Max Semenik wrote:
A month ago, PageImages extension was black-deployed,
intended to
automatically associate images with articles.
I looked at <https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:PageImages> and I'm
still having difficulty understanding this extension's purpose. Is there a
related bug or request for comment (RFC) for this?
select count(*), avg(page_len) from page where
page_namespace=0 and
page_is_redirect=0 and page_touched < '20121229000000';
+----------+---------------+
| count(*) | avg(page_len) |
+----------+---------------+
| 977568 | 3172.0948 |
+----------+---------------+
1 row in set (5 min 59.55 sec)
select count(*) from page where page_namespace=0 and page_is_redirect=1
and page_touched < '20120101000000';
+----------+
| count(*) |
+----------+
| 16 |
+----------+
1 row in set (26.61 sec)
I ran a script in December 2012 on the English Wikipedia that updated the
page_touched date of every redirect in NS:0 (and a few other namespaces, I
believe) where the page_touched date was not like '2012%'. I'd considered
running the same script on non-redirects. It turns out that if you take
the stored wikitext of pages and echo (post) it back at the wiki via the
edit action a few million times, you can discover some interesting bugs.
Thus, I would like to populate this data with a
script[3]. To reduce
the scare, let me remark that these pages have almost no templates and
are significantly smaller than average: 3172 bytes vs. 5673 so they
should be mostly fast to parse.
I don't think there's any reason to be scared here.
MZMcBride