I recently set up a MediaWiki (http://server.bluewatersys.com/w90n740/)
and I need to extra the content from it and convert it into LaTeX
syntax for printed documentation. I have googled for a suitable OSS
solution but nothing was apparent.
I would prefer a script written in Python, but any recommendations
would be very welcome.
Do you know of anything suitable?
I have just joined, I am from mumbai, india. I would like to get the
articles translated in marathi, my mother tongue. Looking at the effort
and no of volunteers, this will not be usable in any reasonable amount
That has made me think of alternatives - machine translation. A state
funded institute has a software available but I don't have access to it
Pl. comment about this approach. Has this been tried for any other
Thanks & regards,
Yahoo! India Matrimony: Find your life partner online
Go to: http://yahoo.shaadi.com/india-matrimony
in the past few days the following problem occurred in a local mediawiki
installation: When opening an article for edit, everything seems in order.
Showing the preview also works and the change applied to the article is shown.
But when trying to submit, one gets the other-user-edits-conflict-warning and
in the preview field there is the old unchanged version. This happens with
every article (as far as tested) independently whether that respective article
being edited by someone else or not.
Writing a new article works, trying to edit it just afterwards leads to the
Already did a rebuildall which took all night (2500 articles), but the problem
remains the same. Is that something known and what am I missing here?
Dear WikiTech ML,
I'd like to ask wiki programmers a wiki-software
improvment. Since now if we have two words that means
the same we have to write the article for one of them
and redirect to that article the other:
ex. States or US or USA redirect to United States of
That force wiki writers to create tons of boring
redirects (one by one) both for:
1) real redirects (diffrent way to say the same thing)
ex. Soia cheese redirect to Tofu
2) synonyms (different word to means the same thing)
ex. Gauffres and Waffles
3) most likely errors (wrong words whose meaning is
ex. State for States.
That means that "equivalent expressions", synonyms,
errors have to be handled in the same way.
I suggest it would be easy and more effective to have:
A) REDIRECT tag
B) SYNONYMS list to be writed at the very end of the
C) a (I suppose it's the right name) Fuzzy System that
grab the correct meaning from your typing errors -
like Google "Maybe you're looking for..."
That will help those who write, those who search and
those who write again using correct synonyms. The
lasts can link to an existing article the most easy
ex. If I write an article "Waffle" with an active
Synonyms list with "Gauffre", you can write your
article using [[Gauffre]] insted of
writing [[Gauffre]] in your article
writing #REDIRECT [[Waffle]]
and doing the same for plural form.
Plus, in most language you have to handle singular and
plural form of feminin, neutrum or masculin genus of
ex. I'm writing an Italian article for Beignets. I
have to write redirect for:
Choux (al correct forms for the same thing).
Plus singular forms
That is to say 7 redirect... that can be a simple
active list at the end of the main article.
A fuzzy system wiil help to work out bigne e bigne'
for those who shearch and don't know what accented e
is to be used or if the wiki system will accept
Hoping it will be possible,
Gent. WikiTech ML,
Vorrei chiedere ai programmatori del software wiki una
miglioria. Ora come ora se abbiamo due parole che
significano la stessa cosa dobbiamo scrivere il nostro
articolo per una delle due e fare un redirect dalla
seconda verso la prima:
ex. States o US o USA reindirizzano verso Stati Uniti
Questo obbliga a creare tonnellate di noiosissimi
redirect (uno per uno) per:
1) reindirizzamenti reali, cioè espressioni
lignuistiche diverse che significano la medesima cosa
ex. Formaggio di Soia reindirizza su Tofu
2) Sinonimi, cioè parole diverse, ugualmente corrette,
che indicano lo stesso oggetto
ex. Gauffres e Waffles
3) Errori comuni, cioè parole errate il cui
significato è comunque intuibile
ex. State al posto di States per indicare gli USA
Ciò significa che espressioni equivalenti, sinonimi e
errori comuni di battitura vanno trattati nello stesso
Suggerisco che sarebbe più facile e produttivo avere:
A) il tag REDIRECT
B) i SINONIMI gestiti come lista da inserire alla fine
di ogni articolo
C) un sistema Fuzzy (spero che il nome sia giusto) che
intuisca il significato inteso anche dagli errori, sul
tipo di quello di Google "Forse stavi cercando..."
Questo aiuterebbe chi scrive, chi effettua una ricerca
e chi scrive dopo il "primo" articolo di un dato
argomento a scrivere e linkare con maggior facilità
ex. se scrivo un articolo "Waffle" (è un tipo di
dolce) e posso inserire un sinonimo attivo alla fine
dell'articolo come "Gauffres", tu puoi scrivere il tuo
articolo linkando tanto [[Waffle]] quanto [[Gauffre]]
ed arrivare all'articolo principale, invece di:
scrivere [[Gauffre]] nel tuo articolo
Scrivere #REDIRECT [[Waffle]]
Fare lo stesso per eventuali altri sinonimi e per
tutti i plurali
Inoltre in molte lingue si deve tenere conto non solo
delle forme singolari e plurali, ma anche dei generi
femminile, maschile e neutro...
ex. Sto scrivendo un articolo sui Beignets. Dovrei
scrivere un redirect per:
Choux (tutte forme ugualmente accreditate della
Inoltre dovrei inserire anche le forme singolari,
7 redirect che potrebbero benissimo essere una lista
alla fine dello stesso articolo principale. Un sistema
Fuzzy aiuterebbe a gestire le voci bigne e bigne' per
quelli che, cercando, non sapessero se il sistema
accetta gli accenti, o quale e accentata usare.
Sperando che questo sia possibile,
I migliori saluti,
Yahoo! Mail: gratis 1GB per i messaggi e allegati da 10MB
User Assarbe (Ain_xaitan(a)yahoo.es) says:
I have left a proposal for a new wikipedia in murcian (a language spoken by more than 300.000 persons) in the south-east of Spain, between the castilian and catalan) two weeks ago.I have already got the support of more than 6 persons. I am sure more people will be interested.
Well, now I want to know wich is the next step to do. Can I do thing something more at the moment?
Please, help me :)
Comprueba qué es nuevo, aquí
There's been some questions recently about public backup dumps (or the
lack thereof). I've been working for the last few days on getting the
dump generation infrastructure up and running in a more consistent,
Here's what's currently on my plate and the status thereof:
* Title corrections: some of the databases contain invalid page titles
left over from old bugs. This can sometimes break the import or export
process, so I'm writing a fixup script to find and rename them.
STATUS: Finding done, fixing to come.
Should be done with this later today.
* Dump filtering/processing: currently the dump has to run twice to
produce the current-only and all-revisions dump files. I'm working on a
postprocessing tool which will be able to split these two from a single
runthrough, as well as produce a filtered dump with the talk and user
Producing the split versions from one run should also mean that the dump
can run without having replication stopped the whole time.
It can also produce SQL for importing a dump directly into a database in
either 1.4 or 1.5 schema, for those using software based on the old
database layout. (We probably won't be hosting such files on our server
but you can run the program locally to filter XML-to-MySQL.)
STATUS: Mostly done. Some more testing and actually hooking up multiple
simultaneous outputs remains.
Should be done tonight or tomorrow.
* Progress and error reporting: The old backup script was a hacky shell
script with no error detection or recovery, requireing manually stopping
replication on a database server and reconfiguring the wiki cluster for
the duration. If something went awry, maybe nobody noticed... the
hackiness of this is a large part of why we've never just let it run
automatically on a cronjob.
I want to rework this for better automation and to provide useful
indications of what it's doing, where it's up to, and if something went
STATUS: Not yet started. Hope to have done tomorrow or Friday.
* Clean up download.wikimedia.org further, make use of status files left
by the updated backup runner script.
STATUS: Not yet started. (Doesn't have to be up before the backup starts.)
-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
I'd like to add a spell checker to MediaWiki using the pspell library.
is part of php and it uses libaspell.) It doesn't help that I'm new to the
MediaWiki code base and PHP isn't exactly my favorite language. (I wouldn't
even call it my _third_ favorite.) Anyway, I'd like to get a little feedback
and advice on where to go from here.
I know a few people have proposed working on spell check before:
But, as best I can tell no one has gone anywhere. Does anyone know what
happened to User:Archivist's spellchecker?
Right now I have a proof-of-concept running on my computer. You can see it
It is a SpecialPage that reads the article from the database, spell checks
lets the user choose the words from the drop-down box, and then sends a
FauxRequest to EditPage. Eventually I'd like to add it to EditPage, but I
started out with a special page so that I did not have to deal with the
complexity of EditPage.
Here's how I'd like the final version to work:
# There's a button at the bottom of an EditPage beside 'Show Perview' and
Changes' labeled 'Spell Check'.
# When the user clicks 'Spell Check', they get a preview of their edit where
misspelled words are replaced with drop-down boxes.
# The user changes the words they think are mispelled to one of the
or leaves it as is. When they click 'Show Preview', they go back to the
A few questions:
Do I not need to deal with multi-byte character functions like mb_substr
all the languages use utf-8?
Should the user spell check a preview or the wikitext?
If a word is misspelled in several places, should the user be asked once for
the word or should the user be asked everytime the word appears?
I've searched on the meta-wiki and googled for the last two days, but
I can't seem to manage to be able to create a wiki-user from an
My questions are:
1) I'm using the following code to generate the wiki password (as far
as I can tell it's identical as in the wiki source [1.5]).
$wiki_password = md5($wiki_user_id . "-" . md5($_POST['password1']) );
2) the table user_rights. Setting the correspondent id to 'user' or
'sysop' doesn't solve the problem either. The right value for this is
just "user" is it not?
3) Right now, in the user table, I'm setting user_id, user_name,
user_real_name, user_password, and user_email. Do I need to set
user_options as well? Any others?
Any help much appreciated,
I received an e-mail from Dwayne Bailey, coordinator of
translate.org.za (free software localisation group for South African
languages), in which he showed interest in the idea of assisting with
MediaWiki localisation in South African languages.
He also suggested using Pootle, about which you can find more at
There have been a couple of mails on this list I believe about
encouraging localisation somewhat independently of projects, so that
for example a Ladino interface translation could be completed without
the existance of a Ladino Wikipedia or other Wikimedia project. Of
course, this is already possible, but it's unlikely to happen. Within
that framework, it could become a prelaunch condition for requests for
new language versions of Wikimedia projects, and would also allow for
more collaborative translation rather than the current system where
most system messages are translated by one or two sysops in the
MediaWiki namespace, while regular users look on without the ability
to make corrections.
While the current preferred method of localisation appears to be to
use the MediaWiki namespace, this doesn't work well with the
recently-introduced ability to choose ones' own interface language in
preferences: if I choose on en.wiki to view the interface in, say,
Navajo, or Amharic, or Bengali, nothing shows up because most or all
of the translations for these languages were made in the MediaWiki
While this may not seem like a major concern, I think that there are
more than a few editors on the major language versions who speak that
language as their second language and might prefer to view the user
interface in their native language. This may still not seem like a
major concern because, after all, don't all of the "major languages"
of the world have full translations of language.php? Unfortunately,
this is not the case, and is limited almost completely to the
languages of Europe, with few exceptions. Languages such as Bengali,
Amharic, Telugu, Fulfulde, Armenian, are all major world languages
with millions of speakers (Bengali, for example, is the national
language of Bangladesh, and a regional language of India, two of the
most populous nations on Earth, for both of which English is a
relatively common second language), each of them has a
widely-translated interface in the MediaWiki namespace, but none of
them has a LanguageXX.php file, or if they do, it has few or no system
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Dwayne Bailey <______(a)______.___>
Date: 23-Aug-2005 03:06
Subject: Re: Mediawiki software localisation
To: Mark Williamson <node.ue(a)gmail.com>
This is a great idea, I will investigate how we can translate this. Do
you think you guys would be interested in using Pootle
(http://pootle.wordforge.org) so that other languages can easily