Talk:Documentation

Duplication of Information
It seems to me that the info on How_does_MediaWiki_work%3F and Documentation are very similar. With a few tweaks, I propose that the two pages be merged into a page called something like "About MediaWiki".


 * Doesn't seem so, to me. robchurch | talk 00:17, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Typos
I think the 'please read it first before posing any questions' text should be changed to 'please read it first before posting any questions'.


 * Done. robchurch | talk 00:17, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

lusiano
How to turn off access to history pages to all user except to selected user?


 * Not possible with MediaWiki at this time; we won't support this in the future, either. robchurch | talk 00:17, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Why not? This is a very useful feature, especially if you have sensitive pages where you want just one or a few people to be able to see what was there before.

--203.184.36.144 01:34, 17 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Because that doesn't fit in with the purpose or goals of MediaWiki. 86.134.116.228 08:34, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Invalid link
The "complete FAQ" link leads to an obsolete page, as per the page itself. It should link to Help:FAQ if I am correct.


 * Seems to do so now. robchurch | talk 00:17, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Downloadable version of Documentation
Is there a way to download the documentation for offline browsing? Perhaps a snapshot of the current state of the documentation or whatever would be nice.


 * The documentation is still sparse, and what little we have is under a mismash of licences. When we have something to release, we'll do so, but we don't right now. :) robchurch | talk 00:17, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

CVS-related docs on SourceForge no longer exist
Dear all,

the CVS-related docs on SourceForge, mentioned in the article, don't exist anymore. MediaWiki now uses Subversion, and indeed a link for it is on the left.

Unfortunately, the newcomers (like myself :)) will have a hard time to find it out. I tried to update the link, but the page is not available for editing.

Could someone please correct it. My suggestion would be to replace


 * The docs directory on SourceForge provides other CVS-related documentation.

with


 * The docs directory provides other Subversion-related documentation.

Of course it could be rephrased for better...

Publish?
I removed this from the note at the end of the page because it and looks inaccurate and does not makes sense to me:
 * It is also planned to publish a complete MediaWiki Manual, that is in the public domain, but still has to be written.

Please clarify and substantiate it if you want to put it back. Thanks. --Rogerhc 20:53, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Invalid link (again)
The link to the discussion page of the FAQ is incorrect again. It looks like it needs to link to Manual_talk:FAQ. Stack 22:33, 7 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks - fixed. --HappyDog 03:33, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Search command
PLEASe move the search command up. It is off the page of most browsers, and most people use search much more than the other links here.

This change is almost as gay as the "show preview" change. 69.153.88.108 08:44, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

What are the benefits of Wiki?
May I suggest a page explaining the benefits of using wiki? I am attempting to evaluate wiki but am unable to understand if it will serve the purposes of my group without getting my head much farther into this than I want to just to evaluate it. Example: with wiki you can track changes; with wiki you have a record of discussions; with wiki you can limit/not limit who posts; Wiki is a collaborative software that facilitiates group work; etc. Maybe there is a page like that that I missed? -- 77.52.89.100 - 15:01, 29 November 2008


 * You're right. That is something mediawiki.org is missing. A decent marketing message to attract more corporate users. Wrote this on my user page a while ago, but haven't attempted to fix it (yet)
 * The page called How does MediaWiki work? is a noddy introduction, and Manual:What is MediaWiki? also makes some basic points, but not really in a "here's why you would want to use it" kind of way. In fact it just defers the main explanation to the Wiki article, which naturally repels bulls**t sales pitches, for better or worse. But also it doesn't explain things from a mediawiki point of view. So yeah, maybe there's sites elsewhere on the internet. Anyone else have recommendations?
 * -- Harry Wood 18:08, 1 December 2008 (UTC)