At 02:00 PM 18/10/02 -0400, you wrote:
I found and corrected 19 separate instances of "seperate" in the Wikipedia today.
All of these are currently in Wikipedia articles. I could use a little help.
Add to the list of misspellings all the innumerable 1990's, 1980's, 1970's, etc. I zap them when I see them, but there are so many...
Even worse are references -- and even links! -- to decades in the first century (e.g., "the 70's") when what is meant is a decade in the 20th century (e.g., "the 1970s").
-----Original Message----- From: wikipedia-l-admin@nupedia.com [mailto:wikipedia-l-admin@nupedia.com]On Behalf Of Bryan Derksen Sent: Saturday, October 19, 2002 09:48 To: wikipedia-l@nupedia.com Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Mispeelings
At 02:00 PM 18/10/02 -0400, you wrote:
I found and corrected 19 separate instances of "seperate" in the
Wikipedia
today.
All of these are currently in Wikipedia articles. I could use a little
help.
Add to the list of misspellings all the innumerable 1990's, 1980's, 1970's, etc. I zap them when I see them, but there are so many...
[Wikipedia-l] To manage your subscription to this list, please go here: http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
hey.. how about we create a db script that fixes this stuff? i can do it if you guys approve it and i'll send it to whoever has permission to do this
seriously, just a big select statement that selects any article that contains ie "mispeeling" and automatically replaces the correct spelling... it's really not hard at all, at all.... same thing for uhm double redirects and other common ailments that take so much of our time, but can be so easily fixed.
Lightning
This is fine until some of the 'mispeelings' are intended....
----- Original Message ----- From: "Lightning" lightning@chaos-productions.com To: wikipedia-l@nupedia.com Sent: Saturday, October 19, 2002 7:31 PM Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Mispeelings
hey.. how about we create a db script that fixes this stuff? i can do it
if
you guys approve it and i'll send it to whoever has permission to do this
seriously, just a big select statement that selects any article that contains ie "mispeeling" and automatically replaces the correct
spelling...
it's really not hard at all, at all.... same thing for uhm double
redirects
and other common ailments that take so much of our time, but can be so easily fixed.
Lightning
[Wikipedia-l] To manage your subscription to this list, please go here: http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
hey.. how about we create a db script that fixes this stuff? i can do it if you guys approve it and i'll send it to whoever has permission to do
this
seriously, just a big select statement that selects any article that contains ie "mispeeling" and automatically replaces the correct spelling... it's really not hard at all, at all.... same thing for uhm double redirects and other common ailments that take so much of our time, but can be so easily fixed.
This is fine until some of the 'mispeelings' are intended....
I figure if we mess up 20 articles, but fix 250, its worth it... or not?
If people like the idea i'll program it, and even tie it into the diff thing, so it logs the edit onto the article history...
Lightning wrote:
If people like the idea i'll program it, and even tie it into the diff thing, so it logs the edit onto the article history...
I'm at the moment patching together a subfunction for the Maintenance Page; let's see how that works out ;-)
Magnus
Lightning wrote:
hey.. how about we create a db script that fixes this stuff? i can do it if you guys approve it and i'll send it to whoever has permission to do this
seriously, just a big select statement that selects any article that contains ie "mispeeling" and automatically replaces the correct spelling...
This is fine until some of the 'mispeelings' are intended....
I figure if we mess up 20 articles, but fix 250, its worth it... or not?
If people like the idea i'll program it, and even tie it into the diff thing, so it logs the edit onto the article history...
Please no! Having 20 of 250 articles murdered by friendly fire is not acceptable. Simply showing 250 recent changes is no help in finding the friendly corpses. Your cure is worse than the disease. Eclecticology
I //really// don't like this idea at all. It is far too generic and there are often good reasons why a word may be mispelt, particularly if we are quoting from old texts etc. Dangerous in the extreme and a lazy solution to something which should be fixed on a case by case basis.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Lightning" lightning@chaos-productions.com To: wikipedia-l@nupedia.com Sent: Saturday, October 19, 2002 8:11 PM Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Mispeelings
hey.. how about we create a db script that fixes this stuff? i can do
it
if you guys approve it and i'll send it to whoever has permission to do
this
seriously, just a big select statement that selects any article that contains ie "mispeeling" and automatically replaces the correct spelling... it's really not hard at all, at all.... same thing for uhm double redirects and other common ailments that take so much of our time, but can be so easily fixed.
This is fine until some of the 'mispeelings' are intended....
I figure if we mess up 20 articles, but fix 250, its worth it... or not?
If people like the idea i'll program it, and even tie it into the diff thing, so it logs the edit onto the article history...
[Wikipedia-l] To manage your subscription to this list, please go here: http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Steve Callaway wrote:
I //really// don't like this idea at all. It is far too generic and there are often good reasons why a word may be mispelt, particularly if we are quoting from old texts etc. Dangerous in the extreme and a lazy solution to something which should be fixed on a case by case basis.
That's why I won't implement an auto-correct feature (and because I'm too lazy;)
Magnus
Lightning wrote:
just a big select statement that selects any article that contains ie "mispeeling" and automatically replaces the correct spelling...
This is fine until some of the 'mispeelings' are intended....
I figure if we mess up 20 articles, but fix 250, its worth it... or not?
Not. An accidental mispeeling, while annoying, is usually harmless. A deliberate mispeeling, OTOH, is usually important. Better a hundred typos go free than one contentful item be wrongfully changed.
-- Toby
wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org