Are there any sites in the web like Wikipedia and this site, which have wiki-engine and may be used for hosting? Wikipedia has some troubles nowadays with formulas tags converting, so I want to use the other site.
10751
This is a general, community wiki  question to address non-specific "I need a CMS or Wiki that does x, y, and z..." questions.  If your question was closed as a duplicate of this question and you feel that the information provided here does not provide a sufficient answer, please open a discussion on .    I have a list of features that I want for my website's Content Management System (CMS) - where can I find a [free] script that includes all of them?
21711
After having read various articles on this site about WWW or Non-WWW website setup, ,  and , and after having setup a correct redirection rule in .Htaccess to at least eliminate duplicate contents (currently the non-www solution (e.g. http://example.com) I have a feeling that my site rank less since I changed this.   My confusion was strengthened by these two opponents:     &amp;     Could the change of www.example.com >> http://example.com have a factual impact on ranking?  say either is better or worse. Are they holding information back?  I am confused fellow folks...  As much as I would like to separate facts from fiction, I am aware that not all the good valid information is written. Not on google webmaster site and perhaps not elsewhere. If so it seems out of date!  Does or does not a WWW domain impact SEO/rank better than its NON-WWW version? (Given that you have setup a proper redirect to avoid duplicates and go with one)
52269
I realised I'm a bit confused about something. I have found three separate wikis hosted at ubuntu.com, and I'd like to know their respective purposes and relationships. I have some guesses (see below) but I'd prefer some clear/official/de facto descriptions or links.  Official Documentation () My guess: the official wiki page for running X on Ubuntu, where X is an officially supported package.  Community Help Wiki () My guess: the public wiki page for running X on Ubuntu, where X is any old thing.  Ubuntu Wiki () My guess: contributor-supported documentation for how to make contributions to the Ubuntu platform itself (not development  Ubuntu).    My primary interest here is in understand what they are so I can a) use them for my own reference, b) contribute to them if possible and c) link to them from AU (where relevant)
1774
Stuff like polls, recommendations based on subjective constraints, puzzles, webcomics etc. do not belong on the serious main SE sites, where professionals should be considered at work and having just a few spare minutes ("code's compiling") to answer questions, so they should not be distracted by such things. However, I'd also like to have a home for these things still using the SE engine. For the reason I mentioned before, this needs to be a separate place though. Let's call it four.[sitename-here].com.
50408
Do you know if I should use &lt;link rel="canonical" tag, or 301 redirect from:  http://example.com to http://www.example.com  ...to avoid a duplicate content penalty in case other pages link to the domain without the www subdomain? Or is Google smart enough now to identify which is the canonical one?
8036
I am confused about domain names (I think)  I call these things, i.e. names you can buy, 'domain names'  bbc.co.uk google.com   I call these things, i.e. extensions of names 'host names'  www.bbc.co.uk mail.yahoo.com arts.mit.edu hello.there.example.com   Is this naming scheme correct? Are there official definitions of these?  In particular, what are each of the texts between the dots called (i.e. the name for "www", "bbc", "edu", "example")?
9344
While idly chatting over at  (boring room name, I know. Anyone have any better ideas?), we noticed that  articles (like ) don't onebox. There , while . After some more , it looks like the system only takes two-letter language codes. This should be expanded to accept any language or flavor of Wikipedia.
6875
I am trying to find some database tutorials,books and similar, since I have started this course in college, and received some material, but it is really hard to manage through all the info on the net. I searched through the questions on the site but didn't find any. Thankfull for all your input.
15570
Is developerquestion.com a Stack Exchange ripoff, or is there some valid connection to SE? I.e. does it use the Stack Exchange framework (it really looks very similar)?  Interestingly, it mirrors all the questions of the Stack Exchange sites. Unfortunately, the site does not contain any "about" info at all.
92699
Instead of asking a question I would love to share the one or other code snippet I have created that is too small to make a full article on e.g. CodeProject.com or CodePlex.com.  Question: Would it be a good idea to post it as a Stack Overflow question? Or are there any other suggestions how to share it?  (Of course I could post it on my own weblog and then twitter about it, but I would love to put it in more of a programming context)
16022
There is . Is the site appropriate for stuff related to requesting frameworks and libraries? Or should we have another site for that (e.g. name it Frameworks Recommendations or stuff alike)?  I can ask stuff there like: I need a software satisfying W, X, Y, and Z, but I'd like -some day- ask like: I need a Python library satisfying W, X, Y, and Z. The audience may be (and perhaps will be) different.    Is that website on-topic for stuff like that? Or should we open another proposal for that?  No: It's not about asking for a giga-dump for subjectivish questions. The linked-to-dupe question was written and answered with an old mindset and without Software Recommendations in mind. Also it does not consider this specific kind of questions but all the crap in one place. So, no,  is not an appropriate dupe mark for this question.
102175
I think I've seen a script for converting mediawiki syntax to Latex. Also, in case there are more than one solution for this, it might be nice to summarize them here.
105142
I'm starting to write a book on . Since I've been contributing on this tag for a long time, I had the opportunity to read &amp; answer several interesting threads on Stackoverflow related to this technology.  I would like to discuss some of the interesting cases published on Stackoverflow in my book, and I wonder if I could use the images and code shared on those threads in it.  I'm hoping somebody from StackExchange could clarify about the copyright status of the material shared on Stackoverflow questions/answers.
60377
Today I had some time and felt like writing a relatively good answer on Stack Overflow; explaining both the underlying mechanisms and good practices, unlike usual declarative answers in a "do that" style.  It took me like an hour of time, $50 if I were free lance. It'll bring me nothing but 3-5 occasional views, and - if I get lucky - some ignorant comments.  You know, it's quite discouraging.  Instead of pride for the job that was done, I feel frustrated. I know, this answer may offer help to the OP, if he ever notices it (being already satisfied with other answers).  So the only fate the answer will meet is to sink forever, below thousands other questions, falling like snow.  So, being a programmer, I am thinking of efficiency. It's a waste of time to spend so much effort to answer one question when there is no way to [actually] reuse it. So, I wouldn't do it again but just turn back into short answers mode without explanations.       Seeing other answers, I don't think I am only one with such feeling.  The current policy is driving knowledgeable and educational users away, yet it attracts inexperienced ones in numbers. Ones who will tell you to use [some technology] which they never have laid their hands upon. Ones who write answers just because they have learned some "good practice" from other questions, and this "knowledge" becomes an endless source of rep points.  The idea of Stack Overflow is rotten. It was excellent when trees were high and traffic was low.  It turned bad now; it has become a honeypot for all the "enthusiast programmers" of the world, eager to share their 2 cents faster than you can say the word "close".  You're killing a great resource. Despite all the nice words and proper declarations, it discourages the reuse of the knowledge. And encourages fast on-site answers.  Of course, the rules will tell you contrary. It's all nice and proper (if you don't mind it's strict mutual exclusivity). But mechanically, technologically it works in the way I described.  I tried to write a tag wiki. You know, it was biggest waste of time in my life. As a matter of fact, it is not a wiki at all; you can't even link to a certain section. Not to mention that nobody ever has the idea to read tag wikis.  Reference questions? Don't make me laugh. There is no good mechanism to store and categorize links. Favorites, although intended for the different purpose, are a chunk of crap when you want to use it as a reference. So, you can't compete with 30-seconds answers: a question will get 5 answers before you can even find an appropriate link.  Okay, I can organize links myself but, there are some problems:   I am just a human. I cannot remember everything I am just a human and I cannot answer questions at rate of 1 qpm. One person cannot fight the Tide. It's helpless. When technology makes people writing fast [incomplete] answers -  no good will of proper declarations can do a thing.  Even if a question gets finally closed, it won't hurt anyone - the hydra grew two more already.   You'll call me a brute for insulting honest users and innocent volunteers, but that's fact: There are much more inexperienced users than experienced ones. And inexperienced users have much more spare time to hang over than experts who have their job to do. So, from that fact we can conclude that most of the answers on Stack Overflow have a low quality. Nobody cares. But I do.   There should be a technical way to limit the activity of not-so-knowledgeable-yet-eager-to-answer users. There should be a technical preference for the closing a question over answering it (have a silly answer for the silly question? welcome to comments). There should be a technical solution to accumulate and structure knowledge, a system that lets you choose a good answer instead of writing it by hand.   That's the only way. Otherwise Stack Overflow will remain an automated dispenser of bad practices.  Well, I just felt like letting it out again. Thank you for reading.
102852
Both MSDN and Wikipedia are very referenced documentation resources.  Would be possible to automatically replace not formated links, like:    with the page title:    or you're only implementing this on SE sites because all it requires is a database query instead of scraping the title?  I'm in doubts about if this is allowed in MSDN or Wikipedia, but that's not for evil purposes, totally the opposite.  I've seen many questions linking MSDN / Wikipedia without formatting the link, like:           Of course, I'm refering to the post editor, and not about comments, because as Jeff said in , comments are processed on the fly.
103368
How does Stack Overflow work so well with search engines? It's really amazing; if I post a question, it'll show up in Google's search results within 15-30 minutes!  What are the tricks? sitemap.xml? Or, any other good methods?  Help me, and others too, if anyone knows a good technique/method.
18736
Wikipedia has a "" link on the front page that makes it easy for people to start exploring. It would be interesting to have something similar for Stack Overflow, perhaps with an additional (optional) constraint for "unanswered" questions. This might help eventually provide some attention to long-forgotten questions that weren't lucky enough to get an answer when they were new.