Last modified: 2014-02-12 23:54:10 UTC
In Russian Wikipedia we have a lot of reports about mistakes in artisles that were fixed already; the mobile version shows the old versions of articles for a long time.
How old? Minutes, hours, days, months..?
Months. From my letter to Kul (from 4 of July) as an example: This [1] edit was reverted [2] at 9 of June but this [3] version was displayed [4] at 2 of July. But if you would used search [5] then everything was ok [6] [1] http://ru.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%D0%A3%D0%BA%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%BF%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B5_%D0%B2%D0%B5%D1%80%D1%82%D0%B8%D0%BA%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B8_%D0%B2%D0%BB%D0%B0%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B8_%D0%B2_%D0%A0%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%81%D0%B8%D0%B8&diff=35124371&oldid=33287059 [2] http://ru.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%D0%A3%D0%BA%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%BF%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B5_%D0%B2%D0%B5%D1%80%D1%82%D0%B8%D0%BA%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B8_%D0%B2%D0%BB%D0%B0%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B8_%D0%B2_%D0%A0%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%81%D0%B8%D0%B8&diff=35129855&oldid=35124371 [3] http://ru.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A3%D0%BA%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%BF%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B5_%D0%B2%D0%B5%D1%80%D1%82%D0%B8%D0%BA%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B8_%D0%B2%D0%BB%D0%B0%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B8_%D0%B2_%D0%A0%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%81%D0%B8%D0%B8 [4] http://ru.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%D0%92%D0%B8%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%BF%D0%B5%D0%B4%D0%B8%D1%8F:%D0%A1%D0%BE%D0%BE%D0%B1%D1%89%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%8F_%D0%BE%D0%B1_%D0%BE%D1%88%D0%B8%D0%B1%D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%85&oldid=35797989#ru.m.wikipedia.org.2Fwiki.2F.D0.A3.D0.BA.D1.80.D0.B5.D0.BF.D0.BB.D0.B5.D0.BD.D0.B8.D0.B5_.D0.B2.D0.B5.D1.80.D1.82.D0.B8.D0.BA.D0.B0.D0.BB.D0.B8_.D0.B2.D0.BB.D0.B0.D1.81.D1.82.D0.B8_.D0.B2_.D0.A0.D0.BE.D1.81.D1.81.D0.B8.D0.B8 [5] http://ru.m.wikipedia.org/wiki?search=%D0%A3%D0%BA%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%BF%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B5+%D0%B2%D0%B5%D1%80%D1%82%D0%B8%D0%BA%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B8+%D0%B2%D0%BB%D0%B0%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B8+%D0%B2+%D0%A0%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%81%D0%B8%D0%B8 [6] http://ru.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%D0%92%D0%B8%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%BF%D0%B5%D0%B4%D0%B8%D1%8F:%D0%A4%D0%BE%D1%80%D1%83%D0%BC/%D0%A2%D0%B5%D1%85%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%87%D0%B5%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B9&oldid=35794823#.D0.9B.D0.B0.D0.B3.D0.B8_.D0.B2_.D0.BC.D0.BE.D0.B1.D0.B8.D0.BB.D1.8C.D0.BD.D0.BE.D0.B9_.D0.B2.D0.B5.D1.80.D1.81.D0.B8.D0.B8
Dupe of bug 22014? Lvova, can you please try the procedure described in the latest comments of that bug and see if the new version workd for you?
user:Sealle did it. He says it works as it describes in bug 22014 - some pages doesn't work, some pages showed on the last version. But we both don't understand how this procedure can help globally - should we say about it to every user? But it isn't user's problem, it's a real bug.
This was a problem of the old mobile gateway. Apparently the new gateway no longer has this problem. What I can suggest is to tell people this is a known issue and that a new versions is being worked on. Also, offer them a link to the opt-in page so that they can test the new mobile version. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 22014 ***
Are you serious? Why the new gate isn't a default gate? Where _we_ should post in the mobile interface the disclaimer for the _readers_?
That's what I've been told - please read the last 5-6 comments from bug 22014. I am in the same situation as you - mobile user and unofficial "technical contact" for my Wikipedia. I suspect the new version has not been deployed because it's not yet production-ready. Again, please try the opt-in procedure I followed and see if the pages are still outdated. As to where to put the warning, I have no idea. The mobile homepage, perhaps?
Sorry about the confusion Lvova. We tried to publish our switch over in as many places as possible http://blog.wikimedia.org/2011/08/17/calling-mobile-testers-for-round-two/ http://blog.wikimedia.org/2011/06/10/testing-mobile-prototype/ http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2011-August/054692.html http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2011-August/054877.html http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/MobileFrontend/Deployment http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mobile_Projects/Contribute#Contributors (under mobile site re-write) If there was some other news source that would have been helpful to use then let know. But as you can see we tried to message very broadly.
The problem is not with wikipedians. The problem is with readers. They try to use the mobile wiki (just because they are automatically redireted to it), and it shows the old version of articles. They try to fix problems in articles and see the code without the founded problem. It doesn't matter if you wrote about the problem in the blog and on metawiki - no one normal Russian user of Wikipedia would not read it. We have a page for reports about mistakes in articles and we see a LOT of reports about nonexistent mistakes. If you want to say 'we know about the problem and you SHOULD WAIT WE WILL NOT DO NOTHING' - write it on the current mobile wiki pages, please. Your reply is not a solution at all.
The problem still exists.
(In reply to comment #10) > The problem still exists. Could you join the mobile developers on #wikimedia-mobile (http://webchat.freenode.net/?channels=wikimedia-mobile if you don't have an IRC client) so they can find out what sort of device you're using and try to track down the problem?
today I'm in irc until 16:00 by UTC and may be later at evening. Now at #wikimedia-mobile there aren't any replies.
After talking to bawolff and Lvova in IRC, I tried the following URL http://ru.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%D0%97%D0%B0%D0%B3%D0%BB%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%8F_%D1%81%D1%82%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%86%D0%B0&mobileaction=view_normal_site&action=purge (added "action=purge" to a broken URL) and got the following: Error 403 HTTP method not allowed. HTTP method not allowed. Guru Meditation: XID: 1930273745 Varnish cache server
For reference, (my) current theory is: http://ru.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%D0%97%D0%B0%D0%B3%D0%BB%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%8F_%D1%81%D1%82%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%86%D0%B0&mobileaction=view_normal_site is a non-canoncial url (the &mobileaction part, plus the /w/index.php instead of /wiki/pagename ), and only canoncial urls get their squid/varnish cache purged (otoh, I'm very unclear on how mobile sites get their caches purged in the first place since $wgInternalUrl seems to just be the normal url. But I did do test edits, and it does appear that normal mobile urls got their caches cleared on edit while non-canonical urls don't.) Steps to reproduce (I was doing this on enwikinews, adapt these steps as appropriate): *Viewed (in another browser that has no wikimedia cookies) http://en.m.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=Wikinews:Sandbox&mobileaction=view_normal_site http://en.m.wikinews.org/wiki/Wikinews:Sandbox http://en.m.wikinews.org/wiki/Project:Sandbox *Edit [[n:Wikinews:Sandbox]] (in your normal browser, not the one you viewed pages during step 1) *Refresh the pages you were viewing from step 1 Actual behaviour: *Only the one with the normal canonical url ( http://en.m.wikinews.org/wiki/Wikinews:Sandbox ) is updated Expected behaviour: All 3 should show the new version of the page. HTCP purges (I assume we use those to purge mobile cache as well as normal squid) should be sent for http://en.m.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=Wikinews:Sandbox&mobileaction=view_normal_site sine that url is advertised (Ditto for noimages version of the url), or some magic should happen on the caching end so that if the canonical page is purged, so are these variants. Url's like http://en.m.wikinews.org/wiki/Project:Sandbox should be redirected to the canoncial namespace name (so this becomes a non-issue), like we do in normal mediawiki
Fix for non-canonical redirects for mobile is in r98547.
We should move all actions such as "enable this, disable that" to a dedicated special page so that all content pages should have canonical titles.
*** Bug 30951 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
We've
