User talk:Speckmade

Hello and welcome back to WikiIndex! Looks like you know your way around the place. Great! Let me know if you have any ideas or questions about this wiki. Best, MarkDilley

Nice to hear some words from real humans...

Thanks for the offer - I'll remember it!--Speckmade 17:12, 23 May 2007 (EDT)

Welcome to WikiIndex. I see you've made many good edits already. I hope you enjoy contributing to and exploring the WikiIndex. (I agree that OneBuckWiki doesn't look like a wiki.) --DavidCary 01:49, 22 November 2007 (EST)

Question about OneBuckWiki (and similar websites) at Category talk:Wiki Edit Mode#PayToEdit.3F --EarthFurst 16:40, 17 December 2007 (EST)

Curious

I like the tags and am wondering why you are removing all of them?

I do not simply remove all of them.

Those tags are there to categorise pages - and if a page is already categorised more precisely in a subcategory I remove them from the main category. I think it's more clear and logical this way.

(Curious: Does this make sense to you?)--Speckmade 09:53, 19 July 2008 (EDT)

Wiki License parameter

Hi Speckmade. I reverted your changes to the Template:Tl template. For some reason, it was breaking the infobox in some articles, but not in others. I left a note about it on the talk page of the template. I like the idea, though. --MarvelZuvembie 18:40, 14 October 2008 (EDT)

I added a note about removing the "Wiki" from the license name in the Wiki License category notes. That was the primary reason why I edited the boilerplate template. It seemed a little counter-intuitive that the category name did not match the text you have to put in the infobox (I was confused by it intially), so I wanted to try to help other people by spelling it out. Hopefully, the note will serve that purpose. However, if you have a better way of doing it, please do. Thanks, MarvelZuvembie 16:03, 4 December 2008 (EST)

:-D - ...and I thought, that I eased things with the template adding the prefix "Wiki " automatically...

Yeah, nice to clarify this there. - But: I wouldn't get it from this "sentence" you added there - did you maybe mess up the sentence?--Speckmade 07:59, 6 December 2008 (EST)

Yep, I sure did. I meant "if", not "in". Thanks for catching that. Naturally, feel free to change it if it's still unclear, despite my fix. --MarvelZuvembie 22:26, 8 December 2008 (EST)

Overcategorization

Hi Speckmade. Thanks for creating all of those categories! However, it seems to me that we ought to consolidate some of them. For example, do we really need the three categories blog, blogs, and blogging? What's the difference between them? --MarvelZuvembie 14:50, 4 December 2008 (EST)

Yesyesyes, please do it!

I didn't create those categories - I just categorized them because it just was the easier solution for the moment; for me the chaos was too big to get everything fixed in one go.

So: Yes, I also see the problem you mention - and there are many more cases like this one. One may argue though that for example blogging is a more general thing than just blogs...--Speckmade 18:17, 14 December 2008 (EST)

I think of it as a Tagsonomy - where those categories might be tagged with their peer cateogories. ~~ MarkDilley

Heh. Tagsonomy.

Alternatively, if there are no differences between them but we don't want to eliminate them, should the appropriate wikis be in all three categories? --MarvelZuvembie 22:20, 8 December 2008 (EST)

Oh no! That would just look confusing with no practical use I can see.--Speckmade 18:20, 14 December 2008 (EST)

Two questions:

I am concerned that the edit to the list on the front of WikiIndex is going to slow down people adding links to it - I do like the focus for adding wikis being highlighted, I wonder if highlighting the one click create button would be good?

Secondly, I am interested in exploring a two column solution for topics and new wiki showing up

+----------------+
|                |
|                |
+----------------+
|       |        |
|       |        |
|       |        |
|       |        |
|       |        |
|       |        |
|       |        |
+----------------+

What do you think?

I'm not into it...--Speckmade 15:08, 4 February 2009 (EST)

Wiki Language

Hi Speckmade. I don't object to the changes you made to the {{Wiki}} template. However, I wanted to point out that as a result of some of your changes there are now several miscategorized wikis. For example, in the repurposing of Category:English to be used for wikis about the English language rather than in the English language, those wikis which are multilingual and include English as one of those languages have not been transitioned to Category:Wiki English. Also, many of the less-represented languages do not have a corresponding "Wiki [Language]" category, which means that most of the non-English versions of Wikipedia now have a red link in the language field where once they had a blue link. I'll endeavor to fix this. Maybe you could fix some of the multilingual wikis? Thanks, MarvelZuvembie 19:55, 6 March 2009 (EST)

I see that you already fixed the more well-known languages. This is something I hadn't noticed when I posted my last message. Thanks for doing that. --MarvelZuvembie 17:03, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

I am glad you are improving the categories here at WikiIndex. Would you mind commenting on a proposed "improvement" to the category system at Category talk:Wiki Language? --DavidCary 01:32, 17 March 2009 (EDT)

Non-free wiki licenses

Hi Speckmade. How should we categorize wikis which are copyrighted? For example, all Neoseeker wikis are "Copyright Neo Era Media Inc." It seems like we ought to let potential contributors know that their work will become the property of the site. --MarvelZuvembie 16:14, 13 March 2009 (EDT)

True...

Dunno - maybe mark them as "proprietary" or something? Explaining stuff on the corresponding category page?--Speckmade 23:03, 13 March 2009 (EDT)

Proprietary sounds good. And an explanation on the category page is even better. :-) --MarvelZuvembie 20:24, 30 March 2009 (EDT)