2008/2/20, DanTMan <dan_the_man@telus.net>:

<h2><span class="editsection">[<a href="/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Main_Page/Errors&amp;action=edit&amp;section=T-2" title="Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors">edit</a>]</span> <span class="mw-headline">Errors in the summary of <i>Today's featured article</i> on the Main Page</span></h2>

<p><a name="Errors_in_In_the_news" id="Errors_in_In_the_news"></a></p>

<h2><span class="editsection">[<a href="/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Main_Page/Errors&amp;action=edit&amp;section=T-3" title="Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors">edit</a>]</span> <span class="mw-headline">Errors in <i>In the news</i></span></h2>

<ul>
<li>The Wikileaks entry says it is "offline", but this is not true. As our <a href="/wiki/Wikileaks" title="Wikileaks">Wikileaks</a> article says, it is still online at its IP address. --<a href="/wiki/User:Jedravent" title="User:Jedravent">Jedravent</a> (<a href="/wiki/User_talk:Jedravent" title="User talk:Jedravent">talk</a>) 16:51, 19 February 2008 (UTC)</li>

</ul>
<blockquote>I just tried the links. Wikileaks.org is still off-line, but Wikileaks.be (a mirror site?) is accessible. If you think the wrong link has been placed on the <a href="/wiki/Wikileaks" title="Wikileaks">Wikileaks</a> article, please discuss this at <a href="/wiki/Talk:Wikileaks" title="Talk:Wikileaks">Talk:Wikileaks</a>. Thanks. --<a href="/wiki/User:PFHLai" title="User:PFHLai">PFHLai</a> (<a href="/wiki/User_talk:PFHLai" title="User talk:PFHLai">talk</a>) 17:39, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

<dl>
<dd>Still, Wikileaks is not "offline", as it can still be accessed. --<a href="/wiki/User:Jedravent" title="User:Jedravent">Jedravent</a> (<a href="/wiki/User_talk:Jedravent" title="User talk:Jedravent">talk</a>) 18:39, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

<dl>
<dd>I agree, the headline is misleading. Wikileaks is not offline. Their previous primary domain name, wikileaks.org is no longer available by court order. If we are going to keep this, we need to explain the situation without misleading people <a href="/wiki/User:Nil_Einne" title="User:Nil Einne">Nil Einne</a> (<a href="/wiki/User_talk:Nil_Einne" title="User talk:Nil Einne">talk</a>) 20:21, 19 February 2008 (UTC)</dd>

</dl>
</dd>
</dl>
</dd>
</dl>
<dl>
<dd>Wikileaks entry should say "the Wikileaks.org site is unavailable, however the site remains online an can be reached via its mirrors.<a href="/w/index.php?title=User:Thalia42&amp;action=edit" class="new" title="User:Thalia42">Thalia42</a> (<a href="/wiki/User_talk:Thalia42" title="User talk:Thalia42">talk</a>) 20:16, 19 February 2008 (UTC)</dd>

</dl>

<h2>Errors in <i>In the news</i></h2>

<ul>
<li>
The Wikileaks entry says it is "offline", but this is not true. As our <a wtitle="Wikileaks">Wikileaks</a> article says, it is still online at its IP address.<a wtitle="User:Jedravent">Jedravent</a> (<a wtitle="User talk:Jedravent">talk</a>) 16:51, 19 Febuary 2008 (UTC)

</li>
</ul>

<blockquote>
I just tried the links. <a href="http://Wikileaks.org">Wikileaks.org</a> is still off-line, but <a href="http://Wikileaks.be">Wikileaks.be</a> (a mirror site?) is accessible. If you think the wrong link has been placed on the Wikileaks article, please discuss this at Talk:Wikileaks. Thanks. --<a wtitle="User:PFHLai">PFHLai</a> (<a wtitle="User talk:PFHLai>talk</a>) 17:39, 19 February 2008 (UTC)


<blockquote>
Still, Wikileaks is not "offline", as it can still be accessed. --<a wtitle="User:Jedravent">Jedravent</a> (<a wtitle="User talk:Jedravent">talk</a>) 18:39, 19 February 2008 (UTC)


<blockquote>
I agree, the headline is misleading. Wikileaks is not offline. Their previous primary domain name, wikileaks.org is no longer available by court order. If we are going to keep this, we need to explain the situation without misleading people <a wtitle="User:Nil_Einne">Nil Einne</a> (<a wtitle="User talk:Nil_Einne">talk</a>) 20:21, 19 February 2008 (UTC)


</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>

<blockquote>
Wikileaks entry should say "the <a href="http://Wikileaks.org">Wikileaks.org</a> site is unavailable, however the site remains online an can be reached via its mirrors.<a wtitle="User:Thalia42">Thalia42</a> (<a wtitle="User talk:Thalia42">talk</a>) 20:16, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

</blockquote>

I have never said that we'll use native XHTML. I said that Wikitext is too loose, making it difficult to parse and we waste a lot of work hours for it. What I suggest is a XML-based markup because it's less painful and I can prove with you, it can represent anything Wikitext can. We just only add some tags as: <if>, <include>, <value-of> and even <for-each>,... It's sound complicated but it isn't more complicated than Wikitext at all. It's nothing more than Wikitext structures rewritten in XML style. It's good because it's clearer, easier to parse and not too difficult to read.