Hi,
I'm trying to set up an intranet using the wikipedia software. Everything seems set up and configured properly, but I can only access the main page - when I follow any link, I get the main page again. It's as if the arguments to the page are not being passed in, though I suppose there could be other causes. None of the logs show anything particularly weird (though the wiki log claims "We're confused" and that there's some caching trouble).
Anyone done this and know more about setting this up than I do?
Thanks,
Aaron Oppenheimer
aoppenheimer(a)dcontinuum.com
> when these kind of important and critical changes are made
> by people from the other side of the Ocean, without consulting the
> hardworking people on this side of the Atlantic, people can
> become very upset. I can't feel anything of a community-feeling in
this way of acting.
> Jeroen (Dutch Wikipedian)
Jeroen, I don't think many Wikipedians work harder than Brion. Not to
mention his cooperativeness.
Drastic problems call for drastic (temporary) measures till a better
solution can be applied.
I for one don't feel there is an 'us and them' issue at all. Of course
it helps that my biological clock for some mysterious reason is tuned to
EST most of the time (and that my boss is very understanding).
Erik Zachte (also Dutch Wikipedian)
Kurt Jansson wrote:
> Don't know about others, but I have never used the
links to the users'
> talks pages on recent changes. I think they are
useless, because you
> won't go there before seeing the diff. I'd be happy
about a rc without
> the links to users' talk pages, because they only
clutter up the page.
> Do others find them useful?
As someone who likes welcoming the newbies, I find
these links very useful. Since sysops can no query the
datebase, this is the only way of finding new users. A
red link to a user talk page shows that there is a
user who has not yet been welcomed.
Angela.
__________________________________________________
Yahoo! Plus - For a better Internet experience
http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/yplus/yoffer.html
In the dev branch I've dumped the big array in Interwiki.php in favor of
a table in the database; memcached is used to avoid hitting the database
all the time.
I've also switched the order of checks in link parsing so that local
namespaces are checked before interwikis. Among other things this should
avoid the annoying problem we had briefly on Wiktionary where the
'Wiktionary' interwiki prefix was overriding the 'Wiktionary' namespace,
making it impossible to link to such pages.
Further testing and tweaks on that part are likely useful.
Updated code running on http://test.wikipedia.org/
-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
Hi Guys, I'm sure some of you remember me from the early days. Sadly 'real life' has kicked in and I really don't have time for the 'pedia anymore. I miss it a lot.
I do however have a business proposition to throw out into the ring. I am interested in getting an estimate of the cost of porting something equivalent to the Phase III 'pedia into the DotNetNuke (DNN) framework. (In $US or Euros please.)
Some of you may remember that I am professionally involved in meta-data management, and I believe that the combination of the best of DNN with the functionality of Wikipedia might be an ideal solution to the challenges of corporate meta-data management, particularly as DNN is making serious inroads into the corporate intranet world.
I am not interested in a "pure" clone of the current Wikipedia software, the most notable change would be the introduction of user classes including "reader", "limited scope editor" (able to edit pages within a custom-defined subject area), "global editor" (similar to the standard user of the 'pedia now), and "admin (just like the 'pedian admin, rights to delete, rename pages, etc). All user classes would be able to edit in the Talk: namespace. The Wiki Namespace would need to be renamed (as it's not going to really be a Wiki anymore).
If you're interested, send me a private email, although feel free to discuss the general notion of the idea on the list if you desire. If your estimate runs into the $000's then it's out of my budget (I have no financial backing for this and I'm funding it out of my own pocket).
However, by posting to this list I acknowledge that I am throwing the idea into the public domain, so feel free to investigate it on your own. (If you end up making a million dollars off of my idea, I'm going to expect a REALLY nice dinner at a VERY fancy restaurant some time.)
Best regards to all of the old faces, and a big hello to the new ones.
Manning Bartlett
PS - I'm flying all over the world at the moment for work and so my responses to your email might be erratic. My apologies in advance.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brion Vibber [mailto:vibber@aludra.usc.edu]
> Sent: 21 August 2003 03:10
>
> I'm sorry if that's not enough to keep a high-traffic site in peak
> condition 24 hours a day seven days a week. I wish it were, and I hope
> that you and others will help to make it so in the future by
> pitching in
> with development and maintenance work and money for server upgrades.
>
Any news from an account for wikimedia ? Can we give now some money to improve server or replace server ?
Hi,
This is unworkable. I understand the reason why a part of the search
function is removed, but I find it very annoying and it gives many
wikipedians a real headache.
1. When you have made a new article, you want to find more possible pages
for links to that article. That's one of the whole wiki-experience.
2. When you want to make a new article, you want to search if there are no
paragraphs somewhere similar to your new article.
3. Sometimes there are synomyms of the same thing. You can solve this with a
redirect. Yes absolutely, but you have to find those possible redirects and
if you can't find them, people will write double articles.
4. Normal (read-only) users of the Wikipedia want to find simple things.
Eg.: Search for 'Purple Rain' on the dutch wikipedia. No results. Normally
it should point you to the Prince article.
Every site, with a minimum of a a few pages should have a search system and
when the sites are as large as the Wikipedia sites, it should have an
advanced search.
I remember how I discovered Wikipedia. I was installing a few Mozilla
searchengines (mycroft) and found one for Wikipedia. I tried it, but to my
suprise I came on a google search. So I lost interest. Later the
search-engine was back and I became totally obsessed by the Wikipedia.
The last point I want to make is: I can understand that decisions of
upgrades of sotware and hardware are made by the sysops on location, but
when these kind of important and critical changes are made by people from
the other side of the Ocean, without consulting the hardworking people on
this side of the Atlantic, people can become very upset. I can't feel
anything of a community-feeling in this way of acting.
Cheers,
Jeroen (Dutch Wikipedian)
Message: 10
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003 22:31:56 +0000 (UTC)
From: Walter Vermeir <walter(a)wikipedia.be>
Subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: mailman :-(
To: wikitech-l(a)wikipedia.org
Message-ID: <bhu8gs$d9$1(a)sea.gmane.org>
Jason Richey <jasonr(a)bomis.com> wrote in
news:20030818165236.E22575@joey.bomis.com:
[cut]
> So, the old templates are available like this:
> >
http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/[listname]/oldtemplates/
> > Jason Richey
Ok, thanks. I will modify them for the new version and
inform the list
admins. Can take some days.
-------
thanks Jason
anthere
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
I agree with Anthere and Luc, sometimes, I get a page in half a seconde, sometimes in 2 minutes !
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Anthere [mailto:anthere6@yahoo.com]
> Sent: 20 August 2003 13:09
> To: wikitech-l(a)Wikipedia.org
> Subject: [Wikitech-l] Slow, very slow, very very slow, much too slow
>
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2003 00:08:41 +0200
> From: Luc Van Oostenryck
> <luc.vanoostenryck(a)easynet.be>
> Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] fr.wikipedia.org almost dead
> To: A mailing list for discussing about the technical
> organization of
> the Wikipedias <wikitech-l(a)Wikipedia.org>
> Message-ID: <3F429FE9.7070502(a)easynet.be>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii;
> format=flowed
>
> Luc Van Oostenryck wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > since a few days the french wikipedia was sensibly
> slower than
> normal,
> > but now he is almost dead : it take minutes to view
> a pages or the
> > request timeout.
> > > Is there any particular reason for this?
> > > Looxix
> > Of course just a few instant after that I sent the
> mail,
> the french pedia 'react' again normally.
>
> Sorry for the disturbance.
>
> Looxix
>
> ------
>
> I rejoin Luc
>
> In the past three days, the french wiki has quite
> frequently some times when it comes to an halt
>
> Yesterday, it has been nearly dead for half an hour
> Basically, it has now been stuck for half an hour
>
> I don't know what the other international notice, but
> I do know it is bad, very bad
>
> There is no way we can make promotion in that
> situation. That would be suicidal. Where is the
> problem ? Is someone launching many queries these
> days ? Do we need to disconnect further stuff ? Some
> of the special pages ? Or what ?
>
> This is very serious
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
> http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l(a)Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>