Talk:Main page

From ArchWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to 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. 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 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 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 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)

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)