>Ec wrote: I do find the whole argument tedious to follow. The first
>paragraph of Stan's quote of Robert's complaints establishes only a lack of
>specificity in Robert's claim. The article history and talk page for
>[[Israel]] doesn't help at all, and I really don't have the time to
>understand enough what is at the root of the argument to be helpful.
I agree the argument is tedious. I have debated the issue on the talk page
with people. I changed the add-in text to accomodate what they said. The
page currently contains a version of what I wrote written by another user,
to which I made minor adjustments. It has not been reverted or deleted.
Robert's contribution to the debate was to do blanket reversions to the
article as he wants it without discussion, make no comment on the talk page
but to make wild and ludicrous allegations on the wiki-list. In our
discussions on this and on related matters, he has accused me of
anti-semitism (which is ludicrous. I have just blocked a user who was
vandalising articles on wiki, putting POV rants calling Israelis liars and
murderers. I also requested the blocking of a user who filled up pages with
anti-Israeli rants, including redirecting the Israel page to [[Zionist
entity]]. I not only reverted the redirect I deleted Zionist entity /twice/
rather than leaving it as an offensive POV redirect showing up, then set up
a ban page for the user, spent over an hour going through his edits and
NPOVing or deleting them (most were beyond salvage and were simply deleted).
I then put all the evidence on this list with a request for his immediate
banning, which Jimbo agreed to. Would I have done that if I was 'pro-Arab'
and 'anti-semitic'?
Robert in a letter here accused me of calling Zionists racist. I never said
that. I quoted the user above assaying that, pointed out /all/ his
anti-semitic rants and Zionist-bashing, in the letter calling for his
banning. Since when is defending articles on Israel from attack and getting
a Zionist-basher banned calling Zionists rascist? It has been repeatedly
pointed out to Robert by others that he is mixing up the user who was
Zionist -bashing with me and treating the other person's opinions as mine.
Yet he has not once apologised for grossly defaming me, simply resent his
attack again and again.
I have discussed my edit on the relevant talk page. The version currently on
the page was written by another user, with some minor tweats to the text by
me. One user chose unilaterally to delete stuff without giving one word of
an explanation to anyone, and that is RK. I have been discussing the points
at issue, explaining them, etc. He just reverts and then accuses /me/ of
disrespecting everyone else.
Having slandered Anthere for weeks with his abuse, then me with gross and
libelous distortions of my opinions, RK is now doing the same to others. He
has just took BL at [http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk%3AQibya_massacre]
''By what Nazi like standards do you operate? Please cease and desist in
your hatespeech.'' He had previously told BL on the same page ''BL, stop
lying about murdering Jews.''
RK's attacks on me are just part of a long long pattern. As the list below
shows, he has abused MyRedDIce, Anthere, Sirubenstein, Ezra Wax, 172, Fred
Bauder, Stevertigo, Jennifer, GrahamN, Clutch, Quasar, Danny, Ed Poor, Julie
Kemp and many others. He has called them 'vandals', 'anti-semite', 'jew
baiters', etc etc etc.
Here are just a few of his other attacks on people for being supposedly
'anti-semite', etc.
# 15:38, 3 Jul 2003 Talk:Anti-Semitism (Sysops, please awar: MArtin
(MyRedDice) is censoring and deleting other user's Talk discussion. I am
concerned about his attempt to hide his repeated acts of Jew-baiting.)
# 19:07, 1 Jul 2003 Gaia philosophy (Reverting Anthere;'s POV violations,
again. This is the English Wikipedia, and not Anthere's personal wish list
of she wishes English speakers would use this term. Please ban that vandal.
Seriously.)
# 19:12, 25 Jun 2003 Talk:Judeo-Islamic tradition (Sltr, goodbye. I am tired
of your arrogance.)
# 01:58, 2 Jul 2003 Jew (Removing Ezra Wax's egregiously incorrect claims.
Is he trolling? Making this stuff up? He isn't even representing the
Orthodox POV. He's just wacky.)
# 03:10, 24 Mar 2003 Chiropractic medicine (Reverting dishonest
introduction. Fred Bauder, stop lying about the beliefs of chiropracters.)
# 17:15, 21 Mar 2003 Chiropractic medicine (VANDALISM AERT. Reverting
vandalism by Fred Bauder. Sysops have been notified.)
# 19:41, 20 Mar 2003 Chiropractic medicine (Vandalism alert. Removing Fred's
bald-faced lies. He keeps falsely claiming that an anti-Chiropractic report
supports chiropractice. This is grossly dishonest.)
# 02:05, 19 Mar 2003 Rachel Corrie (Stop pro-Palestinian advocacy. No
Palestinian nation exists. You can't make up facts that you *wish* were
true.)
# 19:41, 18 Mar 2003 International Solidarity Movement (Removing the
sanitized version. This group publicly says that it is Ok to murder Jews.
Let's be clear about that.)
# 19:41, 18 Mar 2003 International Solidarity Movement (Removing the
sanitized version. This group publicly says that it is Ok to murder Jews.
Let's be clear about that.)
# 01:32, 4 Mar 2003 Talk:Idol worship (Why is Stevertigo threatening me, for
simply asking him to stop abusing Wikipedia? This is not a forum for his
anti-Zionist rants.)
# 16:44, 26 Feb 2003 Ethnocentrism (reverting GrahamN's anti-Semitic
vandalism. Stop lying about the Jews, and claiming that they alone have
ethnocentrism.)
# 15:12, 23 Feb 2003 Anti-Zionism (Restoring NPOV version. Removing
Jennifer's anti-Semitic attack. Removing Noam Chomsky's bald-faced lies that
Zionism used to be against a Jewish State. Does anyone other than Jew-haters
believe that?)
# 15:45, 22 Feb 2003 Jewish ethnocentrism (Removing the introduction, which
was an anti-Semitic lie. sin't anyone here bothered by the non-stop Jew
bashing?)
# 15:38, 22 Feb 2003 Anti-Zionism (Restoring article. Removing Stevertigo's
bald-faced lies and subtle anti-Semitism. )
# 21:24, 20 Feb 2003 Jewish ethnocentrism (VANDALISM ALERT. Clutch is STILL
filling Wikipedia with anti-Semitic rants. Why do Wikipedia Sysops refuse to
ban him? Please, stop this insanity.)
# 03:49, 14 Feb 2003 Ehud Barak (if someone wants to create this page, fine.
But the hateful hatchet job violates ALL Wikipedia standards and protocols.
Stevertigo, please get over your obsession with Jews, or go away. )
# 16:06, 11 Feb 2003 Islam and anti-Semitism (Restoring a page. Reverting
vandalism. Boy, are some people here obsessed about the Jews. See a
therapist.)
# 01:03, 9 Feb 2003 Al Naqba (Deleting deliberate biased and anti-Israeli
polemics. Will the Jewhaters here please understand that Wikipedia is not a
Jew-bashing forum?)
# 00:55, 9 Feb 2003 Arabs and anti-Semitism (Reverting anti-Semitic
vandalism by Quasar. His obsession with Jews is not healthy, and I mean that
seriously. Someone needs to stop his abuse of Wikipedia for anti-Semitic
attacks.)
# 00:52, 9 Feb 2003 Palestinian terrorism (Reverting Quasar's bias and
polemics. This guys needs some therapy. His obsession about Jews is not
healthy.)
# 19:22, 7 Feb 2003 Talk:Jewish ethnocentrism (Please, ban Stevertigo. His
obessession about Jews is clearly out of control.)
# 19:15, 7 Feb 2003 Jewish ethnocentrism (Deleted article. Its sole purpose
was to incite anti-Semitism.
# 00:43, 6 Feb 2003 Wikipedia:Vandalism in progress (Stevertigo is creating
a deliberately false article, Semitism. Jew-baiting does not belong in an
encyclopedia.)
# 00:39, 6 Feb 2003 Semitism (Anti-Semitic lies deleted. Sysops, please ban
the author of this article. Wikipedia should not be used for Jew-baiting. )
Wikipedia is not the appropriate forum for anti-Semites to obsess about
Jews.)
# 00:50, 9 Feb 2003 Terrorism against Israelis (Removing Quasar's
anti-Semitic vandalism and NPOV violations. The Jew-haters just keep coming
and coming this week. :()
# 15:11, 20 Jan 2003 Timeline of Jewish history (VANDALISM alert. Danny
keeps vandalizing tis page, and lying about the history books sources it is
based on. Please ban this troll.)
# 19:26, 18 Dec 2002 George Washington (Removing a visciously anti-Semitic
attack. Why do people try to use Wikipedia to literally incite the murder of
Jews? This non-stop hatespeech against Jews is damaging Wikipedia's public
image.)
# 02:41, 1 Dec 2002 Talk:Judeo-Christian tradition (Removing a childish
attempt to taunt Jews by attacking their faith. Wikipedia is not a
playground, so 6 year olds shouldn't be playing here... )
# 16:33, 21 Nov 2002 Richard Wagner (removing a dishonest and misleading
apologetic for Wagner's anti-Semitism. Come on guys, this is immoral. No one
on Wikipedia does this for ANY other ethnic group.)
# 16:02, 20 Nov 2002 Israel (You guys just don't get it, do you? We will not
let you violate NPOV by inserting your anti-Israel polemics. Give up this
vandalism.)
# 01:31, 20 Nov 2002 User talk:RK (Ed, you have crossed the line. Stop
making apologetics for outright Jew-hatred and anti-Semitism, and stop
attacking the victims of hatespeech.)
# 17:54, 5 Sep 2002 Talk:Anti-Semitism (Countering more of GrahamN's
anti-Semitic outrburts against the Jews. Please ban this person.)
# 07:55, 29 Jul 2002 Talk:Anti-Semitism (Anti-semites use Newspeak to
rewrite the dictionary to further their goals. But that is not NPOV useage,
and so should be noted in the text.)
# 19:48, 3 Jun 2002 Talk:Persecution of Christians (Please ban
"ark". He keeps vandalizing articles with anti-semitic
hatespeech.)
# 17:52, 30 Dec 2001 Talk:Jews in the New Testament (SJK's anti-Semitic lies
and historical revisionism have no place in this project. )
How many people on wikipedia does RK have to libel before something is done
about him.
RK's lies about me and gross libelous distortions are nothing new. Tomorrow,
next week and next month he will be accusing someone else of jew-bashing and
anti-semitism, which in reality means anything who expresses an opinion
different to him. As I have said I am thoroughly fed up of having to deal
with this obnoxious arrogant person and his wild accusations against
everyone, I have merely tried to apply academic standards of NPOV and work
with people. I am thoroughly fed up having to put up with vicious bile and
blatent lies from RK in the process.
JT
_________________________________________________________________
Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
I believe there is overwhelming evidence that this user is not interested in
any way of contributing NPOV content to wikipedia but instead vandalising
articles.
==Examples==
* Inserting a picture of Ariol Sharon on the [[Penis]] page with the summary
''INSERTING PIC OF UGLY DICK SHARON''
* Inserting a picture of Sharon the the [[Feces]] page with the summary
''SHARON IS FECES''
* Inserting a picture of a penis on the [[Ariel Sharon]] page with the
summary ''new pic looks more like him''
* replacing real headlines and texts in [[Israeli-Palestinian conflict]]
with
=== ZIONIST TERROR===
The Zionists are the REAL terrorists.
''and''
The Zionist entity, which the Zionists call "Israel" so that everyone
forgets their crimes against the Arab nation of Palestine, is the world's
biggest terrorist. Like Nazi Germany and bin Laden, this terrorist must be
destroyed so that Palestine can strech from the river to the sea.
He summarised his changes as ''This site is crawling with Zionists''
* In [[Intifada]] he replaced a paragraph with the following
''Both intifadas were originally characterized by civil disobedience by the
[[Palestinians]], which escalated into the use of honorable armed
insurrection. Many Palestinians, including women and children, were
martyred due to the Nazi-fascist brutality of the Zionists.'' The summary he
gave was ''This site is crawling with Zionists''.
* redirected [[Israel]] to <nowiki>[[Zionist Entity]]</nowiki>. I deleted
the page and restored it to its proper location, but he reinstated it,
leading to a second deletion.
I do not have any problem with a pro-Palestinian viewpoint on wiki. Indeed I
have been called ''pro-Arab'' and ''anti-semite'' by RK for seeking to stop
his blatent pro-Israeli propagandising of some pages. Personally I do
believe that wiki represents the what outside the US is seen as America's
''Israelophile'' sympathies. But it is crystal clear that this user is not
trying to offer a balancing analysis of the Palestinian analysis of the
Middle East problem. He is simply maliciously trying to vandalise articles.
It is worth noting a similar user appeared on wiki some weeks ago
propagandising articles supposedly from one viewpoint, yet whose
contributions seemed nothing but vandalistic malicious nonsense, not a
serious attempt at offering an alternative viewpoint. It might be worth
someone checking this user's IP and comparing it to that user to see whether
it is the same person. This user here clearly warrants a ban, not for his
opinions but for his malicious vandalism of pages.
[[User:Jtdirl|FearÉIREANN]] 12:19, 4 Aug 2003 (UTC)
BTW 172 summed up this user's contributions with the following, which I
concur with.
I can see that you're a mature and articulate advocate of your cause, laying
out very convincing arguments involving poo poo and wee wees. 172 08:20, 4
Aug 2003 (UTC)
Since I started this page, Pl wrote on the talk page
I will stop messing with pages without permission. I will stop making rules
on my page. However, I still want to be able to have others sign the list
I'm starting agreeing that Zionism is racism.
I agree Zionism = racism
* user Palestine liberator
After changes, that version was posted at 13:02, 4 Aug 2003. He then
followed it up 8 minutes later, at
13:10, 4 Aug 2003 with
* United States - some in the Palestinian movement and others regard
America as a puppet of the Zionists.
So much for the promised neutrality and stopping messing. This guy is simply
playing games.
I have already had to protect one page that he continually reverted over and
over and over again. I and others have been continually reverting other
pages. A ban is /urgently/ required.
A ban page is at [[User talk:Palestinian liberator/ban]]. Please express
your viewers whether here on the list or there on the page. A decision is
clearly needed quickly before the scale of vandalism gets out of hand.
JT
_________________________________________________________________
Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
>At 06:08 PM 8/5/2003, you wrote:
>>On a separate topic: I am uncomfortable with the way that
>>Jtdirl and others slander me as a racist. For example,
>>Jtdirl again stated that Zionists are racists. He does this
>>knowing that I a Zionist, therefore the clear implication
>>is that I am racist bigot whose words should be ignored.
>>
>>Such angry and false speech about Zionists (which includes
>>tens of millions of Jews and Christians) is not appropriate
>>here. Would we accept it if people said that Irish
>>nationalism is racist? That feminism is FemiNazism? That
>>black progressivism is really white-hating communism? I
>>doubt that most Wikipedias would stand for this. But when
>>people here make these generalized and incorrect statements
>>about Zionists, no one says a word.
>>
>>You and I don't speak this way about people of other
>>groups; I propose that this standard should be true for all
>>of us here. I hope that I am not perceived as being
>>unreasonable.
>>
>>
>>Robert (RK)
>
>Dante Alighieri replied:
>I would imagine that it doesn't help your cause when you falsely attribute
>comments to the improper party. jtdirl didn't say that Zionists were
>racists, PL did. jtdirl mentioned it as an example of why PL should be
>banned. Not that I expect logic and facts to get in the way of your agenda,
>but I figured I at least ought to point out one of the most egregious of
>your mischaracterizations.
Thank you, Dante, for pointing out that. Trust RK to yet again read into
something not about him a personalised attack on himself. In all the time I
have been on wiki I have read many (endless, oh god, endless!) epistles from
RK talking about all the horrendous personalised attacks on himself. And
then I'd go looking for one of these attacks to read to see how could anyone
say anything so horrid to him and find some totally innocent or mildly
critical comment which RK had built up into one of the biggest attacks ever
issued on wikipedia, an assault on every fiber of his being. Even more
comically he now actually imagines that I am so preoccupied with him that I
either care that he is a zionist or even remember that he is one. Even
though I have heard it probably 4.8 million times from him since I first had
the 'pleasure' of encountering his editing syle I actually forgotten that he
is a zionist, so even if some miracle, I was bothered enough to want to
'offend' him, it would have been difficult to deliberately do so using a
fact I am forgotten. (I wonder if I try enough can I blank out not just RK's
zionism but RK from my consciousness?)
The curious thing is, it is not the first time he has accused me of
deliberately insulting him by calling him a Zionist and I've read him make
the same accusation of others. Does he recycle his allegations or
something? Or is there this vast conspiracy of people on wiki, all hovering
around waiting to make anti-zionist comments when he is logged on to wiki,
millions of wiki users secretly watching a hidden camera to wait for the
moment when RK decides to log on to wiki, then all the world's (well the
wiki's anyway) anti-zionists, anti-semites, anti-RKians, all rush to add in
special insults, just for RK, about RK.
For the record, RK
1. I do not spend everyone working hour thinking about you, nor for that
matter do most people on wikl. You have told us ad nausaum that you are a
Zionist but frankly we really couldn't be bothered to remember.
2. From what I could see, most of the offensive comments you have complained
about on wiki are your own imaginings. /You/ attach frequently bizarre
meanings to them, take offence at your bizarre attached meanings, and then
attack others for lauching attacks on you that are in fact your own
fantasies, as in interpreting my reference to an anti-semite vandal's
comments, which were intended to point out why this user should be banned,
as an attack on you.
BTW just so we are clear, RK, that last paragraph did not (a) call you a
vandal, (b) call you an antisemite, (c) did not call for you to be banned,
(d) did not mention ''Zionism'' (which I had forgotten again for a moment.
That you for reminding me about a fact that is of no interest to me, least I
use the forgotten topic of no interest to me to deliberately attack a user I
really don't think much about using something I have forgotten anyway!)
Finally, an example of how RK's rampant paranoia is catching. In a first
draft of the first paragraph, I accused RK in his paranoia, of to use a
theatrical saying, 'hamming it up'. But then it dawned on me that he might
(no, in RK's case, would) think I was attacking his Jewish identity by
referring to religious dietary rules. So though using a threatrical phrase
not thinking of food or religion (just a film earlier last night about an
actor accused of hamming his performance), /I/ found myself not thinking
about the nature of what I had written, but instead about the paranoid
interpretation that RK, as usual, would construct around it and so how to
avoid triggering offence, however accidentially, to RK who seems to have an
almost masochistic desire to take offence. (BTW RK, please don't interpret
the word 'masochistic' as meaning that I am in any way commenting on any
sexual matter, I am not accusing you of any kinky activities, much less
thinking of you engaging in any kinky activities of a zionist or non-zionist
kind. Is that now clear, RK? Have you /finally/ got the message? (Oh
please, dear God/Jehovah/Allah, Our Father, Our Blessed Mother, anyone out
there, let RK get the message this time and stop driving the rest of wiki
demented with his paranoia!) :-)
JT
_________________________________________________________________
Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
Hi,
In the "not found" screen ("No page with this exact title
exists, trying full text search. Well, I would be trying a full text
search here... Google and run a search on
site:wikipedia.org -- the results will be outdated and
incomplete, though.") wouldn't it be much friendlier to send
the user directly to the following link? I think I copied this
from the old search or "not found" screen:
http://www.google.com/custom?
sa=Google+Search&domains=wikipedia.org&sitesearch=
wikipedia.org
Regards,
Harris7
An apology: sorry for the superfluous email and wasted bandwidth. I
just read Brion Vibber's announcement of the temporary search in the
most recent WikiEN-l digest.
Thanks again Brion, it looks great!
Regards,
Harris7
8/6/03 10:49:12 AM, Chris Harris <harris7(a)io.com> wrote:
>Well, I realize I'm a newbie and all... but <sniff> I guess I'll have to just
>reply to my own email since nobody will talk to me :-)
>
>I just noticed the search button is now working, and working great! A
big
>Thank You to the responsible developer!!
>
>One followup newbie question: I didn't see the search "fix" announced
>on Wikipedia:Announcements - is there some other place that
>Wikipedia/software announcements are made? Or maybe there is
>another maillist with such announcements?
>
>Thanks,
>Harris7
>
>
>8/5/03 2:09:53 PM, Chris Harris <harris7(a)io.com> wrote:
>
>>Hi,
>>
>>In the "not found" screen ("No page with this exact title
>>exists, trying full text search. Well, I would be trying a full text
>>search here... Google and run a search on
>>site:wikipedia.org -- the results will be outdated and
>>incomplete, though.") wouldn't it be much friendlier to send
>>the user directly to the following link? I think I copied this
>>from the old search or "not found" screen:
>>
>>http://www.google.com/custom?
>>sa=Google+Search&domains=wikipedia.org&sitesearch=
>>wikipedia.org
>>
>>Regards,
>> Harris7
>>
>
>
Out of curiosity I looked up wiktionary on Alexa. It doesn't make it
into the first 100,000 but it does show that 2% of the wiktionary
traffic is on fr.wiktionary.org!? I didn't know that anybody had
started a French wiktionary.
Eclecticology
Saurabh wrote:
>So wikipedia is now reaching 1 in 1000 web users according to Alexa,
No. Alexa says that Wikipedia's traffic is ranked at about position
1000 among all websites. This is completely different, and given the
likely traffic distribution, Wikipeda has a much much smaller share
than 1 in 1000 of the whole traffic.
If your lot is the tenth biggest in your street, then you own a lot
less than one tenth of the real estate in your street.
Axel
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
I've set up a static copy of the search index table to run on Larousse,
the web server, separately from the main database server, and modified
the wiki to run searches through it.
This is rather experimental, and I don't know if it'll remain smooth. If
it doesn't play nice, it'll get disabled again. For now this is a static
copy of the search index, so it won't automatically update with new
pages, changed pages etc. But, it's better than nothing and should be
more up to date than Google for the time being.
(I'd prefer to be running these sorts of things on a third machine,
capable of being a full live backup database server, but we don't yet
have one. Larousse does have plenty of free memory at the moment, so
stealing some to run a limited-purpose mysqld shouldn't hurt it too much
in the short term.)
Technical notes: the duplicate searchindex table has been modified to
include the cur_is_redirect and cur_namespace columns out of cur, since
these are used to narrow down the search. The modified search engine
grabs a series of matching page ID numbers out of the alternate
database, then grabs the current title and and contents from the real
cur table using the index numbers for just the matches that it needs to
display, which should be quite fast. I've also dropped the default
number of results per page from 20 to 10.
I haven't checked in these experimental changes to CVS; a diff to
SearchEngine.php is attached. Also slight change to
DatabaseFunctions.php to support more options to wfGetDB() but it
doesn't diff cleanly against the current version and I'm too tired to
sort it out right now.
-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
Index: SearchEngine.php
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/wikipedia/phase3/includes/SearchEngine.php,v
retrieving revision 1.12
diff -u -r1.12 SearchEngine.php
--- SearchEngine.php 13 Jul 2003 23:19:56 -0000 1.12
+++ SearchEngine.php 6 Aug 2003 11:28:29 -0000
@@ -170,27 +170,64 @@
$searchnamespaces = $this->queryNamespaces();
$redircond = $this->searchRedirects();
- $sql = "SELECT cur_id,cur_namespace,cur_title," .
- "cur_text FROM cur,searchindex " .
- "WHERE cur_id=si_page AND {$this->mTitlecond} " .
+ global $wgDBsearchServer, $wgDBsearchUser, $wgDBsearchPassword, $wgDBsearchName;
+ if( $wgDBsearchServer ) {
+ wfGetDB( $wgDBsearchUser, $wgDBsearchPassword, $wgDBsearchServer, $wgDBsearchName );
+ #$meep = mysql_connect( $wgDBsearchServer, $wgDBsearchUser, $wgDBsearchPassword );
+ #mysql_select_db( $wgDBsearchName, $meep );
+ }
+ $sql = "SELECT si_page " .
+ "FROM searchindex " .
+ "WHERE {$this->mTitlecond} " .
"{$searchnamespaces} {$redircond}" .
"LIMIT {$offset}, {$limit}";
- $res1 = wfQuery( $sql, $fname );
+ $res1 = wfQuery( $sql, $fname ); #FIXME
$num = wfNumRows($res1);
-
+
if ( $wgDisableTextSearch ) {
$res2 = 0;
+ $num2 = 0;
} else {
- $sql = "SELECT cur_id,cur_namespace,cur_title," .
- "cur_text FROM cur,searchindex " .
- "WHERE cur_id=si_page AND {$this->mTextcond} " .
+ $sql = "SELECT si_page " .
+ "FROM searchindex " .
+ "WHERE {$this->mTextcond} " .
"{$searchnamespaces} {$redircond} " .
"LIMIT {$offset}, {$limit}";
$res2 = wfQuery( $sql, $fname );
- $num = $num + wfNumRows($res2);
+ #$num = $num + wfNumRows($res2);
+ $num2 = wfNumRows( $res2 );
+ }
+ if( $wgDBsearchServer ) {
+ global $wgDBconnection;
+ $wgDBconnection = NULL;
+ wfGetDB();
}
- if ( $num == $limit ) {
+ if($num) {
+ $ids = array();
+ while( $s = wfFetchObject( $res1 ) ) {
+ array_push( $ids, $s->si_page );
+ }
+ $sql = "SELECT cur_id,cur_namespace,cur_title," .
+ "cur_text FROM cur " .
+ "WHERE cur_id IN (" . implode( ",", $ids ) . ")";
+ $res1 = wfQuery( $sql, $fname );
+ $num = wfNumRows( $res1 );
+ }
+ if($num2) {
+ $ids = array();
+ while( $s = wfFetchObject( $res2 ) ) {
+ array_push( $ids, $s->si_page );
+ }
+ $sql = "SELECT cur_id,cur_namespace,cur_title," .
+ "cur_text FROM cur " .
+ "WHERE cur_id IN (" . implode( ",", $ids ) . ")";
+ $res2 = wfQuery( $sql, $fname );
+ $num2 = wfNumRows( $res2 );
+ }
+ $num += $num2;
+
+ if ( $num == $limit ) {
$top = wfShowingResults( $offset, $limit);
} else {
$top = wfShowingResultsNum( $offset, $limit, $num );
@@ -415,7 +452,9 @@
$wgOut->redirect( wfLocalUrl( $wgTitle->getPrefixedURL() ) );
return;
}
+ $wgTitle = Title::newFromText( $search );
+ /*
# Try a near match
#
$this->parseQuery();
@@ -424,7 +463,8 @@
if ( "" != $this->mTitlecond ) {
$res = wfQuery( $sql, $fname );
- }
+ }
+ */
if ( isset( $res ) && 0 != wfNumRows( $res ) ) {
$s = wfFetchObject( $res );
It is worth mentioning that in terms of academic credibility, Encarta is not
very highly regarded. In fact I have heard it described as a triumph of
image over substance. But it is great to see wiki doing so well. We have
/so/ many quality articles and also other than the 32K limit, we have
greater scope to go into things in more detail.
I think wiki does need as it develops to be able to have some 'final'
articles that, having reached a clear standard of accuracy, readability etc
can he removed from the editing process. The downside of constant editing is
that some articles that reach a high standard then can lose that as those
who produced the standard leave and someone comes on and rewrites it to a
lower standard. Wiki's open edit policy is its major plus, as it allows us
to evolve and update, but its downside is reliability. Can I be sure if at
8.17pm I read an article /everything/ in it is factual or could I have the
bad luck to read it just after some user either through not knowing what
they were doing or deliberately, mucked it up and added in false
information? For example, Jerusalem's status as the capital of Israel is
disputed. That is stated on wiki (after a battle!). But what if a reader at
8.17 reads a version that says in a POV edit it is an 'undisputed' capital.
Or someone doing an essay on JFK reads an edit at 8.17 that says he was the
33rd not the 35th president?
For all their downsides, the 'centainty of standard' is the one major plus
that Brittanica, World Book, Encarta has. When you read an article you are
getting a definitive version, not that moment's edit. At some stage wiki is
going to face a credibility barrier where people ask 'but can I be sure that
King Edward VI of England actually died on that day, or is it a bad edit?
How can I be sure W.T. Cosgrave said that? How and when we deal with the
'certainty of standard' issue will mark the moment we go from being a good
secondary source that may give a fascinating insight but which just to be
sure you might want to cross check, just in case, to a /guaranteed/ reliable
primary source.
Please don't think I am knocking wiki. It is a superb encyclopædia that I am
proud to associate with. But it still is in its relative infancy. However
just because we get more hits than other encyclopædias does not mean we are
as generally reliable as they are. (I came across an article on [[John
Redmond]] some time ago that before rewriting would have completely screwed
up any reader's understanding of the early 20th century Irish leader.) As we
grow and become more famous, people's expectations of our reliability and
our 'certainty of standard' will grow and we are going to need to find a
mechanism to ensure that, while not losing wiki's mass participation ethos.
JT
>
>If only Wikimedia could buy out EB........cheap......Imagine!!
>Ec
>
>Erik Moeller wrote:
>
>>Toby-
>>
>>>Jimmy Wales wrote:
>>>
>>>>So, this is pretty interesting. According to Alexa.com, Wikipedia is
>>>>now more popular than Britannica.
>>>>
>>>We should probably keep in mind that Britannica is also available in
>>>print.
>>>In fact, that's the brand's traditional medium.
>>>
>>
>>Encarta has very much harmed Britannica's print sales. Britannica counted
>>on their brand name and image, but even many of their customers did not
>>see why they would have to pay thousands of dollars for a paper
>>encyclopedia when they could get a decent encyclopedia, plus lots of
>>multimedia stuff, maps etc. for 100 bucks or less, and the whole thing
>>would fit neatly into their back pocket.
>>
>>Swiss investor Jacob Safra bought Britannica in 1996 (it's still based in
>>Chicago), and the sales staff for the paper version was fired shortly
>>thereafter. Since then the focus has been almost exclusively on the
>>Internet and CD-ROM version, which was massively reduced in price and is
>>now dirt cheap. For some time they even had the full text online --
>>remember, those were the dot com days.
>>
>>Things are looking pretty grim for Britannica. Their Java-based software
>>is a piece of crap, and Encarta has much better marketing. They still have
>> their original content bonus, but even in terms of content they have
>>massive weaknesses in some areas (for example, compare their article on
>>circumcision with ours). I think the Britannica brand will live on, but in
>> terms of competition we should be more worried about Encarta (and vice
>>versa).
>>
>>Regards,
>>
>>Erik
>>_______________________________________________
>>WikiEN-l mailing list
>>WikiEN-l(a)wikipedia.org
>>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>WikiEN-l mailing list
>WikiEN-l(a)wikipedia.org
>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
_________________________________________________________________
Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail