Page MenuHomePhabricator

Add a spell checker with configuration files in wiki
Closed, DeclinedPublic


Author: xmlizer

The idea is to give to contributers if they want to, the ability to use a simple
spell checker, in order to give more credibility to wikipedia. The idea is to
make the configuration file of such tools in wiki so that it could be updated
and enhanced easily for all languages

Version: unspecified
Severity: enhancement



Revisions and Commits

Event Timeline

bzimport raised the priority of this task from to Lowest.Nov 21 2014, 8:15 PM
bzimport set Reference to bz1677.
bzimport added a subscriber: Unknown Object (MLST).

cmcintosh wrote:

I have wrote a plug in that fits nicely with Mediawiki. The concept was to not
make it solely work with MediaWiki, but a more centralized Spell Checking
service that can tie in easily with any number of apps.

Take a look at for more
information, and to see it in action.

zigger wrote:

*** Bug 3417 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

slowpoke wrote:

LQWiki also has a spell checker:

They're using version 1.4.9 but in the past when I've asked them they've been
willing to cooperate and put that in the main distro as an option if someone is
willing to work with them.

assafkat wrote:

I think that the spell checker that design only for MediaWiki is bad idea.
Better idea is configuration file that link the MediaWiki into a site of
checking. The configuration file is necessary because the spell checkers of
English aren't working for others language like Hebrew.

aronrubin wrote:

I have added a mediawiki extension to Chris McIntosh's base code. His code is
pretty universal and the only Mediawiki-specific component is the one I made. I
had to add a hook to EditPage.php but all that is in the package's README file.
The extension package is at:
This does not preclude a clientside spell checker and does not use more
bandwidth than people do using the preview function.

It's getting to the point where it's hard not to find a non-Stone Age browser without spell checking. Also, using those instead lightens load on the servers. I suppose someone can write an extension if they want, but it really wouldn't likely be to helpful. Certainly, I can't see much use going in the core code.

xmlizer wrote:

I always like the US anglo centric view which tells that if you got it in english on your desktop everyone has...
There is more than 250 different languages and I don't think that there is such tools in those languages
More than that, it could be a parallel project to update such extension with wikipedia content
If your problem is to say that it is of high loads on the server :

  1. first give some figures to demonstrate this assertion
  2. if it is really a problem then we can think of a javascript extension or whatever. The problem will still remain : the dictionnaries do not exists for whatever language

So please, don't make this unlogical decision to simply wontfix this problem

Thanks for that

robchur wrote:

You know what would be *very* nifty in theory, but in practice, probably awkward? Spell checking using Wiktionaries. I mean, that's what free information's for, right?

I agree with Aaron that most modern browsers implement, or have extensions for, spell checking, and often have a large number of dictionaries, although I'm not convinced that an effective extension couldn't also exist if so desired.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say WONTFIX here. Almost every browser has this implemented by now, and I can't see us doing any better ourselves.

epriestley changed the task status from Declined to Resolved by committing Unknown Object (Diffusion Commit).Mar 4 2015, 8:22 AM
epriestley added a commit: Unknown Object (Diffusion Commit).
demon changed the task status from Resolved to Declined.Mar 4 2015, 8:41 AM
demon claimed this task.