Jump to content

Project:Village Pump/Archive 2

From mediawiki.org

Decided Issues

Some issues have either (a) been decided or (b) not been objected to in previous archived discussion, so therefore I am proposing the following actions. If there are no objections to these by the 31st October 2006 then I will go ahead and implement them or add them as policy, as appropriate (though bear with me if they don't all happen on 1st Nov!). Any decisions reached on this page that are not listed below have already been implemented/acted upon (or required no change) --HappyDog 19:32, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A request has been logged at bugzilla:7778

Namespaces

(see Project:Current issues/Archive#Namespaces)

Languages

(see Project:Current issues/Archive#Languages)

  • Policy: All pages with no suffix should be in English.
  • Policy: All other languages go in an appropriately named sub-page of the main article. E.g. the French version of Help:Contents goes in Help:Contents/fr.
  • This is compatible with the import/export of Help data (see Automating help page export)
  • The above has only properly been decided for the Help: namespace. Discussion about other namespaces is ongoing, below.

This has all been written up at Project:Language policy. --HappyDog 01:19, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not yet. Project:Language policy read as "Apart from the Main Page, no policy has yet been decided about other namespaces... Discussion is ongoing at Project:Current issues." Thus the following issues shuld be open for discussion (back again) --Vikici 12:44, 18 December 2010 (UTC):[reply]
  • All pages with no suffix, excluding the Help: namespace, should be in English.
Just to warm up a little bit, and not necessarily for the short term, it should be considered to have a "language-neutral" structure in which all the languages are treated equally. In this use case, default content presentation depends on user preference → site preference → first available language version, whichever found first. I am well aware that this means a fundamental change in data structure but has many advantages for multilingual sites. --Vikici 12:44, 18 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • All other languages go in an appropriately named sub-page of the main article.
similar to above. --Vikici 12:44, 18 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Other

These have not been discussed, but are hopefully non-contentious. They need developer input, so I want to request them at the same time as the namespace changes, above, which is why I am rasing them here. --HappyDog 19:32, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

2008

PD Help

Moved from User talk:Skizzerz.

Hi Skizzerz. Thanks for your work in sorting out the non-PD Help categorisation. I hope I'm not shitting in your milk with these comments... the foibles of Category:Help have only just been brought to my attention by your edits.

In my opinion (and I think it is an accident of history that this is not already the case) Category:Help should be a category for all help content, organised sensibly into sub-cats, of which PD Help should be one. It would be easy to add all PD help pages to a single category by editing Template:PD Help Page but I am aware that it would involve undoing a lot of your recent edits to put the other pages back into the category (or an appropriate sub-category). What do you reckon? --HappyDog 03:28, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I did see your objection before I started in Category talk:Help, but since that was from September '06 and it seems to have stayed that way since then, I assumed that it was the way we were going with this. Anyway, going along with what you said that Category:Help should be a category for all help content, isn't that what this entire wiki is anyway? The majority of the Manual: namespace contains help content, a lot of Project: namespace pages have help content, and quite a few others do as well. This encompasses over half of the wiki, so if you feel that you want to categorise that many pages... then feel free. Otherwise, I think that since the wiki was designed to have documentation and help, that the category isn't really all that necessary.
However, if you still think that the category is needed, I must say that "PD Help" is not an appropriate name for the ones containing the PD help pages. You may find this strange, but consider this: Help:Copying currently details how to copy the PD help pages to one's local wiki. However, once they are copied there, the people at that wiki have the option of re-licensing that material under whatever they want, so having a PD Help category contain cc-by-sa licensed pages (as an example) would be quite odd. At any rate, do whatever you want with the cats, I just wanted to say my 2 cents. Just make sure that if you are reverting me, that you use "undo" instead of "rollback" as I've made some back-to-back contributions to some of those pages. --Skizzerz 16:22, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm... those are some valid points.
In terms of the categorisation of the PD help pages, really this should be included in the {{PD Help Page }} template, so that all PD help pages are automatically categorised. This also means that if you import the pages to a new wiki, you can simply modify this template to categorise them however you want (or not at all, if you choose). It therefore doesn't matter from this point of view how we choose to categorise things here.
The original aim of Category:Help was as a second-level category for help content. It would not include any pages (except perhaps Help:Contents and Manual:Contents), just sub-categories that point to various other help categories: e.g. Category:Help for users, Category:Help for sysadmins, Category:Manual, Category:Public-domain help, etc. Basically, the point was to allow the category tree to be usable as site navigation ("OK - I'm here for help, what help resources are there... OK there's the FAQ, there's help for sysadmins... oh no, wait - installation, that's what I'm after") rather than using it as a bunch of boxes to put things in.
Whether that's a sensible aim is still open for discussion, but I don't think it's quite so redundant as it appears on first glance --HappyDog 05:16, 4 August 2008 (UTC) ...and you made me think in order to give this reply - my first reaction was "that's all very true... I hadn't thought of that..." :-)[reply]
Having a second level category with nothing but more specific sub-categories is indeed quite sensible. It provides an extra means of navigation to specific pages that perhaps may not be easily found via search. I also agree with you that the category should be included in {{PD Help Page }} and not put onto every page, as it helps keep things synced. Perhaps this discussion could be opened up in a more publicly-known place for some other people to give their input before we go off and do drastic changes to the category structure of the site. --Skizzerz 16:09, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed - moved to Project:Current issues. --HappyDog 21:54, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support desk overhaul

This is just a short notice about a discussion I started regarding the future of our support desk: Please have a look at Project talk:Support desk#Support desk overhaul (autumn_2008) and comment there. --:bdk: 23:51, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Babel

Would it be helpful to import the Babel templates? It's good that we've avoided the scourge of userboxes, but MW.org is multilingual enough that Babel templates might ease communication difficulties. —Emufarmers(T|C) 13:09, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This was briefly brought up here, and in my opinion that answer still stands. I would like to see a strong consensus from a number of regular admins before any attempt were made to bring those templates here. --HappyDog 00:48, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I saw that, but the question there was only whether there already were Babel templates, not whether there should be. —Emufarmers(T|C) 02:17, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Subpages in the template namespace

While doing some work today I noticed that subpages are not currently enabled in the template namespace. They would be useful to group template-specific dependencies (i.e. templates that another template depends on, but is not depended on by any other template). Is there any reason not to do this? MinuteElectron 21:13, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Odd that it has been explicitly disabled. It should always be on for templates, so many templates use subpage tricks! Splarka 12:20, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Revisión definitiva de los Estatutos del Capítulo de Wikimedia España

Hello, there are news about the Spanish Chapter of Wikimedia, regards:

Se ha terminado con la redacción definitiva de los estatutos del futuro capítulo español de la Fundación Wikimedia. Se ha pretendido realizar una redacción simple y lo suficientemente flexible para que no sea necesario modificarlos en una buena temporada. Algunos de los detalles del funcionamiento de la asociación se incluirán en el futuro Reglamento de Régimen Interno para facilitar su modificación, ya que ese documento no necesita ser presentado en el Registro de Asociaciones y nos ahorramos ese papeleo.

Esta versión de los estatutos se va a someter a la votación de todos los interesados para lo que se abre un período de votación del 28 de abril al 5 de mayo, ambos inclusive. Oportunamente se hará saber el link donde se puede votar. Se ruega encarecidamente a quienes deseen proponer textos, artículos o frases alternativas, que no las intercalen en el texto del borrador de Estatutos, para no hacerlo ilegible, y que trasladen sus propuestas a la discusión de la página.

Queda convocada una reunión para el día 8 de mayo de 2010 en Madrid, reunión a la que podrán asistir todos los interesados, pues en ella se procederá a la firma del Acta de Constitución. Se ruega a todos los interesados en firmar que acudan con sus DNI o identificaciones oficiales (Pasaporte o Carné de Conducir), a ser posible en vigor.

Cualquier duda o sugerencia puede realizarse en las páginas de meta o en la lista de correo. Saludos, Elisardojm, --83.165.14.79 22:35, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do you like StackOverflow? would you like a WikiOverflow?

Hi,

MediaWiki has a great support system and a simplistic forum. But newcomers and mid-termers alike would have lots of similar questions about the system, installation issues, or other questions that could have multiple answers.

We all know the forum concept, but StackOverflow (and its buddies on StackExchange) have started a new system where questions can be asked, found, answered and sorted very effectively, even better than Yahoo Answers. The results are fast and accurate. Great users get reputation, and hence more rights (like, eventually, moderation privileges). The system has really been a success and with a little bit of YOUR help, we could have a StackExchange dedicated to Wiki and MediaWiki questions!

  1. Visit the Wikipedia and Wikis proposal
  2. Login
  3. Click the "Follow" button

Thank you for supporting this venture!

JeremyJenko 13:58, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://www.mediawiki.org/w/index.php?title=Project:Village_Pump/Archive_2&oldid=5449955"