PrattWiki:Community Portal
From PrattWiki
Introduction
This page is a place for discussions about the Pratt Wiki. Please start new discussions with a new Level 3 section (i.e. put the question on the bottom of the page and surround it with three equals signs). Use lists to make the flow of the conversation clearer, and be sure to sign your entries with ~~~~.
Contents |
Current Discussions
Eventually, archived discussions will go elsewhere... There just aren't any yet.
Where do FAQs go?
- In writing some of the pages - such as MATLAB - I have started wondering if the FAQs should be on the main page, in the discussion page, or if there should be a new namespace FAQ: for such a thing. In the latter case, there would thus be a MATLAB page with general information, a Talk:MATLAB page for people to discuss the article or pose questions, and a FAQ:MATLAB page that will take the questions from the Talk page that are most likely to come up again... Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated. DukeEgr93 21:07, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
Namespaces, Part II
- Here'a another organizational issue. I can see this site having several pages related to a particular program - for example, MATLAB - where perhaps there will be an entire page on making plots. Given that, would it make sense to have name spaces for some of the more popular programs? It would mean being able to name something as MATLAB:Plotting, for example, vs. using Plotting (MATLAB) or something like that. The advantage of a name space is that in advanced searches, you can specifically include or exclude particular namespaces; the first disadvantage that comes to mind is that typically namespaces other than the name one are not searched... DukeEgr93 21:13, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
- In regards to the FAQ, I'm thinking that you go with the later case. It will be easier to expand the namespace in the long run that way.... And yes, having a specific namespace for each program would work best I think. I don't believe that you would run into an issue where when somebody searches for a specific item, such as plotting, that they will miss out on not picking up plotting items from the other programs. I think they will go for a specific item, and thus the individual namespace would work best. --Wesleybrown 04:24, 29 June 2008 (UTC) (copied here from talk page)
- Cool deal. I'll come up with some namespaces in the next couple days or so. I might also try to figure out a way for the most common spaces to be a part of the defauls search (MATLAB, for example). DukeEgr93 14:00, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
- In regards to the FAQ, I'm thinking that you go with the later case. It will be easier to expand the namespace in the long run that way.... And yes, having a specific namespace for each program would work best I think. I don't believe that you would run into an issue where when somebody searches for a specific item, such as plotting, that they will miss out on not picking up plotting items from the other programs. I think they will go for a specific item, and thus the individual namespace would work best. --Wesleybrown 04:24, 29 June 2008 (UTC) (copied here from talk page)
Protected Pages
- Earlier today, I created a new template to indicate pages that had been protected because they were part of a class' reading materials (for example, the UNIX Tutorial). The idea is that folks believing there should be edits could go to the talk page and suggest them, but only system administrators could make changes on the main page. I'm of two minds about this - I like the idea that some pages are semi-static so that people choosing to print out the materials all have the same information, but I do feel like that compromises part of the reason for putting the information on a wiki... Thoughts? DukeEgr93 22:00, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
Troubleshooting Pages?
Somewhat along with the namespace and FAQ issues above - would it make sense to have a Troubleshooting space? That is, if someone has a problem with PuTTY, there would be a page called Troubleshooting:PuTTY that would be linked off the main page. That way, the mainspace articles could be focused on other information... DukeEgr93 19:29, 30 August 2009 (EDT)
