Talk:Main Page

From 43FoldersWiki

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
Revision as of 09:01, 26 March 2005 (edit)
Akchizar (Talk | contribs)
(Index Cards vs. Index cards)
← Previous diff
Revision as of 09:02, 26 March 2005 (edit) (undo)
Akchizar (Talk | contribs)
(Software Template)
Next diff →
Line 130: Line 130:
:<nowiki>#REDIRECT [[Index Cards]]</nowiki> :<nowiki>#REDIRECT [[Index Cards]]</nowiki>
:Voila. Problem solved. And also covered in case some other idiot decides to make a new page there. I hope this is correct...let me check. Yup, it works. --[[User:Akchizar|Akchizar]] 04:00, 26 Mar 2005 (EST) :Voila. Problem solved. And also covered in case some other idiot decides to make a new page there. I hope this is correct...let me check. Yup, it works. --[[User:Akchizar|Akchizar]] 04:00, 26 Mar 2005 (EST)
 +== Software Template ==
 +Just so everyone knows, we now have [[Meta:Software template]] for those of you wishing to write articles about software. Any smart ideas on how to publicise this? Perhaps we should have a major announcements page or something so people can check to see what's going on. --[[User:Akchizar|Akchizar]] 04:02, 26 Mar 2005 (EST)

Revision as of 09:02, 26 March 2005

Hi Merlin :) --Todd Dailey 02:09, 21 Jan 2005 (EST)

Nice work, Todd. Welcome, aboard!

In other news, anybody know why we don't get an automatic Table of Contents on the home page? --Merlin 02:27, 21 Jan 2005 (EST)

Hey, all the cool kids are here :-) I'll be adding my OmniOutliner-fu here. --Fraser


Which voice to use?

Just a brief thought - should we each be writing in a personal style here, or would it be better to use a more impersonal voice? I've used a personal tone for my OmniOutliner and Web Browsers pages, but I wonder if that's appropriate? --Fraser

I was wondering a bit about that too. I personally think that a personal style is appropriate in most places if one of the points of this wiki is for people to share their workflows, tips and tools. But I'm happy to edit if that isn't what's wanted. Oh, and hi, everyone ;-) --bsag

These are excellent questions. I think the canonical wikipedia notion is to be as neutral as possible. I think that's a great guiding _organizational_ principle, but I'm not married to it for capture, as we can always re-arrange things in such as a way that we can associate "systems" with specific people. Fr'instance I *love* Fraser's OO stuff, but I could see some of that moving to its own page under the rubric of "different people's systems."

My gut--and I'd love to hear from others--is that the most important thing is to "get it down" here, then we can worry about where the best place to put it is. Make sense? --Merlin 14:02, 5 Feb 2005 (EST)

On the other hand, some wiki communities have a definite sense of polyphony. Witness the original wiki: WikiWikiWeb and ThreadMode (not to the exclusion of singular editorial voice pages, of course). --RobertDaeley 19:28, 20 Mar 2005 (PST)

IMO, we should probably keep it impersonal for the program writeups (with possible an opinion bit below it where we can say what we want about it), but I don't see why a personal feel would be bad for lifehacks or other things where we don't really need an objective viewpoint. --Akchizar 16:16, 21 Mar 2005 (EST)

>= GTD

Just a reminder--as in the Google Group--that you all shouldn't feel restricted to talking just about GTD (please!). Points of orthogonality eschew from _my_ brain, not David Allen's.  :-)

Seriously, though, please also know you can link to and discuss anything that's germane to the general 43F mojo--there's lots of GTD sites, but only one 43F, and I'm pleased as punch you kids are here to help me flesh out what that means. --Merlin 20:04, 5 Feb 2005 (EST)

Are Windows subjects out of the question then? 8-) --K 14:08, 20 Mar 2005 (EST)

Heh. I wouldn't say "out of the question," but as I said in The Rules I do intend for this to remain a Mac-centric site. I'd say most Windows talk is better suited in the 43F Google Group. Candidly, I just know that there are about a dozen people/companies who have been really bugging me to shill their Windows crap on 43F, and I don't want them to be encouraged to regard an editable page as their implied permission to guzzle our tasty Google juice without really giving something to our base. :) Feel free to email me if you have concerns or ideas, K. Cool?

--Merlin 14:09, 20 Mar 2005 (EST)

Synchronize our chronographs

Not sure where else to note this, but here on the West Coast of the U.S., it's 4:10pm on February 6. Yet the time in the Special:Recentchanges section shows that it just rolled over to February 7--eight hours ahead of me. Maybe that doesn't matter. Maybe it does. Just thought I'd note it. --Bren

Probably GMT? That's the default time standard for time-stamping, I think. Could be wrong. --Merlin 13:38, 7 Feb 2005 (EST)

Default timestamps will all be based on whatever the server is running at. In this case it is GMT. (Which is now more properly known as UTC.) You can change how it displays for you in your Preferences. --JamesRifkin

Important Windows Reminder

Please remember: if you're adding content about anything that's not available to a Mac OS X or Unix user, it's very important that you frame why you're posting it and provide as much background info as possible. Are there features here that you'd like to see in a Mac product? Do you have ideas about how interesting elements of a program might be picked up by an Open Source app?

It's no fun to play cop, but I do want to be very clear from the beginning; 43 Folders and its sister sites cater to the vastly under-served users of Mac OS X. Products that cannot be used by OS X users simply don't belong here unless they can be framed in a broader fashion than "here's a nice thing for Windows users." There are thousands of sites that cater unapologetically to Windows users; please respect our desire to provide an unadulterated alternative for Mac users.

--Merlin 02:09, 21 Mar 2005 (EST)

There's a ton of great stuff potentially here. Is anyone else interested in having a section for MacJournal? How about Quicksilver? -Glenda

A Quicksilver hacks section would be great...there's a whole heap of tricks I found out while messing around with it that I wish I had read about. --Akchizar 05:59, 22 Mar 2005 (EST)

Merlin, in light of your update on the blog on Mar 24, I assume this section doesn't really apply any longer? I hate to think that you'd limit such a phenomenal resource to Mac folks only. Being productive and getting stuff done isn't a Mac-only thing, after all ;-) and I don't know of any Windows-specific resources that cover this topic as dynamically and throughly as you have on your blog, and as well as I expect this Wiki will also. --ecm 01:26, 26 Mar 2005 (EST)

Q: Changing the persistent nav?

Dumbguy administrator has a question for you MediaWiki gnomes of renown. Where do I go to change the items in the navigation bar? Knowing how well-abstracted this app is, I'm guessing there's a page or an `include` someplace. TIA --Merlin 10:48, 21 Mar 2005 (EST)

All the info you need right here --RobertDaeley 16:58, 21 Mar 2005 (EST)

GTD Consolidation?

How do we feel about consolidating all the GTD stuff into Getting Things Done? I'm thinking it might be healthy to encourage tighter clustering to start and then sort of break things out once we've gotten a critical mass of info. Thoughts?

--Merlin 12:37, 21 Mar 2005 (EST)

+1 on that idea from me. Better to run a tight ship on the front page, I think. Things will necessarily be messy for the first couple of weeks, I guess, but longer-term it would be good to make the front page a simple list with good pointers into the depths.

--Fraserspeirs 13:05, 21 Mar 2005 (EST)


Why is the content here licensed with the "no derivative works" clause? Doesn't this mean that, technically, nobody can edit anybody else's pages?

Software eating up the main page

Even though it's been organised nicely, the software section is getting pretty long. Do we want a separate page to put it on? Or, alternatively, do we want to create a sofwtare category, possibly subdivided into application launchers, mind mappers, word processing, etc etc? That we we don't really need a page - just a link to Category:Software will do nicely. Incidentally, we can also put each program into the relevant software subcategory and the relevant OS category (Category:OS X, Category:Windows, etc. being subcategories of Category:Software, probably).

OK, it looks like some work has already started on this. Looks like it's time to do some major reorganisation of categories. I'll be using User:Akchizar/Software_to_be_Categorised as a checklist in case anyone else is interested. Lots of useful info on categories here.--Akchizar 16:26, 21 Mar 2005 (EST)

Update: A question to the general populus - it is standard practise on wikipedia that once you've defined something as a subcategory, it doesn't fall into the supercategory as well (i.e. Quicksilver falls into Category:Application Launchers, but not Category:Software). Should we do this, or should we put everything in software as well? It would give us a fair indication of what we have articles on software-wise, and would be useful if someone was searching for a certain piece of software whose name they would recognise if they saw it. OTOH, depending on how many articles we have, it may end up being too cluttered. --Akchizar 02:09, 22 Mar 2005 (EST)

Go with the principle of Least Effort. Just from the early movements, big chunks of the wiki are going to be taken up with software *ahem* discussion, and that'd be a lotta editing. --JamesRifkin

I agree that the software section is getting big, I think it would look better with just each major category on the front page - Unix, Palm, Windows, VIC-20 and the other one. 8-p --K 10:14, 22 Mar 2005 (EST)

Cool Wiki Tricks?

I feel like I keep stumbling onto really neat tricks that might be useful to other gnomes (like "#REDIRECT [[Foo_page]]").

What do you think of an area like, say, Meta:Cool Wiki Tricks? How do other wikis share info like this?

--Merlin 20:15, 21 Mar 2005 (EST)

I don't think they do :)...a lot of that sort of thing was hidden away in several pages in wikipedia, meaning that when you're creating pages you generally have to search to find info on what you want. Maybe we could have some sort of tutorial for it? --Akchizar 01:48, 22 Mar 2005 (EST)


Are we to attribute ourselves if we add a new sub-section to a topic? I see some do and some don't.

--Andy Thompson 00:44, 22 Mar 2005 (EST)

I generally follow the guideline that if it's in an article, I don't attribute it, and if it's in discussion, I do. If you want to, you can see who's done what by hitting the "history" tab and checking from there, whether or not anyone's attritbuted the text. --Akchizar 01:50, 22 Mar 2005 (EST)
That seems sensible. (And thanks also for introducing me to the ":" trick! :) ) --Merlin 10:51, 22 Mar 2005 (EST)
Excellent! --Andy Thompson 00:02, 23 Mar 2005 (EST)
I've written a few things here, all anonymous, before just now setting up a user name. I didn't see a need for a user name on a public wiki. But I've been noticing that a certain percentage of regular articles or lifehacks, etc, have people's names on them. It seems a bit more like than a wiki. The last thing we need is some sort of attribution vs. no-attribution edit war. So maybe Akchizar's above suggestion could be formalized and linked to from the front page. Edits strictly to remove attributions should be avoided, but they should maybe be stripped out during reorganizations, substantive edits or additions, etc. My .02. Yesno 19:53, 23 Mar 2005 (EST)


Things sure have quieted down over at 43F since the Wiki went live. Are those crickets I hear? :)

--Andy Thompson 14:09, 23 Mar 2005 (EST)

Chirp chirp.  ;-)
What you're mostly hearing/not hearing is me up to here (::points roughly at collarbone level::) with slightly overdue work.
God bless my non-paying projects. They are definitely going to kill me.
--Merlin 16:16, 23 Mar 2005 (EST)
Well, I'm ever so thankful for all you do. Please don't think I'm complaining! --Andy Thompson 10:58, 24 Mar 2005 (EST)

Index Cards vs. Index cards

Ok, we already had an Index cards and then a newer article Index Cards showed up, linked to from the main page. I put the info from Index cards into Index Cards. The move feature couldn't be used because the new article already existed. So I put a link in Index cards to Index Cards. This is no good. How do I just get rid of Index cards forever?Yesno 00:30, 26 Mar 2005 (EST)

Remove all text from Index cards...put it into Index Cards if you want to, and then put the following text (and ONLY the following text) in it:
#REDIRECT [[Index Cards]]
Voila. Problem solved. And also covered in case some other idiot decides to make a new page there. I hope this is correct...let me check. Yup, it works. --Akchizar 04:00, 26 Mar 2005 (EST)

Software Template

Just so everyone knows, we now have Meta:Software template for those of you wishing to write articles about software. Any smart ideas on how to publicise this? Perhaps we should have a major announcements page or something so people can check to see what's going on. --Akchizar 04:02, 26 Mar 2005 (EST)

Personal tools