Talk:Main Page

From 43FoldersWiki

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
Revision as of 09:44, 11 April 2005 (edit)
Arjenvr (Talk | contribs)
m (Maintenance)
← Previous diff
Revision as of 12:02, 13 April 2005 (edit) (undo)
Robert Brook (Talk | contribs)
m (Books section suggestion)
Next diff →
Line 59: Line 59:
That looks good to me also. I also think that the only books that should be listed on the front page are those that merit their own wiki page. (''Joy of Cooking'', I'm looking at you.) --[[User:JamesRifkin|JamesRifkin]] 04:09, 3 Apr 2005 (EDT) That looks good to me also. I also think that the only books that should be listed on the front page are those that merit their own wiki page. (''Joy of Cooking'', I'm looking at you.) --[[User:JamesRifkin|JamesRifkin]] 04:09, 3 Apr 2005 (EDT)
 +The books section has grown somewhat: move to a separate page? --[[User:Robert Brook|RB]] 08:02, 13 Apr 2005 (EDT)
== Spamity Spam == == Spamity Spam ==

Revision as of 12:02, 13 April 2005

For previous discussion, please see Talk:Meta:Main Page Archives


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)

Do we / could we have an 'AnswerMe' tag? --RB 03:56, 1 Apr 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)

I'm all for retro-moderation for something like this. I think it's OK for people to contribute their software links, then thoughtful mods can come in after and template it. People who are in-the-know will see the templates and use it anyway, I think. --00:45, 29 Mar 2005 (EST)

Books section suggestion

I wonder how people feel about the books section on the home page. While I (really) appreciate the AMZN links on the home, page (thanks, everybody), I think books like Home Comforts could definitely use their own page. For the GTD Book in particular, I wonder if it would be confusing to people that we're just linking offsite. Maybe we could try something like this?


Merlin, I like the new listing the way you have it. --Todd Dailey 00:44, 29 Mar 2005 (EST)

That looks good to me also. I also think that the only books that should be listed on the front page are those that merit their own wiki page. (Joy of Cooking, I'm looking at you.) --JamesRifkin 04:09, 3 Apr 2005 (EDT)

The books section has grown somewhat: move to a separate page? --RB 08:02, 13 Apr 2005 (EDT)

Spamity Spam

Anyone else noticed that spammers have discovered this wiki? Depressing. I haven't seen anything past the front page, but checking the history reveals that it's happened twice in the last 12 hours. has some good information on wikispam as does Wikipedia. --Jeni 14:10, 29 Mar 2005 (EST)

I just fixed another front-page spam, looks like they're coming from .su and .ru, and don't know how to properly use a Wiki. :) Merlin might want to make editing available to "registered users" only. --Bill 23:21, 29 Mar 2005 (CST)

Another lot of spam from Anyone want to set up Meta:Vandalism for this sort of thing? I think that's what wikipedia uses. --Akchizar 18:52, 30 Mar 2005 (EST)

I set up Meta:Vandalism. It's not much right now, just a blacklist, but at least it's a start.--Jeni 13:53, 6 Apr 2005 (EDT)
It's super easy to make editing registration only. How do people feel about that? --Merlin 01:23, 1 Apr 2005 (EST)
Go forth and conquer. :) --RobertDaeley 01:34, 1 Apr 2005 (EST)
Please do! I'm sure I'm not the only one tired of being the WikiPolice :) --Bill Bradford 01:58, 1 Apr 2005 (CST)
Certainly gets my vote. --Rowlock 03:33, 1 Apr 2005 (EST)
Yes please. --RB 03:53, 1 Apr 2005 (EST)
Done! Where's the best place to announce the change? Should I change the templates anyplace to clarify? Thx. --Merlin 14:07, 1 Apr 2005 (EST)


Hey sysop (cough), how about going over Meta:DELETEME (or rather its What links here?-page). Some of those pages have been marked quite a while ago and people start using, marking them as stub or linking to them. --arjenvr 14:35, 10 Apr 2005 (EDT)

Personal tools