Difference between revisions of "User talk:Alad"

From ArchWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
(5 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 27: Line 27:
 
Heh, yeah I just recently decided to come back and start updating that article again with some new info (my old user was [[User:MaBeef]]). I appreciate it and no hard feelings. -- [[User:Ksd|Ksd]] ([[User talk:Ksd|talk]]) 14:24, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
 
Heh, yeah I just recently decided to come back and start updating that article again with some new info (my old user was [[User:MaBeef]]). I appreciate it and no hard feelings. -- [[User:Ksd|Ksd]] ([[User talk:Ksd|talk]]) 14:24, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
  
== Number of links in a section ==
+
== <s>Number of links in a section</s> ==
  
 
It is often quite useful to convert text into links, such as "pacman" into [[pacman]], however, I am uncertain as to how frequently this should occur. I didn't see a specific mention of link frequency in on the [[Help:Editing#Links]] or in [[Help:Style]], only the styling based on the context and location of the link. In general, is it seen as useful to convert every possible bit of text that references an existing page on the wiki into a link, or should it be done in moderation? My rule of thumb so far has been to convert the text to a link if a term has been mentioned in that section for the first time. Would it be considered "best practices" to do it more or less than I am currently? -- [[User:Aeros167|Aeros167]] ([[User talk:Aeros167|talk]]) 20:16, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
 
It is often quite useful to convert text into links, such as "pacman" into [[pacman]], however, I am uncertain as to how frequently this should occur. I didn't see a specific mention of link frequency in on the [[Help:Editing#Links]] or in [[Help:Style]], only the styling based on the context and location of the link. In general, is it seen as useful to convert every possible bit of text that references an existing page on the wiki into a link, or should it be done in moderation? My rule of thumb so far has been to convert the text to a link if a term has been mentioned in that section for the first time. Would it be considered "best practices" to do it more or less than I am currently? -- [[User:Aeros167|Aeros167]] ([[User talk:Aeros167|talk]]) 20:16, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
Line 36: Line 36:
  
 
:::Oh I see, this rule clears it up "If the name is already introduced by the title of the article or by a section heading, its first relevant appearance in the body can only be used as a link anchor...". For clarification, could [[Help:Style/Formatting_and_punctuation#First_instances]] be linked to in the [[Help:Editing#Links]] section? I've noticed that a few rule sections link to other related rules to make it a bit easier to find them, the [[Help]] pages are quite extensive. -- [[User:Aeros167|Aeros167]] ([[User talk:Aeros167|talk]]) 22:21, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
 
:::Oh I see, this rule clears it up "If the name is already introduced by the title of the article or by a section heading, its first relevant appearance in the body can only be used as a link anchor...". For clarification, could [[Help:Style/Formatting_and_punctuation#First_instances]] be linked to in the [[Help:Editing#Links]] section? I've noticed that a few rule sections link to other related rules to make it a bit easier to find them, the [[Help]] pages are quite extensive. -- [[User:Aeros167|Aeros167]] ([[User talk:Aeros167|talk]]) 22:21, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
 +
 +
::::Why not, I've [https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php?title=Help%3AEditing&type=revision&diff=575161&oldid=555649 added] the link, thanks. -- [[User:Kynikos|Kynikos]] ([[User talk:Kynikos|talk]]) 14:54, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
 +
 +
:::::Thanks, closing. -- [[User:Alad|Alad]] ([[User talk:Alad|talk]]) 15:13, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
 +
 +
== Archman Linux ==
 +
 +
We didn't think the os-release content would be a problem. We provided information about Archman in the lsb_release file. Now we have edited the os-release file. The latest changes will be effective after this date.
 +
:https://gitlab.com/Archman-OS/ArchmanISO/tree/master/airootfs/etc If you look at this link, you can see that we have already edited our os-release file. We edited again the os-release file under usr/lib. When I looked at the other arch-based distributions on the list, I found that many of them worked like us. The os-release file only exists under the etc directory. I just don't understand why we've got your attention. [[User:Tulliana|Tulliana]] ([[User talk:Tulliana|talk]]) 14:43, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
 +
 +
We also did not think the #archlinux chat room would be a problem, we put it as a gesture. We removed the #archlinux room from our chat lists.
 +
 +
I would like to add Archman Linux to the list of distributions in 2017. We will be pleased if you make the necessary arrangements
 +
 +
Best regards
 +
 +
tulliana (Archman team leader)
 +
 +
:I am not authorized to edit the Arch-based distributions page. I could edit beforehand. I would appreciate it if you authorize for me [[User:Tulliana|Tulliana]] ([[User talk:Tulliana|talk]]) 12:43, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 14:43, 17 October 2019

Note: Consider creating a discussion on the respective article talk page before opening an item here.

pacaur

I suggest being friendlier with other users that contribute to Wiki pages right under your nose. I sincerely apologize that I did not scroll down to the table. As far as I can see Yaourt is still maintained but shows up as unmaintained in the comparison table. Dominik

I've lost count on how often people added the "unmaintained" flag to pacaur even though better solutions were proposed. I had to lock the page at some point and consider doing it again.
Yaourt is not maintained by the definition used in the table since it has never addressed outstanding issues with security or corrupting builds. -- Alad (talk) 14:27, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
Better solution: [1] Sorry for losing my patience. -- Alad (talk) 14:49, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

‎Mount efivarfs

I found your comment funny since it was you who flagged that section with Template:Out of date: Special:Diff/489445. -- nl6720 (talk) 13:24, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

Haha, nice one. ;) -- Alad (talk) 17:45, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

Identify damaged files

Your title is much better than mine was but in the future could you please leave more constructive edit comments? Thank you.Ksd (talk) 00:05, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

I didn't expect a comment on this ~3 years later... but yes I will, thank you. -- Alad (talk) 10:42, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

Heh, yeah I just recently decided to come back and start updating that article again with some new info (my old user was User:MaBeef). I appreciate it and no hard feelings. -- Ksd (talk) 14:24, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

Number of links in a section

It is often quite useful to convert text into links, such as "pacman" into pacman, however, I am uncertain as to how frequently this should occur. I didn't see a specific mention of link frequency in on the Help:Editing#Links or in Help:Style, only the styling based on the context and location of the link. In general, is it seen as useful to convert every possible bit of text that references an existing page on the wiki into a link, or should it be done in moderation? My rule of thumb so far has been to convert the text to a link if a term has been mentioned in that section for the first time. Would it be considered "best practices" to do it more or less than I am currently? -- Aeros167 (talk) 20:16, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

I would say your rule of thumb is reasonable, cf. [2] -- Alad (talk) 20:58, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
See also Help:Style/Formatting_and_punctuation#First_instances. -- Lahwaacz (talk) 21:09, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
Oh I see, this rule clears it up "If the name is already introduced by the title of the article or by a section heading, its first relevant appearance in the body can only be used as a link anchor...". For clarification, could Help:Style/Formatting_and_punctuation#First_instances be linked to in the Help:Editing#Links section? I've noticed that a few rule sections link to other related rules to make it a bit easier to find them, the Help pages are quite extensive. -- Aeros167 (talk) 22:21, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
Why not, I've added the link, thanks. -- Kynikos (talk) 14:54, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
Thanks, closing. -- Alad (talk) 15:13, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

Archman Linux

We didn't think the os-release content would be a problem. We provided information about Archman in the lsb_release file. Now we have edited the os-release file. The latest changes will be effective after this date.

https://gitlab.com/Archman-OS/ArchmanISO/tree/master/airootfs/etc If you look at this link, you can see that we have already edited our os-release file. We edited again the os-release file under usr/lib. When I looked at the other arch-based distributions on the list, I found that many of them worked like us. The os-release file only exists under the etc directory. I just don't understand why we've got your attention. Tulliana (talk) 14:43, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

We also did not think the #archlinux chat room would be a problem, we put it as a gesture. We removed the #archlinux room from our chat lists.

I would like to add Archman Linux to the list of distributions in 2017. We will be pleased if you make the necessary arrangements

Best regards

tulliana (Archman team leader)

I am not authorized to edit the Arch-based distributions page. I could edit beforehand. I would appreciate it if you authorize for me Tulliana (talk) 12:43, 17 October 2019 (UTC)