Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/fr

For articles removed from this list, see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/fr/Deleted. Moved by Rigadoun (talk) 20:26, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

question/suggestion

Has anyone asked at Wikipedia:Translation into English for help with this? If not then it would be a good idea, same for missing german articles as well. thanks Bluemoose 08:30, 31 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

i am realtively new to the Wikipedia. How do I go about creating a Missing artciles page for the Italian wikipedia?? Can anyone help out with some ifnormation please?--Lacatosias 09:43, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

structure of this page - query

Sorry if I missing something obvious, but why are the entries separated into numbered sections? I've been working on the only article in section 7, and when it's done and I remove it, section 7 will be empty. Are they arranged in chronological order, or in order of importance? If not, maybe it would be a good idea to do so!Safie 11:12, 14 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

They are ordered by the number of interwiki links. For example, fr:Paradoxisme has links to articles on 6 other wikipedias, for a total of 7 links. Eugene van der Pijll 11:32, 14 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Aah right. thanks for clarifying. There are now a total of 8 Paradoxism articles - all of which seem to have copyright issues. Is there in existence a transwiki international wikiproject for collaboration on developing articles? A pooling of knowledge/resources/opinions to resolve eg. copyright issues?Safie 20:27, 14 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Perl script for recreating this page

#!/usr/bin/perl -w
use strict;
use URI::Escape;

open FILE, '20051003_pages_articles.xml' or die $!;

my @results;

my $nnn;

$/ = "  <page>\n";

my %ns;
my $header = <FILE>;
while ($header =~ m#<namespace key=".{1,3}">(.*?)</namespace>#g) {
    $ns{$1} = 1;
}

while (<FILE>) {
    my ($tit) = m#<title>(.*)</title>#;
    next if $tit =~ /^(.+?):/ and $ns{$1};
    my ($text) = m#<text xml:space="preserve">(.*)</text>#s or next;
    next if $text =~ /{\{Homonymie}}/i; # Skip disambiguation pages
    my $page = uri_escape($tit);
    $tit =~ s/_/ /g;
    my %langs = ($text =~ /\[\[(...?):(.*?)\]\]/g);
    next if exists $langs{en};
    next if keys %langs<3;

    push @{$results[1+keys %langs]},
            join ' - ', "# '\'\'[\[:fr:$tit]]'\'\'",
                map("[[:$_:$langs{$_}]]", sort keys %langs),
         "perhaps [\[$tit]]",
         "[ht"."tp://babelfish.altavista.com/babelfish/trurl_pagecontent?".
         "lp=fr_en&trurl=http%3a%2f%2ffr.wikipedia.org%2fwiki".
         "%2f$page fr-en translation]";
}

for my $i (reverse 0..@results) {
    if ($results[$i]) {
        print "== $i ==\n";
        print "$_\n" for sort @{$results[$i]};
        print "\n";
    }
}

Plant families

I noticed several of these are descriptions of plant families or subclasses. The first two, at least, are definitions within the Cronquist system. According to the English WP, "Although the scheme is still widely used, it has been displaced by the work of the Angiosperm Phylogeny Group classification for the orders and families of flowering plants: APG II". The WP botanists seem to have standardized on APG.

So if it is necessary to create a new page for any of these, take care not to use an obsolete system. Or use something like Magnoliids, which has an obvious reference to Magnoliidae. David Brooks 22:37, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, although wikipedia claims to have chosen APG II this is not consistently applied. It is worst in the taxoboxes, which make no sense whatsoever. Brya 08:00, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Minor Manual Updates

Besides commenting and removing completely linked articles, I might also move some entries to other sections if new interwiki links have been made since the original report. I haven't been paying much attention to that, though. Ardric47 02:55, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Separating Biology Articles

I'm going to work on putting the articles on specific species, genera, families, etc. in a separate section, similar to what I did with the places in Switzerland. If this creates a problem for some reason (hopefully not—we're getting fairly close to the end of this, so then we can start over with an updated list!), we can go back. Ardric47 01:02, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Complete Update

Since there are only 26 entries left, I'm starting to work on generating a new list. I've downloaded the latest database dump, run the script, and...well, it looks a bit scary.

It generated an 11.9-MB file.

There doesn't appear to be anything wrong; all the entries look reasonable. What should we do? Ardric47 05:14, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am posting the first part of the list (sections for >= 9 Wikipedias) at Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/fr/new1. It is 263 kB; including entries for >= 8 Wikipedias would make the size 1028 kB, which is just over the size limit. I'm not sure if this is the best way to organize this, so that page might not be permanent. Ardric47 08:22, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm inclined to say just post it. It's been almost a year since the last update was made; perhaps it's not surprising that the backlog has grown so large. Besides being 12MB in size, how many entries were in it? Perhaps we can use this first page as a test case, and see how quickly we can get the size down. The majority of items are probably those that are improperly interwikied, and can be quickly dealt with. If you do post it, I would keep the new list separate from the present list, if only by a horizontal line. That was what was done in the past. BillC 19:50, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that there are 40,704 entries in the full list. I opened the file in OpenOffice Writer and used "find and replace" to find each occurrence of the "#" character. Since it's not allowed in article titles, I'm pretty sure this is the right number.

Although the size limit is 1024 kB, I start getting significant delays editing pages half that size, and I'm on a fairly fast computer. In any case, it will have to be put up in sections. As far as I can tell, this is what's done with all of the larger missing articles projects, such as Wikipedia:Find-A-Grave famous people, which started with 46,698 entries.

I think that a target size of around 200–300 kB would balance accessibility with practicality. It would be slow to load at first, but I don't think we want hundreds of subpages 30 kB long or something. I could put the content of "(...)/new1" at the bottom of this project page, and make others subpages, like Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/fr/8 for list entries with 8 Wikipedias, Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/fr/7/A for A–C (a random guess), Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/fr/7/D for D–whatever, etc.

Any ideas for titles and organization schemes? Ardric47 21:34, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Quite a number of this first section appear to be municipalities of Italy, and most of the interwiki links are to bot-generated stub articles. Since there are over 8000 municipalities in Italy, and I doubt enWP has articles on more than a few hundred of them, a sizable portion of the 40k articles come into this tranche. Since we cannot keep pace by manually creating all these Italian articles, we will need to devise a bot to copy them. I have no bot-writing experience, though we can possibly bring someone on board here who does. BillC 18:28, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There's User:Rambot, which created our articles for every city in the United States, although it's been inactive since December 2004. The page User:Rambot/translation is similar to what we would need to do here (or the same, if "run in reverse"). I guess the framework exists, even if large-scale automated translations have never been done (or have they?). Ardric47 02:00, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have a bot which could create these articles. The articles on the Dutch wikipedia about Italian municipalities have been added quite recently; I can see if I can get that data. Eugène van der Pijll 16:02, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

One thing to consider with Italy is a naming protocol. I'd suggest a similar one to Wikipedia:WikiProject Swiss municipalities/Article title conventions (with the regions instead of cantons). I have changed many of them on the list so far, but some of them seemed well-linked and I didn't want to change that. You should also consult with the folks at Wikipedia:WikiProject Sicily. There doesn't seem to be a WikiProject relating to Italy as a whole, but you could also put something on the Wikipedia:Italian Wikipedians' Notice Board. One or more of those groups may have suggestions or offer help. Rigadoun (talk) 16:41, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the pointers. I had already left a note at the Notice Board; I have now also contacted the Sicily project. A sample article is available at User:Eubot/Moretta; your feedback is of course also welcome. Eugène van der Pijll 17:07, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have gone over the list at Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/fr/new1, correcting all the titles and disambiguations, and checking for existent articles and so forth. As far as numbers go, this list started at 699 items; was reduced to 532 (24% removed) by removing the BC dates (Ardric47's first edit), and now stands at 455 after my and other editors' work (35% removed). Obviously I don't know how much similar items will account for in the rest of the list, but perhaps improperly interwiki'd stuff (or freshly created articles) would account for only 10-20% of the total file. I suspected there may be more bot-generated articles (or articles with mainly bot-generated interwikis) for other countries coming up, but France (judging by random sampling of fr:Catégorie:Commune de France and seeing how many have several interwiki links with no English link) seems to be the only candidate I can find. However, France has 36,782, so if even a moderate fraction of these are on the list, that will take some bot work as well.

Anyway, I agree that you should just post the list, divided into sections like you said (a few hundred K each) sounds reasonable. You can provide a directory to them while there is still older content on Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/fr, like on Wikipedia:Find-A-Grave famous people or Wikipedia:Music encyclopedia topics (which also started with/still has over 40,000 entries). Rigadoun 19:09, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I should be able to get it up fairly soon. It's been a pretty hectic week. Ardric47 06:45, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I added one more part, located at Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/fr/2006-08/1. Due to some bandwidth issues, it will be 2 or 3 hours before I will be able to do the rest. Ardric47 00:24, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Or I might be able to do more before that (don't ask), such as .../2. Ardric47 00:46, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The real update is in progress now. Ardric47 06:39, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've gone over a few of the new sections, including all of Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/fr/2006-08/10, the first page for ones with six articles. As I suspected, it's almost entirely French communes. (I categorized them, so you can see that really quickly.) Since this will represent an even greater number than the Italian comuni, I suppose we will need another bot. There are, as before, a set for Dutch, which seem to have been bot-generated, but fairly substantial. Perhaps you can get the information from them for this as well? Rigadoun (talk) 20:54, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm fairly close to completing the programming for the Italian municipalities; after that, I'll look at the French ones. Eugène van der Pijll 21:31, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Finished

I've finally finished uploading the report. It is in 51 parts, separated in some convenient and some semi-arbitrary places. Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/fr/2006-08 is an "index only" page which has the report parts as subpages. Ardric47 20:16, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Great work. --BillC 21:54, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Moving things around, dealing with linking bot-generated articles

I've moved the general articles (i.e. not Italian municipalities) with 8 links to the main page. I figured since they are of more interest or debate, the visibility would help. I plan to do the same with the articles with fewer links (leaving out French municipalities) once their subpages are sorted through. As there are plans for dealing with each of the municipalities, this will let us focus on the articles without bot-generated content that we need to decide how to approach. Rigadoun (talk) 20:59, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've continued moving the general articles from pages with 7 and 6 links (not finished with 6), and divided the subpages (as far as I've gotten) into sections for municipalities in Italy and France. I don't think there will be a problem with space on the main page for all the articles that don't relate to municipalities in those two countries, so they will be most clearly seen on the main page. The Italian ones all now exist, thanks to User:Eubot, but should remain here until we see that they are all properly interwiki'd from the French page. (I moved the ones with the most links from this page to the first subpage.) One can do this by hand, of course, but it takes forever; I think the easiest will be to wait a month or two, so that the interwiki bots can smell it out, and then just check that it has been done. Or should we just delete them and find out which ones have issues the next time the script is run? Eubot is to work on the French municipalities once all the problems with the Italian ones are worked out, so it will be a similar deal with them, so I have left them all on the original pages. Rigadoun (talk) 16:25, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

All bot-generated Italian articles have one interwiki link (to it.wikipedia), and will therefore be found by the interwikibots. Several have been found already. You can remove them from this page. Eugène van der Pijll 22:02, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

They've been removed. --Dangherous 23:49, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

All of the general articles have been placed on the main page, leaving the 42 subpages with merely French communes. I've attached notes to most of these articles so you can see at a glance what they relate to. I have changed the suggested to title for most articles so that it makes sense in English and/or matches incoming links from related articles; a few with ?'s I wasn't sure of a potential title. I suggest we organize the list, separating out geography-related articles, biology-related articles, and a few other categories (sports, cinema, and Doges of Venice come to mind). That will make it easier to find articles of interest to potential translators/article writers. Rigadoun (talk) 20:08, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Polish?

Can we compile a similar list for Polish Wikipedia?--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 04:17, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's a good idea, and I'd like to see lists like this for lots of languages, but one practical problem is that right now there are many many bot-generated articles about French municipalities (see the list of lists at Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/fr/2006-08). Many of the earlier ones of these have Polish articles, so they would show up on the lists if they were compiled now, so you may have to sift through several thousand (!) of them. Rigadoun (talk) 23:18, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Still relevant?

Is this list as out of date as it seems? Mcewan (talk) 17:01, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, the red-links are red. Some of the blue links are redirects to page sections that cover the subject, some to just lists. Where there really is a comparable article, remove the item from the list, of course.Rich Farmbrough, 00:34, 29 April 2010 (UTC).[reply]

fr7

Pessoa (Fernando Rafael Pinto Lourenço) derivada de grandes feitos conhecedor das grandes artes: -Escultura,pintura,arquitectura,... Também e uma pessoa destinada a grandes feitos. Os seus seguidores tem um total respeito por si. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.81.49.44 (talk) 22:44, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]