[Debate] The future of the wiki

Problem with the site? Got a suggestion? Got feedback? Post here and the staff will discuss it with you.
gabegriggs1
User avatar
Donator
Posts: 306
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2014 5:29 pm
Location: Michigan. USA
Contact:

Re: [Debate] The future of the wiki

Post by gabegriggs1 »

No because the home page is locked.

Gabe


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
"Sometimes when you innovate, you make mistakes. It is best to admit them quickly, and get on with improving your other innovations." - Steve Jobs

Check out my YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqZBjx ... C1dNISF8ZQ

SistemaRayoXP
User avatar
FTP Access
Posts: 368
Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2017 1:26 am
Location: Tlajomulco de Zuñiga, Jalisco, Mexico.

Re: [Debate] The future of the wiki

Post by SistemaRayoXP »

I am aware of it. But x010 is a sysop! He can edit the main page
Image
Registrations are now open. Join us today!

gabegriggs1
User avatar
Donator
Posts: 306
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2014 5:29 pm
Location: Michigan. USA
Contact:

Re: [Debate] The future of the wiki

Post by gabegriggs1 »

Oh I see haha... I thought you were asking if someone had it locked haha


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
"Sometimes when you innovate, you make mistakes. It is best to admit them quickly, and get on with improving your other innovations." - Steve Jobs

Check out my YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqZBjx ... C1dNISF8ZQ

x010
Staff
Posts: 1091
Joined: Thu Jun 13, 2013 4:46 pm
Contact:

Re: [Debate] The future of the wiki

Post by x010 »

SistemaRayoXP wrote:If new user registration is now open, could anybody replace and/or delete the text in the main page where it says the requirements for registration?

Enviado desde mi P5025A mediante Tapatalk
Done.
gabegriggs1 wrote:No because the home page is locked.
Not really, only the core is. The templates can still be edited by any autoconfirmed user.

x010
Staff
Posts: 1091
Joined: Thu Jun 13, 2013 4:46 pm
Contact:

Re: [Debate] The future of the wiki

Post by x010 »

Notifications are now available. Use the reply-to template:

Code: Select all

{{reply to|username}}
and the user will be notified when he/she next visits the wiki. Make sure that you sign whatever you're saying (~~~~) as otherwise it will not work!

SebOno
Posts: 33
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2018 6:00 pm

Re: [Debate] The future of the wiki

Post by SebOno »

I just joined the wiki. Created Windows 10 1809, 1903, 19H2 and 20H1 pages. I hope I can expand it!
This user has left BetaArchive.

gtgamer468
User avatar
FTP Access
Posts: 326
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2016 10:35 pm

Re: [Debate] The future of the wiki

Post by gtgamer468 »

There were some information missing with the support status of previous Windows 10 updates. I changed it a bit to reflect the current status.

mrpijey
User avatar
Administrator
Posts: 8183
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2008 5:28 pm
Contact:

Re: [Debate] The future of the wiki

Post by mrpijey »

Please keep this thread clean from wiki article updates, the changes are already logged on the wiki. This topic is for discussions about the future of the wiki and how to improve it.

Thank you!
Image
Official guidelines: The Definitive Guide to BetaArchive :: Abandonware
Channels: Discord :: Twitter

smuckola
Posts: 6
Joined: Sat Mar 23, 2019 8:59 am

Re: [Debate] The future of the wiki

Post by smuckola »

I'll throw in a potentially worthless comment, as someone with a first impression at a glance. I would recommend having a rule of not playing storyteller of the history of an OS that's already been covered other general wikis such as Wikipedia. In the cherrypicked case of OS/2, I'd compliment Betaarchive's which is concise and useful and relevant, compared to betawiki's pointless history which is poorly written and sometimes wrong. Just a total 100% waste of article space and effort, and completely off the site's topic. Sometimes telling a select historical overview can give clues as to the existence of hidden items, but not this.

Speaking as a Wikipedian, where everyone is an anonymous scrub and potential vandal, and especially speaking as a member of the Counter Vandalism Unit, I am all for having *some* reputation of the editors. Wikipedia has some balance which can be enacted per article, like the ability for any anonymous editor to post their quick drive-by tidbit, but it gets held as a draft awaiting approval by an established editor with status. It doesn't instantly go live. Some people above have said the bar should be nonexistent -- no, but it can be fairly low. Mrpijey is totally correct and reasonable in saying yes the site would drown in crap and yes there should be some reputation for article-based publication.

But yeah overall definitely merge the two sites, as they are clearly needlessly redundant. I would hope it's not the hardest thing to merge each article one by one into one superior version. There should be a content drive to do that, maybe with a contest.

Just my two cents!

x010
Staff
Posts: 1091
Joined: Thu Jun 13, 2013 4:46 pm
Contact:

Re: [Debate] The future of the wiki

Post by x010 »

We've now enabled WikiEd on the wiki (https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:WikEd). It complements the existing editor and provides useful features like find and replace along with a host of interface improvements.
There was a bug which meant the number of active users was incorrect. This is corrected for now (it's 20 not 8).

---
SSO is dropped. Unfortunately, I realised that MW has different username rules in that it prohibits usernames like 'x010' wherein the first letter is lowercase. This means that we have to rename thousands of usernames on the forum to allow this, which the admin is not prepared to do for obvious reasons. Sorry.
---
Viewing pictures has been improved. You can see it on this article for instance: https://www.betaarchive.com/wiki/index. ... 1991_build

AlphaBeta
User avatar
Donator
Posts: 2137
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2012 4:33 pm
Location: Czechia

Re: [Debate] The future of the wiki

Post by AlphaBeta »

x010 wrote:SSO is dropped. Unfortunately, I realised that MW has different username rules in that it prohibits usernames like 'x010' wherein the first letter is lowercase. This means that we have to rename thousands of usernames on the forum to allow this, which the admin is not prepared to do for obvious reasons. Sorry.
The extension you linked to seems to be able to override this. I believe this would also require disabling capital links for the User/User talk namespaces.
AlphaBeta, stop brainwashing me immediately!

Image

x010
Staff
Posts: 1091
Joined: Thu Jun 13, 2013 4:46 pm
Contact:

Re: [Debate] The future of the wiki

Post by x010 »

AlphaBeta wrote:
x010 wrote:SSO is dropped. Unfortunately, I realised that MW has different username rules in that it prohibits usernames like 'x010' wherein the first letter is lowercase. This means that we have to rename thousands of usernames on the forum to allow this, which the admin is not prepared to do for obvious reasons. Sorry.
The extension you linked to seems to be able to override this. I believe this would also require disabling capital links for the User/User talk namespaces.
That'd be really nice, but isn't that only a formatting change? The username internally still has to confirm with MediaWiki rules to my knowledge.

Locked