Lars said:
The best I know is
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Help:Side_by_side_image_view_for_proofreading
Thanks Lars - that's what I needed! (was just curious what it did without having to read the source - google was no help).
Rob said:
To be honest; the licencing is the least of our worries; a lot of the documentation on Meta is, for want of a nicer term, a bit crap; it's out of date, full of thousands of little fixes for individual configu\rations, or just plain wrong.
I agree - the doc on meta could be much improved. Unfortunately, until more is migrated (cleanly or otherwise) to mediawiki.org, meta will still dominate the search results - perpetuating the perception that it's an authoritative source.
I don't have a solution for this short of a massive doc move effort or putting annoyance text on every page asking "Hey there, before you edit consider if this should be on MediaWiki.org instead".
-- Jim
On 4/20/07, Rob Church robchur@gmail.com wrote:
On 20/04/07, Tim Starling tstarling@wikimedia.org wrote:
Someone decided that most of mediawiki.org should be public domain
instead
of GFDL, thereby making any large scale movement of text from meta
impossible.
To be honest; the licencing is the least of our worries; a lot of the documentation on Meta is, for want of a nicer term, a bit crap; it's out of date, full of thousands of little fixes for individual configurations, or just plain wrong.
If we're going to have documentation on MediaWiki.org, then we might as well have decent documentation.
Rob Church
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l