User talk:Carlduff

From ArchWiki
Revision as of 12:35, 3 December 2013 by Carlduff (talk | contribs) (Xdg user directories)
Jump to: navigation, search


Hi, welcome to ArchWiki!

I've stumbled upon several of your edits, so I'd like to add a few comments:

  • Try to avoid bulky edits. They make the diffs really hard to read: [1], [2]. This is not the case when adding new content and sometimes cannot be avoided (like reordering sections), but these cannot be mixed together.
  • It's good you use the edit summary for every edit you make ;)
  • I'd like to encourage you to exploit the hypertext metaphor instead of duplicating content. Duplication makes the maintenance really hard (if not impossible) as the information gets updated only on some pages and thus leading to confusion.
  • On ArchWiki we have pretty strict style guidelines to ensure high quality and uniform look of our pages, so you should follow them as closely as possible. I know it is pretty long and boring reading, so for the start please don't use blank lines to space out sections, paragraphs and notes.

Please don't take this as ranting, it is meant just as tips to further improve the quality of your edits (though I don't like only 2 so far).

-- Lahwaacz (talk) 00:08, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

[reply moved from User Talk:Lahwaacz -- Lahwaacz (talk) 19:48, 25 November 2013 (UTC)]
Thank you for the friendly advice; will follow in future. Will soon be doing further work on the Openbox article to re-structure and clean up. Interested in the two edits you did not like. Carlduff (talk) 13:07, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
You should have replied here (it's more like a forum thread or mailing list), so I've moved your reply to keep this discussion consistent.
I'm looking forward to your contributions, the current state of Openbox is really mess. Note that there is also Openbox Themes and Apps, so perhaps you don't need to write everything from scratch. But please avoid duplicating List of Applications, I think that most apps from Openbox Themes and Apps belong there.
-- Lahwaacz (talk) 19:55, 25 November 2013 (UTC)


OK, I have not yet seen all your edits to the Openbox page as there are too many, but I feel that I have to make another point.

The page Openbox is almost twice as long as before your edits. This is not necessarily a bad thing, but I think that you really are too verbose. I'll use this recent edit as an example, but it is applicable to others. It is pretty useless to provide dozens of commands for launching individual applications, sometimes even commenting on different command line arguments, when there is a pretty main page for that application covering its usage independently of any desktop environment/window manager. There are dozens of different window managers, imagine the chaos if every page described some application with different arguments, different purpose of the particular setup etc.

Ideally the Openbox page would describe its basic configuration (e.g. here paste the commands of applications you want to be started automatically when openbox starts) and individual applications would be described thoroughly and independently on a separate page. Now here comes the linking part - how will the user know which applications are available to him? There are pages like List of Applications or Core Utilities which provide extensive lists of applications and links to their documentation on either ArchWiki or official homepage. Well, for compositing managers it's Xorg#Composite, which is somewhat expected that the user will read. So, instead of adding the information directly to the Openbox page, you should have preferably added the information into Xorg#Composite or some main page, and just link to it from the Openbox page.

In other words, feel free to update any other page if you feel that some information is missing. And try to use interlinking more frequently. Basically ArchWiki should contain shorter, interlinked articles instead of longer, separate ones describing the subject from just one point of view (I know this has been written somewhere, if only I remembered...).

To give an example, setting up X Server is generally much more extensive topic, yet Xorg is much shorter than Openbox. It provides basic introduction to some problem and links to main pages where the problem is described thoroughly. Take for example Xorg#Driver installation, Xorg#Input devices etc.

-- Lahwaacz (talk) 16:41, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Much of the length comes from:
  • The original article was completely out of date, and - I felt - was missing a lot of important information.
  • A lot of related articles are out of date / wrong / vastly over complicated (see ROX as a prime example). While I intend to clean up other articles, at the moment linking to them would misinform and/or confuse users. The openbox article would also never be finished if I keep going off on tangents. If and when the other related articles are cleaned and updated, then happy to remove the info from the Openbox one.
  • The intention was to create a single-source reference to Openbox. At the moment, only a couple of blogs provide this; the openbox article here was no help at all when I first started out. Now I believe we have one of the best resources.
Still, happy to streamline the overall article. Hopefully some other users will now maintain it too. Carlduff (talk) 16:54, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
Actually... The comments are (of course) right. I've just created a seperate page for Oblogout - hopefully this is set up correctly. Will use the info in Openbox to clean up other article ASAP and remove the conent from this article. Carlduff (talk) 17:19, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
(I've re-formatted this page a little to use indentation instead of sections for replies, hope you don't mind...)
Well, like I said - I've not yet read through all of your edits, I just think that you should try to use interlinking more frequently - that's all. I'd help you with this more, I think that I'm quite acquainted with it as I used openbox in the past, but unfortunately I don't have much time these days... I think that you are a good editor, and this might be another step forward ;)
Oh, and oblogout looks nice, you might consider adding an entry into List of Applications (I don't know into which section though ^^ - perhaps screen lockers?) I would also emphasise that it can be used also with other window managers, which would justify the creation of new page even more - but that's entirely up to you.
-- Lahwaacz (talk) 20:48, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Xdg user directories

Hi, can you please justify better this edit: [3]? For example, what if I wanted to configure my documents folder as $HOME/docs instead of $HOME/Documents? I think the information on configuration was useful, also because the linked upstream documentation only deals very briefly with it. -- Kynikos (talk) 10:33, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Apologies - the original article did not make it clear that the templates file could be used in this manner; it seemed to merely provide the contents of the file, so I was unaware of this. However, can re-add revised / clarified version. Carlduff (talk) 12:56, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
Looks like I will have to pay attention to the smaller details; thanks for the corrections. Carlduff (talk) 12:35, 3 December 2013 (UTC)