Wikitech-l April 2005

wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org

130 participants
178 discussions

mailing list for users with robots
by Pavol Cupka 01 May '05

01 May '05

Hello, I would like to suggest making a mailing list for users running robots. Would this be possible? Something like wikibots-l or similar. Thank you in advance. -- Palica http://sk.wikipedia.org/User:Palica Nezabudni si vziať svoje Wikamíny. / Don't forget to take your Wikamins today. - Palica http://sk.wikipedia.org - slobodná encyklopédia, ktorú môže každý upravovať - AJ TY

6 9

Board elections : organisation team
by Anthere 30 Apr '05

30 Apr '05

Hello The organisation team will be Danny Britty Datrio BjarteSorensen We will also be helped by Tim Starling on the technical side. Bjarte will be able to assist/control the technical settings. Two candidates were not kept (I explain below why, nothing personal), and Danny suggested that we add to the team Britty, which I thought was a very good idea. Upon asking, she accepted. Why did we keep these names ? (and not others...) First, I thought a team of 3-4 was a good idea. More would be harder to organise. Danny was already the organiser last year, so will bring the weight of knowledge on top of his own abilities. All people kept have been active for several months at least, so know community dynamics. All people kept are both active on meta AND on irc, which unable vivid and immediate discussions. People chosen represent 4 continents, several languages and several projects. We hope that this will further stimulate the idea the project is international and all languages should get involved on meta issues. Britty represents the female touch and her involvement in translation issues will be most appreciated. Bjarte is a rather newcomer in the meta team (good to avoid formation of cabal...and renew blood). Datrio is very involved in wikinews (and should keep the team aware all projects are involved :-)). Here we are ! The new team has already escaped in #wikimedia-conclave so I can not tell you more. We will keep them informed of the last basic requirements soon. If there is an opposition to one of those, please explain why now or keep your words within you forever ;-) Anthere __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

2 1

Re: [Wikitech-l] Re: Rollback failed <- What is this?
by Daniel Mayer 30 Apr '05

30 Apr '05

--- Pete/Pcb21 <pete_pcb21_wpmail(a)pcbartlett.com> wrote: > My setup: > 1) I accept cookies and don't delete them so I am almost never logged > out of Wikipedia. > 2) Firefox 1.0.x on WinXP. > 3) *Possibly* it seems to happen more when I make a whole series of > edits in quick succession, but this could be coincidence. Same setup I had. I don't remember this ever happening on my Linux box at home. And this also happened while I was on RC patrol when I opened a whole bunch of rollbacks in new tabs only to discover that almost all failed (one can't click the back button to get to the rollback link again at that point). -- mav __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

1 0

Rollback failed <- What is this?
by Daniel Mayer 30 Apr '05

30 Apr '05

Rollback failed >From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. There seems to be a problem with your login session; this action has been canceled as a precaution against session hijacking. Please hit "back" and reload the page you came from, then try again. -------- This is very annoying. Why did it happen? There isn't a throttle on edits, is there? -- mav __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

4 3

Article counter
by Alfio Puglisi 29 Apr '05

29 Apr '05

Hi folks, is there any way to retrieve the # of articles in a wikipedia language with a GET request or something similar? I know, one can edit an article and put {{NUMBEROFARTICLES}} there, make a preview, and save the value, but it's kinda overkill to automate all that just to get a number. Is there a simple way to access that number? Thanks, Alfio

3 2

REL1_5 Special:Listusers -- proposal to implement a decay time, after which the Logged-In display is no longer shown
by Thomas Gries 29 Apr '05

29 Apr '05

"Xyz (Logged in)" ... for example on the http://test.leuksman.com This "(Logged in)" as such makes sense, but not, when it only means "user has not yet logged-out" I propose to add a "decay time" let's say in the range of hours, and when this time has elapsed without the user coming back, the >>display status<< (Logged in) is dropped in Special:Listusers. Of course, this shall not mean, that the cookies for "login across sessions" are invalidated. T.

2 1

Re: [Wikitech-l] privacy policy
by Daniel Mayer 29 Apr '05

29 Apr '05

--- Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com> wrote: > I agree that the privacy policy is there for all users, anonymous or > not. WE do not log what people read. We leave that to our respective > governments.if they care to. My question is what the added value is to > adding more cruft to each and every article people read? What is the > added value? I do not think that adding all kinds of everything to every > page is a good idea. I prefer a clean crisp look. I prefer that all > relevant information is readily available from apropriate pages like a > help page, a user portal.. The point is that many sites *do* track where specific IPs do on their sites. We need to tell readers that we don't do that - that we respect their privacy. -- mav __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

5 5

Re: [MediaWiki-CVS] phase3/includes Parser.php, 1.424, 1.425
by Rowan Collins 29 Apr '05

29 Apr '05

On 25/04/05, Tim Starling <timstarling(a)users.sourceforge.net> wrote: > Modified Files: > Parser.php > Log Message: > Cleared $wgLinkHolders after they are used. This fixes bug 1770 and probably improves performance too. This change has the unfortunate side-effect that one can no longer replace the link holders from just one part of the page, as this will cause all the link targets to be effectively thrown away (with some rather amusing effects). The only place I know that does this is the hack to make links within image captions not disappear. This is very hacky at the moment anyway, as it uses the $wgParser global from Linker.php, but I'm just about done rewriting that code such that that part (i.e. the parsing part) will be in Parser.php anyway. Would it be ugly to add a parameter to switch off this clearing out, so that that approach could still be used? -- Rowan Collins BSc [IMSoP]

2 4

open and free
by Anthere 29 Apr '05

29 Apr '05

Hello On wikipedia [[free content]], there is the following paragraph : Free content licenses differ from open content licenses in that they require a "source" copy of the content to be provided. For example, a free content publisher should make the source document (f.ex. InDesign or word-processor file) available along with a PDF, which in this case would be considered the "object" copy of the creative work. Some free content licenses have stronger requirements. For example, the GNU Free Documentation License not only requires that a "source" copy of the content is provided, but that the source copy should be in an "transparent" format, i.e., in an open format whose specification is freely available to everybody. It is my feeling that the following point stating that free content licenses differ from open content licenses for the reason free content licenses require a "source" copy of the content, while open content license do not require such a "source" copy ... is making me feel very unconfortable. Actually, I thought that open content meant that precisely the "source" of the content had to be provided, made available for public scrutiny and to ensure somehow a sort of transparency. In other words, I thought that an open source stuff, for example code, was basically mostly about saying "hey, this is how I wrote the software, this is the code used to make that stuff work, just check it !) While I thought free content was related to using the content, reusing it, redistributing it and if desired, modifying it (which requires the source to be available). I removed the sentence of the text as I found it not only very confusing, but strictly speaking wrong in terms of making a difference between what is free and what is open. To be fair, reading the whole articles on the matter is a real mess, because of such confusing sentences. Perhaps you developers can make sense of it and accept that several definitions are given to the same terms and that conflicting definitions just results in giving contradicting differences between 2 terms, but to be fair, these articles are so confused that they are not far from being useless. I have been wondering if the problem was not in the definition of the term "source". Can anyone explain to me what is "source" ???? I tried to discuss it in the article page and I was basically shut down (sort of "I am right, you are wrong, this article is perfect and you are the only one with this crazy idea so get out of here - I exaggerate... but the content is back in, and I still do not get it). Now, I could obviously just put my hat on all this and consider that "WHO CARES ABOUT OPEN AND FREE AFTER ALL !" The problem is that I am spending all my free time on a "free and open" stuff, and am now wondering if I am working for what I think I am. And when I present wikipedia, maybe I just say crap entirely on the topic. Consequently, if some of you could look at the free content article, I would be delighted. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_content

7 8

single quote character in italic and bold
by Ivan Vighetto 29 Apr '05

29 Apr '05

There's a way to have single quote character slanted (italic) using only wiki-sintax? If I write something as ''A'A'' the "A" charatecters appear slanted, the quote character (') appears as normal test. If I write something as '''A'A''' all characters appear bold (as expected). If I write something as '''''A'A''''' all characters appear bold and slanted, the quote character (') appears bold, not slanted.

3 2

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

Wikitech-l April 2005