Wikipedia talk:Version 1.0 Editorial Team: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 19:00, 20 October 2009

Wikipedia 1.0 — (talk) FAQ — To do

Release version tools Guide — (talk) — (stats)
Article selection process (talk) Version 0.8 bot selection Version 0.8 feedback
IRC channel (IRC)

Release criteria
Review team (FAQ)
Version 0.8 release (manual selection) (t)
"Selection" project (Talk) schools selection Offline WP for Indian Schools

CORE TOPICS CORE SUPPLEMENT Core topics - 1,000 (Talk) (COTF) (bot)

TORRENT (Talk)

"Selection" project for kids ((t))


WORK VIA WIKI PROJECTS (talk)


Pushing to 1.0 (talk)

Static content subcom.

Shortcuts

If you are new to this page, please see the Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/FAQs.

Please report any bugs with Version 0.5 on the new bugs page.

Core topics discussions – Wiki sort discussions – FAs first discussions – Work via WikiProjects discussions – Pushing to 1.0 discussions

Version 0.7 - should FINALLY be published soon!

The lengthy cleanup process was completed a couple of weeks back (it took about 6 months), and there is now a clean ZIM file available for the publisher to use. We had been using the "dirty" version for testing the software. The release will probably be sold on a USB flash drive, not DVD; we hope to have a version available for download via BitTorrent too. So look out for a version being shown at Wikimania (though I can't promise!), and available commercially shortly afterwards.

For the future, we hope to use an automated cleanup tool to speed up the time to publication, but that tool is still being written at the moment. Walkerma (talk) 06:16, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome news. Is there a link to what articles will be included? ♫ Cricket02 (talk) 13:38, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yessss! I would love to seed it when you get it out as a torrent. JoeSmack ^Talk 01:24, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article listing (as a set of indexes) is here. (Added later:The topical index has errors!) Joe - thanks for the offer! I was hoping there was someone available to do that. The question is whether it has free software (an offline reader) with it or not. Cheers, Walkerma (talk) 03:49, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The index appears to be malformated and possibly incomplete. There are some very basic articles completely missing, like Plant, Flower, Tree. I don't see the listings for different specific organisms anywhere. --EncycloPetey (talk) 04:21, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the problems with the topical index have already been reported, and should have been fixed for the actual release. Sorry, I should have mentioned that earlier (I added a note). Those three articles are in the collection, but they are missing from the index. It's a formatting issue, dependent on the server settings; I think the index looked fine on a different server. You will find those articles listed in the alphabetical index, for example here. Cheers, Walkerma (talk) 18:59, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I downloaded the Windows version, but I had a problem getting the Okawix program to open the "corpus" (the collection of articles). It may be a memory/size issue - this is a laptop with pretty basic specs. Linterweb are working on that. Also, User:CBM is working on fixing the index pages. Once we can get these to work, we'd like some people to beta test the release before it goes official. Any volunteers? Thanks, Walkerma (talk) 01:59, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you need help from someone who has no idea what "Okawix" is for, you can count on me for beta test. It doesn't have to be completely low tech, I do know the meaning of "download", "memory", and "Windows version". Pknkly (talk) 06:16, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(Unindent) Sounds great. Okawix is just the publisher's latest name for their offline reader software - you wouldn't know it unless you'd beta tested it already! If you have email via WP enabled, I'll email you the information once the bugs are fixed. Thanks, Walkerma (talk) 06:19, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I can volunteer, shoot me an email. JoeSmack ^Talk 03:43, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still waiting for Linterweb to fix the "slow open" problem; I did get it to open on my desktop PC, but it took a long time to do so. I'll keep you posted. Walkerma (talk) 02:28, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What will be the size of 0.7 (approximately, in megabytes)? Axl ¤ [Talk] 11:57, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I heard back from Linterweb - they've done a major rewrite of Okawix. I'm taking a look at the new software, and once we have a stable working version of it I will ask for help. As for the size of the release, it's about 4 GB so it takes a long time to download! (Hence our desire to have a BitTorrent version available). Watch this space! Cheers, Walkerma (talk) 16:54, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, 4 GB = 4,096 MB!! It's sure take a long time to download that... The availability of BitTorrent version sure is helping others to download it more quickly. Keep us informed then. Also, don't forget to update the info for next version's job if there any. Thanks Martin... Ivan Akira (talk) 08:08, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Any news? JoeSmack ^Talk 23:40, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes - finally! We have a beta test ready for you to check here. PLEASE NOTE: There is a bug in the topical index which results in some article links being missing or broken, but everything else should be working. And (IMHO) the interface looks much nicer than in the alpha version. ~~I should point out that the Okawix reader software is no longer GPL/GFDL so it can't be shared (not a situation we're at all happy about, but we can't do anything at this stage until Kiwix is ready).~~ Obviously the content file (the "corpus") can be freely shared. Please give feedback here! Once that is done, and the index fixed, Linterweb will publish this on USB keys (flash drives). Thanks, Walkerma (talk) 15:26, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm one of the Okawix developers. Just to let you know that Okawix is still open source and distributed under the GPL licence. The project is hosted on Sourceforge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/okawix/ with the sources available in a SVN repository. Guillaumito (talk) 12:41, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is an error or bug... I don't know wether wp1-beta1 file is the culprit or client software... but... if you go to article titled "Double play", you will see text like "" depth="10"/>" depth="9"/>" depth="9"/>" depth="10"/>" depth="10"/>" in top of that page which I believe it shouldn't be there. Ivan Akira (talk) 03:50, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Links for beta testing

Before you download, please read all the feedback below, and note that the corpus file is huge (ca 1 GB if I recall).

Client file is here
Corpus (the article collection) is here.

Thanks! Walkerma (talk) 06:07, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Correction

I apologize, I had been misinformed - which is excellent news! See Guillaume's comment above, and I have heard from two others as well confirming my mistake. I apologize to Linterweb and the Okawix team over this, I hope I haven't caused any problems for them.

So, we have a fully open source, GPL reader for the wiki, ready for publication! This will make the distribution much more powerful, and allow things like BitTorrent releases to work effectively. Thanks for the correction, Walkerma (talk) 04:30, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Installing corpus

Can't load the corpus into Okawix. Clicking on Install starts the install process but never seems to finish. I let it run in install mode for over 24 hours and it still says "Please wait while your corpus is being installed". I was able to install and remove the Wiki news corpus. Should I have waited more than 24 hours for the install of the WP Ver 0.7 corpus? Pknkly (talk) 15:32, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What is the size of the downloaded .okawix file? Did Okawix created a repository with some .zeno, .index and .map files in it? Guillaumito (talk) 13:44, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the information obtained from doing a "properties" on the files:

file wp1-beta1 size = 1.88 GB (2,024,473,024 bytes)

These are within a folder, called wp1-beta1 size= 1.88 GB (2,024,469,606 bytes), that was created during the install process.

file article.index size=27.4 MB (28,789,206 bytes)

file article.map size=1.34 MB (1,408,418 bytes)

file word.index size=40.4 MB (42,429,830 bytes)

file word.map size=16.7 MB (17,611,112 bytes)

file wp1-beta1.zeno size=1.80 GB (1,934,231,040 bytes)

Also, I don't know if its relevant, but after the 24+ hour install attempt I received a message from Firefox when I opened it. It said something about installing xxxxx (I recognized it may of had something to do with the install). When I clicked on yes, it came back and said it failed because it was not supported by the latest version of Firefox (ver 3.5.3). I could delete everything and try it again so I can get more information, but I will hold onto everything until your feedback. Pknkly (talk) 18:03, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I received the same message, the addon is 'Linkiwix' and I told it no. Bad bad bad that the offline reader tries to install something (whatever it is) like that without telling. JoeSmack ^Talk 18:39, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, the installation have a major problem. Firstly, we must understand how to install by ourself, because there is no manual in the software. Next it install add-on on Mozilla, I confirm that. The other one is, after the installation of "wp1-beta1.okawix" have finished, the Okawix 0.7 always says "wp1-beta1.okawix vanished, do you want to remove it?", which actually it not vanished at all. So when I search for any article and try to read the article, the application always prompt that message and I must always press Cancel to overcome it. I don't know what happen.

Oh yeah Pknkly, the size of wp1-beta1 foler should be 2.37 GB (2,545,856,301 bytes) [because my wp1-beta1.zeno sized 2.28 GB (2,455,617,718 bytes)], and you missed one file that is entry.lnk (17 bytes). Ivan Akira (talk) 22:29, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the feedback. I'll look for your size and file after my next attempt (see below). Pknkly (talk) 10:10, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Firefox add-on / Linkiwix

I just uploaded a new Okawix build for Windows without the Firefox add-on (Linkiwix) that was installed as part of the installation process. As for the issues with installing the Wikipedia 0.7 content, we're trying to reproduce and fix the problem now. Guillaumito (talk) 07:20, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I just uploaded yet another build that tries to fix the un-archiving experienced by some of you... now we didn't managed to reproduced it, so we just fixed what we guess was not working. Guillaumito (talk) 09:17, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Its too bad you were unable to duplicate my symptoms. That may point to a peculiarity within my PC. Nevertheless, because of the changes, I'm ready to try again. I'll delete my old install of Okiwix as well as the old download of the corpus. Then I will download and install Okawix. Do you recommend using Okawix to download and install the corpus or should I download the corpus outside of Okawix and then from within Okawix point to the downloaded corpus? Should it matter? Pknkly (talk) 09:58, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would recommend not downloading again, just remove the wp1-beta1 folder not the wp1-beta1.okawix file then use the "add new corpus from local file" feature (found in the drop-down menu) and select the .okawix file. Guillaumito (talk) 11:08, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Will do. Expect feedback later today. Pknkly (talk) 12:08, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I will give it a shot of the new client software... And it appear the new client software is smaller (11,019,800 bytes) than before (11,026,885 bytes) so it should be the removal of firefox add-on I presume. Ivan Akira (talk) 11:57, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm already try the new software, so far so good! It run smoothly on my machine. There is no corpus installation error and there is no add-on anymore... Moreover, the HTML text formatting, JavaScript along with the images are seen well... Well done guys. But I not tested any further... Let see if I encounter any other problem... Ivan Akira (talk) 12:20, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm back home from my conference and this morning I just did a download/install on my laptop - which has given me serious installation problems in the past - and everything went smoothly. This is a PC running XP, with an 80GB hard drive that is almost full (only about 5 GB left), and I think around 1GB of memory. The corpus took a while to install (maybe 20 minutes) but I could see the progress meter, so I wasn't worried that it had frozen. Looking good so far! Walkerma (talk) 15:11, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mine was around 20 minutes as well, no install probs. Although, it isn't exactly transparent in explaining what to do with the corpus/application - i think most of us did educated guessing. JoeSmack ^Talk 16:12, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you all for the feedback and the benchmark install times. I tried again and received the same symptoms. Clearly, the problem is local to my PC. I'll load all of it on another PC I have available and then see if I can isolate the problem on the PC having the problem. Pknkly (talk) 04:08, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On the other PC the install worked as well as it did for all of you. Went back to problem PC, deleted everything, rebooted, reloaded fresh copies of corpus and Okawix - no more problems. I'm sure I reset the cause of the original symptoms so the cause is gone and will remaine a mystery. Pknkly (talk) 14:49, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone be kind enough to post screenshots of the program. Thanks, Mahanga^Talk 20:13, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okawix skin

I see that explorer titled skin for Okawix is nice, the colors are great, but how about creating a new skin that have a look and feel like encyclopedia or Wikipedia style? Or there is any guideline to make the skin by ourself? Ivan Akira (talk) 00:20, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There's no really guidelines on how to write a new skin : each skin is a css file with a bunch of png files and are located in the chrome/skin folder. To create a new one, just create a new subfolder named after your skin name and add a line in chrome/chrome.manifest :

skin interfacewiki yourskinname skin/yourskinname/

Guillaumito (talk) 15:37, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oww... so that's how to add the custom skin... Maybe if I have time, I will tweak the skin... It looks interesting for me... Ivan Akira (talk) 06:29, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Index

Are we supposed to be able to find any article using any index? An example - should I be able to find the article Chicago, Illinois in all three of the indexes? Pknkly (talk) 15:17, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Index by location for Americas, for United States - this seems incomplete. Only shows articles within the Mathematics section and they are all biographies of mathematicians. I was hoping to see a section on "Cities, towns, villages" within which I thought I would be able to find the article on Chicago, Illinois. Pknkly (talk) 15:17, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a design spec for how the index was to be set up? At this point I don't know if I'm seeing a problem or if I'm trying to find something (e.g., the Chicago article) in a way that was not within the design. Pknkly (talk) 15:17, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The indexes in this collection are very old versions, and Linterweb needs to compile new versions - they do know that. I think we're waiting for new ZIM files of the topical index. It's clear that the "by location" index in the current corpus is broken - most of the US content is missing! See the latest version of that page here, and you can see how big that page is! For Chicago under US/geography, we have Chicago, Chicago (2002 film), Chicago Board of Trade, Chicago Cubs, Chicago Loop, Chicago Marathon, Chicago River and Chicago metropolitan area. The topical index also needs fixing. Thanks, Walkerma (talk) 19:30, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Content categories

Since content categories are encyclopedic I expected to see them at the bottom or the end of the articles within Okawix. If it was to be there, it is not. If it wasn't within the design, was it considered and rejected? Pknkly (talk) 16:00, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would love these. JoeSmack ^Talk 16:29, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good things within and about Okawix

Very quick presentation of linked pages. Pknkly (talk) 16:00, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fast search results. Pknkly (talk) 16:00, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Overall look of wikipages is intact w/images and infoboxes. JoeSmack ^Talk 16:31, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. Pknkly (talk) 12:25, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bad things within and about Okawix

Clicking on refs sometimes brings you to the refs section sometimes not. JoeSmack ^Talk 16:31, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Do you have some example of not-working ref links? Guillaumito (talk) 07:42, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - It was extremely common, look around. I presume it is a certain format of ref tagging that doesn't work. If you still can't find the problem i'll launch my app, but i got a ton of crap open right now and can't myself. JoeSmack ^Talk 17:51, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No installation documentation, not very friendly even if there was. JoeSmack ^Talk 16:31, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Are you talking about Okawix installation or adding content into Okawix? Btw... Okawix is designed so it can "embed" content in its installation; the idea would be to have a custom Okawix installer that would install both Okawix and the Wikipedia selection. Now we have a technical problem, nsis installer (and I guess other installer software as well) doesn't supports files larger than 2Gb so we have to find a way to workaround that limitation. Guillaumito (talk) 07:42, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - I'm pretty much in the dark from the beginning. Installing the app was't too hard (although the installer could be friendlier with what/where it is install and explaining info briefly about the app), the corpus was the real weird thing to me. Couldn't double click the file, couldn't find how to load the file from within the application. Ended up dragging and dropping, hoping I was dragging it on the right application in the install folder. Then it just started loading for twenty minutes (no, 'would you like to blah? it'll take a while, yes/no?). Maybe the installer could have an after note about installing corpus files too. If you could include the app w/the corpus that'd be more idiot (me) proof. Besides that, a gentle readme would go miles. Also, computer requirements? JoeSmack ^Talk 17:51, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Interface is largely icon based (i mean, you can float over it i suppose) with no menu bar. JoeSmack ^Talk 16:31, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It really slows down my laptop to a crawl, so I'm guessing it's a memory hog - worse than having Firefox, Word and Acrobat all running simultaneously. That is a real issue if this is to be used in developing countries, where computers may have limited RAM. Walkerma (talk) 19:41, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Martin is right it sure slow down client computer. If we're using high-end processor and large space of RAM, we can't see any significat delay. Ivan Akira (talk) 03:43, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimania update

I gave a talk on the 1.0 project at Wikimania 2009, there is a video of my talk available (linked from that page). I'll try to make the slides available soon. I also gave a separate presentation on the assessment & selection scheme - again, there is a video available linked from the abstract.

We had an short, informal "offline releases" meeting - you can see a brief summary of the discussion at m:Offline readers. Walkerma (talk) 02:42, 10 September 2009 (UTC) The main things for WP1.0 that seem new or important to me are:[reply]

The Foundation seems to be backing the OpenZIM format for offline releases.
They like WikiPock as an offline release format. I think they will also support Kiwix as an offline reader once it is available for Windows & Mac (currently only Linux, but Windows version should be available very soon).
~~Linterweb is looking less attractive as a publication partner since they are no longer using an open source reader.~~

Who give you this information Martin ? Pmartin (talk) 15:04, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Foundation will aim to produce a new HTML dump of the English Wikipedia soon, and may even produce an openZIM version.

I also had lots of time to talk with Luca de Alfaro, who is behind the WikiTrust initiative. We are planning to collaborate on getting a WikiTrust-based version selection tool ready to use for the next release - this would reduce our time to publication by about 6 months!

Feel free to ask questions. Walkerma (talk) 02:56, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently I was misinformed on the Linterweb reader software (see above) - it IS open source. Walkerma (talk) 04:34, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Pages where template include size is exceeded

As you may know Category:Pages where template include size is exceeded has many of Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team's assessment pages in it. For this reason I propose simplifying them so that Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/African diaspora articles by quality/2 (scroll to the bottom to see the effect on the page) becomes like User:Rich_Farmbrough/temp38. What do you think? I could change the existing members of Category:Pages where template include size is exceeded, if you are happy for me to do that. Rich Farmbrough, 13:17, 24 September 2009 (UTC).[reply]

How much of a problem is this (a) for users and (b) server usage? Is there anything else? I personally don't mind too much if we lose the templates, but we need to know that this is a real problem. Also, we should get the opinions of several people before we make such a change (because hundreds of people are involved in assessment). BTW, even if you were to change the pages, remember the bot updates these pages every 4-5 days or so, so it involves CBM or Oleg re-coding the bot.

One other solution would be to create a plain page like you showed, and add the color directly into the table using HTML coding rather than template transclusion. If that is possible (we need CBM or Oleg to comment here), then I think we could have the best of both worlds - the tables would look the same, but the server load would be much less. Walkerma (talk) 03:15, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The pages are broken.
Actually while many people may be involved in the assessment, some of these pages are scarcely used. [1] shows that Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Canadian communities articles by quality/13 got 4 hits in the whole of August. Which is not surprising since we have Category:WikiProject Canadian communities articles, of which High importance got a massive 13 hits in August.
Yes coding the colour in is fairly trivial. The reason I didn't suggest it is that I don't want to replace the transcluded template with a subst:ed tempalte,adn stil run into the size problems that mean the page does not render below a certain point."
It is only indirectly about server load. It is fine to have a few hundred or a few thousand rarely viewed pages that are heavy on the server, but the protection is generic and stops the page rendering templates beyond a certain point.

Rich Farmbrough, 18:02, 26 September 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Thanks for clarifying, that's very helpful (I'm not very strong on the technical side - sorry!). I'd seen the error, but hadn't realised this problem was the cause. What I meant by HTML coding was that instead of the Bot having a command to say "Paste this Start-Class template into the next cell" we would code the bot to say "Paste the word Start into the next cell, and make the background orange-red", similar to what is done here. We could also do the same with importance assessment templates. That would mean the page would contain ABSOLUTELY NO TEMPLATES at all. Do you think this is feasible? Walkerma (talk) 20:00, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

CBM is busy/away, but says he will address this issue when he returns. Thanks again for flagging the problem. Walkerma (talk) 15:24, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

All I need to do is to lower the maximum number of articles that can get listed on a single page. I have lowered the threshold some, and I will see after the next full run if I need to lower it more. If anyone were to edit the pages by hand, their changes would get overwritten the next time the bot updates the pages. But the change in format might also confuse the bot, because it does look at the previous content to help detect articles that were removed from a project category. So any changes in format need to be accomplished within the bot code, not outside of it. — Carl (CBM · talk) 04:20, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

One problem with lowering the max number is that then we end up with even more pages for the "X articles by quality" listing - for bigger projects, this large number is already a problem, and I think it would be better if we could make each page smaller by making it more efficient. Can that be done? Walkerma (talk) 08:32, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I find it hard to believe the larger projects would browse through a list of thousands of articles. The maximum number of articles per page was 450, and I decreased it to 400; either way, a list that long is not really readable by a human, and a list with 1000 articles would only be worse.

The longterm fix for all this is to switch over to the new WP 1.0 bot, which will make the lists dynamically, so people can search for what they are interested in instead of having to use these lists. That system keeps being delayed, for various reasons, but I do plan to move forward with it after 0.7 is done. — Carl (CBM · talk) 11:04, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK I'm going to do the temporary fix to the problem pages. It will fix the pages, clear them out of the fairly important category, even if it needs to be re-applied in a few days. the first page I hit had all Low-Class Stub-Class anyway. Rich Farmbrough, 15:38, 30 September 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Please don't do anything by hand! The bot is working on an update, and I need to see which pages are still broken after that. — Carl (CBM · talk) 11:38, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

After the full bot run, I tweaked things and ran a few more by hand. At the moment no WP 1.0 bot tables are in the category. I will check again after the next full run. — Carl (CBM · talk) 11:58, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia stragegy planning and task forces

As some of you may know, the Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a major initiative to develop a strategy for the next five years. Many people here will be interested some of the proposed task forces - offline releases (part of ESP 2) and quality (ESP 3). Please take a look at the list of activities, and sign up here if you think you can help. Cheers, Walkerma (talk) 17:44, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

IRC on producing print versions of Wikipedia content

We will be holding an IRC meeting with PediaPressto discuss production of books based on Wikipedia content. More specifically, we are interested in article collections designed by WikiProjects, for example "Chemical Elements" or "Atlantic Hurricanes since 2000" Please join us, especially if your WikiProject is interested in producing such a book.

Time: Tuesday, October 20th, at 1600h UTC (noon US EDT).
Location: #wikipedia-1.0
Planning to attend: Please sign below

Walkerma (talk)

Download formats

I would like access to all the articles in the dump as a file structure with html (named by article title) + graphics files.

I specifically would like to be able to put a /wiki directory at the top of an apache root directory and serve everything to a standard browser in a school environment.

The school environments I service have no internet access, and wikipedia == internet for these schools.

I understand that search is a problem here - a statically-generated index may be the best we can do.

I realise that the custom reader + zeno file is okawix's answer, but extra software installation is a problem for me (diverse clients, and me not being present except at install time).

I want /n/ne/Nelson_Mandela.html - not /0/09/7766.html.

Search must be static, or server-side.

I am not denigrating all the work put in so far, nor okawix wishing for a $$ return - I would just like an alternate download format, as above. Wizzy…☎ 10:42, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments sub pages

I have a vague memory that "Comments" subpages were started by this WikiProject. If anyone can confirm or deny that, commenting at this discussion might be a good idea. I know that some of the worklists set up by this project for the various WikiProject assessment workflows trasnclude the comments subpages (unless I'm mixing up my assessment WikiProjects). I'll have a look in the talk page archives here. 18:45, 20 October 2009 (UTC) UPDATE: I found the old discussions here: 1, 2, 3 (May to July 2006). I'm going to take this back to the Village Pump discussion. If anyone else knows of any old discussions, please list them here or there. Carcharoth (talk) 18:51, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 229: / Line 229: @@
 I am not denigrating all the work put in so far, nor okawix wishing for a $$ return - I would just like an alternate download format, as above. [[User:Wizzy|Wizzy]]&hellip;[[User talk:Wizzy|<big>'''&#9742;'''</big>]] 10:42, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
+== Comments sub pages ==
+I have a vague memory that "Comments" subpages were started by this WikiProject. If anyone can confirm or deny that, commenting at [[Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)#Talk_page_Comments_subpage|this discussion]] might be a good idea. I know that some of the worklists set up by this project for the various WikiProject assessment workflows trasnclude the comments subpages (unless I'm mixing up my assessment WikiProjects). I'll have a look in the talk page archives here. <small>18:45, 20 October 2009 (UTC)</small> ''UPDATE'': I found the old discussions here: [[Wikipedia_talk:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team/Index_of_subjects/Archive_1#WikiProject_The_Beatles|1]], [[Wikipedia_talk:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team/Index/Archive_2#A_simple_to_implement_comment_scheme|2]], [[Wikipedia_talk:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team/Index/Archive_2#Template:WPBeatles_is_now_transcluding_comments|3]] (May to July 2006). I'm going to take this back to the Village Pump discussion. If anyone else knows of any old discussions, please list them here or there. [[User:Carcharoth|Carcharoth]] ([[User talk:Carcharoth|talk]]) 18:51, 20 October 2009 (UTC)