Misplaced Pages

Help talk:Searching: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 23:09, 4 April 2009 editDavidgothberg (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users16,965 edits What happened to Google: BillMasen: We have now fixed it. You might need to bypass your browser cache to see the fix.← Previous edit Revision as of 00:03, 5 April 2009 edit undoBillMasen (talk | contribs)Pending changes reviewers2,631 editsNo edit summaryNext edit →
Line 394: Line 394:
:::{{tick|18}} '''Done''' - We have applied a fix so now the combo box is working again. If you don't see the combo box yet, then you need to ] your browser cache. (You need to do that since Misplaced Pages tells the browsers to cache files like ] for 31 days.) :::{{tick|18}} '''Done''' - We have applied a fix so now the combo box is working again. If you don't see the combo box yet, then you need to ] your browser cache. (You need to do that since Misplaced Pages tells the browsers to cache files like ] for 31 days.)
:::--] (]) 23:09, 4 April 2009 (UTC) :::--] (]) 23:09, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
::::: Win. ] (]) 00:03, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 00:03, 5 April 2009

Archive
Archives

Proposal: Link to a search of the same word in another language

I often use the Firefox search box to look for a word in Misplaced Pages. However, this will only search the english part of wikipedia. I would highly appreciate a language list on the search page which would switch to the search in another language, looking for the same word. Other opinions? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.187.179.91 (talk) 08:21, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

I fully agree and would highly appreciate this expansion
(213.100.22.98 (talk) 17:43, 16 November 2008 (UTC))
You can add search for other language versions of Misplaced Pages to your Firefox search box. Do like this: Just enter any page on for instance the German Misplaced Pages (or whatever language you are interested in), then click the icon to the left of the Firefox search box and you get a drop down list of search plug-ins you have, and below those you find the search plug-in that the site you currently are visiting suggests with the option to add that search plug-in.
However that only helps people with browsers that has that search plug-in feature. (I know that there are some more browsers that has it.) And it isn't a very visible feature even to Firefox users. So it would be very nice if the search page linked to searches in the other languages in some way.
So I tried to add normal interwiki links to the Special:Search page, that is links that are visible in the left side menu called "languages". I added the interwiki links by editing the MediaWiki:Searchresulttext, that is the text that is shown on top of every search result. Unfortunately that didn't work. But that would have meant about 250 links or so, so it would have been pretty messy anyway.
So the next option is to link from the text in MediaWiki:Searchresulttext to some page where we have links to the searches in other languages. And we already have such a page, the www.wikipedia.org page. Well, that one only allows searching the top 20 language editions of Misplaced Pages, but that is at least a good start.
An even better thing would probably be if we added the same top 20 language editions in the drop down list of search engines on the Special:Search page itself. Since then you wouldn't even have to type the word again. And that seems to be the original request by 129.187.179.91 above. I just realised I can easily add that to the code in MediaWiki:Common.js/search.js. Should we do that?
--David Göthberg (talk) 04:58, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Other external[REDACTED] search engines

There are some other websites indexing wikipedia's articles. To name a few: seariki.com, wikiseek.com. Should they be included? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.57.167.154 (talk) 08:25, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Do people actually use this?

I always just look for things by typing the article title into the web address. That's the way I have always done it, and I'm wondering whether people do the same.--h i s r e s e a r c h 10:00, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Advanced search

An advanced search link would be included near the search box, to look for in some concrete name spaces (i.e. wikipedia: image: and so on), without change every time the search preference (i.e. it can be interesting to look for in the wikipedia: meta pages once, but no forever). --Nukeless 10:54, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

I think this is a great idea. This page would have (at a minimum) the same checkboxes as the "Search in namespaces" box found at the bottom of a search results page. --AlastairIrvine (talk) 14:51, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Search Engine is horrible

Can someone explain why the search engine is so horrible? I have had the following happen to me several times: type something into the search box of my browser and find no hits from Misplaced Pages, but then when I enter the same phrase into Google, the wiki article I was originally searching for is the first article that appears. I think that the default search of Misplaced Pages should use Google's algorithm's because Misplaced Pages has by far the worst searching algorithm I have ever seen on the internet. And seriously, Google's search is pretty much the best out there. </rant> --141.212.142.247 (talk) 16:23, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages's search function uses the open source Lucene engine. It's at least a de facto policy of the Wikimedia Foundation to use open source software (Google's search is not). Given that alternatives (like Google) exist, improving Misplaced Pages's native search is not a high priority for the (mostly volunteer) developers who work on the software that runs the site. BTW - I think Misplaced Pages's search beats the hell out of Google's encyclopedia content. -- Rick Block (talk) 19:54, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
I would differ greatly. Google provides for the creation of custom search engines. On my main health website, I have dropped Google's site search for a couple of different Google custom search engines. I would call them open source XHTML. They are as about as free as you can get.
I think that I will add a Misplaced Pages Custom Search feature to my blog. -- John Gohde (talk) 20:49, 22 December 2007 (UTC)bumface gronola

Contents

The Contents at the top of the page is wrong. Libcub (talk) 06:00, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

It's a customized short version, but all the links work. The full ToC is very long. -- Quiddity (talk) 07:20, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
I can see why one might not want all the level 2 and below headings to show, but shouldn't it at least show all the level 1 headings? It's missing Internal search engines (New),Searching with TomeRaider,If you cannot find an appropriate page on Misplaced Pages, and Notes. Libcub (talk) 18:03, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Poor upkeep? A half-hearted attempt to keep things simple? I don't know. I've added them, except "Notes" which doesn't really need one, and removed "Internal search engines" (see below). -- Quiddity (talk) 20:09, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
This page needs an overhaul in general. I still believe some sort of merge (archived proposal) with Misplaced Pages:Look it up is worth thinking about. -- Quiddity (talk) 07:20, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Merging makes sense to me. Libcub (talk) 18:03, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Also, why is "Notes" indented to the left of the other level 1 headings? Libcub (talk) 18:03, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Fixed. -- Quiddity (talk) 20:09, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Removed section

I'm removing this section (and copying below), as it doesn't appear to do anything useful currently (development halted since March 2007). -- Quiddity (talk) 20:09, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

==Internal search engines (New)== Recently, new ''internal'' search engines were created. These search engines can search Misplaced Pages articles, meanwhile they are user-friendly and are integrated into Misplaced Pages for a good experience. They aren't as good as external search engines though. ===WikEh?=== WikEh? is a '''Wikipedian-friendly''' search engine that searches the articles you want fast. It also searches images that are on Misplaced Pages. Users can give it a try by clicking on the link below. * ]

Stop Words

Before when nothing was found after a search links would come up to external search engines such as Google to search the site for the same keyword. This has been replaced with a information box about stop words, which according to the article about them are no longer an issue due to changed software. Can this error be reverted? 76.24.87.115 (talk) 18:22, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Ouch < | http://en.wikipedia.org/special:search/ >..-2008-03-24T01:55:00.000Z">

Search used to result in an estimate of how many pages it had thought that it had located; this number had frequently been less than accurate: ostensibly it does not communicate w/ itself very well. Now, that number, in the past several days, has disappeared.

Why?

] 01:55, 24 March 2008 (UTC)."> .">

Numbers have returned,.... How? Why?

] 01:30, 25 March 2008 (UTC)."> .">

Context

Somebody removed the section that said "By default, when a search is performed with no user logged in, context is not displayed in the list of search results. When a user is logged in, context may be displayed, and this parameter is modifiable in "My Preferences". " Why? 74.69.82.49 (talk) 20:24, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

The change in question. I'm not at all sure, but possibly due to a few of the items in these lists of "Fixed bugs" and "Other changes": Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2008-03-24/Technology report#Fixed bugs. Lots of tweaks to the search lately. That help? -- Quiddity (talk) 21:40, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
I made the change after seeing . When I log out, I get context in searches, also after closing and reopening the browser. Is it different for you? Maybe there is something in my browser cache influencing results but I don't want to clear the cache. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:28, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Button name change

Hmm. That was odd. Though it's cleared up, I could have sworn the "Go" and "Search" buttons had been briefly replaced by "I'm Feeling Lucky"—a la Google.com—and "Wacky Search," respectively. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 22:25, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

That was one of many April Fools' Day pranks. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:59, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Wildcards in WP search

The following "help" is useless; it doesn't tell you how to use wildcards in WP searches:

Misplaced Pages:Searching#Wildcards
Please exercise self restraint when using wildcard characters, as they take a toll on the server. See Boolean fulltext search for details on their use.

Is there somewhere that does tell you how to use wildcards in WP searches? Pdfpdf (talk) 03:50, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Is Boolean fulltext search not clear enough? What are you trying to do? -- Rick Block (talk) 04:22, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Now that I know that "WP search uses 'Boolean fulltext search', as descibed in Boolean fulltext search", it probably is clear enough! Thanks for your help, Pdfpdf (talk) 04:41, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

What is wrong with the searching?

When you search, it only searches the text of the title and not the contents now, and you cannot make it search the contents of an article. That is annoying. Rcduggan (talk) 11:40, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

The Search facility now also doesn't present the previous options of searching through Categories, Templates, etc. What's up? Michael Bednarek (talk) 12:13, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
I currently get this on any search: "Misplaced Pages search is disabled for performance reasons. You can search via Google or Yahoo! in the meantime". Misplaced Pages:Village pump (technical)#Where are the servers?? says other things have been down earlier. I guess we just have to wait for all things to be enabled. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:29, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks, I see that now. If in doubt, read what's on the screen. — apologies. Michael Bednarek (talk) 12:34, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

When there is no article on the word you typed in

Why not add the Google etc. links as is done when the search isn't working? If Misplaced Pages doesn't have an article on something it's at least nice to give people a leg up to a better site. Richard001 (talk) 08:37, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Also, a link to Wiktionary would be good to, as it's often difficult to know if a word will have its own article or not. Richard001 (talk) 04:41, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Auto-fill in search box?

I've recently noticed that the search box auto-suggests article titles based on my typing. Is this a MediaWiki feature in a recent version? An extension? How does it do this!? I'd like to add it — whatever it is — to wikis I administer. Timneu22 (talk) 10:12, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't know how to administer wikis but maybe you can find what you need at Misplaced Pages:Village pump (technical)#MediaWiki Suggest (for lack of a better link). PrimeHunter (talk) 00:10, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
There is a relatively recent posting about how this was implemented at Brion's blog (see the Open Wiki Planet aggregator blog). -- John Broughton (♫♫) 22:10, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
How do you turn it off? Frickeg (talk) 04:40, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
For your Misplaced Pages account, go to Special:Preferences, click the Search tab, check "Disable AJAX suggestions", click "Save" button. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:47, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. Frickeg (talk) 06:05, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
Do you have a direct link to the post, please? I couldn't find it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.195.86.40 (talk) 23:33, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Problem with auto-fill box covering Go and Search buttons

The auto-fill box now drops down and covers the Go and Search buttons. Great feature but this presents a problem for those who like the Search results page. Could the "drop-down" box come out on the side of the search box instead? It took me awhile to notice a way around this by pointing and clicking on a blank area, which makes the drop-down box retreat. Thanks 172.134.250.104 (talk) 00:16, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Image Searching Not Working

I'm searching "Google Earth" with only the "Image" checkbox checked. Nothing comes up. Subsequent searches for other things turn up nothing. It's worked before. Please help. -- VegitaU (talk) 05:58, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

I get 271 hits in that search. I don't know whether there has been problems with search earlier today. Do you still have problems? PrimeHunter (talk) 21:25, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
Nope. Must've been a glitch last night. Thanks, -- VegitaU (talk) 21:49, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Hm. Maybe not it's not working at the moment (03:53, 22 May 2008 (UTC))). It seems to not work around this time every day. Is something up? -- VegitaU (talk) 03:53, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

It works for me now (and it displays the images which I haven't seen before). The time you give is not practical for me to test. I would be surprised if there is a specific daily time interval where image search fails, but there may be times where Misplaced Pages tends to get more traffic and expensive things like search are more likely to have problems. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:37, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Blank search

can the blank serch be made to redirect to the homepage.

1) why not
2)searchbars selecting[REDACTED] and enter should talk you home
3)allows binding of a "keyword" to wiki search so wiki foo goes to foo but wiki still goes to wikipedia

--82.35.192.193 (talk) 14:38, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Searching the database

Is there a way to search the raw source of the wiki with case sensitive or regexps without downloading the whole thing? A website that hosts a mirror of it, perhaps? Even an out of date mirror would be fine. For instance, I want to search for specific patterns to look for false positives for a Mediawiki proposal. — Omegatron (talk) 00:39, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

How about a tool to search old versions of an article?

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)

Auto-fill suggest box thing

The text says "Misplaced Pages suggests articles matching your entry as you type in Firefox since version 2.x only; this function is not available in Internet Explorer 7.0." but I use internet explorer and it suggests articles to me. Not that I'm complaining! but shouldn't the text change to reflect that?

On another note, the reason why I came to this page, is there any way that the auto-suggest could be filtered to not suggest redirects? It would be a good way of finding article duplicates, badly named articles etc if it could. I must warn that I'm not technical at all at computers or script, so apologies if that was a stupid question! Jdcooper (talk) 00:57, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Problem with "exact match only"

I wanted to find an article with the word "owl" in conjunction with a specific username. Per WP:SEARCH I tried searching "owl" "username" and +"owl" +"username" (in my actual search "username" was of course a specific username).
Along with the correct hits I get false hits on such words as "knowledgeable", "Dowling", and "bowl" which contain *owl*.
Am I doing something wrong or is the search engine? -- Writtenonsand (talk) 13:46, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

The search is working but the results page is lying to you. All those pages do have the word "owl" by itself, but the code that finds and highlights the search terms in the results uses a simple pattern match to extract the search term in context. That means that if you search for "mac" "owl", you will get 154 hits (today), and every single one of them will have the words "mac" and "owl", but might also have false pattern matches, such as knowledge, bowling, Crowley, machines, or Macy's! I wish I knew where to report this really wrong behavior. -- Searchtools (talk) 23:22, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Special:Search

Is Special:Search discussed in the article? --Timeshifter (talk) 17:21, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Search article deletions and deletion reviews

Where can I search article deletions and deletion reviews for specific deleted articles by name? Is this discussed in Misplaced Pages:Searching? I did not see it. --Timeshifter (talk) 17:22, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

How does average searcher find Special:Search?

The search result page from sidebar searches does not link to Special:Search. Most search engines have a link to "advanced search"; either on the initial search page, or on the results page, or both. --Timeshifter (talk) 17:26, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Advanced search is difficult to find

I did not notice right away that advanced search is at the bottom of the regular sidebar search results page. Could a link to "advanced search" be put at the top of that page? --Timeshifter (talk) 16:50, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

I provided a couple of links to it in the article. The advanced search form was hard to find. How ironic. I had seen it before, but couldn't find it until I finally saw it at Special:Search. --WikiWes77 (talk) 19:29, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
To suggest a link in the side bar, a good place would be WP:VPT --WikiWes77 (talk) 23:10, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
Thanks! I left a request there. --Timeshifter (talk) 23:02, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
That discussion and more is now located here:
MediaWiki talk:Sidebar#Placement of "advanced search" --Timeshifter (talk) 17:14, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

All-words search

Misplaced Pages search seems to pull up results that include only some of the words searched for. Is there a way to get it to only pull up results with all the words? --Timeshifter (talk) 16:52, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Clusty

How do you search using Clusty? I tried typing "sandwich" (with and without quotes) and got zero results. SharkD (talk) 21:24, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Proposal: Link to add red-linked search term to watchlist

I find it most useful to add non-existent articles to my watchlist so that I will be notified as they are created. I don't suppose many people take advantage of this possibility, however, as I think it's a feature which many more people than myself will find useful, I propose that the page which is called when a search turns out negative includes this option of adding the search term to the user's watchlist. __meco (talk) 10:00, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Theoretically a "watch this" link could be added to the end of MediaWiki:Noexactmatch, except that it would be meaningless for IP users ... —AlexSm 14:38, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
I often use this functionality too, but I find it easy enough to click on either of the two redlinks and add to the watchlist from the editpage. Think of it as an easter-egg for us smart cookies ;) -- Quiddity (talk) 18:29, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Proposal: Default to an external search

Misplaced Pages's built-in search is bad. There are good external searches (Google, Yahoo, Windows Live, etc.) allowed as an option -- an option that I always end up taking, because the default search engine won't find the article that I need. The question is: what is more important: (1) Giving people easy access to the information that they need, or (2) A dedication to using exclusively open-source software? I feel that Misplaced Pages's purpose is (1), and that insisting on using an inferior search engine just because it's OSS is inflexible and self-destructive. And, after all, if we default to an external search engine and end up not liking it, we can switch back, no harm done. So how about it?24.84.9.2 (talk) 22:20, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Recent mods to Wiki:Searching

This section was moved to Misplaced Pages:Village pump (technical)#Recent mods to Wiki:Searching, please continue any discussion there. --David Göthberg (talk) 11:22, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Recent mods in September/October 2008 to the search function have not necessarily been advantageous.

Amongst other things, around 5AM UTC, when Wiki search is presumably updating its lookup tables, the search function is turned off and finds nothing.

Try searching for the misspelled "diffrent". If a misspelling such as "diffrent" is corrected to "different" then the lookup table should ceasing finding the word under its old spelling and start finding it under its new spelling. Prior to September, this was as quick as pressing the "Refresh" button of IE or Firefox. Performing the search again, or moving from one page to another of the search results would also do a refresh.

Now this refresh seems to happen only once a day.

Tabletop (talk) 04:52, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

I think you are correct in the discovery that the search index now seems to update much less often. It might be because lately they have had several problems with the Misplaced Pages servers and databases, so they have been turning off lots of "luxury" functions to save load and to avoid triggering some of the bugs. Or at least that is what it seems to me they are doing, based on some of the server admin logs and other comments people have pointed me to. And for instance Special:MostLinkedTemplates haven't updated for a month now. It used to update about twice a week before. :(
Anyway, I will move this report to the Misplaced Pages:Village pump (technical), since the devs and some of the people who manages the servers take a look there every now and then.
--David Göthberg (talk) 11:17, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

This section was moved to Misplaced Pages:Village pump (technical)#Recent mods to Wiki:Searching, please continue any discussion there. --David Göthberg (talk) 11:22, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Double quotes do not force an exact match

I have removed "exact match only" from the heading for "Phrases in double quotes" as it was misleading. Putting search terms in double quotes does not force an exact match search. For example, searching for "log in" finds Log cabin which does not contain "log in", but contains "logs in". Nurg (talk) 22:15, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Size of "No article title matches" section in search results

Maybe it's just me, but it seems like when a normal search from the sidebar returns no articles with matching titles, the results page has a lot more text up at the top than it used to. All the partial match results are still there, but now they're further down on the page, so much so that I have to scroll before I can see any of them. Instead, there's a really large section that takes up most of the page and gives info about how to phrase the search correctly or create new articles. Was this section always that large, or is my computer just acting strange? 76.28.10.13 (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 01:23, 29 October 2008 (UTC).

The message currently seen by unregistered users is taken from MediaWiki:Noexactmatch-nocreate which was created 25 October. It sounds likely that unregistered users saw something shorter before but I don't know exactly what. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:47, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Searching article titles

Is there any mechanism for restricting a search to just article titles? (i.e. can I search for all articles with a particular word in their titles, like I can use the A-Z index to get a list of all articles that start with a particular word?) If not, has this idea ever been proposed?--Kotniski (talk) 16:07, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

It has just become possible with "intitle:". PrimeHunter (talk) 22:00, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Search for one type of Misplaced Pages templates

Is this possible?

I've formulated a new WikiProject named WikiProject Haystack, which aims to highlight the most essential in Misplaced Pages by gathering the most important information into special templates. However, it would have full potential only if such templates could be searched separately. So before I officially propose it I'd like to know - is it possible to sort out such templates in the search-engine. One example would be to add another namespace, such as Essentials:(Article name). If that's impossible, could the search engine be modified to search through templates of a certain category, or having some kind of marker that the search engine can sort out? Mikael Häggström (talk) 17:35, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Icons of search engine plugins should reflect language of Wikipedias

---As David Göthberg suggests I copy this here from village pump (proposals). --Edupedro (talk) 02:00, 1 November 2008 (UTC)---

Hello: I think that many people like me look for information in different Wikipedias (different editions/languages of it). I believe that not few people, to save time, use the offered (in one of the first code lines, that begins with <link rel="search") search engine plug-ins for the browsers. If Firefox is used each plug-in comes with an icon (in this case a W). The problem is that, as the icons of the different Wikipedias are all the same, it happens to me often that I search in a Misplaced Pages that I didn't want to look for. I think that this could easily happen to more people. The solution is easy: to put a flag in a corner of the icon: for example the one of Italy for the Italian Misplaced Pages. Thanks, --Edupedro (talk) 22:29, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

But is English a UK, English, or USA language? Is Portugese a Portugese or Brazilian language? What flag would we use for Anglo Saxon? And the flag would be so small, it would be hard to work out what it depicted. DendodgeTalk 22:33, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
Hello: I would go to the origins and use the flag of England for the English Misplaced Pages and the one of Portugal for the Portuguese version. I imagine that some Australian, ... and Brazilian ... people would prefer to use different flags: the solutions is easy, create a page with the search engine plug-ins (for example Misplaced Pages:search engine plug-ins for the English edition) with different flags to choose from. For the Anglo-Saxon Misplaced Pages "ang" could be used instead of a flag. I've been using personalized icons for the Misplaced Pages search engine plug-ins from some months ago and can confirm that the flags are easily seen (and my vision is normal, not excellent) and really help to search faster, in a more comfortable way and not confusing looking for in a different Misplaced Pages. You can see a similar solution for the Dutch and Nynorsk editions in Mycroft and for Encarta in the same web. Thanks, --Edupedro (talk) 23:22, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
A person can already restrict searches to a particular language Misplaced Pages by adding a search term, such as site:en.wikipedia.org for the English Misplaced Pages. You can even create a "smart keyword" in Firefox so that you don't have to type as much. (Also, I think that the "W" icons you mention are actually part of the Firefox browser, rather than something provided by the Wikimedia Foundation; if so, it's somewhat pointless to make a suggestion on this page.) -- John Broughton (♫♫) 14:44, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
That's not actually true. While Firefox does ship with a Misplaced Pages plugin, every WP page also uses OpenSearch to provide a search plugin for auto-discovery by any compliant browser. OpenSearch allows a site to specify a default icon. The request is perfectly cromulent when discussing them. Smart keywords are undiscoverable and are basically deprecated in favour of OpenSearch (and the Add to Search Bar extension, which is due for integration into Firefox in future), and are a workaround for the issue described rather than a solution. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 15:01, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
Hello: In the past I searched sometimes from Google adding for example site:en.wikipedia.org in the end. I think it's useful, but the search engine plug-ins make the searches faster and more comfortable. I didn't know about the "smart keywords" of FF: I've tried them and find them OK. But if you usually search in more than 20 web sites or pages (like me) I find it difficult to remember so many keywords and when you use 2 or 3 versions of the same web (for example of WordReference or Misplaced Pages) it can be confusing. So I prefer the search engine plugins: they work with Explorer and Firefox. The first one only admits the OpenSearch format and doesn't show icons, while FF admits both OpenSearch and Sherlock and shows icons, which is really helpful. Every page of en.wikipedia.org has as one of the first lines of code this one: <link rel="search" type="application/opensearchdescription+xml" href="/w/opensearch_desc.php" title="Misplaced Pages (en)" />. It offers the search engine plug-in, located where href says: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/opensearch_desc.php. If we go to that page and open it with the notepad we can see the icon label (<Image height="16" width="16" type="image/x-icon">), that contains the URL of the icon for the plug-in: in this case http://en.wikipedia.org/favicon.ico (the favicon of Misplaced Pages, shown if we enter this URL in the address bar of the browser). My suggestion would be to use instead an icon with something to distinguish it from other Wikipedias (languages). To avoid controversy it could be just the "en" Wiki (abbreviation). And to make it more visual I'd create a page called Misplaced Pages:search engine plug-ins with several plug-ins, each one with the flag of England, UK, USA, Australia, ..... so anyone can choose the one which prefers. Regards, --Edupedro (talk) 23:57, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
You may want to move this discussion to WP:VPPR, as a proposal. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 20:24, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

←I'm thinking this probably isn't the greatest idea. It's just an invitation to drama and arguments over using the 'right' flag. Plus, I just don't see many people using it--and those who would, probably already know, or know where to ask, how to change favicons.   23:33, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Well, to you Americans it might seem strange, but most of us Europeans speak several languages and regularly use several different language Wikipedias. (Consider that for most of us there are several countries within just some hours train ride.)
I use Firefox and I use the search plug-ins that Misplaced Pages offers, since they are very convenient and in many ways are better than using an external search engine. And since the search box on the pages don't open the result in a new window, then that box is not an alternative to the search plug-ins. I have a whole bunch of Misplaced Pages search plug-ins, but all of them have the same white icon. So it is pretty confusing. It happens all too often that I can't find what I search for and try several alternative spellings until I realise that my search box has the German or Swedish search selected, not the English one.
One fairly okay alternative is of course as Edupedro suggested to use the short text form of the language, like "en" for the English Misplaced Pages. But we who use multiple languages know that it is a long standing tradition to use the "origin" flag of each language. That is, most multilingual web sites use the British flag for English, the Portuguese flag for Portuguese, and so on. I have actually several times seen Brazilian web sites where they use the Portuguese flag to mark the language, in-spite the site being very Brazilian.
And the flag doesn't have to be big, since it is merely a matter of telling apart a handful of known flags. One only needs some pixels to see the colour difference between for instance a British, German and Swedish flag. As little as 8×6 pixels can be enough for that. I think you can tell which one is which of these flags, with the Misplaced Pages favicon as size comparison:
--David Göthberg (talk) 02:38, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
That's Russia, Germany, and Swaziland, right? It's even worse on my laptop, where the first one is Puerto Rico and the third is Barbados, but I can't find anything with the black-and-yellow stripes of the second flag. --Carnildo (talk) 08:06, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
See WP:Icons for the issues with flags Gnevin (talk) 10:40, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
Carnildo: I hope you are just trying to be funny, right? What I meant is that since I know that I speak English, German and Swedish, and have installed the search plug-ins for those languages, then those tiny flags are enough for me to tell apart which plug-in is which. And I would actually use slightly bigger flags, since there are plenty of space in the favicon. And the three examples above were resized by MediaWiki's SVG renderer. When I use a better tool for the resizing and do some hand tweaking the images become slightly clearer. Now, if I only had some tool to add those images to the plug-ins...
--David Göthberg (talk) 16:01, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
I'm being completely serious. What I'm saying is exactly what I see when I look at those icons. You need to consider that not everyone has an LCD monitor capable of reproducing crisp single-pixel areas of color. My desktop monitor is an old CRT connected through a cheap KVM switch, while my laptop is an OLPC XO-1, which cannot display detail that is less than 2 pixels on a side (you should see the rainbow effects that result when someone tries to be cute and use halftoning instead of a 50% grey). --Carnildo (talk) 21:45, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Another option could be to precede or superimpose the W logo with a little language code. These could be created using a tiny pixel font, 5 pixels or so tall. Michael Z. 2008-10-30 16:49 z

DE.W

EN.W

WPT

The last one needs a 1-px white outline for the language code, so it's clearly readable over the W. Michael Z. 2008-10-30 16:55 z

Hello: The Misplaced Pages's search engine plug-ins that I have at the moment installed are the one for the English version and the one for Spanish. I did the procedure (easy and quick but "craftwork") that you can see in this user subpage of mine to see flags in the bottom of the icons with the W. These flags are bigger than the ones shown by David Göthberg. I can recognize well David's flags and very well the ones I use. I used the tiny command-line program of Fatih Kodak to covert the personalized icons to the code I inserted in the plug-ins (it can be downloaded from this page of him -for Linux and Windows- and also can be used online from this page also of Fatih). I have had a look to Misplaced Pages:Icons and seen that has nothing for these plug-ins. We could put a link there to a new page (for example Misplaced Pages:search engine plug-in) with different versions of the English search engine plug-in, each one with a different icon: the default one (W), one with "en" on the bottom of the W, another one with the flag of England, another with the one of the UK, Ireland, USA, Canada, Jamaica, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, India, ...... I think we shouldn't discuss about which one is the best, just offer the possibility to everyone to choose the one (s)he preffers. I think that page would really be helpful for many people (and avoid the "craftwork"). Thanks, --Edupedro (talk) 21:45, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
Edupedro: Oh, thanks for the links! Now I have inserted flag icons in all the Misplaced Pages search plug-ins I use. It looks very nice in my Firefox, no confusion anymore. I actually use flags that are 13x8 pixels, placed in the lower right corner of the usual icon.
And yes, let's make a how-to page named something like Misplaced Pages:Search plug-ins, where we can document all this. I see that Misplaced Pages:Searching#Browser-specific help does have some (outdated) information on this. An option would be to update that one instead.
I have now read up on these plug-ins and did some testing, and have a nifty image trick to report. (But let's agree on the page name for our how-to page first and then discuss more there, or move this discussion to Misplaced Pages talk:Searching.) But I think I have found out something even better:
Instead of uploading the plug-ins to our how-to page I suggest we create them at mycroft.mozdev.org. I took a close look at that site and there is much more to that site than first meets the eye. We can actually update the existing Misplaced Pages search plug-ins there and add new ones, with any images we like. (And many of the Misplaced Pages plug-ins there do need a work over.) That site has much better handling of plug-in creation, updating and installation than we would have on our how-to page. I will probably create some plug-ins with the language icons I have made, and do some updating of the existing plug-ins there.
--David Göthberg (talk) 05:18, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

End of section moved here from the Village pump (proposals).

Hello, David (everyone invited also, of course): I changed the icons of Mycroft for Misplaced Pages in English and in Spanish a couple of times (with flags in the bottom) but they put the previous ones again, without the flags. So I think it will be better to do all for these languages in the Misplaced Pages site. I think that Mycroft people don't want to change the plug-ins already in OpenSearch format. But I see many still with Sherlock format. This can be a good chance to put personalized icons with flags while we change those plug-ins from Sherlock to OpenSearch. I think we can also edit Misplaced Pages:Searching and/or create the page you propose: Misplaced Pages:Search plug-ins, and redirect to it Misplaced Pages:Search plugins, Misplaced Pages:Search plug-in, Misplaced Pages:Search plugin, Misplaced Pages:Search engine plug-ins, Misplaced Pages:Search engine plugins, Misplaced Pages:Search engine plug-in and Misplaced Pages:Search engine plugin. And, as you say, we can inform about all this in Misplaced Pages talk:Searching. Today I go for a trip of one week, so probably I won't be able to write in Misplaced Pages. But if you can and want go ahead, please. Thank you, --Edupedro (talk) 01:56, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
Okay, if the people over at Mycroft are reverting your flag additions, then I guess we have to make our own page here. But it sounds like you changed the images of the existing plug-ins over there? Then I agree with their reverts, since I think that was the wrong approach. The existing "default" plug-in over there should have the old default Misplaced Pages search plug-in icon, if nothing else to not provoke others who disagrees with the flags. What we should do is to add new plug-ins with new names and with the flags. So we should try that and see how they react.
But if that doesn't work then we have to make our own page here. It probably is a good idea anyway since then we get a talk page too where people can discuss the design of the icons and ask questions. And since this will mean a long list of plug-ins with icon examples and so on, and these plug-ins only work in some browsers, then I think the plug-ins should have a separate page instead of that we extend Misplaced Pages:Searching.
I have a number of ideas how to make our page work neatly. I'll put it on my to-do list and get to work with it when I get the time. And regarding the nifty image trick I discovered: I can make it so the plug-in file we store here doesn't contain the image, instead it links to the image as stored here at Misplaced Pages (the same image we will show in our list here). At least in my Firefox 2 the browser then automatically download and substitute the image into the plug-in file on first load. We have to check if that works for the other browsers that use this search plug-in standard too. This means people will get the latest version of the image in their plug-in when they install the plug-in. Which means we don't need to update both the image and the plug-in here each time we update the image. (But user's that already have installed a plug-in and want the new image need to get the plug-in file again.)
I think the search plug-in icons should be uploaded to Commons, and we need a category name for the images. We have to check what is the proper name for such a category at Commons.
It is currently not clear to me if we should (and are allowed to) upload the search plug-in files themselves to Commons, or if we should upload them here at the English Misplaced Pages. Or perhaps they should be uploaded to Meta-Wiki or so?
Actually, since we are going to make search plug-ins for many languages, then in theory it is kind of wrong to put the plug-in page itself here at the English Misplaced Pages. We should perhaps move all this to Meta-Wiki, and just link to that from the appropriate pages here?
--David Göthberg (talk) 21:05, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Searching for section headings only

Is there a way to search for section headings only? I'd like to find articles that contain (for example) == Bibliography == as a section heading, but not those that use the same word in the text or references (e.g., does not find "bibliography" in <ref>Smith, J. 2006. "A Complete Bibliography of Santa Claus's Writings." J Christmas.</ref>.)

So far, I've been using Special:Search and scanning for (section Bibliography). Any ideas? WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:46, 18 December 2008 (UTC)


Typo on Misplaced Pages:Searching

Search for '2or'. Missing whitespace. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 00110001 (talkcontribs)

I don't know what you are referring to. Can you clarify? PrimeHunter (talk) 13:27, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
Presumably this. -- Rick Block (talk) 16:46, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikilink to Misplaced Pages search???

I'd like to create links using code such as

]

but it appears that you cannot do such a wikilink. And have to do instead create an external link using code like

Is there a reason why the internal link cannot be done? Jason Quinn (talk) 22:24, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Per m:Help:Special page#Links to special pages, simple searches work - e.g. Special:Search/searchstring. If you want any parameters other than the search string it appears you have to use the external link syntax. You can use a variable for the base URL, e.g. {{fullurl:Special:Search}}?ns0=1&search=privledge&fulltext=Search expands to //en.wikipedia.org/Special:Search?ns0=1&search=privledge&fulltext=Search. -- Rick Block (talk) 23:49, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
Thanks, Rick. I didn't know about the fullurl thing. Ok. The simple search doesn't really do what I do. I'll just have to use the full URL. Jason Quinn (talk) 20:15, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Random selection of searches

Is it possible to see a random selection of searches tried on Misplaced Pages? Bondegezou (talk) 17:19, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Tips for effective searches

I've rejigged the content of this section a bit. To relay some of the history: in November of 2008, the search function was radically improved and I asked at VPT whether there shouldn't be big banners to let people know this happened. At the same time AlexSm added a template here asking that the section be improved to better describe the new functions. Carcharoth made a temporary copy of the mailing list entry describing the new functions (violating GFDL a tiny bit). Ipatrol removed the improvement template as "spurrious" along with the source link to which Carcharoth referred, further obscuring the source text added here.

And no-one has addressed the issue of needing a major revamp to the section to provide good and easy examples of how to actually effectively use WP's new search engine! Thus, I've restored the tag asking for improvements to the section. Franamax (talk) 00:45, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Utilize searchbox usage data so that the quality of Misplaced Pages is improved

Administrators should analyse searchers' use of the Misplaced Pages search box to see which new articles there could be a demand for. Search logs from Misplaced Pages could be used to improve the encyclopaedia's relevance amongst readers if tools like Google Trends and Google Insights for Search were provided at least to high level admins, but based on the Misplaced Pages searchbox's usage instead ofthat of Google Search .


Of course, there could be privacy implications from this as user's data may have to be kept for longer.


Indeed, if the quality of the Misplaced Pages search service was improved so that more people would use it, then moe accurate and useful data could be gathered.

All the best, Shane (talk) 22:08, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Toolbars?

Aren't toolbars very old? New browsers often have this searchboxes on the right? --87.78.112.57 (talk) 16:17, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

What happened to Google

Resolved.

What's happened to the feature where you could use Google or other external search engines from within Misplaced Pages? BillMasen (talk) 16:06, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

I checked Special:Search and you are right Bill, there is no longer the drop down box where one could choose which search engine to use. So I investigated:
There is a problem with the javascript that usually is loaded and adds that drop down box. So I have reported the problem to the guys who take care of those javascripts, see MediaWiki talk:Common.js#What happened to Google.
--David Göthberg (talk) 02:54, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
See this. --TheDJ (talkcontribs) 03:45, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
checkY Done - We have applied a fix so now the combo box is working again. If you don't see the combo box yet, then you need to bypass your browser cache. (You need to do that since Misplaced Pages tells the browsers to cache files like MediaWiki:Common.js/search.js for 31 days.)
--David Göthberg (talk) 23:09, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
Win. BillMasen (talk) 00:03, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
Help talk:Searching: Difference between revisions Add topic