|
|
| (2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| | {{WSArchiveLink}} |
| <big><big><big>Now that the wiki is migrated what do you want to do, guys?!<small><small><small>[[User:PiotrGrochowski|PiotrGrochowski]] ([[User talk:PiotrGrochowski|talk]]) 16:39, 29 September 2018 (UTC) | | <big><big><big>Now that the wiki is migrated what do you want to do, guys?!<small><small><small>[[User:PiotrGrochowski|PiotrGrochowski]] ([[User talk:PiotrGrochowski|talk]]) 16:39, 29 September 2018 (UTC) |
|
| |
| = ARCHIVED WIKISPACES DISCUSSION BELOW =
| |
| '''All discussion below is archived from the Wikispaces export in its original unaltered form.'''
| |
| ----
| |
|
| |
| == why twice ==
| |
| i see a section in the porcupine family article and here this...
| |
|
| |
| Did you try page inclusion...
| |
|
| |
| ...I think, the software will handle this as poor as redirects (?)
| |
|
| |
| Are there special tags like <noinclude>, <includeonly> ... as we know it from MediaWiki?
| |
|
| |
| - '''xenwolf''' August 19, 2011, 11:26:56 AM UTC-0700
| |
| ----
| |
| If you call it "Main Article" it should expand on what is available on the family page.
| |
|
| |
| - '''genewardsmith''' August 22, 2011, 12:29:30 PM UTC-0700
| |
| ----
| |
| Yes Gene, we are talking about Keenan's hypothetical case when someone has created a dedicated page with more content. I will revert all the horrible things I've done here once the demonstration is complete.
| |
|
| |
| - '''clumma''' August 22, 2011, 02:52:49 PM UTC-0700
| |
| ----
| |
| Since we now have 93 "soft redirects", I hope it's OK if I leave one example of an alternative that doesn't fill the wiki with blank clickthrough pages.
| |
|
| |
| - '''clumma''' September 19, 2011, 02:55:41 AM UTC-0700
| |
| ----
| |
| Carl: I think that consistency is more important than doing it any particular way, so if you want to change all the soft redirects to your preferred way of doing it, I won't do anything to interfere. Just make sure you're doing it to improve the wiki and not to prove a point.
| |
|
| |
| - '''keenanpepper''' September 19, 2011, 11:06:15 AM UTC-0700
| |
| ----
| |
| There is an important problem with the wikispaces redirects, that I forgot to mention: they are red!
| |
|
| |
| http://xenharmonic.wikispaces.com/file/view/wikispaces-redirects-are-red.png/255774154/wikispaces-redirects-are-red.png
| |
|
| |
| ...and therefore undistinguishable from links to non-existing pages.
| |
|
| |
| - '''xenwolf''' September 19, 2011, 12:20:57 PM UTC-0700
| |
| ----
| |
| Xenwolf, there is a workaround for the link color bug. I just went to http://xenharmonic.wikispaces.com/page/edit/generator and created a page there. The page should never be seen because whenever you go to "generator" it redirects to "Generators", but it makes links to "generator" the color of links to existing articles.
| |
|
| |
| - '''keenanpepper''' September 19, 2011, 02:42:43 PM UTC-0700
| |
| ----
| |
| Not so bad, but too tricky I think. Next problem: Backlinks are not redirected.
| |
|
| |
| Wikispaces is a <strong>lousy</strong> wiki implementation.
| |
|
| |
| Was a wiki migration ever been discussed?
| |
|
| |
| - '''xenwolf''' September 19, 2011, 11:39:10 PM UTC-0700
| |
| ----
| |
| You won't interfere if I manually go through and fix the 93 crap pages you unilaterally restructured the wiki with? Gee, thanks! Too kind.
| |
|
| |
| - '''clumma''' September 20, 2011, 10:08:02 PM UTC-0700
| |
| ----
| |
| 1. Why in the world would I make changes for you if I don't agree with them? I think the soft redirect pages are the best possible workaround for the crappy redirect implementation.
| |
|
| |
| 2. If you actually looked at the pages you'd see that I didn't create all of them. I didn't even create the first ones, so it's hard to see what you mean by "unilaterally".
| |
|
| |
| - '''keenanpepper''' September 20, 2011, 10:25:46 PM UTC-0700
| |
| ----
| |
| I know you didn't create all of them. You announced the policy unilaterally on the tuning list, and created them at a high rate while discussion there was ongoing. In light of this, I interpreted your remarks above as patronizing - why would I be here if I didn't care about the wiki?
| |
|
| |
| I must say I don't understand your idea. You are not addressing any need, but are preemptively supposing such a need will arise, and then claiming that this preemption should be done consistently at all costs, despite that nothing else on the wiki - including things of actual importance like definitions, directory pages, etc - is remotely consistent.
| |
|
| |
| - '''clumma''' September 22, 2011, 09:59:59 AM UTC-0700
| |
| ----
| |
| Okay, I don't really disagree with any of that (except I never said "at all costs", because that's stupid).
| |
|
| |
| So... what are you going to do about it?
| |
|
| |
| - '''keenanpepper''' September 22, 2011, 11:46:44 AM UTC-0700
| |
| ----
| |
| Very little. My schedule is unsettled lately. Hopefully it'll normalize in a few months.
| |
|
| |
| - '''clumma''' September 22, 2011, 05:48:09 PM UTC-0700
| |
| ----
| |
| Quite right, I will delete this page. I made it when experimenting with page inclusion.
| |
|
| |
| My experiments showed the inclusion system is as poor as the redirects. :( And there are no special tags like you mention.
| |
|
| |
| - '''clumma''' August 19, 2011, 08:41:22 PM UTC-0700
| |
| ----
| |
| I removed the extra heading and included it into the page Porcupine family with a backling there (in the heading "Hedgehog").
| |
|
| |
| There are two problems, I adressed on the tuning list http://launch.groups.yahoo.com/group/tuning/message/101363
| |
|
| |
| - '''xenwolf''' August 22, 2011, 12:08:39 AM UTC-0700
| |
| ----
| |
| Now I think, that the "wikiest way" was to add a short statement (hard-coded) to the overview page and not to include the detail page.
| |
|
| |
| (of course with links in both directions)
| |
|
| |
| - '''xenwolf''' August 22, 2011, 12:34:53 AM UTC-0700
| |
| ----
| |
| I see you got around the toc and heading font problems by leaving the heading on the family page and removing it from the included detail page. That seems to work.
| |
|
| |
| But if I understand your latest "wikiest way" proposal, it is the same as what I had
| |
|
| |
| http://xenharmonic.wikispaces.com/page/view/Porcupine+family/247480907
| |
|
| |
| ?
| |
|
| |
| - '''clumma''' August 22, 2011, 02:09:27 AM UTC-0700
| |
| ----
| |
| Nearly the same. There should be a statement that makes more sense to the containing article than see somewhere.
| |
|
| |
| - '''xenwolf''' August 22, 2011, 02:51:26 AM UTC-0700
| |
| ----
| |
| Howabout "Main article:"?
| |
|
| |
| - '''clumma''' August 22, 2011, 11:48:08 AM UTC-0700
| |
| ----
| |