Gerard Meijssen wrote:
Hoi, For whatever reason there is this silly sign that should indicate that a link is external.
It is a silly thing for two reasons: *It does not show itself in an IE browser *When it is used in a language that is left to right like Arabic or Hebrew, it insists on being on the right side of the word in effect blocking out the first character.
Could we PLEASE get rid of this silly thing. And if someone insists on keeping it, could it be fixed so that it behaves properly ...
Thanks, GerardM
Hello,
Better than getting ride of it, we can fix the bug to align the icon on left side using rtl.css ;o)
As for the IE issue, really people should use a modern browser wich can handle css 2.0 .
cheers,
Unfortunately, Ashar, what people should use and what they do use are two different matters.
Mark
On Sat, 11 Dec 2004 08:08:13 +0100, Ashar Voultoiz hashar@altern.org wrote:
Gerard Meijssen wrote:
Hoi, For whatever reason there is this silly sign that should indicate that a link is external.
It is a silly thing for two reasons: *It does not show itself in an IE browser *When it is used in a language that is left to right like Arabic or Hebrew, it insists on being on the right side of the word in effect blocking out the first character.
Could we PLEASE get rid of this silly thing. And if someone insists on keeping it, could it be fixed so that it behaves properly ...
Thanks, GerardM
Hello,
Better than getting ride of it, we can fix the bug to align the icon on left side using rtl.css ;o)
As for the IE issue, really people should use a modern browser wich can handle css 2.0 .
cheers,
-- Ashar Voultoiz - WP++++ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Hashar Servers in trouble ? noc (at) wikimedia (dot) org "This signature is a virus. Copy me in yours to spread it."
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
kelvSYC wrote:
Unfortunately, Ashar, what people should use and what they do use are two different matters.
I'd like to add that, IMO, this is because people are largely unaware of what they can use...
It is all well and good to be in favour of using Firefox and, I use Firefox with pleasure HOWEVER, when used with texts in Farsi, and Arabic IE is to be preferred, it allows me to upload soundfiles with a name consisting of mixed alphabetic and arabic text. When reading a Farsi text, the default size of texts is such that you can read the characters with IE while they are almost unreadable because of their small size with Firefox. Add to that this, the pesky upload symbol that makes the first character unreadable and I must say that the case for IE is overwhelming in favour.
Just saying that Firefox is better is plain stupid when the argument IS that it does underperform. Saying that this "download figure" can be fixed is nice but it does not help the case for Firefox until it is fixed. So I am fully aware why there is a such a strong case for IE and against Firefox when used with Farsi and propably Urdu, Arabic and Hebrew.
Thanks, GerardM
Unfortunately, Ashar, what people should use and what they do use are two different matters.
I'd like to add that, IMO, this is because people are largely unaware of what they can use...
It is all well and good to be in favour of using Firefox and, I use Firefox with pleasure HOWEVER, when used with texts in Farsi, and Arabic IE is to be preferred, it allows me to upload soundfiles with a name consisting of mixed alphabetic and arabic text. When reading a Farsi text, the default size of texts is such that you can read the characters with IE while they are almost unreadable because of their small size with Firefox. Add to that this, the pesky upload symbol that makes the first character unreadable and I must say that the case for IE is overwhelming in favour.
Just saying that Firefox is better is plain stupid when the argument IS that it does underperform. Saying that this "download figure" can be fixed is nice but it does not help the case for Firefox until it is fixed. So I am fully aware why there is a such a strong case for IE and against Firefox when used with Farsi and propably Urdu, Arabic and Hebrew.
Well, I learned something new today - never try to be funny on a mailing list. Seriously, I was never referring to Firefox or any other user-agent in particular (I for one regularly use three browsers - none of which are IE or a Mozilla-brand derivative - for absolutely no reason, not to mention various other programs that make use of the internet). The people that I work with are just like that - they stick to IE because they do not know of any alternative, and will stand by it despite whatever flaws it may have. Of course, you have an equally valid argument - I haven't have yet worked with a person who used any language from the Middle East...
One thing I don't like too much about Firefox is its lack of support for inline-block.
...and Gerard, the links in the articles entered in the form: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITEM A B C etc] keep on disappearing. We can't have an articles to all the relevant links in Tumbuka (not within a short time, anyway) hence the references to the English relevant entries. What could be causing that, someone deliberately changing them or does the system change links automatically to the form [[ITEM A B C etc]]?
Mamma Mia wrote:
....and Gerard, the links in the articles entered in the form: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITEM A B C etc] keep on disappearing. We can't have an articles to all the relevant links in Tumbuka (not within a short time, anyway) hence the references to the English relevant entries. What could be causing that, someone deliberately changing them or does the system change links automatically to the form [[ITEM A B C etc]]?
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Hoi, Indeed someone has changed all these references. I had changed just one (the first) to have it refer to the en:wikipedia using the standard syntax ([[:en:word|word]] where word is the name of the article). This syntax has a better performance than the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITEM A B C etc] syntax.
I do agree that you want to slowly change the articles to the chiTumbuka language. At this moment you have it the hardest, there are so few articles that it is hard to imagine how beautifull the tum:wikipedia will become :)
I will ask this person to not make any changes on the tum:wikipedia (I know the man).
Thanks, Gerard http://tum.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=ChiTumbuka&action=edit
Hello Dinette,
On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 18:49:55 +0200, Mamma Mia dinnette@softhome.net wrote:
...and Gerard, the links in the articles entered in the form: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITEM A B C etc] keep on disappearing. We can't have an articles to all the relevant links in Tumbuka (not within a short time, anyway) hence the references to the English relevant entries. What could be causing that, someone deliberately changing them or does the system change links automatically to the form [[ITEM A B C etc]]?
I'm not sure I understand you. Are you saying that links entered in the chiTumbuka wikipedia, in the form [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITEM A B C etc], are being rewritten somehow as [[ITEM A B C etc]]?
If that's happening automatically, that's a problem. One possible solution is, instead of entering them as
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITEM A B C etc]
to enter them as
[[:en:ITEM A B C etc|ITEM A B C etc]]
For example, I believe [[:en:Canada|Canada]] will point at the English wikipedia version of the article on Canada from any wikipedia (French, German, chiTumbuka).
Hopefully using the wikipedia-style link above will prevent the automatic replacement from happening. Additionally, you might want to include some kind of notice to readers that the link they're about to follow contains English text (in case they don't read English).
Regards,
Steve
What I wonder here is this, what is the motivation for linking to English articles for every single internal link?
Wikipedia practice - on all existing Wikipedias - is to link to the local version of an article, even if it doesn't exist yet.
The reason for this is that somebody who clicks on the link will be invited to write an article, rather than be forwarded to an English article.
Right now, I think an outsider would go "this Wikipedia isn't in chiTumbuka, it is almost completely in English", rather, the intention is to make it obvious that those pages don't exist and invite people to create them which is currently not what happens.
Mark
On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 17:52:39 -0500, Stephen Forrest stephen.forrest@gmail.com wrote:
Hello Dinette,
On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 18:49:55 +0200, Mamma Mia dinnette@softhome.net wrote:
...and Gerard, the links in the articles entered in the form: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITEM A B C etc] keep on disappearing. We can't have an articles to all the relevant links in Tumbuka (not within a short time, anyway) hence the references to the English relevant entries. What could be causing that, someone deliberately changing them or does the system change links automatically to the form [[ITEM A B C etc]]?
I'm not sure I understand you. Are you saying that links entered in the chiTumbuka wikipedia, in the form [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITEM A B C etc], are being rewritten somehow as [[ITEM A B C etc]]?
If that's happening automatically, that's a problem. One possible solution is, instead of entering them as
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITEM A B C etc]
to enter them as
[[:en:ITEM A B C etc|ITEM A B C etc]]
For example, I believe [[:en:Canada|Canada]] will point at the English wikipedia version of the article on Canada from any wikipedia (French, German, chiTumbuka).
Hopefully using the wikipedia-style link above will prevent the automatic replacement from happening. Additionally, you might want to include some kind of notice to readers that the link they're about to follow contains English text (in case they don't read English).
Regards,
Steve
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
I had actually intended to send that email to Gerard privately and guess where it ended? In fact am glad it ended here because now I have received more advice than I would have received from Gerard alone.
Mark, I do get you, and you'll have noticed that I actually said that with time I hope most relevant articles will have been translated into chiTumbuka but that takes time and in the meantime it's a way of helping the reader get more information, albeit in English. The current 'depth' of the articles in chiTumbuka is such that a reader with limited knowledge of English should find the article detailed enough for information purposes but at the same time give those that understand English an opportunity to learn more about the items mentioned in the article. This is what I have seen in English articles - the articles themselves are complete, cross-linking just helps you get more information on an item mentioned in that article.
At the moment only my husband and I have contributed articles and we are both in full-time employment and that puts a limit to what we can do but I am selling the idea to friends and I am optimistic that in time we should have a 'semi-self sufficient' wikipedia. Normally you don't get that much participation on most e-fora this time of the year as people are too busy getting ready for the holidays.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Williamson" node.ue@gmail.com To: "Stephen Forrest" stephen.forrest@gmail.com; wikipedia-l@wikimedia.org Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2004 2:24 AM Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Wikipedia email
What I wonder here is this, what is the motivation for linking to English articles for every single internal link?
Wikipedia practice - on all existing Wikipedias - is to link to the local version of an article, even if it doesn't exist yet.
The reason for this is that somebody who clicks on the link will be invited to write an article, rather than be forwarded to an English article.
Right now, I think an outsider would go "this Wikipedia isn't in chiTumbuka, it is almost completely in English", rather, the intention is to make it obvious that those pages don't exist and invite people to create them which is currently not what happens.
Mark
Hi Dinnette,
I understand what you are saying and as you and your husband speak Tumbuka and I do not, I will leave the matter to you.
However I think I should note, it's OK to write short articles that say "Zimbabwe is a country in southern Africa, located to the east of ______ and the west of ________. It has a population of _____________, and its capital is ___________.", these are called "stubs" and their purpose is to give at least basic information on the topic in the native language until somebody has time to expand them into full articles.
Mark
On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 08:04:30 +0200, Mamma Mia dinnette@softhome.net wrote:
I had actually intended to send that email to Gerard privately and guess where it ended? In fact am glad it ended here because now I have received more advice than I would have received from Gerard alone.
Mark, I do get you, and you'll have noticed that I actually said that with time I hope most relevant articles will have been translated into chiTumbuka but that takes time and in the meantime it's a way of helping the reader get more information, albeit in English. The current 'depth' of the articles in chiTumbuka is such that a reader with limited knowledge of English should find the article detailed enough for information purposes but at the same time give those that understand English an opportunity to learn more about the items mentioned in the article. This is what I have seen in English articles - the articles themselves are complete, cross-linking just helps you get more information on an item mentioned in that article.
At the moment only my husband and I have contributed articles and we are both in full-time employment and that puts a limit to what we can do but I am selling the idea to friends and I am optimistic that in time we should have a 'semi-self sufficient' wikipedia. Normally you don't get that much participation on most e-fora this time of the year as people are too busy getting ready for the holidays.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Williamson" node.ue@gmail.com To: "Stephen Forrest" stephen.forrest@gmail.com; wikipedia-l@wikimedia.org Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2004 2:24 AM Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Wikipedia email
What I wonder here is this, what is the motivation for linking to English articles for every single internal link?
Wikipedia practice - on all existing Wikipedias - is to link to the local version of an article, even if it doesn't exist yet.
The reason for this is that somebody who clicks on the link will be invited to write an article, rather than be forwarded to an English article.
Right now, I think an outsider would go "this Wikipedia isn't in chiTumbuka, it is almost completely in English", rather, the intention is to make it obvious that those pages don't exist and invite people to create them which is currently not what happens.
Mark
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Mamma Mia wrote:
I had actually intended to send that email to Gerard privately and guess where it ended?
Umm... I guess that means that the mail address Gerard set in his preferences is wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org This seems to me to be a Bad Idea. When someone mails privately they really should be able to expect that it will not be delivered directly to a public mailing list
--sannse
Mamma Mia wrote:
I had actually intended to send that email to Gerard privately and guess where it ended?
Umm... I guess that means that the mail address Gerard set in his preferences is wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org This seems to me to be a Bad Idea. When someone mails privately they really should be able to expect that it will not be delivered directly to a public mailing list
My misunderstanding - this wasn't a private mail via the Wikipedia mailing system I'm told. sorry
--sannse
sannse wrote:
Mamma Mia wrote:
I had actually intended to send that email to Gerard privately and guess where it ended?
Umm... I guess that means that the mail address Gerard set in his preferences is wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org This seems to me to be a Bad Idea. When someone mails privately they really should be able to expect that it will not be delivered directly to a public mailing list
--sannse
Hoi, I just checked my preferences on tum:wikipedia and I can confirm that they are as expected. It is exactly the same e-mail adress that this mail is comming from. Yes, having an e-mail adress with wikipedia-l@wikimedia.org is a bad idea. :)
Thanks, GerardM
wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org