5,391
edits
OniGalore:Current events: Difference between revisions
1) two cents on categorization; 2) haiku change denied: the idea is that it's *jokes* about wiki work that get old quickly, not wiki work itself
m (→Organizing the modding side of the wiki: link fix) |
(1) two cents on categorization; 2) haiku change denied: the idea is that it's *jokes* about wiki work that get old quickly, not wiki work itself) |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
|[[Image:Penny_Arcade_-_EvilCorp_Too.png|250px]] | |[[Image:Penny_Arcade_-_EvilCorp_Too.png|250px]] | ||
|- | |- | ||
! | !ENOUGH FOR A JOKE OR TWO<br>THEN IT GETS BORING | ||
|} | |} | ||
__TOC__ | __TOC__ | ||
| Line 56: | Line 56: | ||
#:I ([[User:Iritscen|Iritscen]] again) am currently second-guessing this approach, and planning to delete the few category categories already in existence. Creating a second level of categories muddies up the [[Special:Categories]] page more than it clarifies it. My mistake was in thinking that the page would show only the top-level of categories if I set things up correctly, but in fact every wiki's Categories page shows all categories regardless of their place in an overall hierarchy (just look at Wikipedia's categories page, it's millions of screens of category names despite their careful hierarchy). Only the installation of something like WP's Category Tree would help at all, and after some extensive investigation a while back I concluded that the Tree's default display was not even going to work in a way that was user-friendly, showing an expandable list of the hierarchy of categories like I would want to see. So, in short, it looks like this is a waste of time for a wiki our size and one level of categories is enough, even though it does make for some strange bedfellows on the [[Special:Categories]] page. | #:I ([[User:Iritscen|Iritscen]] again) am currently second-guessing this approach, and planning to delete the few category categories already in existence. Creating a second level of categories muddies up the [[Special:Categories]] page more than it clarifies it. My mistake was in thinking that the page would show only the top-level of categories if I set things up correctly, but in fact every wiki's Categories page shows all categories regardless of their place in an overall hierarchy (just look at Wikipedia's categories page, it's millions of screens of category names despite their careful hierarchy). Only the installation of something like WP's Category Tree would help at all, and after some extensive investigation a while back I concluded that the Tree's default display was not even going to work in a way that was user-friendly, showing an expandable list of the hierarchy of categories like I would want to see. So, in short, it looks like this is a waste of time for a wiki our size and one level of categories is enough, even though it does make for some strange bedfellows on the [[Special:Categories]] page. | ||
#:Okay, another update: currently doing some more research on categorization. I currently have no plans to do anything as far as removing existing hierarchy or putting more in. Stay tuned. --[[User:Iritscen|Iritscen]] 20:57, 5 October 2008 (CEST) | #:Okay, another update: currently doing some more research on categorization. I currently have no plans to do anything as far as removing existing hierarchy or putting more in. Stay tuned. --[[User:Iritscen|Iritscen]] 20:57, 5 October 2008 (CEST) | ||
#:Categories were never supposed to be a tree-like structure to begin with; they allow for overlaps of related or unrelated categories. Think of them as a context-sensitive commodity layer, rather than a primary tool for wiki-wide organization, and you'll be fine. --[[User:Geyser|geyser]] 21:12, 5 October 2008 (CEST) | |||
# Set up handy [[wikipedia:Redirect|redirects]]. These can be great time savers. | # Set up handy [[wikipedia:Redirect|redirects]]. These can be great time savers. | ||