As wikipedia is slow at the busy time, I propose to get some new servers for our cluster.
- Some new web servers(3 or 4), P4 2,8Ghz with 2Go of RAM
- A server which could be a backup for nfs server, zwinger, with bigger disk, 80Go is very low, maybe 200 or 250Go
- Upgrading disk of zwinger to 200 or 250Go (or add a new one)
- A db server in 64 bits mode with 4Go of RAM (if we cant make working geoffrin), like this one :
With raid 10 disk system, 4 or 6 drives in raid and 1 stand-by. I prefer 15000rpm disk, but I can understand that they are more expensive
- Maybe another squid server
What do you think of that ?
Firstly, I'm disappointed Erik chose to characterise my stated
motivation as "false pretenses", as if I had some kind of bias towards
Klingon and I deliberately tried to mislead the list. I mistakenly
created Klingon, I did not try to pull a swiftie on the Wikimedia
community. I hope that Erik's choice of words was in error.
Jimbo issued one statement against Klingon and one statement in favour
of Klingon. His opinion was thus sufficiently ambiguous that my pretext
was removed. However he later clarified his position by withdrawing his
initial statement -- both on wikitech-l and on #wikipedia. I would have
been happy to re-enable the wiki as soon as he did this, however he
asked me to wait for the discussion to pan out.
The compromise agreed to by Erik and Timwi is to allow the Klingon
Wikipedia, but to avoid interlanguage links. Accordingly, I have
commented out the Klingon entry in $wgLanguageNames. This means that
markup of the form [[tlh:wIqIpe'DIya]] will create an external link
rather than an interlanguage link, just like links to meta or sep11.
Otherwise the wiki is fully functional.
-- Tim Starling
In de: we have a lot of articles on graph theory missing example images. Graphs
are also useful in other articles to visualize information. Editing images of
graphs with your favorite program and format is a consumption of time and nobody
can easily alter my images. We do have <math> and <hiero>-section. I'd like
editable graphs with <graph>...</graph>.
We could easily use the DOT-syntax and
to create PNG-images or SVG. It's damn powerful and not that complicated!
EasyTimeline by Erik Zachte is an extension for creating graphical
timelines with clickable links. WikiHiero by Guillaume 'Aoineko' Blanchard
is for rendering hieroglyphs. Both are now enabled on all Wikimedia wikis.
As per our earlier extension syntax vote, EasyTimeline uses the <timeline>
syntax, WikiHiero uses the <hiero> syntax.
You can read more about them here:
To my knowledge, MediaWiki is the only wiki software which supports such
functionality. It should make our wikis interesting even in the highest
Although EasyTimeline can generate SVG output, only PNG output is
currently supported. In the future, we hope to offer SVG as a user
I suggest two immediate changes to the category content display:
1) That, when a category contains less than 200 pages (arbitrary number),
we use a vertical display rather than a horizontal one, i.e.
In the long term we'll want neat things like paging, splitting by letter
etc. And of course the most requested feature is showing all categories
and articles in subcategories on a single page (tree-view), but I won't
code that one.
2) That the sorting criteria are actually used as the page title in the
category display, so that [[Category:Albert Einstein|Einstein, Albert]] is
rendered as such. It should be possible to override this, maybe using the
syntax [[Category:Albert Einstein|:Einstein, Albert]].
"Tim Starling" <ts4294967296(a)hotmail.com> schrieb:
> The compromise agreed to by Erik and Timwi is to allow the Klingon
> Wikipedia, but to avoid interlanguage links. Accordingly, I have
> commented out the Klingon entry in $wgLanguageNames. This means that
> markup of the form [[tlh:wIqIpe'DIya]] will create an external link
> rather than an interlanguage link, just like links to meta or sep11.
> Otherwise the wiki is fully functional.
I find this a rather disappointing compromise. Either we consider this
a valid Wikipedia, and then I would like to use it as such. Or we
consider this not a valid Wikipedia, and then I have to wonder why
we put it on Wikimedia in the first place. Can I get my own Wiki here
too? I really get the feeling that the compromise is worse than either
of the alternatives it is compromising between.
And I also want to reiterate that if we would find Klingon not worthy
of a Wikipedia, then this should be doubly so for Tokipona.
"Jay Bowks" <jjbowks(a)adam.cheshire.net> schrieb:
> The Ethnologue lists
> Esperanto, Europanto, and Interlingua.
> It further mentions that Interlingua is
> a language of France...
> It also claims that Esperanto is a language
> of France, and that it has "200 to 2,000 people who
> speak it as first language". If so it would be a
> natural and non-artificial language for them
> wouldn't it, those French native speakers of
> Esperanto.... Highly irregular!
As strange as it may sound, it is not fully nonsense. As
I understand, our own contributor and Steward Arno Lagrange
grew up in a family where Esperanto was the language spoken
at home, and thus can be considered a native speaker of the
It seems that as a by-product of being a bureaucrat on English
Wiktionary, I'm starting to be asked technical questions about the
operations of the new other language Wiktionaries. These are well beyond
Ronline from the Romanian Wiktionary has pointed out that the
((NUMBEROFARTICLES)) function on that Main Page gives only the number
"-1". That also seems to be the case in several other new Wiktionaries.
While checking this I also noticed that the list of all articles by
title in same projects also comes up blank.
Perhaps someone more capable might look at this.
I've played around with the /User:xyz/monobook.css feature today. It's
incredibly cool. Not just because I can customise the look of the site
for myself, but also because it's pretty damn flexible.
However, almost all formatting for infoboxes like the taxoboxes and
article series boxes (ignoring for a second the question whether we
still want them, with the categorisation system in place now) is in the
markup for those tables themselves.
It should instead be in a Wikipedia-global CSS file.
So my idea would be to have a [[Wikipedia:monobook-global.css]] or
something like that, which contains the CSS for these boxes, and which
is also wiki-editable, so as to allow users (or at least sysops) to
define new classes for new kinds of elements as they are invented.
(a) we can keep the styling out of the table mark-up
(b) users can customise these things with the same flexibility as
While we're at it, please could someone casually add a class="..."
attribute to the table row in the TOC that contains the words "Table of
Contents"? Thanks ;-)