Difference between revisions of "User talk:Kynikos"

From ArchWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Cheers! and pointing out a discussion: re)
(thanks again.)
Line 37: Line 37:
 
:By the way I've noticed that I put the article in the wrong category: it's somewhat fixed now, but if you're interested, in [[ArchWiki:Reports#System recovery category]] we're also talking about the possibility of merging [[Step By Step Debugging Guide]] with [[General Troubleshooting]].
 
:By the way I've noticed that I put the article in the wrong category: it's somewhat fixed now, but if you're interested, in [[ArchWiki:Reports#System recovery category]] we're also talking about the possibility of merging [[Step By Step Debugging Guide]] with [[General Troubleshooting]].
 
:-- [[User:Kynikos|Kynikos]] 07:29, 7 January 2012 (EST)
 
:-- [[User:Kynikos|Kynikos]] 07:29, 7 January 2012 (EST)
 
== Cheers! and pointing out a discussion ==
 
Cheers for pointing out the style guidelines by fixing up my wiki pages, to be quite honest: I was oblivious to the fact that they existed before I noticed the styling edits to pages I maintain.
 
 
Perhaps these guidelines are worthy of a [http://www.archlinux.org/news/ news bump]. --[[User:Stefanwilkens|stefanwilkens]] 18:29, 10 January 2012 (EST)
 
 
p.s. mind taking a look here: [[Help_talk:Style#Style_vs._Usability]] ?
 
:Our wiki has [https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Wiki_News its own news page]. -- [[User:Karol|Karol]] 19:04, 10 January 2012 (EST)
 
::Which is where I found the announcement before I replied here, it's not nearly as obvious as the distro news.--[[User:Stefanwilkens|stefanwilkens]] 06:33, 11 January 2012 (EST)
 
:::Our forum has its own [https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewforum.php?id=24 announcements subforum] too. I'm not against making wiki news or at least the styleguide change announcement more visible, but IMHO it's good as it is. -- [[User:Karol|Karol]] 06:49, 11 January 2012 (EST)
 
::::Cheers mate! About the news bump I don't think it's necessary at the moment, just a few people are constantly editing the wiki, and they get to know the style rules just the way you did; about casual contributors, you could even send them personalized emails, but they would hardly want to read and follow them. As I wrote more than once when we were discussing the style guide, it's not intended for casual users, but for habitual contributors, and even more for the very few habitual generic maintainers and recent changes patrollers, so that they can have a definite reference for correcting the various edits made to the articles each day.
 
::::About [[Help_talk:Style#Style_vs._Usability]] I'm taking my time to read the poem you two have written meanwhile :) and then I'll share my opinion there.
 
::::-- [[User:Kynikos|Kynikos]] 07:45, 11 January 2012 (EST)
 
:::::Ha, it did turn into somewhat of a wall-post I'm afraid. Lively discussion and all that. Considering the page is locked, I'll thank you and Karol here for taking part :)
 
:::::Given the mess the pacman upgrade is causing in the IRC channels, I do now have a new perspective on things. Apparently quite a few people lack the know-how to guide pacman through these upgrades, thus I suppose that the additional attention the pacman article would receive from the style I debated might end up being beneficial. Either way, nothing hurts documentation more than a lack of uniform style. It's a great thing you guys are doing!
 
:::::I also noticed the exempt status for the beginner's article ++ --[[User:Stefanwilkens|stefanwilkens]] 17:34, 16 January 2012 (EST)
 
::::::Good to see that you appreciate the style guide, even its apparently controversial rules ;) However its talk page is not protected, I hope the protection notice at the top is not misleading and makes people think that also the talk page is protected... If you had that impression please tell me because it's not intended at all! -- [[User:Kynikos|Kynikos]] 19:18, 16 January 2012 (EST)
 
:::::::I could have sworn that the talk page was locked when I last visited it! The '''protection notice''' must have thrown me off, or perhaps I wasn't logged on. --[[User:Stefanwilkens|stefanwilkens]] 15:56, 17 January 2012 (EST)
 
::::::::Eheh I guess it was the latter, however I'll reword that notice in order to avoid any ambiguity. -- [[User:Kynikos|Kynikos]] 16:00, 17 January 2012 (EST)
 

Revision as of 01:08, 2 February 2012

Feel free to leave here your comments on my edits or anything else you want to talk about: I'll reply as soon as I can!

Note: Please, add new discussions at the bottom, and with a proper title: I'll take care of removing old discussions once they are exhausted.

Xyne-related page edits after Powerpill, Bauerbill... discontinuation

See Xyne-related page edits after Powerpill, Bauerbill... discontinuation.

Flattening of the category tree

Would you be okay with the removal of Category:System administration (English) and Category:Desktop user's guide (English) as proposed here? I know you voiced your opposition to flattening in general, but I don't plan on removing the Software/Hardware categories because I think those are useful (even if they overlap a lot). thestinger 13:49, 7 September 2011 (EDT)

Actually, I think simply merging Desktop user's guide into System administration might be a good first step - flattening it will clutter the top-level English category a lot. thestinger 15:58, 7 September 2011 (EDT)
I'm perfectly fine with merging those categories, please do it, you're on a roll these days, I'm going crazy in the recent changes XD
I'm basically against a systematic flattening of the tree, I mean just done for the sake of it, or being the flattening itself the main purpose of the restructuring, but when there's a rational justification it's a good thing, like in this case.
-- Kynikos 05:59, 8 September 2011 (EDT)

Thank you!

Thank you for your massive contribution in initiating -- and completing! -- Help:Style. This is something I have wanted to tackle for years! Well done! -- pointone 14:23, 1 November 2011 (EDT)

In Italian on these occasions we say literally "praised by Caesar" :) I'm proud and eager to be helping the community of this amazing project, and to be working with other enthusiastic people like you! ^^ -- Kynikos 16:02, 1 November 2011 (EDT)

Categories for Port Knocking

Hi, I saw you set back the category to "secure shell" only.

08:30, 17 November 2011 Kynikos (Talk | contribs) (5,369 bytes) (Category:Secure Shell is already under both Security and Networking, adding all of them doesn't comply with Help:Style#Categories) (undo)

I understand having the three of them wasn't correct, however, I think that instead of removing "security" and "networking", it would be better to remove "secure shell". The reason is because port knocking is not only for port 22, but it can be used for any other port (for instance, I have used it for openvpn with some different rules)

And since iptables has both categories (security and networking), and this article is mostly some special use of iptables, I think their categories fit fine here.

What you think? Chrisl 11:52, 17 November 2011 (EST)

Agreed, you can go on and recategorize the article, thanks for contributing :) (remember to sign your edits in talk pages with ~~~~) -- Kynikos 11:06, 17 November 2011 (EST)
Thanks :D Chrisl 11:52, 17 November 2011 (EST)

Thanks!

Thanks for fixing the style on the Step By Step Debugging Guide page! --Trontonic 20:52, 6 January 2012 (EST)

Thank you for contributing :) Actually it'd require more fixes, for example the expansion of contractions, see Help:Style for more information.
By the way I've noticed that I put the article in the wrong category: it's somewhat fixed now, but if you're interested, in ArchWiki:Reports#System recovery category we're also talking about the possibility of merging Step By Step Debugging Guide with General Troubleshooting.
-- Kynikos 07:29, 7 January 2012 (EST)