User talk:Twz/Archive 2007 06

From JumbaWiki

Contents 1 good points 2 user banning 3 user upgrade 4 User Registration Captcha 5 extensions 6 Award 7 WAG collaboration 8 proposal for new namespace 9 redirection and moving 10 descriptive discussion summary 11 wikitable formatting 12 new namespaces 13 deletion 14 merged staff 15 Todo template 16 Collaboration of the week 17 ghastly working templates 18 Delete discussion 19 italic redirects 20 wiki addiction 21 Popups

good points

Hey, you've made some good points and contributions, be sure to check your watch list for discussion points you've started so you can contribute further to the discussion. Aussiepete 15:06, 28 May 2007 (EST)

user banning

I tag users as spammers as I'm now used to them - it's essentially a guess. If someone accidentally gets banned and want to contribute they can contact us through the forums etc. But usually the spam accounts being created are 6 characters and random capital and numerical which don't look like regular usernames (although the odd one might be). Usually only one or two of the accounts wipe or submit data, the rest lay dormant. I hope to delete them all together with the delete user extension, and add a captcha to the sign up to eliminate further spam accounts. Aussiepete 14:48, 9 June 2007 (EST)

lo and behold yes I just sift through userlist. I did see somewhere an extension to list or notify of new users, it required a recent version of mediawiki. I'll have a look again when it's moved to the new spot. New user list is much more manageable. Makes it difficult to welcome new users also. Aussiepete 16:15, 9 June 2007 (EST)

user upgrade

I think WAG members need admin user rights to be able to move and delete pages, you also have options to revert changes correctly, which actually revert the changes and not leave them in history. There are a bunch of other extensions that can be added but I'll lay low until there's a flood more contribution, for now it's manageable. Aussiepete 14:49, 9 June 2007 (EST)

User Registration Captcha

I'm sick of spambots registering accounts and crapping all over the wiki so I've installed a registration Captcha: http://wiki.jumba.com.au/w/index.php?title=Special:Userlogin&type=signup

The problem is that the currently installed version of MediaWiki doesn't go well with the extension so the text comes up as ????? but you still get the point of the calculation - what do you think, put up with spam until the version is upgraded, or use this extension that looks a little funny. Aussiepete 16:11, 12 June 2007 (EST)

extensions

Extensions that will be added with the new mediawiki update, let me know your thoughts:

• Captcha - The captcha calculation (image or sum) for new user accounts and edits that contain URLs.
• Cite - addition of tag <ref></ref> and <references /> which allow for footnoting
• SpecialUserScore - Ability to see most active users and contributors (useful for offering rewards)
• Newuserlog - See the recently added user accounts (useful for welcoming new users, and checking for spammers)

Aussiepete 16:54, 12 June 2007 (EST)

This will all be happening as soon as the new mediawiki version can be upgraded (from v1.6 to 1.10). This requires PHP5 which means Craig needs to transfer the wiki to a server that supports the new mediawiki upgrade. This will take as long as Craig takes to transfer the wiki/setup on an alternate space. Aussiepete 17:02, 12 June 2007 (EST)

Award

Just letting you know I appreciate your contributions and discussion points. I have awarded you with the wiki contributors award :) You are also the first recipient of the award - even though you are part of the wiki action group. Although it's not an "official" award as it's user awarded, I still think it's a nice way of users thanking others and encouraging participation. Hopefully when others contribute we can butter them up with a thankyou. Aussiepete 11:45, 19 June 2007 (EST)

A can't really award myself now can I :) Aussiepete 12:00, 19 June 2007 (EST)

WAG collaboration

I want to get some ideas on your thoughts for some of my ideas put on the WAG article - particularly in this case "collaboration of the week". To post boldly on the main page "this week's (month's) collaborative article is 'Web Design' - please have your say!" or something along those lines to encourage participation. With my work on wikipedia (although a much larger community) they drum up substantial interest on film articles for example by stating a weekly, fortnightly or monthly article to focus on, and vote on the next collaborative project whatever the time frame is. This can then be advertised on the forums also to vote on articles or topics of most interest and encouraging contribution to just one article. The best articles are written when bouncing ideas off others and gives varied perspectives and gets others involved. What's your thoughts on this? Aussiepete 22:07, 17 June 2007 (EST)

Maybe the Main Page and Jumba Services can be the first collaborative articles... Yes it's been the main issue I've always had with wiki, do you reply to the thread on your own talk page, or reply on the other users talk page so they see it but then break the conversation thread... I tend to reply on the user talk page because it's fresh enough to understand the note, but later it's not so clear. I don't miss things because I have notes e-mailed and check my watchlist (which is every article) and recent changes. The difficulty is when there's hundreds of contributions a day, then things start getting lost so it's best to reply on the users talk page so they don't miss it, or keep the conversation thread running but then put a note on the user's talk page to mention the note has been left if it's that important, otherwise keep discussion threads on the related article so others can see related discussion. There's not really any etiquette or anything, but I guess it would be good to establish some basic rules to help streamline things. Either way I won't miss it, unless I'm on holiday :) Aussiepete 22:35, 17 June 2007 (EST)

proposal for new namespace

I've had an idea for a while... I've created the Archive and WAG namespaces (which don't come up in general searches etc) we could set up a namespace TODO or something along those lines. All these stubs can be moved there so we cull it right back to 50-100 reasonable articles, then work on the TODO articles and then move them to the main namespace when they are good enough. My main concern is that I've spend hours and days setting up a basis to add articles and content (which never eventuated, I'd love to step through and do it myself when I get time, but that's the point of group collaboration). The new namespace preserves these articles whether they eventuate or not, they can just sit there dormant, others can browse the TODO namespace, or Archive or STUB or whatever it's called and add to them if they feel the need. Is this fair enough? Aussiepete 20:51, 19 June 2007 (EST)

Other ideas for articles can also be added in this namespace, maybe it could be called Proposed or something. Then people can add all the articles they want with reasonable discussion points to lead the article. Then it can be interlinked and launched. Aussiepete 20:52, 19 June 2007 (EST)

A TODO namespace sounds like an excellent idea. I know you've put a lot of thought and work in - it would be great to "hide" these articles without losing them completely, and as you say, provides a space for people to suggest new articles --Twz 21:09, 19 June 2007 (EST)

I think we need to set up some kind of voting system in the WAG namespace or something to vote on this sort of thing - simply place a or with a brief comment or suggestion. I think setting up a new namespace would be a good idea for a development area, but we need to have a consensus on a name, (eg. Dev:Articlename, Todo:Articlename, Working:Articlename, Test:Articlename, Proposed:Articlename). Aussiepete 08:39, 20 June 2007 (EST)

redirection and moving

Not a problem with moving articles and changing previous links because the old article you've moved from just becomes a redirect. The problem occurs when you then move that article again, the previous redirect then goes to another redirect and need to be manually changed to the new moved title. A lot of these areas are mentioned in the Wiki Action Group in the toolbox area - others are orphan articles, dead-end articles or broken redirects (ie. if a page is deleted, a page may redirect to it still). Generally you don't need to change the old links, but for cleanness I like to. Again, once we see things moving and people beginning to contribute, we can set up some kind of notices or guidelines for people to be aware of these things. I think there should also be a style guide to follow for headings, colours etc. Aussiepete 11:39, 21 June 2007 (EST)

descriptive discussion summary

Another issue now will be having descriptive edit summaries. I generally try to leave a summary so when you browse recent changes you get a basic idea of what's been done. This is more important now with the link from the forum (if it's used) so each talk point or change on the wiki can have a brief subject to see what the discussion is about. Aussiepete 11:40, 21 June 2007 (EST)

wikitable formatting

Just making sure you were OK with the wikitable class on the forum pol article you started? Couldn't quit work out whether you'd posted that before or after the new formatting :) Aussiepete 22:45, 21 June 2007 (EST)

Replied on Talk:Jumba_Forum_Polls#Table_borders --Twz 23:25, 21 June 2007 (EST)

new namespaces

The new namespaces WIP and Proposed have now been set up but I'll look at moving things soon. The main issue is templates and interlinking throughout articles which might cause some trauma, but haven't attempted anything yet. Before moving things left right and centre, maybe we should compile a list of the main articles that should be kept, moving the rest. Aussiepete 00:12, 22 June 2007 (EST)

deletion

I say go for you life. Scalix, 100% uptime, all the unknown or old services delete them. If the article is significant, move it to Archive:article name. Aussiepete 11:50, 22 June 2007 (EST)

PS. you don't need my permission :) You're part of the WAG and are the other main editor so you can pick and choose or if you're unsure get a consensus on the forum, otherwise it's probably OK :)

Thanks. I just didn't want you to think I'm treading on toes --Twz 15:12, 22 June 2007 (EST)

merged staff

I've started an idea for the staff page (check http://wiki.jumba.com.au/w/index.php?title=Staff&action=edit and click preview to see what it looks like, it's hidden so I didn't mind keeping it in the same space. The tables are messy and the Template:staff bio template needs a little modification but I reckon it might work OK, what do you think? Aussiepete 12:07, 22 June 2007 (EST)

Yes I like the idea. For those without a photo can we use a generic "blank head silhouette" image? How about renaming from Staff to JumbaStaff or Jumba_Staff? --Twz 12:31, 22 June 2007 (EST)

I've been meaning to see what happens if you put content after the #redirect tag - now I know! --Twz 12:33, 22 June 2007 (EST)

Yes it's a work in progress so am open to ideas. I thought redirect pages would show the content, oh well. I've got a few other ideas but this is at least a start. I'm not sure how to hide the noin existing variables, will check. I'll do up (or you can) a silhouette called nophoto.jpg or something. That's why I want to do some artists impressions so there's at least something there. Aussiepete 12:54, 22 June 2007 (EST)

We could probably find a suitable "nophoto" image on the web, or maybe something with the text "faceless Jumba staff member" across it - might encourage staff to submit a photo! :) --Twz 13:12, 22 June 2007 (EST)

I'm just about to delete all the staff articles, in place of the new Staff article. Any final thoughts or anything to convince me otherwise? Aussiepete 00:39, 23 June 2007 (EST)

Go ahead. One suggestion about the Staff bio template - can the name be more prominent in the box - either enlarge the font for "FullName" or have the Fullname above the photo as well? The new Staff page looks great! --Twz 00:43, 23 June 2007 (EST)

Todo template

In case you don't see it, I've set up a todo template (based on the note you left on Cache. Hopefully it's clear enough to know how to use it... I've got a whole bunch of other ideas i want to get set up too, another one is to set up an archive template which pretties up the archive links with a pretty picture and list, eg. {{talk archive|archive1|archive2 title|archive3}}. Are all these templates and things getting way too complicated? Maybe they could be protected so people don't stumble across them and get freaked out.Aussiepete 01:28, 23 June 2007 (EST)

Looks good. Maybe we need a WAG: or Help: article that lists the templates and how to use them? I'm not sure what {{talk archive|archive1|archive2 title|archive3}} is all about! (maybe it's just getting late for me) --Twz 01:37, 23 June 2007 (EST)

That archive 1/2/3 thing was how it's used. Eah of the template describes the usage of the template, are these not clear enough? The advanced templates are annoying me because I can't hide unused variables... There does need to be a place to collate all of these templates and ideas - I've listed them in the WAG article for now. Aussiepete 01:47, 23 June 2007 (EST)

Hiding unused variables - there's something about setting default values and #IF stuff on wikimedia help - not sure if it applies to our version, and it's way too complicated for me right now http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Template --Twz 01:54, 23 June 2007 (EST)

It's an extension ParserFunctions but is buggy. I'll leave it for now, probably not really important. Just annoying. Will look at it when I can think :)Aussiepete 02:07, 23 June 2007 (EST)

Collaboration of the week

I've started a thread on my talk page (User talk:Aussiepete#Collaboration of the week) that I'd like your thoughts on and particularly action made. Cheers Aussiepete 21:57, 26 June 2007 (EST)

This week's collaborative article is: Frequently Asked Questions. Please contribute to this article over the week, and don't forget to vote and discuss next weeks; Vote for week 3 at WAG:Collaboration. Aussiepete 01:35, 30 June 2007 (EST)

ghastly working templates

I think it was mentioned somewhere before, but it's almost like every article can be tagged with "expand", "delete", "update" templates and it's very "in your face" when browsing content. Although I feel it's only temporary as the content is refined and a direction is established, these tags can begin to get removed. I'm just wondering whether people need to see these notices or if they could be moved to talk pages, or if they could be toned down so they're not so bold. But then it's encouraging contribution. Don't know what I'm saying! Aussiepete 20:12, 27 June 2007 (EST)

Yes I know what you're saying. Another option is to place the templates at the bottom of the article - it's hard to know the best way to go. Most of the time people don't need to see them, but in some cases if there's a {{update}} it's a useful warning that the article could be out of date. I don't know! --Twz 20:18, 27 June 2007 (EST)

At the moment I think we should just keep going as we have, and over the next few weeks or however long it takes to fine-tune, we can start addressing them when things are looking cleaner. Again this would be linked with policy discussion. Aussiepete 20:58, 27 June 2007 (EST)

Delete discussion

I've just realised a booboo - OK so we've decided to delete this article, someone can just come along and recreate it. Maybe all delete discussion should either be archived or listed in a WAG:Delete/Articlename area or something so when the article (and discussion) is deleted, this discussion is still valid for if the article is ever recreated. PS. hope you don't mind my waffle all over articles and your talk pages, expecting so much response. Aussiepete 21:01, 27 June 2007 (EST)

Yes, or instead of deleting, move to Deleted: namespace? Either way, it would be up to editors to remember an article that was previously deleted. PS. Waffle all you like! I've been doing some waffling myself --Twz 21:09, 27 June 2007 (EST)

italic redirects

I updated the common.css file with a new version, the redirect articles have been italic since then. I really like it - it really helps define what are actual articles yet still lets you see them all together, otherwise it was difficult to determine. Aussiepete 09:15, 28 June 2007 (EST)

wiki addiction

Am I correctly sensing some kind of wiki addiction oozing out of this user account? :) Aussiepete 16:27, 29 June 2007 (EST)

I believe so. It's very sad --Twz 16:52, 29 June 2007 (EST)

Popups

I use an extension in Wikipedia which I find invaluable when editing articles. You might like to install it and see what you think. Copy the text in my monobook.js file into yours User:Twz/monobook.js. Some of the features I find handy are selecting links within the edit window and having a snapshot preview of the article along with a bunch of common actions associated with the page. All links pop-up a preview of the article with actions. Very handy, give it a go and let me know what you think. Aussiepete 23:56, 29 June 2007 (EST)

Looks like you might have run into a little toruble? I think it should be fine to keep it as Aussiepete/popups.js, but I forgot to mention the other css file.

I'll have to do this later - I've been trying to look at it with other things going on around me (ie kids!) --Twz 01:29, 30 June 2007 (EST)

I've edited the necessary files for you, I expect it would work now if you clear your cache (CTRL+Refresh). You can delete the javascript in monobook.js if you want to turn it off. Aussiepete 01:41, 30 June 2007 (EST)

Thanks. It's amazing! It can be distracting at first, but I can see the value and I'll probably get used to it --Twz 11:20, 30 June 2007 (EST)