Difference between revisions of "En:WP rewiring"

From Creolista!
Jump to: navigation, search
(Deconstructing the tools)
(Toolz for finding authorial rights & responsibilities: forum mentions)
Line 17: Line 17:
 
<p>The students would probably very quickly suggest a simple improvement to the WikiHistory tool:  replace the links to each page contributor's WP user page (which if you think about it is really, really senseless) with a link to their contributions to that page.  This would be a chance to talk about variables, perhaps.</p>
 
<p>The students would probably very quickly suggest a simple improvement to the WikiHistory tool:  replace the links to each page contributor's WP user page (which if you think about it is really, really senseless) with a link to their contributions to that page.  This would be a chance to talk about variables, perhaps.</p>
  
<code>https://tools.wmflabs.org/sigma/usersearch.py?name=ADD_NAME_HERE&amp;page=ADD_PAGE_HERE&amp;server=enwiki&amp;max=</code>  
+
<code>https://tools.wmflabs.org/sigma/usersearch.py?name=ADD_NAME_HERE&amp;page=ADD_PAGE_HERE&amp;server=enwiki&amp;max=</code>
 
 
<p>TDK mentioned -- in the [http://wikipediareview.proboards.com/post/1346/thread starter thread] -- that in the encyclopedia of the future, users would be notified when their text was changed (in fairness, this was also noted by Greg K concerning an edit about Qatar [http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=6572&p=198917&#p198917 here] ^^).  (As it is users are individually notified only if a user punches the "undo" button, otherwise they have to track changes using their watchlists or the history page.)  In terms of copyright, teachers could ask students why Wikipedia does not permit them a simple manner of accessing and downloading all of their own graciously-given contributions to the encyclopedia.  There is nothing in the database design that prevents such a feature.  While one should certainly not expect something so clean as on a forum where one posts in blocks, there is nothing technically preventing a user from downloading all of their contributions to the encyclopedia ever, except that no tool has ever been developed and promoted to encourage users to do so.  Perhaps such a marketing strategy would be contrary to the altruism (the invisible sixth pillar of WP) that runs through Quaker-style consensus models.  But, to my knowledge, the tool does not exist.  Notifications of users when their text is changed?  That's going to require some processing time, but it's a fascinating idea.</p>
 
 
 
<p>So, hmm... I've mentioned httrack, wiki-blame, wiki-history, and sigma here.  </p>
 
 
 
<p>Who can think of other tools for deconstructing <s style="color:gray;font-style:italic;">Wikipedia</s>?</p>
 
 
 
Flip Flopped reminded me of the [https://tools.wmflabs.org/sigma/editorinteract.py editor interaction tool], which is powerful. Entering one's own name when looking for cabalistas gives perspective if you feel several editors are working you over. ^^
 
 
 
Probably some risk of confirmation bias there though.
 
  
 
==Bonus:  MediaWiki ↹ HTML (links)==
 
==Bonus:  MediaWiki ↹ HTML (links)==

Revision as of 11:23, 14 October 2017

Deconstructing the tools

Some writing from the Chief Technical Officer of the WMF:

  • coauthor (proceedings), 1992: "Newthink: An Orwellian specification language for real time safety critical systems" [1]
  • coauthor, 2017: "Reclaiming U.S. Defense Leadership on Innovation: Three Priorities for the New USD(R&E)", Heritage Foundation

Toolz for finding authorial rights & responsibilities

Developing more than the current attitude of "healthy skepticism" concerning WP is necessary, particularly for en.wiki. Teachers could fairly simply construct wrappers around assignments related to Wikipedia. For example, I could ask students to use the tool WikiBlame (revision history search) to find the author of a specific sentence within a WP article (Check lots of versions with a reasonably high skip number). For example to find out who added the bit about concerning Cubans to Jill Stein's page, I skipped 25 versions, ignored the first 50 and suggested checking 5000 versions. (Pushing the skip number up increases the likelihood of finding what you are looking for relatively quickly, I think.)

Likewise it would be good practice to encourage newbies to read a different history page than the chronological revision history provided by default, favoring instead the one given by the WMF-Tool Wikihistory.

https://tools.wmflabs.org/xtools/wikihistory/wh.php?page_title=

The results of this tool should be read with caution however. For example, I have more edits to the page Jill Stein (by far) than any other editor. To conclude from that fact that I wrote the page on Jill Stein would be quite erroneous, as most of my edits were a product of my naive sentence-by-sentence editing style. It is only by comparing the first and second editor's contributions (1 | 2) to that page with yet another WMF tool (sigma) that the history becomes clearer concerning who wrote more of the page between our two front-runners. A transparent foundation, it seems to me, would want its users to have a more powerful combination of these two tools.

The students would probably very quickly suggest a simple improvement to the WikiHistory tool: replace the links to each page contributor's WP user page (which if you think about it is really, really senseless) with a link to their contributions to that page. This would be a chance to talk about variables, perhaps.

https://tools.wmflabs.org/sigma/usersearch.py?name=ADD_NAME_HERE&page=ADD_PAGE_HERE&server=enwiki&max=

Bonus: MediaWiki ↹ HTML (links)

here's a short procedure for converting external Wikilinks in a document to HTML using PRCE (Perl regex cheatsheet):

Replace

]] with @
[[ with §; which gives §OutBoundLink@
] with µ
[ with £; which gives £InternalLinkµ
| with

External links: MediaWiki ↪ HTML

replace £(\S+) (\S+)µ
with <a href="\1">\2</a>

External links: HTML ↪ MediaWiki

replace <a href="(.*?)">
with [\1
replace </a>
with ]

Anyone want to do internal links? ^^

(The problem will be the pipe and spacing...)

unpiped

piped

Note on BBcode

The BBcode-Mediawiki extension page is archived out of shame:  here's what it looked like prior to archival.

Note on HTML Rendering

On this Mediawiki page, I learned that just by typing ?action=render at the end of an address, it will publish HTML for you to save if you so desire. It even works on Wikipedia hoax pages. ^^

It must be said that the HTML produced is thick with handles (classes and such).

Also on HTML enabling (and the dangers that implies), cf. [here]

Parsers

Strip References from Wiki

Unnamed References

Search for: \<ref\>.*?\</ref\>

Replace with:   

Named References

Search for: \<ref.*?>

Replace with:   

Strip text leave blue-links

Search for: ].*?\[

Replace with:

This does leave some manual work...