..even though it knows about them. Daniel Brandt explains the problem
here:
http://www.google-watch.org/dying.html
Of course that article is hyperbole, but you can see the problem if you
search for articles on Wikipedia that do not include the word "MediaWiki"
(which occurs on every page), e.g.:
http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Aen.wikipedia.org+-mediawiki
This lists the pages on en.wikipedia.org that are not indexed, presently
255,000 (Google apparently has a list of URLs with no associated content).
That includes dynamic URLs, redirects and other duplicates, but it also
includes many pages that should be indexed. E.g. if I search for the text
of the English article "Potassium", I currently get plenty of mirrors, but
not Wikipedia itself.
I have a few questions, which someone with more Google-Fu than I may be
able to answer:
1) Why exactly doesn't Google index these articles?
2) Is there a way we can make them index them?
3) Is there a clever way to get a list of only the actual articles that
aren't indexed, as opposed to the redirects, edit pages and dupes? That
would help in estimating the scope of the problem.
It also to me makes it clear that we can't just rely on Google to do our
searching for us. It is not just outdated, it is also quite incomplete. We
really need to develop a working search infrastructure. In the meantime,
we might want to add some of our "good mirrors" to the Google search
query.
Regards,
Erik
I've been looking at a way to make Mediawiki (or is it wikimedia?)
effectively create a few namespaces, for a few different departments
within my intranet. Doing this would let us make a few different pages
called something like "faq". At first, I thought namespaces would be
the perfect solution, but now, I'm thinking that doing some kind of
implicit name mangling might be a better solution. What I mean by this
is that if you're on a page called, say, "Foo.Bar.SomePage", and you
link to [[Blah]], I'd perhaps augment the link indexing to first search
for [[Foo.Bar.Blah]], then [[Foo.Blah]], and then finally just plain
[[Blah]]. Something like [[::Blah]] would let you pick names from the
topmost hierarchy.
Have there been any discussions about this before? Any opinions /
pointers would be welcome.
thanks all!
-Nick
Hi all,
I saw the German Wikipedia create WikiProject's "portals" [1] into the
encyclopaedia's namespace (ns=0).
What do you think about create a new namespace just for those pages
(already 103 on de:) ?
I see some benefits:
* allow special settings for this namespace (for example, CSS),
* don't count those page as article,
* no more need of [[category:Portal|Foo]] to put [[Portal Foo]] at
letter 'F' (the new title may be [[Portal:Foo]]),
If no one disagree I'll patch Mediawiki to allow that.
Aoineko
[1] http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kategorie:Portal
Hi all.
Our company wishes to use a wiki to create a user-browsable database of law
regulations, best practices and other accounting material. I tried to read
the GPL but I find it incomprehensible :S
>From what I've read I think I should not use material that must not be
changed so can Laws be published on a wikipedia or is it forbidden ?
Also, am I allowed to display banners on the wiki ?
Thank you for your advice,
Jure
[[de:Benutzer:Joma]] has written a fast search engine for a Wikipedia mirror
which can handle complex search queries. He emphasises that it's meant as a
supplement to an existing SQL database, not a replacement. He is willing to put
the code under GPL if we are interested.
I think this might be useful for us, could one of the German speaking developers
please take a look at
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_Diskussion:Projekte%2C_die_Wikipedia…
and - if we want to give it a try - get in contact with Joma?
Kurt
--
http://leihnetzwerk.de -- Teile Bücher, Videos und CDs mit anderen!
http://wikipedia.de -- Arbeite mit bei der freien Enzyklopädie!
Kurt Jansson, Wiener Str. 7, 10999 Berlin, http://jansson.de
Hi,
upon Jason's request, i set up a wiki for wikispecies.(org|com).
It's using the specieswiki MySQL DB and the document root is
/home/wikipedia/htdocs/species/
Best regards,
JeLuF
Without quite going so far as to request someone set this up for me,
*grin*, I merely note that if there were a mail alias of
info_en(a)wikipedia.org (or similar) which delivered email into an
installation of otrs (or similar, although I played with the demo of
otrs), then I would be able to significantly and quickly reduce my
personal email burden by forwarding emails that I get from people to a
ticket system where others could help me give proper answers.
The problem I have right now is that I get many many requests that are
not private to me, but not quite public either. I generally answer
all these myself. This is a lot of work, and other people exist who
would be glad to help with it. But short of sending the request on to
a public mailing list (not always good), I have no convenient
mechanism to share the burden.
With an otrs system, not open to the public, I could invite specific
peopl who know enough about "the official wikipedia response" to
things to help me out with these emails.
If a first experiment seems to go well, we could publicize the address
on the website, and even set up sub-addresses for specific types of
inquiries.
--Jimbo
--
"La nèfle est un fruit."
- first words of 50,000th article on fr.wikipedia.org
Hello WikiPedia Sysops,
for most of you: good evening ....
my (coming soon as promised) E-MailNotification patch is two-fold:
one part is for general page changes (perhaps only suited for
low-traffic MediaWiki installations, but not for worldwide WikiPedia, or
we have to limit the amount of (mail-) watched pages per user), the
other is for user_talk page changes.
Question to you (Sysops of the big WikiPedias):
=====================================
Please can you send me recent statistical data about the amount of
***User_talk page changes*** per time unit (hour or day) on the big
WikiPedias ?
For user_talk page changes only one E-mail is sent to the owner of that
User_talk page, and not for own edits. This feature could ***perhaps***
be enabled generally or switched on for privileged contributors,
developers and sysops only. But is written above, I am just curious
about this number, if it you can supply me with this.
Tom
Berlin
Hi,
Recently in Wikipedia's help desk another editor and I have asked how
to count one's own and/or another editor's contributions. The answer
given was to reload the page with different count limits and estimate
that way. Somebody mentioned that this would strain the database. I was
wondering if it would be possible to turn the lists in "User contributions"
and "My contributions" into numbered lists? This way people will not strain
the database by reloading those pages with different limits to determine
the number of contributions.
cheers,
ato
PS: I have written a similar note at meta's "MediaWiki feature request
and bug report discussion" page.