Also, checkusers in Russian Wikipedia abused the 'checkuser' rights
(for example linked to me unrelated edits from open proxy with
marasmic vandalism -- create marasmic attackpages-like topic on
«Request for Administrators» about Kalan, obviously with a view to
Kalan thought that I was a degenerat-pederast); who can I write about
this? Ombudsmans on Meta?
Such decisions are very bad name in the wikiprojects.
Ferrer.
I'm using Chrome 3.0.195.21, and have long found that some characters
in Wikipedia render as boxes. One example:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P_with_stroke renders as "<box>
(minuscule: <box>)..."
Now, I looked at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Special_characters
and the advice is not very useful or specific: it says that "Special
symbols should display properly without further configuration with ...
Safari and most other recent browsers." I tried installing Gnu Unifont
and setting it as the default browser font, but that seems to be
overridden by MediaWiki anyway?
So anyway, I'm asking two questions:
1) What can I do to get more special characters to render correctly in Chrome?
2) Could/would anyone improve [[Help:Special characters]] to make it
clearer, more specific and correct?
Thanks,
Steve
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 8:38 AM, Happy-melon <happy-melon(a)live.com> wrote:
> The 10% drove people off cliffs because it is, pretty much by definition,
> the horrible unexpected behaviour that is a *consequence* of not having a
> formal definition. Writing a formal definition is not impossible if you
> require that it be sensible at the final reading. The parser is, in many
> places, *not* sensible, and naturally those quirks are difficult to
> describe, but they're also undesirable overall. A true move to a formal
> language definition involves action from both ends: writing a formal
> definition that follows the current parser in general, *and* being prepared
> to alter the parser to remove some of the more egregious deviations from
> expected behaviour.
I just wanted to state for the record that when we were talking about
this last time, the developers (Brion included) were actually quite
open to the idea of the semantics of wikitext changing if they weren't
widely used. In other words, it was ok to build a new parser which was
incompatible with the old parser, as long as that didn't break too
much existing wikitext ("too much" being in the order of 1 or 2% of
articles).
Another comment:
>The problem is the ambiguity with italics, (''italics''). So the
>current parser doesn't really make its final decision on what should
>be bold or what should be italic until it hits a newline. If there are
>an even number of both bold and italics then it assumes it interpreted
>the line correctly.
...
>I think this is part of what makes wikitext undescribable in a formal
>grammar.
Yeah, but from memory, using ANTLR's formal-grammar-breaking features,
this wasn't a massive problem. A small, annoying one, to be sure, but
not a killer. It does tend to mean potentially a lot of back-tracking
though, which is slow...
Steve
Updates are coming back for LocalisationUpdate and ProofreadPage
extensions, which we tested then pulled Tuesday due to performance problems.
Roan's redone LU to store the message updates in serialized files
instead of the database, which we can sync locally to web servers and
should perform much better; I'll also do a more gradual test rollout so
we can scale it back more gracefully if we have problems again.
ThomasV has fixed up some bad queries in ProofreadPage, and it should be
ready to go again; the updated version has much more advanced index
support and looks pretty spiffy. :)
And if we've got time between other things, I'll roll out the updated
Collection as well -- this makes big improvements to the UI for building
a multi-page book, and leaves the sidebar much less cluttered when
you're not using it.
-- brion
Hello everyone.
I want to propose changing {{SITENAME}} in jawp. But I don't know how
to, and who can do it. Editing some pages, requesting to server
administrators or anything... Please teach me what I have to.
Thank you.
----
[[w:ja:User:mizusumashi]]
Please authorize my post
-----Original Message-----
From: "Bryan Tong Minh" [bryan.tongminh(a)gmail.com]
Date: 09/22/2009 01:00 PM
To: "Wikimedia developers" <wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] Working towards branching MediaWiki 1.16
Note: Original message sent as attachment
------------------------------------------------------------
Click for a wide selection of quality scales.
Scale
http://tagline.excite.com/fc/FgElN1gvzpYARt38nb7h2GmUy7t9KUGqHRDg9eHNXdoPkJ…
Quick note for those who have been asking — we’re starting to maintain a
list of feature & extension deployments that we’re rolling out in the
very near future and their status on the Wikitech wiki:
http://wikitech.wikimedia.org/view/DeploymentList
Note that some things like the English Wikipedia FlaggedRevs deployment
aren’t on there yet; we’ll start prepping something for these in the
next round in a couple weeks.
-- brion
Hello!
I noticed at sr.wikipedia there is an option "Variant" under
"Internationalization" at the preferences. How is that different from
the 'sr', 'sr-ec' and 'sr-el' which are shown at "Language" option
(also under "Internationalization")?
I'm interested in this because there are some differences between
"Brazilian Portuguese" ('pt-br') and "Portuguese of Portugal" ('pt')
which usually cause troubles for the admins at the Portuguese
projects, who needs to warn the users not to change the wording of the
texts from one variant to another (this usually happens, mainly from
anonymous contributions), because some differences between the
variants seems to be [at a first glance] a typo, and they want to
"correct" it...
So, I would like to know if there is currently any feature which could
help us to avoid the problem of having a divided community of users
('pt' x 'pt-br') "fighting" with each other ad infinitum... (and to
avoid proposals like that [1] of a new "Brazilian Wikipedia", which
IMHO will not have any good result, and is not the better way of
solving the problem...)
I found [http://strategy.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Proposal_talk%3AA_Brazilian…
a comment] about the existence of "on-the-fly translation" for some
languages (Chinese and Serbian), but I don't know how it works, and if
it solves or improve the situation.
And before this I was also thinking of use (a possible enhanced
version of) a procedure like this: considering that currently it is
possible to show a system message using {{int:MESSAGE}} in the
wikitext in a way that the result changes according to the user's
language, would it be possible to create new messages at "MediaWiki:"
Namespace just for defining language variants of words which usually
appears at the content of the projects? For example, would it be
possible to create "MediaWiki:WORD/pt-br" and "MediaWiki:WORD/pt", and
use them (with {{int:WORD}}) instead of the actual word variant in
wikitext? This isn't likely to be the better solution, but it could be
a first step towards a solution...
Any thoughts on how could Portuguese community improve the situation
at pt.* projects?
(is there any other list I should ask about this?)
Helder
[1] http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposal:A_Brazilian_Portuguese_Wikipedia