Brukerdiskusjon:Rotlink: Forskjell mellom sideversjoner
Slettet innhold Innhold lagt til
Ingen redigeringsforklaring |
|||
| Linje 13: | Linje 13: | ||
: Hi Rotlink, just wondering; are you affiliated with archive.is in any way? Archiving is good, but I normally use [http://webcitation.org WebCite] to archive pages, an archiving service established in 2005, driven and supported by a concortium of reputable publishers. I'm quite reassured WebCite will be around in the future, and if not, that the material will be transferred to archive.org. On the other hand, archive.is is a rather new service, created in May 2012(?), and there is no information on the site to reassure that the material will be available in the future. My main worry is that there is no information either about storage or funding. Storing webpages safely is sure costly. – [[Bruker:Danmichaelo|Danmichaelo]] ([[Brukerdiskusjon:Danmichaelo|δ]]) 14. sep 2012 kl. 11:41 (CEST) |
: Hi Rotlink, just wondering; are you affiliated with archive.is in any way? Archiving is good, but I normally use [http://webcitation.org WebCite] to archive pages, an archiving service established in 2005, driven and supported by a concortium of reputable publishers. I'm quite reassured WebCite will be around in the future, and if not, that the material will be transferred to archive.org. On the other hand, archive.is is a rather new service, created in May 2012(?), and there is no information on the site to reassure that the material will be available in the future. My main worry is that there is no information either about storage or funding. Storing webpages safely is sure costly. – [[Bruker:Danmichaelo|Danmichaelo]] ([[Brukerdiskusjon:Danmichaelo|δ]]) 14. sep 2012 kl. 11:41 (CEST) |
||
:: Hi. Yes, it is my friends' project. I will tell them to provide more information about the project on the site in order to increase the trust rank. As far as I know the technical side, it uses Hadoop file system, so all data is duplicated 3 times across different servers. Webcitation.org is great, and it is used in some wikis (Russian, Ukranian, ...) to archive all the links immediately as they appear on Wikipedia. But it has the disadvantage of saving only the main html, without the supplement files, such as frames, CSS, images and embedded fonts. This result in something like http://www.webcitation.org/666oNAsWx (this link is taken from Wikipedia), as soon as the supplement files disappear or relocate. I do not exist on archive.is usage, but it seems that it is the best option what we have for fighting link rot, and also we can be in touch with its authors if some features would be required for Wikipedia.--[[User:Rotlink]] 14. sep 2012 kl. 17:38 (CEST) |
|||
Sideversjonen fra 14. sep. 2012 kl. 17:39
Hei Rotlink, takk for dine bidrag og velkommen til Wikipedia på bokmål og riksmål. Se nn.wikipedia for Wikipedia på nynorsk. Her er noen lenker du kan få bruk for:
Hjelp
Samleside for hjelpsidene
Samleside for hjelpsidene
Stilmanualen
Stilmanualen for utformingen av Wikipedia-artikler
Stilmanualen for utformingen av Wikipedia-artikler
Fem søyler
Wikipedias offisielle regler og retningslinjer er basert på fem søyler, og innholdet skal oppfylle kravene om nøytralt ståsted, verifiserbarhet og ingen original forskning.
Wikipedias offisielle regler og retningslinjer er basert på fem søyler, og innholdet skal oppfylle kravene om nøytralt ståsted, verifiserbarhet og ingen original forskning.
Sentrale wikipediaprinsipper: Opphavsrett, objektivitet, konsensus, wikikette og hva Wikipedia ikke er
Andre lenker som kan være nyttige: Navnekonvensjoner, oppsettsveiledning og bildeveiledning
Vi håper du vil like ditt opphold på Wikipedia. Ikke vær redd for å gjøre noe feil, det blir sannsynligvis rettet opp raskt. Du kan eventuelt begynne å kladde på personlig kladd. Og still gjerne spørsmål på nybegynnerforumet om du lurer på noe.
Hello, and welcome to the Norwegian (bokmål and riksmål) Wikipedia! Your contributions are appreciated. If you do not understand, or cannot write Norwegian, you can inquire for further information in your native language at the embassy.
Mvh Geanixx (diskusjon) 13. sep 2012 kl. 08:01 (CEST)
archive.is
Hei, kan du forklare hvorfor du mener det er nødvendig å endre/tilføye eksterne lenker slik at de peker til archive.is? --M O Haugen (diskusjon) 13. sep 2012 kl. 20:50 (CEST)
- Hello, would you please explain why you are adding/altering urls? --M O Haugen (diskusjon) 13. sep 2012 kl. 20:59 (CEST)
- In order to keep the <ref> links from being removed from the original sites. We have a feature for it (arkiv_url and arkivdato). You see, about 30% of the links point to 404 pages or expired domains. It is a big deal to do something with it. Actually, I do not like my fixes much, 2-3 timestamps per link do not look good. If we will find a better solution, it would worth to write a bot to do it. I use archive.org as well, but it has a problem: when domain is being expired it shows domain registrar's ad, and during this time it has robots.txt which prohibits robots's activity. So archive.org removes its data, even the data which has been saved when it was not blocked by robots.txt. --User:Rotlink
- Is there some plan or investigation behind your selection of articles? They seem rather random to me. --M O Haugen (diskusjon) 13. sep 2012 kl. 21:12 (CEST)
- Yes, it is random for a moment. I try to set up parser which parses out ref urls, checks their existence on the archives, ... And to collect the feedbacks and suggestions, of course :) --User:Rotlink 13. sep 2012 kl. 21:20 (CEST)
- Hi Rotlink, just wondering; are you affiliated with archive.is in any way? Archiving is good, but I normally use WebCite to archive pages, an archiving service established in 2005, driven and supported by a concortium of reputable publishers. I'm quite reassured WebCite will be around in the future, and if not, that the material will be transferred to archive.org. On the other hand, archive.is is a rather new service, created in May 2012(?), and there is no information on the site to reassure that the material will be available in the future. My main worry is that there is no information either about storage or funding. Storing webpages safely is sure costly. – Danmichaelo (δ) 14. sep 2012 kl. 11:41 (CEST)
- Hi. Yes, it is my friends' project. I will tell them to provide more information about the project on the site in order to increase the trust rank. As far as I know the technical side, it uses Hadoop file system, so all data is duplicated 3 times across different servers. Webcitation.org is great, and it is used in some wikis (Russian, Ukranian, ...) to archive all the links immediately as they appear on Wikipedia. But it has the disadvantage of saving only the main html, without the supplement files, such as frames, CSS, images and embedded fonts. This result in something like http://www.webcitation.org/666oNAsWx (this link is taken from Wikipedia), as soon as the supplement files disappear or relocate. I do not exist on archive.is usage, but it seems that it is the best option what we have for fighting link rot, and also we can be in touch with its authors if some features would be required for Wikipedia.--User:Rotlink 14. sep 2012 kl. 17:38 (CEST)