Talk:Wiki/Archive01

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

update the mediawiki code

Its currently 1.4.14, update to latest (currently 1.6.7) -now on 1.8</s>

...but at the current time we are now on 1.9 (Special:Version) but keeping up with latest MediaWiki code is an ongoing admin task I guess. -- Harry Wood 11:25, 17 October 2007 (BST)

Favicon

Put a favicon on the mediawiki [1]

DONE today : --Rickm 03:21, 18 September 2006 (BST)

Sub pages

Allow sub pages in the main namespace ($wgNamespacesWithSubpages[NS_MAIN] = true;)

DONE - Added by Steve --Dean Earley 10:01, 11 Jul 2006 (UTC)

SVG support

SVG support to the wiki as requested by Frankie It would allow SVG files to be uploaded, and then either pre-rendered by a server-side library, or displayed inline on the page. Details on the MediaWiki support are here:

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/SVG_image_support and
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:%24wgSVGConverters

$wgSpamRegex blocking all divs

The wiki spam regex $wgSpamRegex is set to block any use of <div>s in the wiki. In fact the setting we have at the current time is just: $wgSpamRegex = "/<div/"; (User:TomH tells me)

This gets in the way of various legit div usage. You can get around it. Some people figured out that <di<!-- -->v> works in most cases. However you can even just write <DIV> in upper case to get around it! It's a pain to make people figure this out. e.g. templates which work on wikipedia don't work here, unless you know this trick.

The main thing to block against spamwise is dubious use of the overflow style within divs. May as well just paste in this large example which includes protection against this "CSS hidden spam", as well as several other anti-spam tricks.

Spam isn't a big problem on this wiki (as mentioned above)

-- Harry Wood 10:33, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

This has now been removed. <DIV> can now be used. -- Firefishy 21:37, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

CSS for source code

There's a nice style applied to source code snippeds inside pre tags. But i didn't find a way to combine it with the source tags. Is it possible to set the CSS of the source tags to the same as the pre tags? For example, here i had to set the XML code snippets into divs with CSS attributes to make them appear in that nice gray box. --Florianschmitt 21:31, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Syntax highlighting is done by this wiki extension which we have installed : http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:SyntaxHighlight_GeSHi
I just took a look at the usage examples. I notice the rendered HTML on that site comes out with <pre> tags, which is different to the way it is behaving here. And it is the CSS for <pre> tags which gives the grey dotty box style. So I imagine we might fix this if we were to re-install a later version of the extension (I'm guessing that will cause it to always wrap the code snippet in a pre tag) Might be a better solution than trying to devise a css rule for the current output. -- Harry Wood 20:19, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
You may use de:Code im Wiki darstellen. --Markus 00:21, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
Is there still an issue with the extension? The latest stable version is installed. -- Firefishy 09:52, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
For me it's fine, thanks! (but the documentation, I made it in German, may be somebody may translate it? --Markus 17:18, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

The issue Florian pointed out is that XML source such as the following...

<!-- my comment -->
<xmlroot>
  <myelement myattribute="Hello">World</myelement>
</xmlroot >

...is not getting a grey dotty box around it. This is because our extension is not spitting out a pre tag around the output for some reason. Strangely on mediawiki.org it does. Thought it must be a later version. Hardly a major priority though :-)

-- Harry Wood 13:07, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Fixed, Revision 37495 is known good. -- Firefishy 14:59, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Allow use of images from wikimedia commons

There's a suggested config change over at Talk:Collaboration with Wikipedia#Usage of Wikimedia Commons, which I guess would make sense. Newly available in the v1.13, it allows us to use images from wikimedia commons, and fetches description pages automatically. -- Harry Wood 12:09, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

I support this suggest. --Kolossos 17:47, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
Is there a test implementation so that we can see that itr works? I try it i.e. on Toolserver wiki, without luck. --Kolossos 12:28, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
I support this suggest. --John07 19:14, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
Yes Harry, it promise a lot of simlplification. --Markus 17:21, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
This would be awesome, enable! --Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 12:37, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Do we want to be reliant on Wikimedia Commons? --Firefishy 14:52, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
[[Image:SomeImageOnCommons.jpg]] automagically gets linked, local caching is optional. --Firefishy 14:52, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
If I look on pages like Dresdner_Heide,I would say that it is useful for both projects. There are also images for city-districts[2] on commons which could be interesting for both projects.
Commons is stable enough so that the depency should be no problem. Ok there will be problems if an image will delete on commons (i.e. if the copyrights are not ok), but this also protects OSM against legal problems. And the solution doesn't mean that all images need to be saved on commons.
Commons-example-image: Imageworld-small.png
--Kolossos 18:09, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Ping? --Kolossos 09:09, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
Pong, this needs wider discussion. May I ask you to bring this up for discussion on Talk Mailing List? -- Firefishy 10:04, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Couple of reasons why we might not want this:

  • It means we're reliant on Wikimedia Commons. If those servers are offline or slow, then our wiki is adversely affected
  • It serves to make this wiki look more like wikipedia.
    • This wiki is not wikipedia. Some people seem to expect the same rules to apply and the same super-keenness on, for example, decisions by voting. Anything which makes this seem more like wikipedia might worsen this problem.
    • As a more concrete objection though, we actually have more strict rules (or community acceptance tendencies) regarding copyright free sources of maps/map data. For example wikimedia commons has a map of london boroughs. While it might be useful for us to place this on our wiki for coordinating mapping, we don't do that because we want to encourage people to build borough boundaries data without copying, hence our best equivalent is Image:London-borough-boundaries.png

...just playing devil's advocate though really. I personally don't object strongly to the idea. Then again I don't really see why so many people seem to think it will be wonderfully useful!

-- Harry Wood 12:48, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Things have moved on: Collaboration_with_Wikipedia. Wikipedians are not concerned to work with OSM at least. --Malenki 12:18, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi Harry! we have thousands of pictures in Commons. When we can use it without copying to our Wiki, and without clearing all the copyright-stuff - it will be a very simple way to use more pictures in our Wiki! --Markus 23:09, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi Harry, did you add the code to the localSettings.php? How it works to link pictures from commons? --Markus 00:08, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

No, this has not been enabled. I personally do not like it. How long does it really take to upload a file from Wikicommons and add attribution? 30 seconds? Do we really want to "pollute" our namespace with everything in Wikicommons? I am happy to change my mind if there is a real debate, as requested earlier. -- Firefishy 00:54, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
If the images are to be properly categorized and licensed (sometimes requires version history, author(s) ...) and so on, I guess it takes at least three minutes -- which is 170 seconds too much, as documenting stuff in the wiki has to be as quick and easy as possible to ensure that people actually bother to do it. There is another problem with importing images to our wiki: Finding those images. Images on commons are easy to find, because Wikipedia articles use them, because they are usally well categorized etc. So people likely will not use our wiki to find illustrations, which will probably result in duplicates. Last but not least, images on Commons often have helpful captions in multiple languages, information about time and place of creation etc. Copying this information requires additional effort, and it will not be updated automatically when e.g. the caption is translated to additional languages on Commons. --Tordanik 11:11, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Personally, I really like the idea - it's pretty easy to add and should not cause any performance problems. While I do see possible downsides, I for myself think the positive aspects outweight them. --Avatar 06:55, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

+1 from me. --seav 09:06, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
+1 from me. Would save a lot of work --Malenki 12:18, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Hmmm "pulluting" the wiki namespace, is another downside I hadn't really thought of. What happens when a locally uploaded image has the same name as a remote image? -- Harry Wood 11:05, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

I would appreciate it if someone could test Wikimedia Commons Foreign Repos on a test wiki of theirs. Particular cases: 1) Existing same name in OSM wiki and WM Commons. 2) Upload to OSM wiki with a name that exists on WM Commons. 3) Resolving existing? conflicts. 4) Difficult one, performance impact. 5) Possibility of using a special namespace for the Wikimedia Commons items. WMC:Image:xxx unlikely, but worth a look. 6) Other?. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Reusing_content_outside_Wikimedia#Own_MediaWiki_installation -- Firefishy 12:13, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
First of all: Wikimedia Commons is a shared file repositorium for all, not for Wikipedia/Wikimedia projects alone. IMO it does not make sense to duplicate content it if could be used from Commons. Now your questions:
1. The local file has priority over a file from a shared repo. Always. Same behaviour as in Wikipedia.
2. See 1. At time of upload to OSM wiki this local file will become priority.
3. I do not understand the question. Which conflicts?
4. No performance impact for OSM wiki. And the Commons servers are fast enough to handle the requests of OSM wiki. And they have a lot of space: actual upgraded to 24 TB in total (5 TB used)
5. As far as I know not possible.
You can test the function on http://translatewiki.net , an independent wiki used for localization of MediaWiki, i.e. http://translatewiki.net/wiki/User:Raymond. (to clarify: I am MediaWiki developer, Wikimedia Commons sysop and Translatewiki server admin) Raymond de 15:37, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
Locally-uploaded files always override the Commons files. --seav 05:59, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Please can somebody implement this? Thanks a lot! --Markus 07:00, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

BTW: It's not in "Test" anymore, but already in the stable. So the right version of Mediawiki and PHP is here already. All neccesary is some additional lines in the LocalSettings.php. See http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:$wgForeignFileRepos#Using_files_from_Wikimedia_Commons_:_ForeignAPIRepo ---jha- 12:04, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

ENABLED! - If it causes problem we will have to rethink. - Firefishy 18:08, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Cool. I must say I was always tempted to ignore this request until somebody actually came up with some concrete examples for why it will be so useful. Kolossos is the only one who has given an example above, and that example is to bring in potentially derived map images! ([3])
Please do not use this new feature to bring in map images, unless they meet the OpenStreetMap community's strict criteria for 'free' maps. Anything showing administrative boundaries is probably not strictly free, since it will have been created by copying off copyrighted maps (I'm not saying the wikimedia community is wrong in labelling it as a free image, just that we at OpenStreetMap do not like to derive our data from anything like this)
Of course that is not an issue with this new feature as such, but something to be very aware of if you were planning on going on a commons importing rampage. I can think of examples where this new feature will be useful. e.g. I just decorated Tag:shop=garden_centre by doing a quick search on commons.
-- Harry Wood 18:28, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
I want to say thank you, too (and agein :) ). The first page I used this new feature: DE:Tag:historic=castle --Malenki 19:05, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks a lot! --Markus 19:24, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Interesting little problem related to this. If look at the old version of Key:crossing examples, before I fixed it, it's picking up on images from commons, where there used to be 'red link' stub references to non-existent images before. In these cases it might happen upon an image which is relevant, but in the case of Lollipop.jpg it might not be! Easy enough to fix over time though, so if you see a seemingly random irrelevant image on the wiki anywhere, this might be the cause. -- Harry Wood 14:09, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Wiki Search. Install a search plugin?

In Steve's old mailing list post he suggested a wiki cleanup was needed, which cannot be denied, but he also seemed to be particularly peeved by failure to find things. This could partly be blamed on the search function itself.

MediaWiki search stinks or at list it's a bit hit and miss. This comes to my attention every now and then, usually in cases where I can easily create a new handy redirect to remedy the situation for that keyword. But that's not solving the search problem overall. I've no idea why a search for 'Getting' turns up nothing. Getting The Source, Getting Involved, Getting Data, hello??. Sometimes search results come in a funny order, seemingly based partly on the order pages were created or something. Sometimes I just wish I could do more powerful google style text searches. So...

The recommendation seems to be to install Lucene or Spinx plugins.

-- Harry Wood 14:59, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

User:Firefishy has ENABLED lucene search plugin.
That was quick!
Working much better: search for 'Getting'
Kick ass!
-- Harry Wood 17:03, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

enabling email notifications

hi. i wanted to argue about enabling of e-mail notification functionality whenever somebody edits a page on user's watchlist.

on wikipedia it was disabled for a long time because they cited performance concerns. if that is also the reason for osm wiki, i have some suggestions :)

my watchlist produces on average 1-2 notifications a day. current setup requires me to manually check my watchlist every now and then (which i can't always do and often forget), older changes wanish from the watchlist and it seems to me that watchlist 'diff' links only show the latest change to the page (thus i often miss prior edits). that is very, very inconvenient and i constantly miss edits that i'd like to know about. what about enabling this feature, but leaving it to 'off' by default, so users would have to explicitly enable it - and if there still are performance concerns, what about some arbitrary limit, like "you can only enable email notifications if your watclist is < 50 pages" ? i believe that would notably improve quality of the contents - and i wouldn't have to hammer servers by viewing watchlist manually when that's not needed ;)

at first i assumed that this functionality is enabled, thus i left comments on talk pages and wondered why nobody responded... so i'd like to propose enabling of this feature. and, after all, even wikipedia enabled it... --Richlv 15:11, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

ConfirmEdit Spam Captcha

The ConfirmEdit extension is now installed (See Special:Version) however it probably should be ugraded to a later version. The reason I say this is... I've tried to define a whitelist at MediaWiki:Captcha-addurl-whitelist. This should get picked up by the extension, meaning that we no longer get prompted when linking to openstreetmap.org URLs.

This isn't happening, and my hunch is that this whitelist feature was only added to the extension code recently, so we dont have it, until a System Administrator downloads the files (two files linked here) and plonks them on to overwrite the existing ones in extensions/ConfirmEdit directory on the wiki server.

-- Harry Wood 12:15, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

This feature was added to the Extension:ConfirmEdit SVN Revision @ 23122.
Syntax is as follows:
#   * Everything from a "#" character to the end of the line is a comment
#   * Every non-blank line is a regex fragment which will only match hosts inside URLs

-- Firefishy 16:06, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks both for your help in sorting this! --Richard 17:24, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

TomH did the heavy lifting. Can we Captcha-addurl-whitelist, informationfreeway.org, openstreetmap.nl, openstreetmap.de and opengeodata.org

Namespace 'RU'

Hi! Is it possible to create a namespace "RU"? There is certain amount of pages in Russian language already. (including Ru:Main_Page) -- Zkir 13:02, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

  • +1 -- Hind 20:50, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Please add Russian namespace --vvoovv 21:35, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Added and live, search preference need to be reset by user. --firefishy 22:51, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks! -- Zkir 06:13, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

multilingual name spaces

Language Namespaces have been implemented. Currently only: DE, FR, ES, IT and NL. Others at a later stage. Some template linking needs fixing. -- Firefishy 03:06, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Could you briefly explain how to fix the template issue ? For instance, I cannot find the way to fix FR:About calling the template Template:Fr:HelpMenu. Pieren 15:55, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
Ok, thanks. For the others : to fix the template issue, replace the previous call {{Fr:template_name}} by {{Template:Fr:template_name}}. Pieren 10:21, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Language Namespaces are now also included in the search results for anonymous and users who have not set their search preferences. - Firefishy 03:09, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Since the implementation of the namespaces many talk pages can't be reached using the tabs at the top anymore, probably because they have a different name (De instead of DE). Maybe someone knows how to fix this. --Driver2 00:36, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
Can you give any page examples and I will check. --Firefishy 03:00, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
OK Spotted them and corrected now. --Firefishy 03:53, 12 October 2008 (UTC)