Wikipedia talk:Tools/Archive 1

message: I wrote HTML::WikiConverter (and the corresponding MediaWiki dialect) which performs html->wiki conversion. It's available on CPAN and there's also an online interface at http://diberri.dyndns.org/html2wiki.html which doesn't require users to download and compile source code. It might make a better alternative (at least simpler to use, IMO). --Diberri | Talk 15:23, Aug 26, 2004 (UTC)
: Tank's for the Information! I'll put that into the article. -- G. Gearloose (?!) 16:21, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Importing HTML 

message: Are there any macros for MS Word that can automatically convert text to Wikisyntax?  ¶ ɳȉčḩåḽṗ | ✉ 20:25, Oct 14, 2004 (UTC)
:Not that I've encountered, but you might look at http://tikiwiki.org/tiki-index.php?page=WordToWiki_swythan#comments as a starting point. http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?WikiDoc may also be relevant. Mr. Jones 09:37, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Macros 

message: *Compared to other directories within wiki - Wikipedia is the one that I love the most.
*Many people in my town are unware of Wikipedia or the Wiki Project.
*Can I go and tell schools in my part of the country about Wikipeida and Who is autorized to do so?
--AVNP 11:03, July 31, 2005 (UTC)
:I don't see why you couldn't. In fact, the GFDL ensures that you can even copy/quote parts as long as you use sufficient attribution (a link to the Wikipedia article will suffice, I think). Shinobu 11:30, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  My Experience with Wikipedia 

message: I think it could be a good idea if these javascript bits were in a central place that we could transclude into our user js instead.  That way admins could fix up the code, etc. and it would propagate automatically. — Omegatron 03:34, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It's maybe not quite what you're asking for, but see User Scripts WikiProject jnothman talk 14:28, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: That's pretty close.  I'll ask there. — Omegatron 00:13, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  updatable Javascript 

message: According to Wikipedia talk:Tools/1-Click Answers, WP:TOOLS will likely soon be included as a sidebar link under toolbox.  This should be a high-quality and one-stop starting point for tools of all sort.  Especially if in the sidebar, new editors should be welcome, likely including at least a pointer to basic editing help, and certainly to procedural tools such as AfD.  Templates, User style scripts (User:Me/xxx.css & .js), Browser scripts (greasemonkey), standalone tools (answers.com, vandal fighter, kate's, etc), etc etc.
From wikiproject user scripts conversation;  I agree with Zondor's proposal for Wikipedia:User scripts (maybe Wikipedia:User style same as m:Help:User style) for user script repository (outside Tools subpages).  Also jnothman recommends organization by function rather than type.
A wikiproject, Wikipedia:WikiProject_User_scripts, has been created to help rally behind user script organization. ∴ here…♠ 18:17, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Making WP:TOOLS comprehensive and easy 

message: I've written a new wikiside javascript tool for images, see User:Zocky/Picture Popups. How do I go about including it in the tools collection? Zocky 04:18, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Edit the relevant page! jnothman talk 07:04, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Please contribute to WP:US and help us index the growing number of user scripts!  Thanks.  ∴ here…♠ 09:55, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture Popups 

message: Zondor added:
* User:Ingoolemo/Thread help, synchronised threads as alternative to current system of user conversations
Somewhere else, ideas? ∴ here…♠ 06:25, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  thread guidelines 

message: I wonder where this nice project should be listed? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 23:27, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: most likely Wikipedia:Text_editor_support#How_to_use_specific_editors_for_Wikipedia_editing -- Zondor 03:22, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Is that still in development? The last release was over a year ago. Gflores Talk 03:30, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikiwriter]] 

message: This probably should be linked from one of our subprojects page.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 04:19, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[WikiSearch Toolbar]] 

message: How do you use "Wikipedia Animate"?  I followed the instructions on the page, installed greasemonkey, installed the script.  Now what?  Everything looks just the same when I click on a page's history.  -- MisterHand 15:41, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia Animate 

message: javascript:insertTags('[',']','http://www.example.org link title');
External link (remember http:// prefix)
I remember a tool I used to use where you put in 2 pages, and it showed the shortest path between them. Does anyone know which one this is? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.61.28.217 (talk • contribs) 
:I think you are probably referring to this. HTH. --Cactus.man ✍ 18:55, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tool I was wondering about 

message: I've made a Google Desktop sidebar plugin called GDWikiWatch that shows your watchlist in the GD sidebar. I can't release it just yet (my password is hardcoded), but if you're interested, please leave a comment at the talk page! Thanks - Tangotango 15:37, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  GDWikiWatch 

message: Is there a Wikipedia tool that would allow me to filter the RC in such a way to show only new categories?  It's easy to select categories only, but I still have a lot of existing ones to sift through to find the new ones.  CG janitor 12:01, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Can anyone help me? CG janitor 22:07, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think so because Special:Newpages doesn't allow for sorting by namespace.Geni 22:22, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Looking for a tool 

message: Are there any decent Wikipedia editing tools for Linux? Ideally, one that I could also use for Wikisource to make my editing there easier. Thx, Kickstart70·Talk 00:20, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Linux? 

message: I object to listing Answers.com's Wikipedia "1-click" edition on this page since this tool is not only encumbered by software patents, Answers.com has launched an aggressive lawsuit against Babylon to enforce these patents against a competitor who produces a similar toolbar. See my post to foundation-l for details. If there is a Board decision that this tool should be listed here, I hope that someone will point it out. If it is to be an editorial decision, I object on editorial grounds against effectively advertising a proprietary tool whose parent company files aggressive software patent lawsuits against competitors. Given that Wikipedia does not even allow the use of MP3 or MPEG video for patent reasons, it seems highly inappropriate to highlight such a tool. --Eloquence* 16:28, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Is your argument that we shouldn't support it on purely ideological grounds? If so, I disagree - Wikipedia is not an ideology, soapbox etc etc. Presumably the tools section is there to help users browse Wikipedia in other ways. Can't we let users decide for themselves whether software patents are evil? Stevage 16:46, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  It's not just about software patents per se -- many companies try to get as many of these as possible. What is unusual here is that Answers.com is filing an aggressive, unprovoked lawsuit against another company (which, by the way, makes a pretty decent product) based on an arguably trivial software patent. I do not necessarily insist that Answers.com's tool should not be listed at all, but I object to a prominent listing, and I do believe that at the very least, we have an obligation to inform our readers about the patents and the lawsuit in an NPOV manner.--Eloquence* 17:00, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The normal thing would be to link to answers.com, and the software patent controversy ought to be documented there somewhere. Stevage 17:35, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  At least in the version of the link added by Jimbo, there was an explanation that toolbar revenue from answers.com goes to Wikimedia. If such an explanation can be present, certainly an explanation of the patent issues and other relevant business practices associated with this tool is equally pertinent right on this page. If, on the other hand, the comment about revenue is not added here but instead moved to the answers.com page, it may be appropriate to also move the information about the patent lawsuit to that article.--Eloquence* 17:55, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

text: I do not know what the exact wording should be, but I think that our link to amazon on the isbn books page can serve as a reasonable template.  We need to disclose (and/or celebrate, depending on your perspective) that answers.com is sharing revenue when they could do the same thing without sharing anyting.  And we need to acknowledge that there are patent controversies.  I want to make sure that FDL compliance is solid before anything else though.--Jimbo Wales 02:03, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia is an ideological project. "The Free Encyclopedia"? Patents are very un-free. --maru   (talk)  contribs 17:43, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Other than the general evilness of software patents for people who value free information, a strong argument for some sort of reaction to Answers.com's lawsuit is that they are suing a competitor over a tool that allows people to, amongst other things, access Wikipedia content. In addition, Answer.com's patent is so trivial/general that other future search applications that incorporate Wikipedia could be affected: "The patent, entitled "Computerized Dictionary and Thesaurus Applications," covers a computerized searching process of indicating a target word on a display screen and employing at least one word appearing in the vicinity of the target word in order to eliminate ambiguity in the meaning of the target word."  — Matt Crypto 18:39, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Answers.com tool 

message: The answers.com tool requires all users of the tool to agree to the following:
"You are only permitted view and/or browse the Content, and/or make limited copies of portions of the Content as fall within the "fair use" provisions of the United States Copyright Act, provided all such uses are for noncommercial personal purposes. Except as otherwise expressly permitted in this Agreement, you may not: (i) modify or create any derivative works of the Content or documentation, including without limitation, translation, customization or localization; (ii) remove or alter any trademark, logo, copyright or other proprietary notices, legends, symbols or labels in the Content; or (iii) publish any results of benchmark tests run on the Content. Furthermore, you may not use the Content in any manner that could damage, disable, overburden, or impair the Content (e.g., you may not use the Content in an automated manner), nor may you use the Content in any manner that could interfere with any other party's use and enjoyment of the Content. You are not permitted to retrieve and store in electronic or any other form any of the databases underlying the Content that is accessed through our Web Site or Software. All commercial and/or unauthorized use of the Content of any kind, including reproduction of any kind for a commercial purpose of any kind, direct or indirect, is strictly prohibited. The Content, the Web Site and the Software remain solely the property of Answers or of Answers Content providers at all times, and their use is subject to copyright as defined in our copyright statement that may be found at here."
I personally objected to this language months ago, but was told that it would be changed for the Wikipedia specific tool. It has not. These terms are unacceptable. We can not endorse a site which claims to add restrictions on our GFDLed content in violation of the license.  As such, we can not accept this link until answers.com amends their license to comply with the GFDL.  --Gmaxwell 19:52, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have passed your comments along to Answers.com, and they will certainly fix this promptly.  I will keep you posted.--Jimbo Wales 01:48, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

text: You are grossly misreading the terms of use clause in question, but no matter.  I talked to Bob this morning and he is happy to change it.  --Jimbo Wales 23:39, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Jimbo, this exact point was brought up months ago (based on the text with the prior non-wikipedia branded tool) and you provided the same answer (We'd contact them and they'd change it). This isn't something I sprang on you just to trip you up... There is no need to get into an argument about the effective or intended meaning of the text: In violation or not, it's misleading, and most people without the direct contact you've had with Bob read it as an attempt to place restrictions on our content.  This can be simply solved, so lets stop arguing and get it fixed, as it should have been when it was first raised. The dissonance between your perspective on Answer's commitment to our goals, and their recent legal actions will still remain, but thats a matter deserving of discussion and understanding... It is not necessarily a deal-breaker on its own, but the misleading license text is. --Gmaxwell 20:44, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Oh fantastic, it's been changed! --Gmaxwell 01:44, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Answers.com tool violates the GFDL 

message: The license has been updated . "All Wikipedia content is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License (see "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Copyrights" for details). Otherwise, ". With this amendment I see no further basis to object on the basis of license issues. This is a positive move on Answer's part, and I hope the rest of our concerns are as easily addressed. --Gmaxwell 01:48, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  License update 

message: I am surprised that this page is protected - it shouldn't be - the ToS has clearly identified wikipedia content as GFDL here (see Use of Content). Thus, the page should be unprotected and the link should be returned. If terms of service on the Answers 2.0 differ then I think we should assume good faith and that they will make the download software license compatible with the notice on their website. This is biting the hand that offers a gift. Trödel 21:52, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh fantastic, it's been changed! --Gmaxwell 01:44, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please unprotect 

message: I think a poll needs to be held over this.  Jimbo, why is the toolbox link not being left up to community consensus?--Urthogie 19:28, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The toolbox link, if you read carefully, is not up to us.  Only whether its on WP:TOOLS.  What if we oppose to the toolbox link(that thing on the left side of the screen)?--Urthogie 19:14, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  poll needs to be held 

message: I removed this link (Search Wikipedia from any windows application) - this guy's website won't even let you right click to go back to the prior page he is so anti-GFDL - with all the hubbub about Answers.com - a controlling site like that shouldn't be in the list at all. I mean look at the source for the page:
 
 <HTML><SCRIPT LANGUAGE="JavaScript">
 </SCRIPT><SCRIPT LANGUAGE="JavaScript">
 </SCRIPT><SCRIPT LANGUAGE="JavaScript">
 </SCRIPT></HEAD>
 <BODY><NOSCRIPT>To display this page you need a browser with JavaScript support.</NOSCRIPT>
 <SCRIPT LANGUAGE="JavaScript">
 </SCRIPT></BODY>
 </HTML>
Trödel 21:53, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe that obsfucating even where the coding is coming from has a one word name paranoid. Pegasus1138Talk | Contribs | Email ---- 02:56, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removing student search tool that is not open 

message: I've protected the page to stop the reversion war over the Answers.com tool. Please see the dispute resolution process to resolve your differences of opinion, and please do not violate the protection even if you have the administrator access to do so. If you wish to contest the protection, please do so through the normal process at Requests for page protection. // [admin] Pathoschild (talk/map) 14:24, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page protected 

message: I see no problme with listing this as long as we note on the page that we've been paid to include the link.  If nothing else I think we should at least be honest about the nature of the link and why it's there. Pegasus1138Talk | Contribs | Email ---- 01:49, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have added a note to that regard as an addon to the info about the answers.com tool on the tools page. Pegasus1138Talk | Contribs | Email ---- 01:58, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  If nothing else 

message: I have mentioned Answers.com's software patent lawsuit (which is based on a patent directly relevant to the linked here) in the Wikipedia: namespace page about the tool and partnership, Wikipedia:Tools/1-Click Answers, which seems like an appropriate place, particularly since the Answers.com article is currently a terrible mess which I don't really have time to fix. I would also be in favor of mentioning it on this page, especially now that the partnership itself is highlighted, but I will wait for other editors' comments before doing so.--Eloquence* 17:35, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's fine if a little borderline on the 1-Click-Tool page specifically about the program, but it's way overboard here on the general tools page, which is supposed to be more pragmatic and not political. It would also be appropriate for the Answers.com article, but you already knew that. - Taxman Talk 23:41, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The patent issue 

message: Can anyone give me some advice?  I'm fairly new to using Wikipedia tools, though I've been at the site for some time.  I spend much of my wikipedia time guarding high-traffic pages against vandalism.  I've come to about the limits of what I can do manually.  My fingers ache and editors with proper tools are clearly far more efficient than I am.  Can anyone recommend a good-quality anti-vandalism tool that will work with Mozilla Firefox on Win2kProSP4?  The only feature I'm really desperate to get is a better (ie faster) way of monitoring articles for suspicious changes.  A blacklisting or greylisting feature so I can keep track of IP vandals would be helpful as well.  Cheers, Kasreyn 10:27, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: vandalproof will not work with firefox -- it's a vba app that uses ie for its rendering. despite this, i think it's a bang-up tool that has, essentially tripled my performance over using popups alone. it has a black and white list feature which is super handy for "camping" multiple high traffic vandals. having said that, i use popups a lot: mousing over diffs saves time. but, really, for serious rc patrolling or camping high-vandal entries, vandalproof is really the only option. -- frymaster 20:26, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  popups...  vandalproof...  aagh!  help! 

message: Is there a tool (or any other way) of listing only NEW articles created by me? -- I@n ≡ talk 06:27, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New articles created by me 

message: Has someone changed the justification of English Wikipedia from left justification to full justification?  If so, please change it back promptly, because the new way sucks.  Badagnani 03:37, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Justification 

message: I would like to know if anyone can help me with a bot to remove articles, which are listed in both parent categories and child categories, from the parent category.
Specifically, there is a category
:Category:Shopping centres in Australia
This should have child categories :Category:Shopping centres in Queensland etc. but no articles directly.
What I would like is for someone to run a bot over all those articles and remove all the articles which are directly in :Category:Shopping centres in Australia, from that category, if they are in any of the subcategories listed on that page.
After this is done I want to go back through the articles, identify which ones are actually in New South Wales, and repeat the process.
IF anyone can help please drop me a line...--Garrie 00:00, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bot query 

message: the wiki brouser looks great but how do you download it???Chris5897 17:15, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Download??? 

message: The toolserver seems to be down. I get a "Forbidden" message when I try to check my edit count. -  Mike | trick or treat  22:03, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The toolserver is OK, but something is up with Essjay's edit counter, you should still be able to use User:Interiot's javascript-based edit counter (unless you use IE), so look at one of the server based edit counters listed here, hope this helps. Michael Billington (talk • contribs) 08:58, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Hmm, I do not mind counting my contrib that much, but it is the second time this month that Interiots counter has an extra-ordinary high lag. What might be there weird? --Wendelin 14:08, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Toolserver down? 

message: I don't know where to post this so I'm going to throw the question out there and I hope somebody might know. One tool I would find useful is the ability to select a phrase in an article and automatically discover which revision in the history added that phrase. Has there been any work done with this kind of idea?--Will2k 20:44, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Mod parent up ;-) How often I've wanted this... Shinobu 00:55, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tool request 

message: I have a Macintosh; is there a tool I can use? Please contact me on my talk. Scoutersig 15:19, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What I mean is, is there an equivalent tool to, say, AutoWiki Browser? I'd like to make some "lots of edits." Thanks. —ScouterSig 20:17, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Macintosh 

message: Is there any known project for helping the RC patrol with the recent changes, as to draw their attention to certain changes that "look like" vandalism?
:There are some that rv vandalism automatically: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:AntiVandalBot--Will2k 18:09, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tool for helping finding vandalism 

message: I've removed the two links to the answers.com tools. The second one (the search engine on their site) is of no use to the reader, as the reader can decide their own search engine. The first link (1-Click) is just disgusting. --- RockMFR 22:54, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm sorry you feel that way.. But we've had the link for ages now. I was the first to remove it, I believe, but they did everything we asked them to do with respect to the licensing. The tool is really spiffy. I don't use it personally, because it's not free software, but I can see why some people like it.  If some day later we decided to only list free software (and ideally only free software that can be used by people who are on free software OSes), then I'd be glad to see it go. I think the fact that we're suggesting that people use software that denies them freedom is far more unfortunate than paranoia about our relationship with answers.--Gmaxwell 23:04, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I still see no reason for the search engine link at answers.com (not the downloadable tool)- if we have that, we should link to every search engine with domain-specific search capabilities. Of course, other search engines are even better because you can go directly to the wiki content without having it surrounded by ads. I'm going to be bold and remove that one again. --- RockMFR 23:09, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, although in the past it's been way more up to date than Google. I guess the few people that matters to aren't going to find it via this page anyways. (I didn't add that link, and wouldn't have added that link, in any case)--Gmaxwell 23:15, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Answers.com link 

message: I have two tools developed by my company that I'd like to discuss. I'd rather get some feedback rather than just posting them directly to the page.
The first tool is a web service called SWS (Semantic Web Service) that's documented at http://sws.clearforest.com. SWS takes unstructured text or XML and uses natural language processing to locate the people, organizations, companies, geographies and other items inside the text. My thought is that this may be of interest to Wikipedia to "auto generate" links that are not present within articles.
The second tool is a Firefox extension built on top of that web service. The extension, Gnosis, is available at http://gnosis.clearforest.com. Gnosis automatically processes pages as you read them and highlights people, companies, geographies, etc. You can hover over the highlighted terms to launch searches in Wikipedia, Topix.net and a variety of other locations. By default it does this analysis automatically for Wikipedia pages - but you can change this behavior via the options. It's actually quite cool to surf Wikipedia and have a whole new level of hyperlinking to Wikipedia itself as well as external news and reference sources.
So, do these tools belong on this page? And - if you try out the Firefox extension we'd really appreciate feedback here or at clearforestgnosis@gmail.com. Thanks. Ttague 02:59, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semantic Processing & Extraction 

message: I looked but couldn't find much of a reference for making a tool to use with Wikipedia, maybe I'm blind :) I saw plenty of examples for using JavaScript or something similar for added features to your browser. I'm looking for something more external to the web page itself, like XML requests. I saw the RSS feed but that's only for retrieving info, what about for editing? Can anyone point me in the right direction? Thanks Wikidan829 16:44, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not exactly sure what you're looking for - you might take a look in this index and see if it is of any help (check under Queries (database)  to start).  -- John Broughton   (♫♫) 21:47, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  External Tools 

message: The pywikiapi link ( http://sourceforge.net/projects/pywikiapi/ )under External programming interfaces yields a sf.net page that says it's an invalid project.  There is a cached version of the linked page available at  which lists the project admin as mdbecker.  LinuxMigration 19:42, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've deleted the link and the related text.  -- John Broughton   (♫♫) 19:07, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  pywikiapi under External programming interfaces is a dead link 

message: There are multiple sources from which we get pictures for Wikipedia (US govt work, Some press agencies etc). Can somebody develop a search tool which searches for images from a set of web sites based on tags or keywords. The list of websites that can be searched should be editable to add/remove websites. Also, option to select the type of licensing on which the pictures are available should also be present. Where can I find help to develop this tool? --Natrajdr 07:28, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Searching images in the web for WP 

message: Tools: has just been added to the interwiki map as a handy shortcut to toolserver locations. Neil ム 21:38, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Toolserver shortcut 

message: Is there a tool to count how many backlinks a page has? I tried http://en.wikipedia.org/w/query.php but it does not have such a counter. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 04:02, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tool to count backlinks 

message: Is there a tool (just for free!), which counts how often somebody has opened your user page? If yes please tell me about it, many thanks! Dagadt (talk) 16:27, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No. Wikipedia has an immense volume of page requests every day; logs aren't kept of who did what (and even if there was space to do so, they wouldn't be kept for privacy reasons).  Certain governments would be very interested in what pages were seen by what users (IP addresses and registered editors).  -- John Broughton   (♫♫) 14:24, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  special tool... 

message: I can't access Wikicharts anymore. Has that site been discontinued? I found it really interesting. Serendipodous 13:51, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems like it is down permanently. But you can find the same thing (actually, better) at this location. -- John Broughton   (♫♫) 14:27, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikicharts 

message: Does anyone know if the solver has been moved?  If so, I'd love to know where it's new home is.  The one that is linked from  this page was working good.  Then it stopped working good.  And now, the web-site doesn't seem to respond at all. TheBarrow (talk) 21:33, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Six degrees solver 

message: Is there no tool that lists all pages that a given user created? Jobjörn (talk) 13:35, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, there is; you'll find it here. Sometimes is slow. -- John Broughton   (♫♫) 14:22, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article creation 

message: It would be helpful before considering revising an article to see if a particular topic has already been added, removed, added, and removed. Not that that would always keep one from adding it again, but it would still be helpful to know about the earlier revisions. Often that sort of activity leaves a mark on the talk page, but not always. The tool I am thinking of would search for terms throughout the entire revision history of an article, and return them in the context of adjacent text, displaying the range of time over which the relevant text remained in the article. It should not be terribly difficult to write, as the links to earlier versions are all accessible on the history page. The trick would be in figuring a good way to display the results. Any thoughts on the utility of such a tool? Jbening (talk) 02:24, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it wouldn't be terribly difficult to write, but it would be exceedingly difficult to write efficiently. One could simply write a program that downloads all versions of an article, ever, but past a handful of revisions this starts to become extremely time- and resource-consuming. Considering that users would probably want to use such a tool on exactly these kinds of highly-edited articles (evolution comes to mind), this is a major and likely deal-breaking impediment. With direct access to the database itself, however, the outlook might not be so bleak... – ClockworkSoul 19:25, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  How about a tool to search old versions of an article? 

message: Has anyone ever suggested having a tool that informs of any new articles created in a given range of categories?
I would like to be able to track newly categorised articles within the scope of the Project I participate in to enable categorisation correction should it arise.--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 04:36, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  New article creation tracker 

message: We're having a discussion at WT:FAC about what constitutes a primary contributor. The majority of articles brought to FAC are usually nominated by the editor who has the largest number of edits to the article. However, we often get "drive-by" nominations where an editor sees an article he admires and nominates it without having made any (or a very low number of) edits to it. We need to exclude these, since the nominator should have an intimate knowledge of the material during the FAC process. Recently, however, we also got an article nominated by an editor who has contributed the most content to the article, but wasn't at the top of the list by edits: those were taken by vandal-fighters and copy editors who had made minor changes. Most of the editors who review FACs are unfamiliar with the article history of each nomination, and we need to see who has contributed the most content to the article.
What might be helpful is determining the contributions to the article by size. Is there a tool that measures what each editor has added or removed in number of bytes? If it doesn't exist, is it something that could be created? --Moni3 (talk) 13:17, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tool needed to determine primary contributions by size 

message: Is this possible to upgrade, so I don't have to reload pages for new versions?  Sceptik (talk) 00:50, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gmail's real-time updates applied to Wiki software. 

message: I'm looking for a way to watch for additions of pages to a category -- is there anything out there like this?
Thanks, --A. B. (talk •  contribs)  13:13, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is there a tool to watch for additions to Categories? 

message: Hi, I do a lot of monotonous edits on the French Wiktionary, which tool can I use there, and how do I get the settings right (that is for fr.wiktionary.org. Reply to my talk page, please! Mglovesfun (talk) 07:47, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  French Wiktionary 

message: I navigated to the history of a page before logging in to Wikipedia, and saw links to external history tools at the top of the revisions list. When I logged on, they were gone. Is there any way to make them visible when I am logged on? --Joshua Issac (talk) 22:51, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  History tool 

message: I created Desktop Watchlist for Windows. Its main advantage, when compared with Special:Watchlist, is that you are able to see only edits made since you checked for the last time, if you want. Svick (talk) 18:58, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Desktop Watchlist 

message: First wikicharts bit the dust, and now it seems like grok.se's view counter is also dead. I'm currently monitoring an article's viewership, because, as no one initially knew what or where it was, various alternate versions of it popped up all over the site. I think I've created enough notifications and redirects that anyone looking for that specific article will not get lost, but its viewership is still increasing (it has quadrupled in the last month) and I would like to see what I can do to aid it along. Serendipodous 07:21, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I miss the traffic stats, I think it should possible to get it running again. Or at least I hope it will. Who created it? We should contact them..the raw stats are still there if they are any use to you? here (Off2riorob (talk) 18:08, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

text: I'm currently working on building a view counter as part of a suite of tools for the currently-in-development Igor. With any luck, I can have it online relatively soon. Grad school has been particularly demanding lately however, so development hasn't been as fast as I had hoped. – ClockworkSoul 16:03, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  We need a new view counter 

message: Does not work:
*escaladix's tool lists articles created by a given user (as this is done by checking for the first edit of every article the given user has ever edited, it's quite slow.) 
Ikip (talk) 00:25, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link does not work 

message: An editor signing only with his IP created a tool upon  my request that counts the number of editors active on Wikipedia in a given time frame. He released it to public domain ("You can use and modify my code any way you like, I'm not taking ownership or copyright") and made the code available (sourcecode/jar/Windows). Details are at User_talk:Piotrus/Archive_30#RC_active_users. It would be a shame if this was just forgotten in my archives... where could this be added? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk  19:04, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not sure where to add