Talk:Main page

From ArchWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Instructions on checking the user name

The issue with Special:ListUsers is that it displays results even when the name in question is not available. For example, foobarthisnamedoesnotexist still lists all user names starting with foo. -- Alad (talk) 21:36, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

You can go to User:Foobarthisnamedoesnotexist instead, but no idea how to describe the 4 possible cases (account does not exist, account exists but the page doesn't, the page exists but account doesn't, both things exist). -- Lahwaacz (talk) 21:49, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
There's also Special:PrefixIndex, e.g. foobarthisnamedoesnotexist, but the downside is that it also shows subpages. — Kynikos (talk) 09:39, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Well, it's a little like letting new users play dice to find a free name first, but still useful to work around the issue, e.g.
"In order to create an account, check if your desired user name or a suitable alternative is available."
Actually, what should be the primary place to inform about how to register? The main page? Then, we should crosslink it from ArchWiki:Contributing#Improving and maybe even add a redirect for "account registration". --Indigo (talk) 12:14, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
The PrefixIndex shows existing user pages, not user accounts. -- Lahwaacz (talk) 12:22, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Ok, yes, it's no help then. --Indigo (talk) 12:38, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Making the Accessibility article more accessible

As it stands, Accessibility is an orphan article while still an important topic to part of our user base. A link used to be hidden in List of applications/Other, which is definitely an unexpected place to look (not an "application" and especially not an "other" application); see Talk:List_of_applications#Other. Some places where it might fit:

  1. The main page
  2. Category:Getting and installing Arch
  3. General recommendations

3. assumes you already have a running installation of Arch so is "too late" in this case, unless you somehow stumbled on TalkingArch or similar project. That leaves 1. or 2. - I don't have a clear preference there. I suppose with 2. there's no resulting gap but that should be a minor concern in this case... -- Alad (talk) 21:31, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

The current content of Accessibility most matches in General recommendations#Input devices for now. In absence of a dedicated install help article, we could (a) use Category:Getting and installing Arch#See also to link to Category:Accessibility and (b) work on Category:Accessibility's description to guide to what we have. Once it's enough for a dedicated install article (ideas?), creating that is the least problem. --Indigo (talk) 09:04, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
Why is General recommendations "too late"? If somebody needs special a11y features from the beginning of the installation, then they can't use the official iso in any case, so we should rather point them to TalkingArch directly from somewhere at the start of Installation guide or Category:Getting and installing Arch at the latest IMO. To link to Accessibility, another option could be to rename General recommendations#Input devices to General recommendations#Input and accessibility, and add a subsection there. I also like Indigo's Category:Getting and installing Arch#See also idea, but still I think that GR is the natural place for a link to the article. — Kynikos (talk) 11:01, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

System maintenance

System maintenance is hidden 2 sub-section under General recommendations. But I think we should specifically highlight it on Main page just below General recommendations. -- Amish (talk) 12:37, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

I feel like other articles in first 2 sections are equally important as well and that is something stated in its introduction. -- Svito (talk) 19:30, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
In addition, General recommendations is a second front-page of sorts because it is an index of most-relevant articles for Arch Linux systems. I agree presentation leaves room for improvement so I started working with it on User:Svito/General recommendations.
I consider this topic closed, feel free to reopen otherwise.
-- Svito (talk) 18:10, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
Ok in my opinion if no change is needed then atleast the description below General recommendations should be such that it draws user attention of it being an important page.
Current description makes it more like an optional-not-so-important page.
How about: "Annotated index of things you should consider implementing, several tutorials and other popular articles."
I am not good at phrasing things attractively. But I hope I can convey the point here.
-- Amish (talk) 01:02, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
You bring up a valid point. Perhaps changing article name to Recommended articles would be appropriate. I would also prefer to keep description as short as possible.
P.S: Just after I thought of that rename I found previous talk page notice that confirms purpose of the article.
-- Svito (talk) 11:18, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
Recommended articles is not a good title because the point is to recommend some practices or configuration changes, not articles. Having articles for the presented topics is just a bonus. -- Lahwaacz (talk) 18:18, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
This clears it up. I should probably rework my draft completely now as it goes into opposite end. -- Svito (talk) 21:59, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
I think we are going off my original post which was about adding system maintenance. But now we are talking about "General Recommendations" and its description. With the difference in opinion and diversion of topic, I would like to close this section. Another section may be opened for discussion about General Recommendations and best presentation (if at all needed to be changed). Thank you to all the participants.
-- Amish (talk) 01:48, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Draft (General Recommendations)

This section was separated from Talk:Main_page#System_maintenance as that discussion took a diversion towards changing wording related to General Recommendations. In that context, Svito had the following suggestion for renaming General Recommendations to Recommended articles.

Recommended articles
Annotated index of important post-installation topics.
While I can understand that short descriptions are good but too short description does not fetch attention, for an article which contains lots of helpful links. Why not pick the first line of General recommendations itself?
Recommended articles
Annotated index of important information for improving and adding functionalities to the Arch system, post-installation.
-- Amish (talk) 15:25, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
Because it is a short article link description and should be to-the-point and sufficient enough to understand what it is about. I believe suggested copy-paste provides w:diminishing returns and would be repeated again while following the link. It is not the point of short descriptions in definition lists to be technically correct verbose list, but additional clue that contributes to actual link meaning it describes. -- Svito (talk) 16:22, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
In my opinion just saying its "Important" is not sufficient enough to understand what it is about. You must to try to tell readers "Why... why it is important for him/her to read it?". Because "its for improving the Arch Linux you just installed". The User is Drunk (video) (at 2m 22s) says to "Say it twice". So that user knows "Oh I am supposed to read this, it is important". That's what I am trying to do. Reader of Main Page may not be as smart and as observant as we expect him to.
-- Amish (talk) 02:04, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
Furthermore I do not see what your problem is with suggested wording because it contains both Recommended and important and adding more words for the heck of it would just water it down. See also w:Negative space, w:KISS principle, The User is Drunk (video). -- Svito (talk) 16:34, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
Based on Lahwaacz reply I do not suggest changing the title. But just description.
General recommendations
Annotated index of important information for improving and adding functionalities to the Arch Linux system.
-- Amish (talk) 02:36, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Help:Searching now redirects to Help:Browsing

Help:Browsing
How to search and download the wiki.

--Larivact (talk) 18:33, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

And once more: you should discuss these changes before making them. Why is this so hard? -- Alad (talk) 09:52, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
Downloading the wiki is not worth mentioning on the main page. -- Lahwaacz (talk) 18:45, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
How to search the wiki using the internal or external search engines. --Larivact (talk) 18:47, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
That would fit for Help:Searching, but since the page was renamed I think the description should be even better ;-) Lahwaacz (talk) 19:01, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
Last offer: How to search the wiki and find related articles. --Larivact (talk) 19:07, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
That still doesn't include the last two sections (i.e. offline and online viewers). -- Lahwaacz (talk) 19:53, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
I thought that's not worth mentioning on the main page? --Larivact (talk) 20:05, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
I just didn't like the word "download". For offline viewers it doesn't describe the usage and the listed online viewers don't have full download anyway. -- Lahwaacz (talk) 20:22, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
How to search the wiki, find related articles and view the wiki offline. I don't feel like Alternative online viewers is worth mentioning as it only contains Wikicurses and an Android app. --Larivact (talk) 05:33, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
Alright, changed. -- Lahwaacz (talk) 08:54, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
Thanks. --Larivact (talk) 09:02, 21 September 2018 (UTC)