The CVS at sourceforge for MWDumper has been down for a quite a
while. Does anyone know where I can get a copy of the source code or
who I might ask for a copy?
--
_______________________________________________
Surf the Web in a faster, safer and easier way:
Download Opera 9 at http://www.opera.com
Powered by Outblaze
i am waiting for new Dumps ? What happend to the dump-batch ? When will it
be started ?
--
[[:de:Benutzer:Flacus]][[:de:Benutzer:FlaBot]]
http://tools.wikimedia.de/~flacus/IWLC/
An automated run of parserTests.php showed the following failures:
Running test TODO: Table security: embedded pipes (http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2006-April/034637.html)... FAILED!
Running test TODO: Link containing double-single-quotes '' (bug 4598)... FAILED!
Running test TODO: Template with thumb image (with link in description)... FAILED!
Running test Template infinite loop... FAILED!
Running test TODO: message transform: <noinclude> in transcluded template (bug 4926)... FAILED!
Running test TODO: message transform: <onlyinclude> in transcluded template (bug 4926)... FAILED!
Running test BUG 1887, part 2: A <math> with a thumbnail- math enabled... FAILED!
Running test TODO: HTML bullet list, unclosed tags (bug 5497)... FAILED!
Running test TODO: HTML ordered list, unclosed tags (bug 5497)... FAILED!
Running test TODO: HTML nested bullet list, open tags (bug 5497)... FAILED!
Running test TODO: HTML nested ordered list, open tags (bug 5497)... FAILED!
Running test TODO: Parsing optional HTML elements (Bug 6171)... FAILED!
Running test TODO: Inline HTML vs wiki block nesting... FAILED!
Running test TODO: Mixing markup for italics and bold... FAILED!
Running test TODO: 5 quotes, code coverage +1 line... FAILED!
Running test TODO: HTML Hex character encoding.... FAILED!
Running test TODO: dt/dd/dl test... FAILED!
Passed 412 of 429 tests (96.04%) FAILED!
Hi,
Is there a document somewhere that explains how the page, text, and revision tables are used to keep track of articles? I found the schema and that explains a lot as for field use, but I still don't understand what's happening under the hood.
Mike
--
_______________________________________________
Surf the Web in a faster, safer and easier way:
Download Opera 9 at http://www.opera.com
Powered by Outblaze
I want to combine two mediawikis. In both are existing images.
How could this be done?
Just copy the images from one directory to the other ?
+ SQL-Export/import wikidb.images
I've no idea. who can help?
thx. heinzJ
An automated run of parserTests.php showed the following failures:
Running test TODO: Table security: embedded pipes (http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2006-April/034637.html)... FAILED!
Running test TODO: Link containing double-single-quotes '' (bug 4598)... FAILED!
Running test TODO: Template with thumb image (with link in description)... FAILED!
Running test Template infinite loop... FAILED!
Running test TODO: message transform: <noinclude> in transcluded template (bug 4926)... FAILED!
Running test TODO: message transform: <onlyinclude> in transcluded template (bug 4926)... FAILED!
Running test BUG 1887, part 2: A <math> with a thumbnail- math enabled... FAILED!
Running test TODO: HTML bullet list, unclosed tags (bug 5497)... FAILED!
Running test TODO: HTML ordered list, unclosed tags (bug 5497)... FAILED!
Running test TODO: HTML nested bullet list, open tags (bug 5497)... FAILED!
Running test TODO: HTML nested ordered list, open tags (bug 5497)... FAILED!
Running test TODO: Parsing optional HTML elements (Bug 6171)... FAILED!
Running test TODO: Inline HTML vs wiki block nesting... FAILED!
Running test TODO: Mixing markup for italics and bold... FAILED!
Running test TODO: 5 quotes, code coverage +1 line... FAILED!
Running test TODO: HTML Hex character encoding.... FAILED!
Running test TODO: dt/dd/dl test... FAILED!
Passed 412 of 429 tests (96.04%) FAILED!
I've implemented an extension to the [[MediaWiki:Bad image list]] feature.
You can now specify a list of exceptions, i.e. articles where the image is
allowed to be displayed inline. The typical format is:
* [[:Image:Penis.jpg]] except on [[Penis]]
The text "except on" is ignored, it is not special. Only the links are relevant.
I've documented the format at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Bad_image_list
-- Tim Starling
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Birgitte SB <birgitte_sb(a)yahoo.com>
Date: 23-Sep-2006 16:38
Subject: [Foundation-l] Does anyone else think bugzilla is a complete failure
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <foundation-l(a)wikimedia.org>
The subject line pretty much sums this note up. I am
frustrated with the continued lack of development
support for anything where the propents are not
actually developers themselves. I have aware for
sometime that asking for anything without uploading a
"patch" is absolutely useless. So I accepted people
that don't know what a patch is are just screwed. But
I have recently realized many of developments which
have never happened *did* have attachments (which I
think are "patches"). The bugzilla system really must
be broken. Because how can these things just be
ignored for so long? Here is the bug which had the
most effort invested in it from WS.
http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4375
This feature was so desired by people Wikisource a
show of support by 15 separte languages was
orchestrated hoping it would have some effect.
http://wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:Vote_on_enabling_the_ProtectSection_e…
This was back in January. Nothing ever happened. The
underlying problem this feature would solve will now
hopefully be able to be addressed by "Stable version".
At least I hope "stable versions" will be workable.
But the last email about how de.WP wants a much more
complicated system for this worries me.
There are other technical issues that have projects on
WS at a standstill.
http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=189http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5881
I ask people online. Bugs are filed. Nothing
happens. I do not want to make the effort to get all
sub-domains to show support for these new features
when it will have no effect. I realize that the
developers are volunteers and are able to chose what
interests them and where they would like to work. But
they do not even give any feedback or even tell us
they will not help us and we should learn to live
without it. We just wait month upon month hoping it
is on someone's to-do list somewhere. It is beyond
frustrating. Has anyone else experienced these
problems?
Birgitte SB
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
G'day All,
There's a link suggesting tool I'm temporarily putting out there for you all to have a play with and to give feedback and comments
on.
What it does is it takes an article of your choosing from the English Wikipedia, and suggests bits of text in that article that
could potentially be linked. You can then accept or reject those individual suggestions, and then save your changes back to the
Wikipedia.
It tries to do this in a reasonably pleasant UI, where you see the list of suggestions, and then simply select "yes", "no", or
"don't know" for each suggestion, and click "Preview with Added Links".
Quick overview of the UI:
* On the landing page, you type the name of the article that you want to see links for. It should appear in the list as you type
(this bit uses suggestion searching).
* Press enter or click the relevant link, then wait for up to 10 seconds for it to fetch the current version and suggest links, and
then you'll be presented with a list of possible links that you can make.
* To go through the list, you can either use the mouse, or you can use the keyboard.
* For the keyboard, the keys are: Up arrow, Down arrow, "y" for yes, "n" for no, and "s" or "d" for skip/don't know.
* "Yes" adds the link, "no" doesn't, and "don't know" doesn't add the link either; but "Don't know" will make the exact same link
suggestion in future, whereas "yes" and "no" bring closure in that the same suggestion will no longer be made for that page in
future.
* If you don't make any choice for a suggestion, that's treated the same as choosing "don't know".
* Each suggestion has a link that opens in a new tab/window, so if you want to determine whether something is an appropriate link or
not, you can just click its link.
If you want to play with it now, it's at: http://can-we-link-it.nickj.org/
Some caveats to be aware of:
* Currently only works for the English Wikipedia. Although I haven't tried it yet, conceptually similar languages like French should
probably work (i.e. Left-to-Right, spaces between words to separate out ideas [no or quite limited compound words], general use same
characters in both article text and article names for the same idea, etc). No idea if this can be made to work for languages which
differ substantially from this.
* This site will disappear in a few days. It's just a temporary experiment to see what happens, and is currently running on a
development box which has other duties to perform.
* Super-alpha status. It may blow up, eat your homework, key your vehicle, trash your favourite article, etc.
* The tool will work much better if you have JavaScript turned on, and the front page won't work at all if you have JavaScript
turned off.
* It's SLOOOW (e.g. might take 7 seconds to generate suggestions for a 32 Kb page). It doesn't inherently have to be slow, but it is
currently - partially because it's behind a DSL link, but mostly because it's not very efficient currently. I'd rather put out an
early version though with some rough edges and slowness than wait until getting something perfect (which I may never get around to
doing).
* Currently the suggested links will include links to disambiguation pages. Shouldn't really do this (i.e. disambig pages should
ideally be excluded from the results).
* Saving suggestions back to the Wikipedia is a less than optimal process. Currently it goes to an intermediate page, which saves
the user's choices to a local database, and then uses a JavaScript form submission to transfer the user to a preview on the
Wikipedia with links added; ideally this intermediate step could be skipped. Also it would be nicer to go to "Show Changes" rather
than show a preview, but that's not possible currently because Show Changes is protected by an edit token, so you'll have to
manually click the "Show Changes" button if you want to see a highlight of what's been changed (a request that this be changed has
been logged as bug #7369).
* Someone reported that they saw the "null edit summary" detector complain at them when using this; Not sure why this happens, as
there is a default edit summary supplied.
Other things:
* It has "learning from its mistakes" functionality, in that a suggestion which is regularly rejected will no longer be suggested.
The current cut-offs are that a suggestion must be rejected at least 5 times, and also rejected 50% or more of the time; once this
threshold has been crossed the suggestion will no longer be made. Thus, the bad cruft should hopefully be progressively filtered out
as the tool is used more, and what remains should hopefully be mostly useful.
* There are some hidden switches, which you can add to the URL that shows the link suggestions, if you want to fiddle with stuff:
** The first is to add "&exhaustive" to the end of the URL, in which case it will stop trying to be smarter about suggesting links
based on grammatical structure (e.g. by excluding single word links), and will be exhaustive about showing you the links it finds.
This will result in roughly 4 times as many links being found.
** The second switch is that you can specify the number of characters to include in the "context" before and after the suggested
link. The default is 60 characters, but you can set this to anything between 0 and 100 characters inclusive, such as by adding
"&context=20" to the URL for 20 characters of context.
** Lastly you can specify to just check the wiki syntax. It performs some very simplistic checks on the wiki syntax automatically,
that are all about balance (e.g. checks number of [[ equals number of ]] and so forth), and if an article's syntax looks invalid
then it'll tell you what's wrong, but deliberately won't give you the link suggestions until you've fixed the syntax on the
Wikipedia :-) However, if you don't want link suggestions, and only want syntax checking, then tack "&onlyCheckSyntax" onto the
URL.
I also want to give a big thank you to Julien Lemoine for writing his Suggestion Search daemon / server, which this tool uses (or
rather, abuses) in a rather cruel way to determine what's a valid article name and what's not :-) Also the front page uses a
modified version of his web form to help you find the right page that you want to suggest links for.
All the best,
Nick.
An automated run of parserTests.php showed the following failures:
Running test TODO: Table security: embedded pipes (http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2006-April/034637.html)... FAILED!
Running test TODO: Link containing double-single-quotes '' (bug 4598)... FAILED!
Running test TODO: Template with thumb image (with link in description)... FAILED!
Running test Template infinite loop... FAILED!
Running test TODO: message transform: <noinclude> in transcluded template (bug 4926)... FAILED!
Running test TODO: message transform: <onlyinclude> in transcluded template (bug 4926)... FAILED!
Running test BUG 1887, part 2: A <math> with a thumbnail- math enabled... FAILED!
Running test TODO: HTML bullet list, unclosed tags (bug 5497)... FAILED!
Running test TODO: HTML ordered list, unclosed tags (bug 5497)... FAILED!
Running test TODO: HTML nested bullet list, open tags (bug 5497)... FAILED!
Running test TODO: HTML nested ordered list, open tags (bug 5497)... FAILED!
Running test TODO: Parsing optional HTML elements (Bug 6171)... FAILED!
Running test TODO: Inline HTML vs wiki block nesting... FAILED!
Running test TODO: Mixing markup for italics and bold... FAILED!
Running test TODO: 5 quotes, code coverage +1 line... FAILED!
Running test TODO: HTML Hex character encoding.... FAILED!
Running test TODO: dt/dd/dl test... FAILED!
Passed 412 of 429 tests (96.04%) FAILED!