On Wednesday 04 September 2002 10:38 am, Helga wrote:
> Hello, I am a little swamped with all the wiki list reading material and it
> seems my limited email is getting overloaded.
You might want to create an email filter to sort any emails with the string
"Helga" in the subject into a special folder (just use the help menu of
whatever email program you use and look up "filter").
Otherwise you may miss some emails that concern you.
-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)
On Saturday 24 August 2002 12:01 pm, Karen wrote:
> Something I wondered - how do you know who the new users to greet them?
> Do you just look for user names you haven't seen before or is there some
> way to identify them? I'd be happy to do the meet-and-greet but I don't
> know how to do it.
Well - I guess I do it the hard way and scan each edit in all Recent Changes
for a 24 hour period looking for edit link user names (a dead give-a-away)
and for user names I don't remember seeing before. This works for me since I
pretty good reading comprehension and memory.
What would be most useful is a listing of new users that can be accessed from
http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Listusers. That way this job would be
much easier.
BTW we really /do not/ have 3498 real users -- a good many of these "users"
logged in only to abuse our upload utility or for other nefarious or
non-contributing reasons (I don't greet any user who hasn't contributed at
all). Is there a way to get rid of many of these no-longer used user accounts
Lee (just the ones that have been inactive for months and whose user pages
are still edit links)?
-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)
On Monday 19 August 2002 03:41 pm, you wrote:
> Can still be done later. The problem is the lack of time. If you wait to
> long there are to many links to the new location of the english
> wikipedia that can not be broken. If there is no fundamental objection
> to put the English wikipedia at en.wikipedia.org then that must be done.
> What to do whit www.wikipedia.org can wait (a littel.)
>
> giskart
This is just silly -- we are building an encyclopedia here not an
organization. There is nothing at all wrong with having the English wikipedia
at wikipedia.org and have all the pages that are about the English language
project be in the wikipedia namespace (or in the other languages project
namespaces). As each language figures out what to call their wikipedia we can
buy them domain names for that and make sure the xx.wikipedia.com domain
names still work.
Other than being a one-page portal to all the different language wikipedias
(which the Main Page already does -- as do most of the other language main
pages) I don't see any logic in using wikipedia.org for anything other than
the English language wikipedia.
-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)
Beginning next Tuesday (when Jason Richey returns from a weekend
vacation), we are going to be taking the non-English Wikipedias more
seriously:
1. We'll be setting up non-English Wikipedias for all the other major
languages (including many we've omitted).
2. We'll be actively seeking out translations of the main text (e.g., the
GNU license notice), and uploading the translations. I.e., we will
proactively goes to Wikipedia-L, to the individual non-English Wikipedias,
and perhaps also to specific individuals, requesting the text and
promising to upload it immediately upon receipt.
3. We will soon (probably today) set up a non-English Wikipedia
standards mailing list, which would explain set basic standards that we
would like all Wikipedias to follow (think of it as the UN). Since the
English language Wikipedia should exemplify the same standards, whatever
they are, we could very plausibly call this the "international Wikipedia
forum" or something like that.
Larry
I've created a new version of wiki -- wiki.fcgi, which means
'FastCGI'. This is now handling all of the requests of the form:
http://www.wikipedia.com/wiki/foo
but requests for the edit pages and so on still go to the original
script.
This minimizes the chances of problesm -- wiki.fcgi is only handling
requests that are 'read-only'. It can also handle edits, at least in
my testing, but for now I'm not implementing that.
This has resulted in a reducting in the number of wiki.cgi that have
to be run from 20-30 per minute to 4-5. Those numbers are for right
now, a Saturday evening when traffic is low.
We were getting very overloaded during busy days. This should solve
that problem for awhile. :-) Later, if this works fine, I may have
the fastcgi do everything, which would solve the problem for a LONG
while.
I'm excited about moving forward with Magnus's PHP code, of course.
So this is a stopgap measure until we get that running.
--
*************************************************
* http://www.wikipedia.com/ *
* You can edit this page right now! *
*************************************************
the newest Magnus Manske code is up and running at
http://wikipedia.sourceforge.net/fpw/wiki.phtml
please take a look at if if you are into fixing things and writing
short bug reports.
mike dill0
Does anyone here remember the wikipedia admin url?
--
*************************************************
* http://www.wikipedia.com/ *
* You can edit this page right now! *
*************************************************
<lsanger(a)nupedia.com> writes:
> Yep, I agree with all that. It would have been 100% better to present it as
> a project and go to great lengths to de-emphasize it as a product.
Definitely the best plan. I wince every time I see people speak of it as a
"Britannia killer". Eventually, maybe, but lets not forget that the linux
kernel (the metaphor du jour) took about 7-8 years to make a dent on server
space, and still needs maybe another 3 or 4 for decent desktop share.
--
Gareth Owen
But would Liza have been able to fool the count if, instead of being
personally tutored by Higgins, she just asked the advice of 100
different people how to do it? Hmm...
Let's not let our vision of the future blind us to the realities of
the present. The process of Wikipedia will, in a few years, produce
vast quantities of good information that will be possible to assemble
into a great product or two. But the present state of Wikipedia
really isn't a useful product, and pretending it is just gets us
slammed--quite fairly--as we got at Kuro5hin. If we're going to sell
it, let's sell what it actually is--a project, not a product. It's
WAY too early to be suggesting Wikipedia to anything like Ask Jeeves
or Copernic or other real products. In 3 or 4 years, maybe.
>A song immediately pops to mind: "Just you wait, 'enry 'iggins, just
you
>wait...you'll be sorry, 'enry 'iggins, just you wait..."
>
>:-)
>
>Larry
>
>On Wed, 26 Sep 2001, wojtek pobratyn wrote:
>
>> I suggested wikipedia to copernic.com. This is the reply I got.
Oh, well...
>>
>> WojPob
>>
>> engines2(a)copernic.com napisa³:
>>
>> >Hello,
>> > Thank you for contributing to our continuous effort to ensure
that Copernic.com products always meet the highest quality standards.
>> >
>> > Here are the sites you have suggested. Note that a brief comment
will indicate how your suggestions are or was processed.
>> >
>> > Url: http://www.wikipedia.com/
>> > Category: encyclopedias
>> > Remark: -The site you have suggested does not meet the quality
requirements we have set for our products.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Best regards,
>> >
>> > Information Source Team
>> > engines(a)copernic.com
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>[Wikipedia-l]
>To manage your subscription to this list, please go here:
>http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Kuro5hin has been down for the last 6-12 hours, I think. (I forget when
it started.)
I wonder if a certain article might have had something to do with this!
:-)
Larry