WikiIndex

WikiIndex talk:Add a Wiki

Project page Discussion
Add topic
Revision as of 03:25, 17 September 2006 by 70.189.73.224 (talk) (wiki based on mediawiki)

Tags

John, I spoke with Ray and we both agree that the tags are a definate step in the right direction, I am hoping that we can figure out what we need to do to make the tag functional within the description text. Until then, I guess we place the things underneath the header/footer.

  • that was the problem, trying to make it a header, so I have just bolded it, it works now as a footer. What do you think?

Best, MarkDilley

wiki_recentchanges

In order to have a clean, uniform look in the StructuredData template, wiki_recentchanges needs to be set to "no" if there is not a RecentChanges in the wiki. Words other than "no" show up ugly and distracting.

Could we rename wiki_recentchanges to something like recent_changes_URL to emphasize that we *want* the actual URL there, not merely the word "yes" ? --DavidCary 14:38, 8 Feb 2006 (EST)
Need to add it to the SysOp's task list. Need to find or create that. Best, MarkDilley | talk

If not all information available

Can one add a wiki with blanks in several places? I'm thinking of copying a few hundred profiles from wiki4all.com and leaving the "owners" of the wikis (or some other enthusiast) to fill in the blanks from their own knowledge rather than do the research myself. robinp 14:20, 7 Feb 2006 (EST)

I'd recommend using "Unknown" instead of blank. That way, those pages will show up in Category:Unknown for further research, if the owners don't do it themselves. TedErnst | talk 15:36, 7 Feb 2006 (EST)
Should we pre-fill the template on this page with the word "Unknown" ?

If we do that we will lose the category/tag place holders there, not sure which would be more useful.

Right now it has Active instead of Status and OpenEdit instead of EditMode. Changing those would be a step in the right direction. Would then be easier to find the new ones without that info. What I mean is, if we're going to keep the placeholders, let's go all the way. Or go the other way to Unknown. I like the placeholders. TedErnst | talk 16:36, 8 Feb 2006 (EST)
Agreed MarkDilley | talk

The pages that discuss an individual wiki, also display that wiki's logo. There are 2 possible ways of displaying that wiki's logo. (The logo looks identical in the normal "read" view, no matter which way we do it. It is only visible in the "editbox").

I've seen both ways used here:

  • Link directly to that wiki's logo, using the full URI of its location on that wiki.
    • Quicker, for the people putting new wiki into the wikiindex, to copy and past the URI to the image file, than to upload and download files (then delete that temporary file).
    • If someone finds the wiki *here*, then visits that wiki, the logo is only downloaded once (from that wiki) and stored in cache. (Rather than downloaded once from wikiindex.com and once again from that wiki).
    • once and only once
    • PersonalTelcoWiki does it this way
  • Download the image from that wiki, then upload that image to the WikiIndex, then refer to the wikiindex version of that image with double-brackets.
    • reduces load on that distant wiki, in the case where I look at the description here, and then decide not to visit that wiki after all.
    • faster response if I and WikiIndex are on the same continent, but that other wiki is on some other continent.
    • BradfordCompski does it this way
    • The "Add a Wiki" page currently seems to be saying this (download-upload) is the "proper" way to display each wiki's logo.

Which is really the best method?

Have we already discussed this elsewhere, and come to a consensus about the Right Way to Do It? Or should we just start talking about it here? --DavidCary 21:37, 30 Apr 2006 (EDT)

I've always thought that downloading the image was the more sure fire way to get it, given that you have more control over the size and shape, etc. But linking has the advantage that if their logo changes, we get the change also. Some logos have strange shapes and clipping a piece of the logo makes more sense. So I'd say either method is fine, whatever produces the best result visually. I'm sure there are some advantages to consistency, but not sure we can achieve 100% consistency unless we only download. Thoughts? --Raymond King | talk 02:30, 1 May 2006 (EDT)

getting the logo from wiki based on mediawiki

With many wikiengines, you can hit "File" | "Save page as" to snag a copy of the logo, or do "View" | "Page Source..." to find the exact URL of the logo.

However, some wiki based on the mediawiki engine make it difficult to access the logo and put it on wikiindex. When I try to to do "File" | "Save page as", I get some sort of "print version" of the page that doesn't include the logo. When I check the source code, it doesn't mention the logo anywhere. Apparently it is included by reference in one of the several CSS stylesheets referenced by the page.

What's the trick for grabbing that logo and putting it into the wikiindex entry for that wiki? --70.189.73.224 23:25, 16 September 2006 (EDT)

Retrieved from "https://wikiindex.org/index.php?title=WikiIndex_talk:Add_a_Wiki&oldid=31080"