Suggestion to GoW wiki

[Egon]

I have a couple of suggestion to GoW wiki. Here list with no particular order:

* I heard that there might be a rule in edit guile line which would go like this:

If there is already a template heading on a wiki age, then the "stub" template should go to the footer.

My suggestion to guidelines would be that "stub" template should always be in one place. Either always on top, or always on bottom, to lower amount of confusion about it.
* Don't use "pseudo" namespaces. If You really need need new namespace: configure it.
* Laguage: install finally separate wiki instance for each language. That way we could finally use proper tools for translating articles and for linking to different language versions (It is possible to even install new wiki instace on the same database. During instalation You just define new prefix, like "de_" and all database object will be made with such prefix. And You can configure it to use the same userbase as english version. And You can point to English version as a source of images and files for the all instances)
* If, for some bizarre reason, we won't be having couple of instances for languages then in guildelines there should be rule that every page in language different than English should be in proper namespace. That includes categories and templates
* In cases like this it would be better to use subpages. Subpages are better because:
a) You can not confuse them with namespaces
b) They automatically give link to "parent article". For example here You can see link to "Template:Documentation subpage" under title of article. Although it does not work in our wiki. Either because we have to old version, or we have this disabled (it is possible to disable this for each namespace separately or for whole wiki)
c) it is possible to make links relative to the article. Link like this: [[../Downloads]] in PyRPR/Introduction, would linkt to [[PyPRP/Downloads]], and in [[3dMax/Introduction]] would link to [[3dMax/Downloads]]. It won't work in "namespace" convention. Such behavior us useful in making of templates
Having sad that: I think that we should reconsider to not use neither nemaspaces, nor subpages. I mean: what's wrong with titles like this: "Introduction to PyPRP", "Introduction to 3d Max", instead of titles like this: "PyPRP:Introduction", "3d Max:Introduction".
* credits of articles usually don't need to be in directly in article. For that a list of contributors in page history is enough.
* normal users can not delete pages so they must put template {{del}} instead (with proper explanation in the comment od edit). Admins should check this category, and either delete those pages, or remove {{del}} template (also with proper explanation to why).
* names of categories should be plural
* when categorizing try to put as much relevant categories as possible. So, for example, instead of putting [[Category:Tutorials]] and [[Category:Blender]], it's better to put just [[Category:Blender tutorials]]

[diafero]

What advantages would a "real" namespace bring over a pseudo-namespace as it is used now?

* In cases like this it would be better to use subpages. Subpages are better because:
a) You can not confuse them with namespaces
b) They automatically give link to "parent article". For example here You can see link to "Template:Documentation subpage" under title of article. Although it does not work in our wiki. Either because we have to old version, or we have this disabled (it is possible to disable this for each namespace separately or for whole wiki)
c) it is possible to make links relative to the article. Link like this: [[../Downloads]] in PyRPR/Introduction, would linkt to [[PyPRP/Downloads]], and in [[3dMax/Introduction]] would link to [[3dMax/Downloads]]. It won't work in "namespace" convention. Such behavior us useful in making of templates

That does really sound useful, did anyone of our admins consider it?


On another note, I think the text styling definitely needs to be changed. The text is very small currently, about as small as signature text in the forums which is meant to be usually ignored. FireBug says it's 11.2 px with my resolution, I think it should be increased to at least 12.5px, which could be achieved by changing the #bodyContent CSS to set a font-size of 0.9em (instead of 0.8em).
Secondly, intra-wiki links, especially ones I already clicked on, are very hard to distinguish from normal text. Increasing font size will certainly help, but personally I'm a fan of underlining all links unconditionally (and not just on hover). However if you consider that too annoying, the colour should at least be changed to be more distinguishable from the black text (the non-visited colour is really the closest it should get to black, IMHO). External links are not an issue due to the icon next to them.

Andy recently expressed similar concerns, I wonder if more explorers have issues finding the links in wiki text?

[kaelisebonrai]

On another note, I think the text styling definitely needs to be changed. The text is very small currently, about as small as signature text in the forums which is meant to be usually ignored. FireBug says it's 11.2 px with my resolution, I think it should be increased to at least 12.5px, which could be achieved by changing the #bodyContent CSS to set a font-size of 0.9em (instead of 0.8em).
Secondly, intra-wiki links, especially ones I already clicked on, are very hard to distinguish from normal text. Increasing font size will certainly help, but personally I'm a fan of underlining all links unconditionally (and not just on hover). However if you consider that too annoying, the colour should at least be changed to be more distinguishable from the black text (the non-visited colour is really the closest it should get to black, IMHO). External links are not an issue due to the icon next to them.

Andy recently expressed similar concerns, I wonder if more explorers have issues finding the links in wiki text?

Uhh... quick question - do you have these same problems with Wikipedia? as we're using essentially the same theme as wikipedia at the moment. If its a problem for us - its also a problem for Wikipedia. And somehow I kinda think wikipedia would be on top of these sorts of issues - if they are, infact, issues. =P

I can easily tell the difference between the colours, and the font size is a fairly readable standard size. =P

[andylegate]

I think it's more of how it's laid out. A brand new person goes to the main page of the GoW Wiki, and wants to know: What do I need, and where are the tutorials?

They see the sections titled "Creating Ages" and they will zoom in on that. The first sentence tells them this is the primary purpose of the guild and that their are currently two paths, and then bullets the two paths. That's fine. However, the first bullet reads as follows:

Using Blender with PyPRP, which targets Uru: Complete Chronicles and Uru: Ages Beyond Myst.

The bold text are the links, and there are 4 of them. If they have never been here before, the links are easy to see since they are in a lightish blue color. However if the links have been clicked, it's a dark purple color, and with my eyes, looks almost like it's black and not a link. The Blender link will take them to a page about Blender and where to get it. It's the PyPRP link they want to get started and set up on tutorials. IF that is what they know.

Suggest changing the line so that the link to PyPRP takes them to a page that tells them about PyPRP (after all, you guys have a very long and rich history on this, I would think you'd like to have people, especially new people, know about it!), then add to this line so that it reads:

Using Blender with PyPRP, which targets Uru: Complete Chronicles and Uru: Ages Beyond Myst. To get started, go to the Blender Age Creation Tutorials.

And then something like that for the 3DS Max line too.

[diafero]

Indeed, kaelis... I just checked wikipedia. I never noticed this because long ago I zoomed it in by one level, and Firefox remembered that, so the font size was just fine for me . But "Ctrl+0" revealed how small it actually is. I still think either font size or link colour should be changed though, other sites being hard to read doesn't make this better, even if the "other site" is wikipedia. Unless of course andy and me are alone in thinking it is hard to read.

@andy: I would not think that the history of PyPRP is so much of interest for new builders. And honestly I don't want to be the one who describes all the hickup back when the GoW forked Alcugs PyPRP . Maybe a link saying "Get started" linking to the PyPRP/3DS Max would suffice, like this:

• Using Blender with PyPRP, which targets Uru: Complete Chronicles and Uru: Ages Beyond Myst: Get started
• Using 3DS Max with the Cyan Worlds Max Plugin, which targets the most recent version of the CyanWorlds.com Engine: Get started

The links could be bold as they really should be the main sites to go for first visits to the wiki.
And the same for the "exploring" section as well.