Re: [Wikitech-l] no less than [[{{#Special:Specialpages}}|{{ns:special}}:{{int:specialpages}}]] needed

2009-02-28 Thread Tim Starling
jida...@jidanni.org wrote: > I can't believe in 1.14 that you have now removed the ability for > zh-tw users to make links to e.g., Special Pages using their zh-tw > characters. > I can most certainly believe it. It's not like the messages files are reviewed before they're released. Localised sp

Re: [Wikitech-l] HTTP redirects preserving "redirected from" line (was: http://en.wikipedia.org/ --> 301 Moved Permanently)

2009-02-28 Thread Aryeh Gregor
On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 3:53 PM, Daniel Friesen wrote: > It also completely screws up the redirected from line if you CTRL+Click > on a number of redirects. ie: When trying to mass delete redirects > tagged for deletion. How so? Does the "redirected from" notice not appear at all, or does the wr

[Wikitech-l] [SPAM] Re: Bar charts

2009-02-28 Thread Michael Daly
Lars Aronsson wrote: > Should I use divs instead of tables? You could and it would avoid the flak from one cranky bug submitter. I'm not so sure that tables that are *not* nested are significantly more efficient than equivalent divs. I can see that under certain circumstances, it would appe

Re: [Wikitech-l] How to patch?

2009-02-28 Thread jidanni
OK, now the answer is in https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17724 > I don't see how that's terribly hard to find. Trust me. As very few of you will actually try these patches. Perhaps only I, with my measly Internet connection has. A tiny instruction at the top of the patch would no

[Wikitech-l] Bar charts

2009-02-28 Thread Lars Aronsson
For the distribution of seats among political parties in local governments and parliaments, the Swedish Wikipedia has used repeated 5px images of different colours (red, red,... blue), which is both inefficient and hard to edit. To improve this, I created a template that uses tables with bgco

Re: [Wikitech-l] How to patch?

2009-02-28 Thread Roan Kattouw
jida...@jidanni.org schreef: > In https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17724 > they say I should instead submit a bug that the patch is broken. > > But how do I know that is the case. All I know is I read the patch man > page and tried some combinations and they all didn't work. > > So

Re: [Wikitech-l] How to patch?

2009-02-28 Thread jidanni
In https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17724 they say I should instead submit a bug that the patch is broken. But how do I know that is the case. All I know is I read the patch man page and tried some combinations and they all didn't work. So that's is why I thought adding instructions

Re: [Wikitech-l] How to patch?

2009-02-28 Thread jidanni
> "RK" == Roan Kattouw writes: RK> jida...@jidanni.org schreef: >> How does one apply mediawiki-1.14.0.patch.gz and >> mediawiki-i18n-1.14.0.patch.gz to mediawiki-1.14.0rc1 to produce >> mediawiki-1.14.0? >> >> # ls mediawiki-1.14.0rc1 >> # zcat mediawiki-1.14.0.patch.gz | patch >> can't fin

Re: [Wikitech-l] http://en.wikipedia.org/ --> 301 Moved Permanently

2009-02-28 Thread Daniel Friesen
It also completely screws up the redirected from line if you CTRL+Click on a number of redirects. ie: When trying to mass delete redirects tagged for deletion. ~Daniel Friesen (Dantman, Nadir-Seen-Fire) [http://nadir-seen-fire.com] -Nadir-Point & Wiki-Tools (http://nadir-point.com) (http://wiki-

[Wikitech-l] no less than [[{{#Special:Specialpages}}|{{ns:special}}:{{int:specialpages}}]] needed

2009-02-28 Thread jidanni
I can't believe in 1.14 that you have now removed the ability for zh-tw users to make links to e.g., Special Pages using their zh-tw characters. To link to e.g., [[Special:Specialpages]], [[特殊:特殊頁面]] can no longer be used, as now only this [[特殊:特殊页面]] simplified Chinese link works. The problem is

Re: [Wikitech-l] http://en.wikipedia.org/ --> 301 Moved Permanently

2009-02-28 Thread Nikola Smolenski
Дана Friday 27 February 2009 22:57:00 jida...@jidanni.org написа: > > Since is arguably a better URL for linking to > > the English Wikipedia main page than > > , I'd see no reason not to make > > the redirect a 302.  We'd just be t