Infogalactic:Galactic boardroom/Archive 03

From Infogalactic: the planetary knowledge core
Jump to: navigation, search

Coding For Television Episodes

Hi gang. I've been busy lately, so I haven't caught up yet. I'll be back more soon with more stuff. Meanwhile I just popped in to update a mirror and discovered some coding stuff. I just copied the article from Wikipedia and added this to the top:

This is a Wikipedia article mirror, copy update on 2017 April 08.

So you know - I like to declare at least one of the following declarations in bold italics at the top of every article that I confidently can:

This is an InfoGalactic original article.
This InfoGalactic article has forked from originally being just a Wikipedia article mirror.
This is a Wikipedia article mirror, copy update on...
This is a Wikipedia article mirror.
This article was censored on Wikipedia.

To the point, the code results are drastically different between the source and result:

List_of_Real_Time_with_Bill_Maher_episodes on Wikipedia
List_of_Real_Time_with_Bill_Maher_episodes on InfoGalactic

This looks like a very nice code tool thing that I will learn to use in the future. It'd be great if InfoGalactic could utilize it too. (Full disclosure: I've never updated any episode lists before, on WP or IG, though I have been considering building giant episode lists of all of The Corbett Report episodes and lists.)

I'd like to hear comments about it and be pointed to the usage documentation, especially if InfoGalactic adopts it.

Regarding my failed edit attempts, please simply delete my efforts on the Real Time Episode List, linked above, and revert it to the oldest one and only proper mirror even if it is an outdated copy.

Now that I've made a "thing" of this, I promise I will return to it soon to learn about the coding and to update the episode list in one way or another, high on my to do list.

Thanks in advance for your feedback. ~ JasonCarswell (talk) 18:37, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

JasonCarswell, there is no need to revert your edits. The code you copied works perfectly. If you look now, I think the page will look much closer to what you were expecting (though it's unfinished). You will also noticed I have not edited that page at all. Looking into your issue taught me something about transclusion that I did not know, and now I'm chomping at the bit to put it to use myself. The link to wikipedia in the previous sentence is a good place to start. Basicly you're taking parts of one article and inserting them into another. The long and the short of it is, you need to copy several wikipedia pages with names like Real Time with Bill Mahar (season xx) over to Infogalactic to make the list appear as you want it to. Gilgamesh (talk) 13:54, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Some thoughts, more needed

  1. I am not sure what the correct way is to indicate that an article is entirely from Wikipedia or entirely local or a mix of both. Categories look like a way to do it, but we don't want to have to go through all 5M articles and add a category to them. We could default them to showing that the article comes from Wikipedia at the bottom unless they have a category entry saying they are different. However, we have to work on the code for that. Further thoughts are welcome.
  2. The whole transclusion thing and templates are a god-awfull macro language that is hard to understand for normal people ... something better is needed.

-- Crew (talk) 15:59, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Crew, I would like to partially if not wholly disagree with your point 2 above. One of my biggest frustrations is having to update the same information on multiple pages. For example, Daytona 500 and List of Daytona 500 winners have substantial overlap, including a table of winners. I've thought about building templates (in Template: space) to cover situations like this, but by doing so I would be cluttering up Template space with lots of templates that are only called by a couple of pages each. I hadn't realized until now that I can have one encyclopedia article call another encyclopedia article, saving me a lot of work to update.
For JasonCarswell's issue, he has 3 options.
  1. He can learn about transclusion, and use it future edits.
  2. He can hunt for television-specific documentation on Wikipedia about how to edit episode lists without needing to know how transclusion works. This documentation is most likely one or more subpages of WikiProject Television.
  3. He can simply copy the pages I told him to and trust that some editor at Wikipedia has read this documentation and knows how to use it. Gilgamesh (talk) 17:13, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for the transclusion link. I have some reading to do.
You may decide if this idea may be good or bad. Since all articles with only one version in history are direct snapshot copies from Wikipedia, extremely rare exceptions being articles perfectly composed and saved somehow without any need for correction, revision, update, etc. OR extremely new articles yet to be revised. A bot could create a new updated snapshot that would make the formerly unedited snapshot article more current, and more importantly it could add "This is a Wikipedia article mirror, copy update on..." to the top, with whatever coding markers you like, as well as added benefits of collecting more article history documenting growth edits or censorship. Unfortunately it's not copying the entire Wikipedia article history or discussion history, but it's much much better than naught. As for all the other InfoGalactic articles with at least one version in history, the revisions and edits are evidence of human activity likely forking articles in some way(s) or are completely original. ~ JasonCarswell (talk) 18:22, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Fast image uploading idea

Why not give every article a direct button "upload images", and have them automatically be put into gallery for that article? For instance if I find that a diagram is hard to understand, I could just browse the article's gallery until I find a photo which makes sense. A good gallery system would be more useful than even google images Hydrargyruum (talk) 14:02, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

I like brevity, but ...

Forkbot overwrote the article John Lewis (Georgia politician) with a redirect to John Lewis (civil rights leader), so now these two are redirects to each other. For more fun, John Lewis (Georgia) redirects to John Lewis (Georgia politician), so this is now a double redirect. And don't forget that John Lewis (American politician) redirects to John Lewis which is a disambiguation page. Gilgamesh (talk) 00:08, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing that to our attention. I will make sure that the ForkBot people know. -- Crew (talk) 00:17, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
OK, the issue seems to be that on W John Lewis (Georgia Politician) redirects to John Lewis (civil rights leader). I am manually importing that page. --Crew (talk) 13:47, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Request for Self-Citation

Can we cite ourselves for witnessed events that may have no other citation but are nonetheless true? I just noticed LastRedoubt included an important fact that he witnessed himself that can't be cited, so he deleted (correctly) the "needs cited" sticker.

I wonder if it would be useful to have a "cite editor" structure, like this:

< ref>{{cite self|first=Last|last=Redoubt|source=Eyewitness|date=.... and so on

(NeitherNor) 00:29, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

I had a similar problem. Before I was banned off Wikipedia for a year, I was trying to "fix" 9-11 Truth articles, etc. Another angry Truther was defending me. I checked out her(?) profile and saw other things she'd had censored. While I'd heard of Milton William Cooper I new nothing much of significance. Her efforts on his page were refuted but I saw a solution. I simply added "alleged" to the police testimony. Naturally the Wikipedia goons defended the article saying that cops are always truthful etc. Later (somewhere in my email archives) a Milton William Cooper's neighbor wrote me an email with the "real story" of his murder and begged me to put it on Wikipedia. I was banned soon before or after that email, but I added it to InfoGalactic under The Actual Circumstances Of Cooper's Death (with corrected and improved grammar and narrative flow). I replied to that email that I had done this, but received no reply. If there's a better way, I'm all ears. ~ JasonCarswell (talk) 21:52, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Search Timeout Problem

For some reason searching for a non-existent page takes forever then gives you an error. I just tried to see if there was already an article for Bill Still - several days ago. Yesterday and today the problem remains. I thought perhaps it was my internet or your server or something. I just thought I'd bring this to your attention if it's a real problem or I could learn why it's not. ~ JasonCarswell (talk) 15:34, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

I have seen the same thing and was getting timeouts. Eventually it worked. I will work with the support folks to see if we can resolve this. -- Crew (talk) 16:51, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
I had that problem when I was trying to create the Run for Something article, but it worked when I finally manually edited the URL to create the page, rather than trying to search for the non-existent page. Jean Valjean (talk) 14:39, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

"Authority control"

I wondered what this was, copying or editing articles from Wikipedia Authority control on WP. Initially I thought they were monitoring potentially subversive articles. Does IG use this? Should I add it, delete it, or ignore it? ~ JasonCarswell (talk) 00:38, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Editing without registration

After almost a year, InfoGalactic is still several times smaller than Wikipedia. I have been thinking about ways to get more new users.

One option would be to allow anyone to create a new article without having to register. They could continue to edit the new article until they deleted their cookies or changed their IP.

Another option would be to allow anyone to create a new version of an existing article without having to register. The different versions of each article could be listed as part of the main article, or shown in the page header. That could be how the differently "biased" article versions get started.

People could be encouraged to create new IG articles about subjects rejected by WP because of notability issues. For example self-published books, clubs, businesses, careers, etc.

Finally, organizations could be encouraged to create Promotional or "official" articles about themselves. No charge for that service, but the article version would be clearly marked as such, with a link to the neutral version.

I think it's important for the editing page to emphasize that whatever an editor posts must be TRUE. InfoGalactic considers the truth to be supremely important. Other editors will of course try to verify all the changes made.

I have some more ideas, will come back later after some thinking. Jack-arcalon (talk) 23:06, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

The problem will most likely be one of managing all the spam and malicious content ... however, I am interested in hearing ideas. -- Crew (talk) 23:24, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
Nice to see some discussion here. The site was just down for a little while today with a "no database connection" error, and I was afraid it was gone for good.
I think the project needs to do some fundraising. How about doing a Reg A+ stock sale at a site like Or sell shares as cryptocurrency?
With funding, you could get the technical features like user preference sliders and dynamic updates running, and maybe buy some ads to get traffic.
Also seek deals with alternative search engines like duckduckgo who are trying to create independence from google. SolarFringe (talk) 00:45, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
The project is still alive, but how well is it doing? Three months between posts here at the "boardroom"? Are traffic & edits slowly increasing, or going downhill? SolarFringe (talk) 00:53, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Proposed new policy for Infogalactic

I propose that the IG site settings be modified to allow anyone to create a new article on any subject, without having to register first. My understanding is that Wikimedia software allows that as a standard option.

If this change is made, the new option to start an article could appear on top of every page, next to "Read", "View source", and "View history". Presumably, a "cookie" will be set on their browser, so they can make edits until their browser cache has been cleared. If they later want to make further edits, they may have an incentive to get properly registered.

If spammers create millions of spam articles, the Adminstrator version of the Special:NewPages page might be usable to delete all new articles created within a specified date range. Creators of genuine articles should have kept a copy of the text they posted.

Perhaps this option could be tested on a trial basis for a few days or weeks. Jack-arcalon (talk) 21:00, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Mediawiki software could allow anonymous users to create new pages . . .
# Anonymous users can't create pages 

$wgGroupPermissions['*']['createpage'] = false; 
Jack-arcalon (talk) 22:18, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

May we have some more megabytes please

Infogalactic is suffering from its own success, as the increasing number of users can make it harder to edit pages during heavy traffic hours. Jack-arcalon (talk) 19:48, 3 November 2017 (UTC)


In the near future, someone may alter an existing article to make it far-left. We don't have the software yet for different versions of the same article. In that case, I think the far-left edited article should become its own similarly-named article. The original version should be restored where the edit was made.

For example:

Someone edits the entry for Mike Pence to make him seem like a radical fascist. These changes should be moved to a newly created page: Mike Pence (far-left interpretation).

On the main Pence page, there should be a link to the far-left version, and vice versa. Jack-arcalon (talk) 22:25, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

I thought corrupt Mike Pence was a radical fascist dressed in Republican fascist clothing, just like corrupt Hillary Clinton is a radical fascist dressed in Democrat fascist clothing? It's totalitarian turtles all the way up and down. (I also address this "narrative multiplicity" below.) ~ JasonCarswell (talk)

automated wiki editing

Eventually, someone is going to invent software that will replace all current encyclopedias. Not necessarily a conservative AI to edit every entry (or add bias warnings without changing the underlying text), but a way to add any amount of data to any article, from comments and opinions to verified citations, and hide or reveal them as needed. Jack-arcalon (talk) 23:54, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Future IG MediaWiki code evolution

Is it possible to add content to an Infogalactic page without changing the article text itself? For example, there could be giant lists of Tag:alleged cuckservatives or Tag:alleged far-right extremists or Tag:alleged SJW converged organizations. For all articles on those lists, Infogalactic could add pre-determined text in each case. That way, Forkbot would continue to update the articles to the latest version, which it would not do if this information was added manually. There could be many different lists of attributes, representing many possible texts that could be added to each such article. Jack-arcalon (talk) 12:31, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

How about the Special:Categories footer section? ~ JasonCarswell (talk)

Is Infogalactic being blocked

I'm getting a

Secure Connection Failed

The connection to the server was reset while the page was loading.

error when attempting to access Infogalactic directly, I'm currently editing through a proxy. Is anyone else having these problems, either with Comcast or in general?

Thales (talk)