I've been having problems trying to upload an image tonight. I select
the file to be loaded, enter the description, tick the copyright
clearance box and click "upload", and I get:
Upload file
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Successful upload
File "" uploaded successfully. Please follow this link:
(Image:Uk2pnd2002-S.jpg) to the description page and fill in information
about the file, such as where it came from, when it was created and by
whom, and anything else you may know about it.
i.e. it knows what I wanted to call it, but didn't apply the filename to
the actual image. If I follow the link it asks me to, I get:
Image:Uk2pnd2002-S.jpg
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
UK £2 coin, 2002 - Scottish variation - own scan
Image history
Legend: (cur) = this is the current image, (del) = delete this old
version, (rev) = revert to this old version.
Click on date to see image uploaded on that date.
(del) (cur) . . Arwel Parry (23504 bytes) (UK £2 coin, 2002 - Scottish
variation - own scan)
Image links
The following pages link to this image:
British coin Two Pounds
As you can see, there's no date on the detail line for me to click on to
see the image! Any ideas what's happening?
--
Arwel Parry
http://www.cartref.demon.co.uk/
Log pages are a pain. They quickly get too long to load comfortably, so
people end up manually editing them to archive the information, but
attributions of edits are lost when the next automatic edit overwrites
it.
They can't be programmatically resorted or filtered very easily. And
the upload log makes Special:Unusedimages rather hit-and-miss by
linking to every uploaded file...
-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
InnoDB: Database page corruption on disk or a failed
InnoDB: file read of page 1289395.
InnoDB: You may have to recover from a backup.
031205 7:15:02 InnoDB: Page dump in ascii and hex (16384 bytes):
len 16384; hex
d40044c50013acb30013acb10013acb400000006f5bb4a7745bf00000000000000000000
00000002380500070
[snip some dumped data showing various snippets of wiki pages]
93.170.250.70]] 11:06,.t.e.0....Jw;InnoDB: End of page dump
031205 7:15:02 InnoDB: Page checksum 1585856272, prior-to-4.0.14-form
checksum 2519793357
InnoDB: stored checksum 3556787397, prior-to-4.0.14-form stored
checksum 2519793357
InnoDB: Page lsn 6 4122692215, low 4 bytes of lsn at page end 4122692215
InnoDB: Page may be an update undo log page
InnoDB: Page may be an index page where index id is 0 47
InnoDB: and table enwiki/cur index cur_id
InnoDB: Database page corruption on disk or a failed
InnoDB: file read of page 1289395.
InnoDB: You may have to recover from a backup.
InnoDB: It is also possible that your operating
InnoDB: system has corrupted its own file cache
InnoDB: and rebooting your computer removes the
InnoDB: error.
InnoDB: If the corrupt page is an index page
InnoDB: you can also try to fix the corruption
InnoDB: by dumping, dropping, and reimporting
InnoDB: the corrupt table. You can use CHECK
InnoDB: TABLE to scan your table for corruption.
InnoDB: Look also at section 6.1 of
InnoDB: http://www.innodb.com/ibman.html about
InnoDB: forcing recovery.
InnoDB: Ending processing because of a corrupt database page.
It tried to restart itself several times with the same error, then gave
up. A manual restart of mysql got it back on its feet, at least
mostly...?
-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
from here it seemed index corruption on ja, and after that en started to
crawl, then choked.
developers required i guess.
just mumbling to myself.
grin
[Snip wiki markup versus HTML example]
>Also, our own wiki markup gives us a better chance of producing the
/correct/ HTML -- which in this case is <em>, not <i> at all. ^_^
-- Toby
Another reason for preferring the more compact and simpler wiki markup
whenever possible is that HTML might not always be our target format for
display. E.g. I wrote a very simplistic Wiki markup to PDF script,
announced here
http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2003-December/008768.html.
(It currently chucks more-or-less everything inside HTML tags as there
don't appear to be any HTML->TeX converters around that support anything
beyond HTML 2.0)
Pete / User:Pcb21
Hi Jimbo, or whoever can help me on this,
I was just having a look on the wikimedia donation page, and found out,
that we need 10000 to 20000 USD per year... (posted on 6.Oct.03 by
Eloquence:
http://meta.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Wikimedia_Fundraising_page&old…
)
I tried to find the discussion about it on the mailinglist. Can some one
please tell me where I find more infos on this numbers or where they
come from?
Would be interresting to know, how much we will (probably) spend in 2004 on:
- bandwith
- HW
- People (server admin - is this a real plan, or just an idea?)
- Domain registrations
- ...
Thanks a lot,
Fantasy :-)
Stan wrote:
>Syntaxwise, I like [[meta:name:value]], with a general inclination
>to create new names that are recognized specially, so I can say
>[[category:person]] or even [[cat:person]] to be really brief, since
>nearly all articles will have one or more category tags.
"meta:" is already used as an interwiki link syntax to get to Meta-Wikimedia.
However a metadata:namepace would be a great place to put category tags and
inter-language links. For example [[metadata:United Kingdom]] would be where
all the category tags and language links for [[United Kingdom]] would go.
As it is, all these metadata are (or will be in the case of category tags)
placed in the article itself resulting in cluttered harder to edit wiki text.
It might also be easier to do relations between articles and even make it
possible to place interlanguage links in once and have all the corresponding
metadata pages on other language wikis update at the same time.
Just brainstorming....
-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)
> Google is how people get _to_ Wikipedia and does a
> good job at it; as
> an internal navigation mechanism it's wholly
> unsatisfactory for
> contributors who need to be able to check the
> current state of things
> in detail.
secunded wholeheartedly
sometimes it takes many days for google to index a
page. If you look for it, and do not exactly remember
the title, you are doomed.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/
So, are there any high-profile bugs that need to be squashed before
doing another stable release?
~ESP
--
Evan Prodromou <evan(a)wikitravel.org>
Wikitravel - http://www.wikitravel.org/
The free, complete, up-to-date and reliable world-wide travel guide
I've just made "the switch" to a Power Mac G5, which is of course Unix
"underneath". I'm interested in trying to get wikipedia running
locally on this machine, for my own study.
How hard will that be? Has anyone tried it, or, barring that, does
anyone have experience with OS X (10.3)?
--Jimbo