Difference between revisions of "Talk:Table of contents"

From ArchWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Rename Category:Web Server to Category:Servers: sorry I didn't notice that Fengchao moved Category:Web Server out of Category:Internet Applications)
(4 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 65: Line 65:
 
::::::Apparently the cache doesn't refresh this feature, instead it refreshes it only as the pages are edited and saved (or just purged as shown above). -- [[User:Kynikos|Kynikos]] ([[User talk:Kynikos|talk]]) 19:52, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
 
::::::Apparently the cache doesn't refresh this feature, instead it refreshes it only as the pages are edited and saved (or just purged as shown above). -- [[User:Kynikos|Kynikos]] ([[User talk:Kynikos|talk]]) 19:52, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
  
== Rename [[:Category:Web Server]] to [[:Category:Servers]] ==
+
== Remove [[:Category:Daemons and system services]] ==
 
+
There are too many pages in [[:Category:Daemons and system services]] which make it harder to navigate. [[Daemons List]] has short descriptions which are much better than a category. Should we remove [[:Category:Daemons and system services]] and put pages their into other categories? -- [[User:Fengchao|Fengchao]] ([[User talk:Fengchao|talk]]) 06:04, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
Moved from [[Talk:Fengchao]]:
+
I noticed you moved the sendmail article to the "web server" category. But is that correct? It does not use or require apache, or lighthttp or any other web server.
+
And this is not an article about squirrelmail or any other webmail package. (It can work with squirrelmail and others, and I do plan to add a link to the current  squirrelmail article, and including config tips for sendmail on the squirrelmail article, but squirrelmail is not the point of the sendmail article)
+
I did look for a category called "mail server" or something, but since there isn't any, I came to the conclusion that Networking was the closest correct thing.
+
 
+
Hmm, may I suggest a "mail servers" category? It could hold not only this article, but also the one about Postfix, Exim, Courier MTA, etc.
+
We currently have a "email clients" category. [[User:Chrisl|Chrisl]] ([[User talk:Chrisl|talk]]) 15:22, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
+
: +1 on creating a new category. Thanks Chris for your work :) --[[User:Maevius|Maevius]] ([[User talk:Maevius|talk]]) 15:53, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
+
:: :D hehe thanks! [[User:Chrisl|Chrisl]] ([[User talk:Chrisl|talk]]) 03:19, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
+
::: +1 for a new category. Currently there are too many pages in [[:Category:Networking]]. Right now I am moving "Server" related article into [[:Category:Web Server]]. Clean up [[:Category:Web Server]] is next step in my Todo list. -- [[User:Fengchao|Fengchao]] ([[User talk:Fengchao|talk]]) 06:46, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
+
:::: At the same time, the introduction in [[:Category:Web Server]] says:
+
:::: ''This category contains articles on various types of servers: web page servers, mail servers, code repository servers.''
+
:::: Should we change the category name to [[:Category:Servers]] to make it less confusion? And then we can add sub category for different servers.
+
:::: -- [[User:Fengchao|Fengchao]] ([[User talk:Fengchao|talk]]) 07:15, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
+
:::::IMHO [[:Category:Servers]] is too generic, servers can be many different kinds of software, not necessarily related to networking, think e.g. of Xorg.
+
:::::I guess creating [[:Category:Mail Server]] directly under [[:Category:Networking]] (just like [[:Category:Web Server]]) would be the most natural way to go since it's indeed true that a "mail" server is not a "web" (http/ftp) server.
+
:::::Thank you Fengchao for trying to split [[:Category:Networking]] in more subcategories, it will be surely a great improvement for our ToC.
+
:::::-- [[User:Kynikos|Kynikos]] ([[User talk:Kynikos|talk]]) 16:34, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
+

Revision as of 06:04, 5 November 2012

i18n standardization

Non-English categories should follow the naming scheme Title in English (Language). See Help:i18n for details. Template:i18n should be included on all category pages. Furthermore, all category titles should be appropriately capitalized (Like a Title).

Are there any objections? I will prepare an outline of my imagined category tree shortly.

-- pointone 20:20, 10 May 2011 (EDT)

How about using native category names with redirects to i18n named categories on category pages? --AlexanderR (talk)
Actually I was thinking to propose the liberalization of titles for all pages (not only categories), but only after implementing Help_talk:I18n#.22Dummy.22_interlanguage_links_and_deprecation_of_Template:i18n. Please, until then let's stick with the current standard: we'll discuss this thing after that, there's already lots of stuff going on in that talk page :) -- Kynikos (talk) 20:30, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
Done. Thank you for pointing to Help_talk:I18n. Good luck with i18n work! --AlexanderR (talk)

Capitalization

[split from a previous discussion, now closed. -- Kynikos 16:48, 23 April 2012 (EDT)]

As I began sorting and standardizing the Spanish categories, I realized that many English categories have improper capitalization. These issues could probably more efficiently be dealt with simultaneously. --Emiralle 21:46, 10 September 2011 (EDT)

I can easily solve this one with my bot, although it's not urgent. -- Kynikos 16:48, 23 April 2012 (EDT)
Maybe not so easily, since I'd need a dictionary of words that should be left lower-case. -- Kynikos (talk) 20:51, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

"also in" links

Do you like seeing the "also in" links next to categories that have more than one parent? -- Kynikos 06:56, 1 March 2012 (EST)

Related discussion: Help talk:Style#Category pages - tree or otherwise? If we return to a tree structure, "also in" links would not exist. -- pointone 19:18, 13 March 2012 (EDT)
But maybe in that case displaying them would be even more important, as a means of detecting violations to the rule. -- Kynikos 08:27, 14 March 2012 (EDT)
Quite right. My vote is conditional upon the tree decision, then. If a tree structure is enforced, display it to detect violations. If we allow multiple categories, however, hide it to avoid clutter. -- pointone 13:04, 15 March 2012 (EDT)
Ah kk your position is perfectly clear. However I wouldn't consider the ToC only as a tool for end-users, I think it's also very useful for maintainers, in fact being able to spot multi-parent categories (be them allowed or not) gives a clearer idea of how the articles are structured.
Some ideas to reduce/avoid clutter:
(I'll probably implement this solution for the next update)
(for this option, place the mouse on the asterisk; we can use another symbol, like + ^ #  !)
-- Kynikos 07:06, 16 March 2012 (EDT)
The first idea is implemented currently with <small>. -- Kynikos 11:56, 18 March 2012 (EDT)

Poll

Display it
[vote with : ~~~~]
thestinger 00:48, 2 March 2012 (EST)
Skydiver 00:51, 2 March 2012 (EST)
Kynikos 05:09, 2 March 2012 (EST)
Don't display it
[vote with : ~~~~]
Fengchao 20:09, 1 March 2012 (EST)
pointone 19:18, 13 March 2012 (EDT)

"also in" translations

Currently only Spanish, French, Italian and Portuguese have a translated "also in" string for categories with more than one parent, all the others are using the English wording. Please request new translations here. -- Kynikos 05:59, 12 March 2012 (EDT)

Add Table of Contents link into left navigation panel

Sometime I want to visit this Table of Contents page. Right now I have to click to Main Page and then Click the link on the top. Why not add a link into navigation part on left page. It will be more visiable their. -- Fengchao (talk) 04:14, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Actually this seems a pretty cool idea to me! It's as easy as editing MediaWiki:Sidebar: what about putting the link in second place, right below the link to Main Page? -- Kynikos (talk) 09:50, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
That is my prefered location too. -- Fengchao (talk) 14:02, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
Sounds good! A possible alternative would be to include the ToC on the Main Page itself. -- pointone (talk) 15:04, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
For the moment I've added the link to the navigation pane (also for curiosity ^^ ), although I don't understand why our MediaWiki:Sidebar had been deleted (automatically with an update?) with a "No longer required" summary.
The idea of reorganizing the Main Page however is kind of interesting, it would be worth discussing it separately :) Maybe instead of adding the whole ToC we could add only some major categories, or create a section with featured articles...
-- Kynikos (talk) 10:56, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
Where to translate "Table of Contents" to other language ? I can not find it. -- Fengchao (talk) 02:11, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
I'll see what can be done, thanks for the report. -- Kynikos (talk) 08:06, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
We'd probably need to create and translate a system message: Special:AllMessages says "This is a list of system messages available in the MediaWiki namespace. Please visit MediaWiki Localisation and translatewiki.net if you wish to contribute to the generic MediaWiki localisation.". I don't have a clear idea of what we should do now, there's still the alternative of adding the ToC to the main page. -- Kynikos (talk) 19:52, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
Currently there's a problem with the cache and the link to Table of Contents is visible only on a minority of pages: it should be visible when logged in, or by appending ?action=purge to the url when not logged in (see mw:Manual:Purge). I hope the cache will refresh automatically in the next days. -- Kynikos (talk) 08:02, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
Apparently the cache doesn't refresh this feature, instead it refreshes it only as the pages are edited and saved (or just purged as shown above). -- Kynikos (talk) 19:52, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Remove Category:Daemons and system services

There are too many pages in Category:Daemons and system services which make it harder to navigate. Daemons List has short descriptions which are much better than a category. Should we remove Category:Daemons and system services and put pages their into other categories? -- Fengchao (talk) 06:04, 5 November 2012 (UTC)