Talk:Wiki markup

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wikitext vs. WikiText

Eh, I think the right name is 'WikiText'. Why is the tag WikiText redirected to tag DocBook? And why is this item available under the 'Wikitext' tag although the right name is 'WikiText'? --Martin Kozák 23:20, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

I don’t know why WikiText was redirecting to DocBook. But it seemed so odd—the DocBook article doesn’t even mention a case-insensitive WikiText—that I have changed the redirect. Perhaps someone will now tell us. Ian Spackman 16:30, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Converting to WikiText

  • Is there any software for converting, for example MS Word docs, to wikitext? Aaron McDaid (talk - contribs) 14:30, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Not to my knowledge. The different formats don't have enough in common. --*Wilfred* (talk) 17:53, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

: Yeah, that's a pity. However, there is a great Wikitext editor, wikEd. To install it, you have to edit your monobook.js page (see

wikEd help) - it just swithces ordinary edit toolbar. And it can convert formatting of the MS Word text.

This is the text I write in MS Word. It is very hard to transpose this formatting to WIKITEXT.

1. But
2. Now
3. it
4. is

  • really
  • simple
  • just
  • look
La la la La la la La la la La la la
dsgerger rg ergrtgrg

ger

 g
Gerg ergergergergerg ger
g g ergerg erg

All you have to do is to write a text in MS Word, (or any other WordProc, I think) and to press a button called "Correct Wikitext" :D Simple, isn't it?? Piotr mil 17:00, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Merge from Wiki markup

Any reason not to merge the stub Wiki markup into this article? A simple redirect ought to do the trick. --MichaelZimmer (talk) 10:27, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Agree --Oblivious 11:01, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

MediaWiki WikiText

WikiText is a general classification, which covers different lightweight markup languages used by a variety of wiki software; so is it appropriate to refer to the specific markup in Wikipedia as MediaWiki WikiText? Squideshi 02:39, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

WikiCreole

Is there any chance that Wikipedia will adopt WikiCreole or any other standardized markup language? ste_nohype 10:15, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

The WikiCreole section appears to be entirely promotional as far as I can see, so I've removed it. I've also nominated its article for deletion as it does not appear to be notable. Vquex (talk) 16:41, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

I have re-added information on Creole, without any promotional slant. The Markdown markup language has it's own article and seems to be a similar thing, and little difference in notability, so there is no reason to exclude Creole. Barrylb (talk) 11:20, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

I've never used it, but I would definitely say it's a notable wiki markup. Steven Walling (talk) 22:23, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

This page not as helpful as it could be

Could someone provide a key to the symbols/codes used found at the bottom of Editing pages (e.g., <includeonly>) for the unitiated? Or is this found on another page? (When I searched for "Wiki markup", I was directed here.) Thanks. Tawagoto 02:17, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Kinda late, but look at Wikipedia:Formatting. C0N6R355talkcontribs 00:35, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Patience is key [[User:(Blind-Peace)|(Blind-Peace)]] [[User talk:(Blind-Peace)|talk]] (talk) 23:25, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

<Ref>

Is this the right place to discuss this? If not, where?

I often feel overly constrained by the lack of flexibility of the Ref markup. A wished-for extension would be some means to have multiple, differently-named, <References/> tags within a page. Perhaps something like <Ref tag=tag_ID> - with the tag parameter defaulting to tag=References if not specified. This would allow several separate collections of references on the page. These could be grouped at the foot of the page (probably under separate section headers) and/or spread out (probably at the foot of individual page sections), as the page editor deems suitable.

Another item I've found bothersome, though it's probably messier to deal with, is lack of a mechanism for citation templates to interact with Ref. I often use <Ref name=something/>{{cite ...}}</Ref> and I find clumsiness with cite parameters such as page numbers which vary from cite to cite but which all apply to the same Ref. I end up not putting such parameters in cites which are wrapped in Refs, sometimes superscripting page number info, etc. immediately after the closing </Ref>. If Ref could provide a mechanism for the cite templates to pass info up, the Ref processing could format that info uniformly rather than having individual page editors working around this in different ways.

Or is it just that I've missed understanding something? -- Boracay Bill 06:59, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

revisiting this, I'm still wondering about this -- should I pursue it elsewhere? Where? One example where this comes into play is Dred Scott v. Sandford, where there are two cites of a note with no external link which, per WP:GTL should go in a Notes section, but which was presumably placed in the References section (violating WP:GTL)in order to have those two cites grouped into one Ref. The facility to say something like <Ref tag=Notes>, paired with <Notes/>, would be useful here. -- Boracay Bill 01:43, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

closing this discussion I now realize that I should probably be using Template:ref_label and template:note_label, and that this issue should not have been raised here. -- Boracay Bill 07:16, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I think the best place to the discuss the <ref> tag is at footnotes. -- Mizipzor 08:49, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Reverted Vandalism to 'see also'

Reverted vandalism to the SEE ALSO section. --Jamesjiao 00:13, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

List of operators

Could someone tell me if there is some list of operators which are used at Wikipedia? I would be glad to know even the basic ones (such as bold text or coloured text) since I do not know them ... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mountleek (talk • contribs) 18:36, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

List of operators

Could someone tell me if there is some list of all the text operators which are used at Wikipedia? I would be glad to know even the basic ones (such as bold text or coloured text). Is there anything like that? Mountleek (talk) 18:53, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

I came here looking for same. One of my gripes about Wikipedia, searching for a simple question about editing Wikipedia pages, and you end up chasing links. No doubt, somewhere there is a page listing some common and useful Wiki markup examples ... but where is it? Do we have to rely on Google to find such answer (which often works better for me than trying to search in Wikipedia itself). Yo ... is anybody out there? No wonder Mountlake disappeared. Tachyon (talk) 11:46, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Low quality link

This link ("Why Wiki Syntax Is Important") speaks advertizoid rubbish, such as "WikiSyntax", lacks programming languages (my interpretation) JavaScript and HTML that can be hacked, and then exclaims "WikiSyntax" can even be used as a programming language! I say, that link resides here on borrowed time (shiver!), and as soon as there is some few better-quality links, it will unsentimentally be confined to /dev/null (Waste basket). Said: Rursus (☻) 11:09, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

I removed it. Plrk (talk) 11:14, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
Acknowledged. Said: Rursus (☻) 11:51, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
1- The page states that wiki markup can be used as a "mini-programming language", not a full programming language. You can have variables such as TWikiVariables and basic logic (if/then/else). With some wiki engines, such as TWiki and XWiki, you can build quite complex applications from Wiki Syntax. For TikiWiki, here is an example of basic if/then/else:
{GROUP(groups=>Registered|Admins, notgroups=Editors)}
some text
{ELSE}
other text
{GROUP}
I am not as familiar with MediaWiki but my hunch is that some of the features could also make it qualify as a "mini-programming language"
2- As for Javascript and HTML, they can indeed be interpreted or not by the wiki engine (depending on the settings). According to WikiMatrix, 17 wiki engines have optional support for html tags. If you do support full html, and are in a fully-public (anyone can register/edit) context, you should use something like HTML purifier
3- I am looking forward to more input as to how to make that page clearer and more useful. On my user page, I address the conflict of interest concern Marclaporte (talk) 18:17, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
In any case; there is no reason for the link to be included at all: wikipedia is not a web directory. Plrk (talk) 22:34, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

I think one of the most important thing in Wikipedia is its MARKUP LANGUAGE (Wikitext/Wiki markup)

Color wikilink

Minor Bias?

One word or two?

Rename of page to Wiki markup

Open wikis and reliable sources

Wikitext as category name?

Workarounds

The 1905 Dallas star news paper printeing press

Google usage frequency results: Wikitext vs: Wiki Markup

Precise meaning / WD

Related Articles

Wikiwand AI