You should visit Wiki Index -
http://www.wikiindex.org/index.php?title=Welcome
You can see what every one in the Wiki world is working on and add your own
wiki to the list.
Caitlin
______________________
Caitlin Dempsey, Editor
GIS Lounge
http://gislounge.com
editor(a)gislounge.com
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2007 10:41:40 -0400
From: "Monahon, Peter B." <Peter.Monahon(a)USPTO.GOV>
Subject: [Mediawiki-l] What Wiki are we each working on?
To: mediawiki-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Message-ID:
<13E609DD5C46E64EBC847D37B677370D06A991ED(a)EXCHANGE2.uspto.gov>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
.
May I suggest that we share what Wiki we each are working on? Include a
link if your Wiki is public, and include a description, especially if
your Wiki is private. I'll go first:
Peter Blaise's Wiki: Our (US Trademark Office) challenge is how to
publish laws and rules (which are now in HTML, PDF, and DOC on the web),
AND seek community critiques and suggestions that are shared with each
other in full view (Wiki, right?), BUT leave the "statute as it is now"
intact as an uneditable master reference above all suggested
replacements. We want more than discussions on the separate
"discussion" page. We want people to actually rewrite the laws and
rules as they would prefer it, and then edit each other's preference on
how they want the statute to read, word for word. Supporting
discussions are important and informative, but we've noted that
word-for-word replacement suggestions quickly get lost in discussion
pages. We want the community-suggested exact replacements, even a
series of alternative exact replacements - version B, version C, and so
on - right there on the article page below the current statute in force.
I think this idea has great potential for opening up the law world wide,
but off-the-shelf MediaWiki is a tad immature. Wish me luck. Ideas?
So, what's everyone else working on? Can we see?
- Peter Blaise
Hello guys,
Sound like a great tool, i have some problems with FCKeditor... So
WikEd looks a good compromise. Anyway, I installed it and it work but :
- I have the old toolbar + the new one, is there a way to remove the
old one ?
- How force WikEd to be the default editor for all users without ask
them to add a piece of code in User:YourUsername/monobook.js each time ?
Thanks,
Johan
> Take a look at
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Cacycle/wikEd for
> 'wysiwyg'-like editing - and copy'n'paste from word or any
> other ms-tool.
>
> hth,
> bene
"Les informations contenues dans ce message electronique peuvent etre de nature confidentielles et soumises a une obligation de secret. Elles sont destinees a l'usage exclusif du reel destinataire. Si vous n'etes pas le reel destinataire, ou si vous recevez ce message par erreur, merci de le detruire immediatement et de le notifier a son emetteur."
"The information contained in this e-mail may be privileged and confidential. It is intended for the exclusive use of the designated recipients named above. If you are not the intended recipient or if you receive this e-mail in error, please delete it and immediately notify the sender."
>As for forums, there is AWC's Forum Extension:
>http://forums.anotherwebcom.com/vb/wiki.php?page=Category:MediaWiki:Forum
>Not having used that myself, I'm not sure whether it works with the
>latest MW version (though I believe Wikia uses it).
>
>HTH.
It might work if you fiddle some. My experience trying the installation script on 1.9.3 is
"Fatal error: Call to undefined function wfProfileIn() in /public/html/wiki/includes/Setup.php on line 23"
.
Does anyone have a solution to long link wrapping on list-serve
distribution
Was: Re: [Mediawiki-l] Status of wysiwyg editors for mw1.9?
> Peter Blaise wrote: I cut and paste the page back
> and forth with my own text editor. Word2Wiki
<<http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Word2Wiki>>
> seems effective as a macro to prep Word
> documents for pasting into MediaWiki articles.
So I'm trying << and >> around the links as that worked in Yahoo Groups.
I know about http://tinyurl.com/ so the link above is now also:
http://tinyurl.com/ynqv3w
- Peter Blaise
Hi,
I have a javascript error and dont get why/where exactly it comes from, I
guess
its from the automatically generated content table...
Line: 69
Char: 10
Error: Object expected
Code: 0
URL: http://srvwiki/wiki/index.php/SA_-_Main_Page
Its only if I add this part:
=TEST=
==A1==
==B1==
==C1==
What I'm doing wrong?
TIA
Oli
I'm seeing _lots_ of wikis vandalized by bots today (Tuesday/Wednesday),
and I was wondering if anybody else had noticed this and/or had any more
information on what is happening.
The wikis I've seen this on all run MediaWiki, so I'm unsure if it
affecting only MediaWiki-based wikis or if it extends to others.
Also, the bots only seem to be able to attack a wiki if e-mail
registration is not required. The bots create accounts and use the
accounts for the vandalism, but if e-mail confirmation is set to on, it
seems to stop them. Another thing that seems to stop them is a captcha.
As far as actions taken by the bots, I've seen HTML that was encoded
be decoded, blank lines deleted, and content completely removed. The
last one in the list scares me the most, as the bots just "eat" away at
the content on the wiki. All changes they make are marked as "minor"
and each account only seems to make one change before moving on (or
registering a new account?).
All the bots seem to have the same type of random account names that
seems only to be alphanumeric, contain six characters, and have the
first and fourth character be uppercase. Some examples that I found on
one of the wikis include: VtjX6p, OcmFis, Gb5Jab, Pm2O0t, SvhYc0,
QusUdr, LiiRq5, etc.
I'm not sure if this is some type of new virus/trojan infecting users
and then vandalizing wikis, but they are definitely coming from
multiple IPs. I'm interested in knowing if the IPs are all from a
specific area or if they are spread out over various ISPs. Also, I
would like to know how the bots are finding the wikis to vandalize. If
they are using a specific query on a search engine, the respective
search engine might could help stop this madness.
If anybody has any information about these bots, please let me know.
Thanks,
~reed
--
Reed Loden - <reed(a)reedloden.com>
Identifying the type isn't the problem - that's easy. The problem is writing decoders for every document format in the world, and hacking them into the existing MySQL-based search system.
Having said that, if we had to-plaintext converters for key doc formats, couldn't we add that plaintext to the text indexed for the Image: page? This could happen at save, and Wiki admins could configure converters by doc suffix.
Of course, the true answer is still to browbeat our users into using wiki markup... ;-)
Ian
-----Original Message-----
From: Dave Sigafoos [mailto:davesigafoos@sanmar.com]
Sent: Saturday, April 07, 2007 06:45 PM Pacific Standard Time
To: MediaWiki announcements and site admin list
Subject: Re: [Mediawiki-l] Storing or Linking Documents
So how hard would it be to expand the upload process to allow selecting
the 'type' of upload? Then the 'type' would be able to be searched thus
adding a good benefit to MW.
Also, wouldn't it make sense, since the upload process has a 'comment'
that you can enter, that a search against this comment be allowed.
I do understand that searching on binary of an image really makes no
sense (unless you are storing hidden text :) but allowing entry / search
of keywords might be a good idea
Thanks.
DSig
David Tod Sigafoos | SANMAR Corporation
PICK Guy
206-770-5585
davesigafoos(a)sanmar.com
-----Original Message-----
From: mediawiki-l-bounces(a)lists.wikimedia.org
[mailto:mediawiki-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Jim Wilson
Sent: Friday, April 06, 2007 11:31
To: MediaWiki announcements and site admin list
Subject: Re: [Mediawiki-l] Storing or Linking Documents
> The Image: namespace stores the meta-data for all uploaded files; I
> guess the "Image" name is based on history and how it's used in WP.
But
> for those of us using MW for corporate nets, "Image:" means any
uploaded
> file.
AFAIK, the namespace is called "Image" because that's what it's meant to
store - images. Not video, not Excel spreadsheets, not Word docs.
Using the Image upload facility for something other than pure images
represents an intentional circumvention of the spirit of the device
(regardless of business needs - which I understand).
For the record, we have a wiki here where I work, and yes, people upload
Excel spreadsheets and word docs and PDFs and ZIP files and .... etc.
-- Jim
On 4/6/07, Ian Smith <ismith(a)good.com> wrote:
>
> Dave Sigafoos:
> >
> > I had gathered that images weren't searchable which makes sense to
me
> > (except for descriptive information) but I did not realize that a
> > document with 'text' would not be searchable.
>
> Documents are simply stored as-is in the filesystem; so, an uploaded
> Word doc ends up stored in c:\WebServer\mediawiki\images\f\f7\foo.doc.
> In contrast, Wiki pages are stored as fields in the MySQL database.
>
> Search doesn't work on uploaded documents, because:
> 1. the search uses the MySQL search facility, and so only works on
stuff
> which is in the DB
> 2. since an uploaded doc could be in any format, there's no way to
> search it: eg. if a document compresses its content using some
> proprietary scheme, there's no general way to look inside it.
>
> Note that the problems go beyond search: features like "What links
here"
> only work for links from Wiki pages, etc.
>
> > I do see now that it seems to put all uploaded 'media' to IMAGE:
which
> I
> > am not sure I understand.
>
> The Image: namespace stores the meta-data for all uploaded files; I
> guess the "Image" name is based on history and how it's used in WP.
But
> for those of us using MW for corporate nets, "Image:" means any
uploaded
> file.
>
> Believe me, I feel your pain... if you find a way to stop your users
> using Word for a single sentence of plain text, let me know. ;-)
>
> Ian
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> MediaWiki-l mailing list
> MediaWiki-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l
>
_______________________________________________
MediaWiki-l mailing list
MediaWiki-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l
_______________________________________________
MediaWiki-l mailing list
MediaWiki-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l
I'm running a wiki (http://howdypedia.com/) with the setup on the root of
the domain; I know that you're not "supposed" to do this, but here I am.
(It's loosely based off the structure of another wiki, and changing it would
be a last resort.)
Anyway, things worked fine with this for a while, until recently, I noticed
that the robots.txt file for my domain wasn't accessible: It had been the
last time I checked, so I have to assume that a software upgrade changed
something here. Does anyone know a way I could kludge (through .htaccess,
or whatever) robots.txt (and sitemap.txt) into being accessible, without
changing the root structure?
> Subject: Status of wysiwyg editors for mw1.9?
> dirk wrote: ... does someone know the status/
> plans for 'real' wysiwyg editors included in
> mediawiki? ... Wikiwyg ... FCKEditor... Mozile ...
Plan B: I cut and paste the page back and forth with my own text editor.
Word2Wiki
http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4GGLD_en_
__US215&q=Word2Wiki
seems effective as a macro to prep Word documents for pasting into
MediaWiki articles.
So on the one hand, I'm also looking for a WYSIWYG Wiki editor INSIDE my
Wiki. Yet, I use Google spell check whenever I'm about to [Save] a
MediaWiki page anyway ... wait a minute: maybe Google or some other free
toolbar maker can include a Wiki-check along with spell-check? In other
words, if we think outside the box ... hello, Google?!?
My Wiki NEEDS copious links and they're not going to be the simple
[[link name]] - so a WYSIWYG Wiki would be nice, very nice. Anything to
avoid hand-coding, especially for admins, let alone non-coding users!
- Peter Blaise