What exactly do you mean? As the one who made pretty much all the Sept. 11 pages, I can tell you that the subpage functionality made
it
much easier--I certainly wouldn't have been able to deal with all of the information in there if I didn't make some kind of subpagery. I'm certainly not tied to the particular implementation of the
UseModWiki,
but the ability to generate pages tied into another page without having to type the entire title every time is extremely useful.
-TC
that strikes me as ridiculous. Ctrl+c, ctrl+v.
kq.
0
What exactly do you mean? As the one who made pretty much all the Sept. 11 pages, I can tell you that the subpage functionality made
it
much easier--I certainly wouldn't have been able to deal with all of the information in there if I didn't make some kind of subpagery. I'm certainly not tied to the particular implementation of the
UseModWiki,
but the ability to generate pages tied into another page without having to type the entire title every time is extremely useful.
-TC
that strikes me as ridiculous. Ctrl+c, ctrl+v.
Why should I have to do that if it can be automated?
Putting in many days of work into making the most popular entries on the site (pat pat) is ridiculous. Having automatic functionality making that work easier isn't.
-TC
From: kband@www.llamacom.com
Why should I have to do that if it can be automated?
Putting in many days of work into making the most popular entries on the site (pat pat) is ridiculous. Having automatic functionality making that work easier isn't.
You are right, and ridiculous is certainly not a word that I would have used. But the thing is that by making such things easier we also stimulate the creation of subpages which, as Larry will explain to you if his wife lets him, :-), is something that we'd rather not have in Wikipedia. Maybe you don't agree with that, but then you should try to convince Larry and the rest of the Wikipedia-gang that subpages are a good thing. That won't be easy.
-- Jan Hidders
From: kband@www.llamacom.com
Why should I have to do that if it can be automated?
Putting in many days of work into making the most popular entries on the site (pat pat) is ridiculous. Having automatic functionality making that work easier isn't.
You are right, and ridiculous is certainly not a word that I would have used. But the thing is that by making such things easier we also stimulate the creation of subpages which, as Larry will explain to you if his wife lets him, :-), is something that we'd rather not have in Wikipedia. Maybe you don't agree with that, but then you should try to convince Larry and the rest of the Wikipedia-gang that subpages are a good thing. That won't be easy.
Actually, to my knowledge LMS is just about the only one who's strongly anti-subpages in any form (look for the previous discussion on this issue). If he's still the final arbiter of all Wikipedia functionality, then this is a moot point. If, however, we're back to policy by consensus, then it won't be too hard. But Mr. Wales needs to tell us what the story is there.
-tc
kband@www.llamacom.com wrote:
Actually, to my knowledge LMS is just about the only one who's strongly anti-subpages in any form (look for the previous discussion on this issue).
I don't agree with this at all.
If he's still the final arbiter of all Wikipedia functionality, then this is a moot point. If, however, we're back to policy by consensus, then it won't be too hard. But Mr. Wales needs to tell us what the story is there.
Don't think of it as "Larry as final arbiter" on the one hand and "policy by consensus" on the other hand. The right way to look at it is that Larry is the final arbiter of what the consensus is. Since agitators on all sides are likely to never concede that the consensus is against them, we need to have a final stopping point.
That's Larry, or maybe me if the issue is something technically beyond the scope of his knowledge, but so far, achieving technical consensus has been pretty easy.
--Jimbo
On Tue, 26 Feb 2002, Jan Hidders wrote:
From: kband@www.llamacom.com
Why should I have to do that if it can be automated?
Putting in many days of work into making the most popular entries on the site (pat pat) is ridiculous. Having automatic functionality making that work easier isn't.
You are right, and ridiculous is certainly not a word that I would have used. But the thing is that by making such things easier we also stimulate the creation of subpages which, as Larry will explain to you if his wife lets him, :-), is something that we'd rather not have in Wikipedia. Maybe you don't agree with that, but then you should try to convince Larry and the rest of the Wikipedia-gang that subpages are a good thing. That won't be easy.
You'd actually have a hard time convincing me that it's worth spending any more bandwidth discussing it at all.
(Wife is calling me to dinner right now. :-) )
Larry
On Mon, 25 Feb 2002 kband@www.llamacom.com wrote:
What exactly do you mean? As the one who made pretty much all the Sept. 11 pages, I can tell you that the subpage functionality made
it
much easier--I certainly wouldn't have been able to deal with all of the information in there if I didn't make some kind of subpagery. I'm certainly not tied to the particular implementation of the
UseModWiki,
but the ability to generate pages tied into another page without having to type the entire title every time is extremely useful.
-TC
that strikes me as ridiculous. Ctrl+c, ctrl+v.
Why should I have to do that if it can be automated?
Why should we revert to an inferior technology just to save you a little convenience? That's ridiculous. EVERYONE is having to do extra work in order to make the switch to the (better) new software.
Larry
On Mon, 25 Feb 2002 kband@www.llamacom.com wrote:
What exactly do you mean? As the one who made pretty much all the Sept. 11 pages, I can tell you that the subpage functionality made
it
much easier--I certainly wouldn't have been able to deal with all of the information in there if I didn't make some kind of subpagery. I'm certainly not tied to the particular implementation of the
UseModWiki,
but the ability to generate pages tied into another page without having to type the entire title every time is extremely useful.
-TC
that strikes me as ridiculous. Ctrl+c, ctrl+v.
Why should I have to do that if it can be automated?
Why should we revert to an inferior technology just to save you a little convenience? That's ridiculous. EVERYONE is having to do extra work in order to make the switch to the (better) new software.
There's that good Yankee-Puritan ethic: if it tastes bad and is more difficult, it's better.
Better == more convenient, not more work, in the world of software.
If EVERYONE is having to do extra work, then we're wasting a lot of human-hours which could be better spent just making good articles.
And I'm not arguing for any "reversion" to "inferior" technology. That would be ridiculous. I'm talking about better information management techniques--how exactly to implement those is a secondary issue.
--tc
wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org