Talk:Record of Wiki Creation

From My Big TOE Wiki
Revision as of 18:01, 21 May 2011 by David Mathis (talk | contribs)

Jump to: navigation, search

InterCommunication Page For Wiki Workers

Until we have a better use for this page as the Wiki becomes established, can we not continually edit/add to this page for communication rather than send e-mails back and forth separately and outside the Wiki?

Ted

========================================================================================================================================================================================================

David, I assume that you have seen the various comments in e-mails to the effect that we do want this to be a secure Wiki rather than actually editable by any chance passerby. So it seems that the first things we need to do are to set up the log in procedure, even though this will add inconvenience for us. Then we need to establish a hierarchy of users with a limited number at the top able to let others move up the scale to do appropriate work. I suggest the following as being known and meaningful terminology instead of the more foreign Wiki standard terminology:

Developer: Tom, you, me, anyone else who is going to participate in the set up of the 'guts' of the Wiki. Each level needs to inherit the rights of the level below down to the level of Member.

Administrator: (to replace Bureaucrat) Tom, you, me, anyone else who is going to be able to change the rights of others.

Moderator: (to replace Sysop) Tom, you, me, anyone else who is going to be able to do what they attribute to a Sysop.

Member: Anyone granted a login and having the ability to create and edit pages. Membership needs to be granted by an Administrator after they do a login to request membership. After approval, login becomes normal procedure.

--David Mathis 14:57, 21 May 2011 (EDT)This part is done. If you go here: http://wiki.my-big-toe.com/index.php/Special:RequestAccount you will see that members now have to request accounts at this URL. Then and admin can do various functions based on the request.

--David Mathis 14:57, 21 May 2011 (EDT)Ted you have been added with all rights

Visitor: Anyone visiting the Wiki and paging through, searching and reading the pages. Any Visitor should have the right to enter comments on the discussion for a page only. We need to be able to receive this input. They cannot go back and edit their comments or anything else. Visitors need not log in, not having a log in, but should Record their 'name' with the system, if we can do this. I understand that the system keeps a record of the URL of any one doing any editing and so should for this limited posting ability of comments. I think that we need this limited kind of information so that we can ban visitors who are destructive in their comments, either with garbage or deliberate unhelpfulness. We need to eventually have a page with rules and commenting rights for visitors, associated with their Registration, including the explanation that this Registration allows them to make comments and suggestions on the Wiki contents. We should try to approximate this if we can't do precisely this.

If you have other suggestions then note them or edit as appropriate.

Ted

=========================================================================================================================================================================================================

Hi Ted,

This sounds like a great starting point. I will start working on this today and see what I can get accomplished. I will add notes to your list above, or something else that makes sense as a chip away at it. Most of it sounds reasonable with a few things sounding iffy, so the approximate statement is accurate at this point.

The first thing I want to do Ted, is to get you into the system with all rights so that you can start looking through the special pages and help me figure some of this out. Can you please e-mail me your desired username / password so I can set a temp password for you, when you have a chance.

Best Regards

David

==============================================================================================================================================================

David,

I saw another level of membership referred to as Stewards that seemed to be above Bureaucrats. Is this correct? That is where Tom needs to be set up if there is in fact such a level.

In looking at some of the changing of rights, it seems that we could change the terminology, but it does not seem worth all that trouble. It seems that you would have to set up a new group, assign all of the rights to it as appropriate and then remove the group with the old name. I can learn to live with the new terminology and so can everyone else to save needless trouble.

Ted

===================================================================================================================================================================

Hi Ted,

You will want to stick to the Media Wiki Manual

Here are the levels that are shipped with the default install...

User rights levels

sysop

A user with the rights of a sysop can delete and undelete pages, protect and unprotect pages, block and unblock IPs, issue read-only SQL queries to the database, and use a shortcut revert-to-previous-contributor's-revision feature in contributions. See Manual:Administrators for details. (Due to something of a historical accident, users with sysop status are generally referred to as 'administrators' or 'admins' on the English Wikipedia, and most likely elsewhere; although on other Wikimedia projects they are known as custodians, bibliotecarios, and moderators. To change what sysops are called, you can do a find-and-replace in MessagesEn.php.)

developer

This is obsolete and removed from later versions of the software.

Developer has special rights and sees additional features in the Special-Pages (lock / unlock DB) as well in setting User-rights. Only a developer can UN-Set (delete) the Sysop-Rights of an admin.

bureaucrat

This is a user that is allowed to turn other users into sysops via the aforementioned Special:Userrights page.

bot

A registered bot account. Edits by an account with this set will not appear by default in Recent changes; this is intended for mass imports of data without flooding human edits from view. (To show bot edits, either click the "Show bots" link on the Special:Recentchanges page, or append &hidebots=0 directly to the page URL, e.g. like this on Wikipedia, or like this on MediaWiki.)

See the category Wikipedia:Category:Wikipedia vandalism on main Wikipedia.

David


I read extensively regarding Wikipedia Vandalism on Wikipedia. I was not sure exactly why you suggested this. Our situation will differ substantially from that of Wikipedia.

We have much less information to deal with and we have proportionately less editors who will be working on it. They catch the errors introduced into Wikipedia apparently in large part because they have people who are constantly scanning the edits in nearly real time. Thus questionable edits are mostly caught. We will not have that luxury. We will be more in the way of having a problem finding persons interested in actually working on the Wiki and keeping at it. We just don't have the active numbers of members. We will have to depend upon the quality of those doing and permitted to do the editing and the fact that potential vandals are excluded.

I don't know how this project will develop yet, but I think and hope that it becomes an effective replacement for the archive section I tried and somewhat succeeded in creating at the bottom of the Index page on the BB. Few members are involved in ferreting out 'gems' that Tom has posted in the past and referencing or copying them there. No one works on it systematically, mining a particular section as Tom set them up. The hardest thing to do is to get the search function to be used rather than just ask the same questions over again. The ability to use the search function is one problem and the quality of the search function is another. And I personally don't find it easy to use.

We are hopefully not going to so much have new articles generated as postings by Tom found and linked into coherent articles if they are not already sufficiently extensive to be encyclopedic on a subject. I am not at all sure we have board members who should be writing new articles that do any extensive expansion of MBT concepts other than Tom and I, to be perfectly frank. Tom because he is our primary reference for such extended information and he has done so with some postings that were more advanced than he felt he could include in the books. I because I have done so with Tom's blessings and some input as I was in the process of the work. No one else has actually done any such extension to MBT concepts. One of the things I will likely do is to consult with Tom as to whether I shouldn't just put everything I planned as a book, since I have already posted so much on the BB, into the Wiki as it isn't likely to make me any more money than MBT has made for Tom. Tom hasn't made a dime out of the books yet but rather foots expenses for every copy produced. The only alternative is to sell PDF copies that you produce yourself at trivial expense and that means once a few are sold, you will realistically sell no more. Neither Tom nor I are in this for the money.

What have I missed?

Ted


David,

Another thing that we need to consider ASAP is the question of Backups of the Wiki. If you are not aware, one of the things I do every night is to run a backup of the BB using the supplied compressed backup function included as part of the administration package. What do you do for backups with a Wiki? There seems no such thing as an administration package unless it appears at your level of access to the software itself. Is this something that you must set up on the server and then I can download copies nightly? The compression of the BB actually occurs on the server and I just receive the resulting download. I have 1.5 TB drives so I can take the volume for quite some time. It is presently less than 26 MB per each on the BB and only takes about 5 minutes, including transit on my relatively slow and cheap Internet access. What do I need to do?

Ted

--David Mathis 19:01, 21 May 2011 (EDT) Already taken care of. I do redundant backups automatically daily to two separate locations. Basically the daily backups are overwritten daily and the weekly happens every 7 days and is overwritten from the week before. Just standard practice for web hosting. This takes care of catastrophic events.

If you want the backup sent to you daily I can setup a cronjob that would e-mail it to you daily, ftp it to a server of choice or I can have a cronjob copy the compressed backup to a web accessible directory that you can download from daily, either way I am backing the stuff up daily and weekly.

Regarding non catastrophic events, you are aware that the wiki saves previous versions of pages in the event that someone accidentally messes something up and these can be restored right from within the wiki software layer. It's one of the cool features of the wiki.