I think we finally have a complete copy from December 2007 through
August 2011 of the pageview stats scrounged from various sources, now
available on our dumps server.
See http://dumps.wikimedia.org/other/pagecounts-raw/
Ariel
Hi,
I think developer accounts on the Wikimedia SVN repository should be
easier to get. I say this because a consultant of ours at WikiWorks,
Ike Hecht, asked for a developer account last week and was rejected.
He created his first major MediaWiki extension, Ad Manager, recently,
which I added to the repository a few weeks ago - you can see it here:
http://svn.wikimedia.org/viewvc/mediawiki/trunk/extensions/AdManager/
When he requested access, this was the relevant part of the response
from Sumana:
"Right now, we are not approving your request for commit access. I'm
sorry. We'd like for you to get more practice writing code for
MediaWiki, submit patches for review via Bugzilla attachments, and ask
us for comments... Please come back and request access again in a few
months."
I don't know whether this is WMF policy now, or a personal decision
from Sumana, or a decision made by someone else, but in any case I
don't understand it. It seems to me that there are two valid reasons
for not simply allowing everyone to get a developer account: the
first, and major, reason is to prevent malicious users from
vandalizing or deleting code. The second is to prevent
well-intentioned but incompetent developers from checking in buggy
and/or badly-written code that requires lots of fixes and review time
by the reviewers. In both cases, the person's presence in SVN would
cause more harm than good.
Neither of those cases apply here - the Ad Manager code was
well-written, and it works. If you're curious, you can see for
yourself the kinds of fixes and changes that were made to the code
after it was checked in - all minor stuff, the only major thing being
that the extension originally included support for MediaWiki 1.15,
which people thought was unnecessary. Clearly a higher bar is being
applied here than what's spelled out in the mediawiki.org
documentation - which only says that "we don't have time to train
programmers from scratch":
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Commit_access#Prerequisites
Note, by the way, that if there's a more stringent policy in place
now, it's not being applied consistently, because the students in this
year's Google Summer of Code got developer access after much less
proof of programming ability.
It seems to me that if someone writes an extension that basically
matches the MediaWiki guidelines, works, and does something useful,
they should pretty much be granted automatic access to an account,
because they will have proved that their presence will be a net
positive overall. Any thoughts on this?
And out of curiosity - is there a new policy in place?
-Yaron
--
WikiWorks · MediaWiki Consulting · http://wikiworks.com
In the search box, I get suggestions on the fly as I type, and I'm
often impressed by the good suggestions. However, right now at Wiktionary
I get suggestions that aren't the best ones for the given prefix.
For example, at en.wiktionary.org if I type "lagru" it doesn't
suggest"lagrum", but instead a bunch of inflected and derived
forms:
lagrumshänvisning
lagrums
lagrumshänvisnings
lagrummets
lagrummen
lagrummet
lagrumshänvisningars
lagrumshänvisningar
lagrumshänvisningarnas
lagrumshänvisningarna
Since these are Swedish entries in the English Wiktionary,
none of these pages get much traffic. Are the completion
suggestions based on traffic stats? In this case, link
count might be a better predictor for best suggestion,
since all derived forms link back to the basic form.
Not much traffic: 5 page views in 30 days,
http://stats.grok.se/en.d/latest/lagrum
--
Lars Aronsson (lars(a)aronsson.se)
Aronsson Datateknik - http://aronsson.se
Just to remind you:
* India hackathon (18–20 November, Mumbai, India) — Alolita Sharma,
Siebrand Mazeland, Sumana Harihareswara and the local India team are
preparing for this event, which will focus on language, mobile and
offline support for MediaWiki content. You can register to request a
free invitation; approximately 100-125 attendees are expected.
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/India_Hackathon_2011
* Brighton hackathon (19–20 November, Brighton, England) — Free
registration is open for the general MediaWiki hackathon planned by
Lewis Cawte. You can register online. WMF engineers Antoine Musso, Roan
Kattouw, and Sam Reed plan to attend.
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Brighton_Hackathon_2011
--
Sumana Harihareswara
Volunteer Development Coordinator
Wikimedia Foundation
> "Carl (CBM)" <cbm.wikipedia at gmail.com> writes:
>
> > On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 12:15 PM, Mark A. Hershberger
> > <mhershberger at wikimedia.org> wrote:
> >> Posted this issue at <http://hexm.de/8m>.
> >
> > The above link is to :
> >
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28proposals%29#Does_Wi…
>
> As of this morning, I count 21 "support" and 25 "oppose".
>
> Part of the opposition was how I phrased it. Wikipedia obviously
> doesn't "need" a share button.
>
> I also didn't make it clear that I didn't think we should or would use
> any one else's "share" button since that would allow them to track their
> users through Wikipedia. As a result, I didn't count the one opposition
> that seemed primarily concerned with the tracking issue.
>
> Someone pointed to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:TheDJ/Sharebox and
> I tried it out, but it only worked after disabling the Firefox extension
> that I use to stop trackers. I'm glad TheDJ has made this available for
> those that want to use it, but I would like to get something else in
> place that doesn't share data with any intermediaries (such as
> AddThis.com) beyond the place that the user actually wants to share
> the page.
>
> Mark.
Making a share this link box is really trivial. There are several
implementations on different wikis (I wrote one at enwikinews -
http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Template:Social_bookmarks . Commons used
to have one with stockphoto.js. Not sure if they still use it, several
other wikis do their own thing) The issue has always been if people
actually want it, which I believe is one of those discussions that
comes up over and over again on enwikipedia.
-bawolff
On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 11:47 AM, Siebrand Mazeland (WMF) <
smazeland(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
> Today the localisation team has had its first development showcase,
> something we hope to repeat every two weeks. Outside of three of our
> team members, one invitee was present (Robin Pepermans). A recording
> of the WebEx session is available at
> https://translatewiki.net/static/showcase/. Unfortunately it is not
> very easy (better: extremely difficult) to convert this into an open
> format, so you need a WebEx recording player to view it.
>
I've recorded it as a screencast and converted to Ogg Theora+Vorbis:
http://leuksman.com/misc/temp-vids/Localisation-team-showcase.ogv (149mb)
I was going to upload it to Commons or mediawiki.org, but it's over 100M so
the web upload form won't work. We really need that fixed. :)
-- brion
The Apple Lossless Audio Codec has been released under Apache license 2.0:
http://alac.macosforge.org/trac/wiki
Something to add to the Commons file format portfolio? Do we support
FLAC already?
