwp, but I somewhat agree with people on svwp (a wp version for a language with a speakerbase of about 10 million people) that think it's too much even for that project.
So, in my view, in the best of worlds we 1) would lower the amount of external mass messages 2) let them have their own page, so we can have a flow of ordinary discussions on one page, external updates (with discussion if that occurs) on another. (The mass messages was one reason I didn't suggest to merge also the Tächnik forum :].)
One method we could use could be "speedy" archiving of ext. mass messages so that the Krouf isn't drowned in them, i.e. sooner than the other threads, maybe.. 3 months, that's perhaps too long, but.. 1 month, or sooner? (And write that as a rule on the top of the page, "mass messages may be archived after 4 weeks after inactivity in the discussion".)
One system could be: one section for registered user discussions, one section for bots, and one section for non registered users. With external mass messages to Toochte, we'd in my view be using that as a dump for mass messages :p ... and then have newbies would have to use the mass message bin to write in.
So, a question is: do we need to keep registered discussions and questions/discussions from non-reg users apart? (10 million speakers-svwp doesn't :) And we have one main Krouf, albeit also a forum for the technical parts. We do have an interaction page for newbees too, though.)
(Another system then would be to make one Krouf section clearly the (main) Krouf, and turn Tächnik and (maybe) Toochte into clearly separate pages.)
I should also add: Mann kann mir auch in Deutsch antworten. Ich verstehe ein bißchen, ... and we can probably sort it out (solve it, I mean). (We could probably solve it with messages in nordfriisk too.)
Lots of ideas here and long message... sorry about that. Hopefully, the discussion can lead to something good for the project. Flinga (Diskuschuun) 13:55, 3. Apr. 2017 (CEST)
With that said, something I forgot to say: I like the ideas in Murmas post about separating bot messages from the main discussion, and to "market"/display the available forums more clearly and directly. Flinga (Diskuschuun) 15:13, 3. Apr. 2017 (CEST)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── I also want to have low barriers for discussions. But even the Sitenotice on top doesn't create much traffic.
O.K. Maybe this could help:

  1. The page Wikipedia:Krouf, which is blocked at the moment, shall be the main place for discussions, open for everyone. Many other pages and projects are linking to this page. And as we have low traffic usually, one page for all the user questions might be sufficient. P.S. This page looks much like my idea: alswiki
  2. The page 'Politiik' shall change its scope. From discussions for registered users to general WMF policy, WMF announcements, ... , open for everyone.
  3. The page 'Tächnik' will be kept for Tech News, open for everyone.
  4. The page 'Toochte' shall change its scope. From discussions for everyone to a 'request for comments' (RfC) page, votings ... for registered users. BTW: The proper expression for what I call 'registered users' might be 'autoconfirmed users'?
  5. The links to 'Politiik', 'Tächnik', 'Toochte' shall get a less prominent position. Maybe in a box at the right margin of the page with links to these and other important pages (RfA, Bots, Translation requests, ...).

Could this work? --Murma174 (Diskuschuun) 18:04, 3. Apr. 2017 (CEST)

That sounds like good ideas too, I think! That might be a solution. I see benefits and one drawback, but I will think some and plan to come back to that later :) Other opinions are also welcome.
Some things I'm curious about:
What are the goals with for example separate page for RfC and votings? (It's like more overarching administrative stuff if I get it right?) Is there need to keep those discussions apart, or is it just to have that structure, as a organization and structure that you think are good? Both are okay with me, I can see the sense in having a special page for such things.
There must be a page IMO, which is blocked for IPs, and open for active (registered/autoconfirmed) users only, especially in case of votings. --Murma174 (Diskuschuun) 23:17, 5. Apr. 2017 (CEST)
Would the pages still have the same names?
Not necessarily, we'll find new names. --Murma174 (Diskuschuun) 23:17, 5. Apr. 2017 (CEST)
Do you agree with me on the external mass messages being a bit much for a discussion page here? Otherwise we don't have to move them. And do you (Murma and also others) think it could make sense to make a change like this? Or is it mostly me?
Yes, that's why these mass message pages ('Politiik', 'Tächnik') should get a less prominent position, but still be accessible. And the discussions could be held on the one central Wikipedia:Krouf page. --Murma174 (Diskuschuun) 23:17, 5. Apr. 2017 (CEST)
And yes.. I understand that the potential difference in contributors might not even be noticable in the end. But it's worth a try, perhaps, to be as accessible as possible, maybe.. and if we think the ideas are sane and might give a resonable structure here, then that would be a benefit, I think. Flinga (Diskuschuun) 22:22, 5. Apr. 2017 (CEST)
I think this sounds good, I'm for it! It gives a more focused ordinary discussion, more accessable for both experianced and new users. The only downside I saw was that it more or less meant +1 in pages and therefore a somewhat increased "complexity", but those pages are for the interested and experienced parties (is that the word? participants, otherwise) anyway, so I don't think that will be any real problem (and one is a replacement of the "menu" page of today, so kind of no addition anyway).
If we're doing this, I can gladly help with the setup of the new structure. Bit do! :) Flinga (Diskuschuun) 17:03, 11. Apr. 2017 (CEST)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Changed 'Krouf' to central discussion place for everyone. Hope it is more accessible now. --Murma174 (Diskuschuun) 09:47, 5. Mei 2017 (CEST)

Tip-top! Sorry about the delayed reply. I think it does seem very accessible, and good (I found new pages I didn't know about myself). I just hope I didn't somehow accidently push this through, because it's of course what we collectively want to do and find good that should be the route, not my ideas in case I appear opinionated.. :3. Flinga (Diskuschuun) 17:46, 20. Mei 2017 (CEST)
@Flinga: Small wikis sometimes need a push from the outside IMO. A conflict on another wiki - for example - was the reason for my bot flag request (see below). --Murma174 (Diskuschuun) 18:58, 20. Mei 2017 (CEST)
Yes, okay :) Hopefully we are taking steps in the right direction, in other words. 😊 Flinga (Diskuschuun) 19:53, 20. Mei 2017 (CEST)

WikiCon 2017[Kweltekst bewerke]

Hallo zusammen. Die WikiCon 2017 findet vom 8. bis zum 10. September 2017 in Leipzig statt, schaut unter de:Wikipedia:WikiCon 2017. --Holder (Diskuschuun) 17:44, 2. Apr. 2017 (CEST)

Der Call for papers wurde eröffnet. Bis zum 15. Juni können Beiträge eingereicht werden. --Holder (Diskuschuun) 23:00, 1. Mei 2017 (CEST)
Die Frist zum Einreichen von Beiträgen zur WikiCon 2017 wurde bis zum 30. Juni verlängert: Wikipedia:WikiCon_2017/Programmvorschläge. --Holder (Diskuschuun) 17:43, 15. Jun. 2017 (CEST)

Bot flag uunfraag MurmaBot[Kweltekst bewerke]

English language.svg Please comment on this Bot flag request by Murma174.
Nordfriesischeflagge.svg Wees so gud an sai din meenang tu detdiar Bot flag uunfraag faan Murma174. --Murma174 (Diskuschuun) 14:43, 18. Mei 2017 (CEST)

Yes check.svg Klaar Botflag erteilt nach Abstimmung. --Holder (Diskuschuun) 06:00, 28. Mei 2017 (CEST) (kopiaret faan Bot flag request Murma174 (Diskuschuun) 13:08, 1. Jun. 2017 (CEST))

Galicia 15 - 15 Challenge[Kweltekst bewerke]

Mapa de Galiza con bandeira.svg

Wikipedia:Galicia 15 - 15 Challenge is a public writing competition which will improve improve and translate this list of 15 really important articles into as many languages as possible. Everybody can help in any language to collaborate on writing and/or translating articles related to Galicia. To participate you just need to sign up here. Thank you very much.--Breogan2008 (Diskuschuun) 14:59, 12. Mar. 2018 (CET)

Welcome to Wales! The Celtic Knot Conference...[Kweltekst bewerke]

Celtic Knot logo 2018.jpg

I apologise that this invitation is in English; feel free to translate into your own language!

I would like to invite you to the second Wikipedia language conference focusing on supporting Celtic and other small and Indigenous Languages. This year 'Celtic Knot' will be at held on the 5th and 6th of July at the National Library of Wales in Wales' most famous seaside resort of Aberystwyth.

For more information on how you could be part of this great event, pop over to our website where you can also contact Jason Evans, our National Wikimedian and conference organiser. We have many speakers who will talk about what works for them, how we can learn from each other... small is beautiful...

Viva la diversity! Llywelyn2000 (Diskuschuun) 15:09, 4. Apr. 2018 (CEST)

WikiCon 2018[Kweltekst bewerke]


Die WikiCon 2018 findet vom 5. bis 7. Oktober in St. Gallen in der Schweiz statt. --Holder (Diskuschuun) 06:40, 19. Apr. 2018 (CEST)

Zur WikiCon 2018 können jetzt Programmvorschläge eingereicht werden. --Holder (Diskuschuun) 08:00, 4. Jun. 2018 (CEST)

Friisk Uurterbok[Kweltekst bewerke]

!!! Kopiaret faan min persöönelk diskuschuunssidj: Benutzer_Diskussion:Murma174#Friisk_Uurterbok !!!

Gur Dai, Ik wel dit üp dütsk skriiv om’t iinfocher tö forstuunen es.

Ich arbeite nun schon seit einigen Monaten an einem Söl’ring Wörterbuch (mit ungefähr 10,000 Wörtern), dass online verfügbar sein soll. Dies wird wahrscheinlich in ein-2 monaten in einer Beta verfügbar sein. Allerdings war es von Anfang an mein Ziel ein Gesamtnordfriesisches Wörterbuch zu erstellen. Daher meine Frage, wären sie interessiert daran mitzuwirken (für das Öömrang)? Und könnten sie vielleicht andere aktive Nutzer anderer Dialekte fragen ob sie mithelfen wollen würden? Diese Arbeit wäre nur im zusammenstellen einer Wörterliste (+/- 10,000 Wörter) und Verb Deklinationen, mehr dazu dann. Ich würde mir dann die Namen notieren und mich melden sobald Ich soweit wäre.

Fuul Dank en hartelk sölring Gröötnis ! - Tanno Lizius2 (Diskuschuun) 08:06, 24. Mei 2018 (CEST)

"Gur Dai, Ik wel dit üp dütsk skriiv om’t iinfocher tö forstuunen es." - Naa. Mesken liirst Dü beeter jest en luki iin ön Uurterbokern fan Popiir, jer dat Dü bigiarst en wet salev en digitaal Jen skriiv. Mi tinkt, dat diar jit masi waant. Gröötnix, --Marschmensch (Diskuschuun) 16:46, 24. Mei 2018 (CEST)
Nö ja, diar san oober al flook wurdenbuken skrewen wurden faan lidj, diar nian fresk mamenspriak haa. - Ik men man, det as en böös stak werk! Man profeser Bo Sjölin saad ans: "Wörterbücher schreiben ist eine Arbeit für Leute, die Vater und Mutter totgeschlagen haben." ;-) --Murma174 (Diskuschuun) 17:40, 24. Mei 2018 (CEST)
Ik snaki Sölring, ik haa dit bluat sa skrewen aurdat ik weet dat Sölring ek sa lecht tö forstuunen es, Murma es jaa en Aamring. -- Lizius2 (Diskuschuun) 18:35, 24. Mei 2018 (CEST)
Ja, diar haa ik wel wat ferkiard maaget. Det skriiwen boowen wiar tuiarst üüb min persöönelk diskuschuunssidj, an do haa ik det ianfach heer hen kopiaret, saner ferklaarang. Dää mi iarag, Tanno :-( --Murma174 (Diskuschuun) 19:36, 24. Mei 2018 (CEST)

Liiwe Frasche (uk Sölringe). Ik hääw n Tjüsch-Saterfrasch uurdebök stönjen aw Man deerfoon jeeft et uk en papiir-version, jü ål mååst ütferkaaft as. Deerönj koon ham siinj wat wichti as. --Pyt (Diskuschuun) 21:18, 24. Mei 2018 (CEST)

Detdiar sidj as was uk intresant: Nuurdfresk wurdenbuken --2003:52:EF46:A406:9442:D917:C311:21D0 22:10, 24. Mei 2018 (CEST)

Diskussion:Jönköping (Prowins)[Kweltekst bewerke]

Leew frinjer,
wees'em so gud an ferfulge'm det diskuschuun auer Diskussion:Jönköping (Prowins) --Murma174 (Diskuschuun) 23:07, 8. Jul. 2018 (CEST)

Wikipedia:1000 wichtag artiikler[Kweltekst bewerke]

Leew frinjer, ik san jüst diarbi an paase Wikipedia:1000 wichtag artiikler uun.
Ferlicht meest Dü jo di ään of ööder 'ruad' artiikel 'blä' maage. --Murma174 (Diskuschuun) 11:39, 9. Aug. 2018 (CEST)

Änderungen an CSS/JS-Seiten[Kweltekst bewerke]

Hallo Murma174. Vor kurzem wurde beschlossen, dass den Adminstratoren das Recht zum Ändern von CSS- und Javascript-Seiten entzogen werden soll, siehe diese Diskusion auf der dewiki und diese Seite auf meta. Es wurde hierfür eine neue Nutzergruppe eingeführt («Oberflächenadministrator»). Das Recht kann von Bürokraten vergeben werden, es sollten aber Wahlen dazu abgehalten werden. Viele Grüße --Holder (Diskuschuun) 17:28, 13. Aug. 2018 (CEST)

@Holder: Danke für den Hinweis! Mir war schon die neue Benutzergruppe auf Spezial:Statistik aufgefallen, habe ich erst einmal nach Wikipedia:Administratoore umgeleitet. Wir hatten hier auf frrwiki schon häufiger Hilfe von "auswärtigen" Autoren, die in diesen Dingen ganz geschickt waren. Da hilft es jetzt also nicht mehr, ihnen zeitweise Adminrechte einzuräumen. Sie brauchen dann wohl zukünftig Admin- + Oberflächenadminrechte, wenn ich es richtig verstehe. Im Prinzip kann ich die Argumentation nachvollziehen, dass Admins in der Regel nicht an CSS/JS arbeiten. Auch ich agiere in diesem Bereich sehr zaghaft. Glücklicherweise sind wir hier jetzt zwei Bürokraten, die ggf. aktiv werden können. --Murma174 (Diskuschuun) 17:47, 13. Aug. 2018 (CEST)
@Holder: Nachdem ich mich etwas mehr ins Thema eingelesen habe, wird es wohl so kommen, dass auch wir beide als Bürokraten diese Rechte verlieren und nicht automatisch Oberflächenadministratoren sein werden. IMO sollten wir aber diese Rechte lokal behalten. Die Seiten MediaWiki:Common.css, MediaWiki:Vector.css und MediaWiki:Common.js müssen doch gelegentlich angepasst werden. Daher wäre mein Vorschlag, dass wir beide uns gegenseitig mit diesen Rechten ausstatten nach einer Diskussion und Abstimmung auf Wikipedia:Administratoore. Wollen wir so vorgehen? --Murma174 (Diskuschuun) 18:47, 15. Aug. 2018 (CEST)
Hallo Murma174, ja das finde ich ein gutes Vorgehen. Gruß --Holder (Diskuschuun) 18:49, 15. Aug. 2018 (CEST)
@Holder: Na, dann bereite ich mal die Anträge vor. --Murma174 (Diskuschuun) 18:54, 15. Aug. 2018 (CEST)