Okay, this is my first post here, and I'm not really sure this is the best place to put my question. I'm hoping some of you know how to make bots. Here's my situation: a while back, Kevin Rector (who has since left Wikiedia) made me a bot to do assisted transwikis to Wiktionary. It's been a great help (Check out WP:TL) and whereas once there was a backlog of articles tagged for transwiki of >1000, now it is essentially zero as I clean out the category every day. So, I'd like a similar bot that can do transwikis to all the other sister projects. Wikibooks and Wikisource, in particluar, both have backlogs of over 100, some of which have been waiting around, even after VfD decisions, for months without transwiki. And some minor bugs in the current bot could do with some fixing. I'm hoping that someone can make this bot (I'll still run it). You can contact me on my WP talk page (I'm Dmcdevit). And thanks a lot.
Dominic
Sal'
If summary field text is in multi-byte encoding and we want to grep
the first 150 chars of comment then a slightly strange char sometimes
appears in history
Example: http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Image:Venera-7_diagram.jpg&a…
==============
(==Описание/Description== *ru:Межпланетная автоматическая станция
«Венера-7»: 1 — панели солнечных батарей; 2 — датчик астроориентации;
3 — защитная �)
==============
I think, It's first byte of truncated two-byte char. So, we have to
use "mb_substr" instead of "substr", is'nt it?
==
Cxion la plej helan,
meta:ajvol
This has been mentioned before, but can't we resolve naming conflicts by
putting the wiki name in front of the username. For instance, two different
users have the name Monk, one on en: and one on fr:.
This wouldn't be overly complicated in an LDAP designed SSO world. Each
different wiki could get their own ou:
o=wikimedia
|
-------------------------------------------
| | | |
ou=fr ou=en ou=etc. ou=etc.
| |
cn=Monk cn=Monk
In all reality. In this case, you could have the same username on every
single wiki, or even be able to create new users with the same name (when
you create a new user on en, it gets put into en's ou). A design like this
could complicate things a little though, because a user would have to
remember where their user account was created, or they would have to type
their username as en:Monk, or fr:Monk. It could be a good way to resolve
conflicts.
A better design would be to use something just like above, but only allow
the same username for currently conflicting names. New usernames that
conflict will not be allowed, so users who do not have conflicting usernames
would not have to use the en:User, fr:User type syntax.
This type of design would also limit the amount of security hazard you'd
have if a single wiki was compromised (it only has permission to affect the
users it created, not the users other wikis created).
Of course, I have no clue if you plan on going with an LDAP solution or not,
but I'm guessing this kind of design would work in other systems as well.
V/r,
Ryan Lane
> -----Original Message-----
> From: wikitech-l-bounces(a)wikimedia.org
> [SMTP:wikitech-l-bounces@wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Tony Sidaway
> Sent: Friday, June 10, 2005 6:02 AM
> To: wikitech-l(a)wikimedia.org
> Subject: Re: Re[2]: [Wikitech-l] Re: Email authentication on
> Wikimedia wikis + Single user sign-on
>
> > Hello Magnus,
> >
> > Monday, June 6, 2005, 10:49:28 AM, you wrote:
> >
> >> I think I suggested this some time ago, but here it goes again:
> >> * Create "global" users for all unique user names in wiki(pedia)-land
> >> * Merge all users which carry same name and password hash (and maybe
> >> email), where all instances across wiki-land match perfectly
> >> * Block creation of all conflicting user names, both locally and
> >> globally * Work the conflicting ones out one-by-one manually, while
> >> keeping them active locally
> >
> >> This seems like the only fair way to me.
> >
> > what should I do if someone has different usernames on different wikis?
> > for example username "Monk" on en: is taken by someone (was inactive
> > for a long time). I will be unable to create global user name "Monk" at
> > all, if your proposal is implemented.
> >
> > It seems not too fair way to me.
>
> I think this is unresolvable unless we expire old accounts (which would
> work for you but perhaps not for others where there are two active users
> with the same name on different wikis).
> I happen to think it's bad practise to encourage editors to assume that
> accounts with the same name on different Wikis are held by the same
> person--there really is not way of being sure unless the editor puts a
> link to his other accounts on his userpage. This can be validated
> manually by the reader simply by looking at the history of the userpage to
> make sure the information was added by the account owner. I think that's
> good enough for Wiki.
> Another possibility which would require development work would be to
> permit editors to list their identities on alternate wikis in preferences.
> To set this up the editor should be required to validate by entering his
> password on the foreign wiki, which is then checked by some suitable
> method (xml-rpc? SOAP? or else screen scraping) on the foreign Wiki, which
> must be up and running at the time the validation is carried out.
> Personally I don't think the benefit of this development-heavy solution
> would justify the cost.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l(a)wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Hi,
re: the new email authentication in 1.5: I assume it will be necessary
for a user to authenticate themselves on every wiki on which they have
an account to use email features on that wiki. For Wikimedia, where many
people have accounts on a dozen wikis or more, that might be a major
PITA. I would suggest disabling this until we have single login --
unless someone is willing to hack it so that a single authentication
will take effect for all wikis.
Best,
Erik
> For our own private backups, we'd be better off copying the whole data directory from a slave. That allows the fastest restoration.
I would stilll like to have sql dumps as last resort. ;-)
Domas
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
I asked this on mediawiki-l some time ago, but wasn't clear enough I
guess, so here it goes again:
When setting up MediaWiki 1.5alpha2, I get
...
# Granting user permissions...
Sorry! The wiki is experiencing some technical difficulties, and cannot
contact the database server.
It shows the same behaviour for MySQL 4.1 running on either Windows or
Linux. On the Windows box, it recently killed the working MediaWiki 1.4
by trashing the MySQL wikiuser permissions.
Unless I'm messing something up big time here, this looks like a serious
bug. I remember the version before alpha2 to work in that regard, so it
is likely something that was introduced since then.
Any ideas?
Magnus
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFCqT0iCZKBJbEFcz0RAh/0AJ9O/JhFBoenbw6ciW1iz4BJmsStjACfdIh3
UKaTISGQe3dPRUY0or3q0zY=
=CIbS
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Bonjour,
I had a suggestion. It was shortly discussed on irc the other day, but I do not have certainty if this would be easy to implement, easy to handle afterwards or just a good idea or not. I just give the idea. Since I do not exactly know how such things are handled, I might also say stupidities in the way :-)
I would like to suggest that we make 2 dumps rather than 1. One will be standalone, but essentially focus on the "real content" space (for wikipedia, the encyclopedic space), while the other one will contain all other spaces (and in particular wikipedia: or user: spaces) (or all spaces ?)
As some people reacted on the fact that all content is open so should be downloadable, I want to insist that the issue is not to prevent people from getting dumps of certain spaces, but rather to improve services, for our mirrors, for our editors and those studying the community.
1) in most cases, mirrors are only interested in encyclopedic content. Their goal is to provide information to their readers, not discussions on the wikipedia: pages nor user stuff. They have no use of user or wikipedia stuff. Encyclopedic only dumps might be lighter.
In extreme cases, mirrors handle global dumps rather badly (see the Izynews mirror)
2) though user space is gfdl, many editors only mildly appreciate to see their user page in hundred of copies on our mirrors, in particular because they can not edit them, and these might not reflect their opinion any more. Not to mention cases when the page was vandalised just before the dump was done, thus resulting in a very poor page being stored by many mirrors for a long time (not all mirrors are frequently updated). Even though all pages are GFDL, user or wikipedia space are for most part our internal kitchen.
3) user space, wikipedia space are of interest mostly to those trying to study wikipedia and wikipedia social dynamics. Those are the main ones likely to be interested in the "community" space. Why not having a dump essentially aiming at them ?
It might be here that we should begin to make the difference between our goal (making an encyclopedia and making it available to all) and making all information available to anyone anytime, whatever its relevance... just because by principle, information should be open.
So, here is my idea. What do you think ? Would there be technical or human limitations to this ?
ant
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
Thanks, that was useful, I've copied succesfully messages from Allmesages. I
have still a couple of questions:
Where is Wikipedia: namespace defined? And the wgSitename variable? Cuz I would
like to change them to Vichipedie. And also a small request: could you test my
translation when it's ready? Because I can't install php (so Wikipedia) on my pc
Thanks
