On Sunday 21 July 2002 12:01 pm, you wrote:
> Hi,
>
> the wiki counts multiple links to the same article no longer as only one
> link as it did before. Investments is linked many times from the September
> 11 article.
>
> Regards,
>
> jens
Now there is something that really needs to be fixed. Even though proper wiki
style states that only the first occurrence of a term should be linked,
oftentimes a table in an article will have something linked as well as the
text of the same article.
Some people will look at the table first, others will look at the text first,
so one can't arbitrarily link just one and not the other. This is especially
true for tables with standardized layouts (like the element tables or
organism tables -- either of which would also look weird if certain terms in
one article's table were not linked but were in other similar articles).
--maveric149
Stephen Gilbert wrote:
>I only redirect common misspellings. In this case, I
>would redirect "Colombus" and ignore "Idendity".
[[Colombus]] is arguably a variant spelling, not a misspelling.
But [[Idendity]] certainly shouldn't redirect to [[Identity]],
since [[Identity]] doesn't even exist!!!
-- Toby
>===== Original Message From "Krzysztof P. Jasiutowicz" <kpj(a)kki.net.pl> =====
>Hello all,
>
>The popularity counter starts from 0 after the move.
>Is this the right thing to do ?
>
>What do you think ?
Personally, I think the popularity counters should be reset to 0 on a regular
basis. Otherwise the results are permanently skewed to favor older popular
pages over newer ones, pages that have remained where they are over ones which
have been recently moved, etc. A counter that never resets is only fair for an
encyclopedia that never changes its contents, IMO.
Before the move, the most wanted page was Nian Hao, followed closely by a few
other Hao. Now it is Investments. Wiki claims that there are 78 links to
Investments, but when asked what they are, it provides only two. What's wrong?
phma
This isn't exactly a bug: I've noticed that talk pages no longer show up on the
list of newly created pages, and I for one find them useful as alerts to
things that
need working on. (I know they're being omitted because I created one last
night.)
Vicki
--
Vicki Rosenzweig
vr(a)redbird.org
http://www.redbird.org
Brion Vibber wrote:
>Toby Bartels wrote:
>>When I go to www.wikipedia.com using IE,
>>I get a snapshot that was apparently taken shortly after 10:48.
[..]
>>Well, I just deleted all of my temporary Internet files for IE.
>>Now it's working! But I still wonder what was going on.
>To hazard a guess, IE was preserving the IP address for the former
>www.wikipedia.com (130.94.122.195) in some sort of cache. The new
>www.wikipedia.com (130.94.122.197) has the new live server.
When I try it at 130.94.122.195, I get an error page with a Nupedia logo.
But if you copied down the wrong IP #, then that seems reasonable.
A suggestion then:
Somebody with the appropriate access should go to the original IP #
and edit the main page so that it tells people that the IP # changed,
and urge them to take appropriate corrective action.
There must be others besides me thinking that the site is still down.
-- Toby Bartels
toby+wikipedia-l(a)math.ucr.edu
Here is a copy of a recent feature request I made. The last part of this
feature request would need list approval so I am copying the request here:
In the past I have provided very important source information to the summary
field provided when uploading an image (alas, now this is gone from the log
-- where is it?). It would be /very/ useful and important to have this same
text become part of the image's history.
It seems odd that this isn't now the case: Logically, uploading an image
"creates" the image in the database so whatever is said in the summary field
at that time should be entry #1 in the image's history, no?
In addition, for one image we have; the image history, the history of edits
to the image page and the uploads log -- which is a bit confusing. I'm not
sure how to remedy this particular thing though....
http://www.wikipedia.com/wiki/Wikipedia:Upload_log
BTW, it is way cool that URLs in the upload summary fields now are active.
Perhaps we should encourage (maybe even require...) uploaders to provide a
weblink to the media's source /if/ that media were obtained from another
website. This would make checking for copyright compliance a snap.
--maveric149
On Saturday 20 July 2002 12:01 pm, you wrote:
> What's the proper procedure to determine that a page should be deleted, and
> not stubbed or redirected?
>
> phma
See:
http://beta.wikipedia.com/wiki/Wikipedia_policy_on_permanent_deletion_of_pa…
If you have any suggestions on changes please bring them to the list.
--maveric149
Could someone who can read French have a look at the GPL
Photo gallery at http://gnuart.net/, and add the categories to the
photo resources page ?
Imran
--
TheOpenCD Project
Promoting Open Source on Windows
http://www.theopencd.org