I'm starting a discussion here because I'm having trouble navigating my way round the site -- which is surely a bad sign, considering how much time I spend here. There are at least 3 different groups of people to bear in mind when modifying this:
- Casual browsers trying to find information
- More advanced users who are not editors but who might one day become editors
- Wikispooks Editors
Before talking about smaller points, perhaps it would be worth discussing, are these three equally important? Personally, I am inclined to make (2) the priority at the moment, intending to attract more editors.
- Sorry - only just spotted this.
- Piwik stats show that the bulk of site visitors get here from a Google search. They are followed by fairly regular links posted on Reddit ('Conspiracy' and 'Endless war' sub-Reddits mainly); then Twitter (I regularly tweet article and document links) then Facebook, then odd mentions on odd sites about specific subjects that sometimes bring a flood of brief visits. A single page accounts for around 15% of total site visits since it was posted 3 years ago - 9/11:Israel did it. It remains the top visited page nearly every day.
- I agree it would be nice to have more editors. Site purpose would be more effectively advanced. I'm happy for you to exercise judgements over which group to prioritise on navigational matters. I do think a mandatory form for DocProv would be good when current mountain of work and mods is complete. Also, I have still not thought through the most effective way to employ semantic properties with categories. I'm still also preoccupied with timeline stuff - I am using the Sandbox wiki a lot now too --Peter P (talk) 21:56, 20 November 2013 (GMT)
- I'm also mulling over a major main page revamp using SMW to select and present lists rather than the current mish-mash using both the 'News' and 'DynamicPageList' extensions. SMW can do all they currently do without defining any more properties - there are resource implications that I do not fully understand yet though --Peter P (talk) 11:37, 21 November 2013 (GMT)
Since any user can be made a member of the Bot group, I am unclear what the purpose of the two new users are - beyond their user pages being a logical place for discussing the use of bots anyway. Do you have any existing bot or bot framework in mind? --Peter P (talk) 07:58, 8 December 2013 (GMT)
- The other main benefit of a separate user is the ability to keep statistics/edits clear. Today's User:UpgradeBot efforts are by a home baked PHP script adapted from this. Robin (talk) 13:22, 8 December 2013 (GMT)
SMW potential etc
The SMW query additions to William Blum David Guyatt John Pilger Sharmine Narwani and Mark Curtis provide insight into some of the potential for SMW use on Wikispooks. I have not altered any other author person pages yet because this needs a bit more thought. Such queries can themselves be saved and parameterised for use in templates. There are also many other output formats, the appearance of which can usually be tweeked with CSS, so best to settle on a bit of standardisation before taking this further. I also think we should delete all the named person categories in Category:Authors because they duplicate the SMW Property:Is author which is far more useful and are thus redundant - some of them can be converted straight into regular pages because they have page-like content already. There is also scope for dramatically pruning the current category tree and replacing with better considered SMW properties. - Lots of work and I want to be addressing content rather more - Hmmm --Peter P (talk) 09:43, 12 December 2013 (GMT)
- I've done a couple of new templates and had a first pass at the above pages now - plus just one subject page Blood diamond. --Peter P (talk) 15:08, 12 December 2013 (GMT)
Greetings, so I added some documents regarding Larry McDonald and KAL-007, these do show up in the KAL article, but do not get linked with Larry McDonald, and I don't get it - there must have been enough time in between now for the server to update if that is needed. Can somebody please help me out here, what am I missing? Thanks! Sunvalley (talk) 22:34, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
- I was puzzled, too. It may have been a reflected of the large size of this site resulting in slow updates. Anyway, I just fixed it by making some minor edits to the Larry McDonald page. This apparently spurred the software on to re-render the page. -- Robin (talk) 23:58, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
A couple of useful tools
- Plus: Old server sub expires 10 February. I think I've got everything needed off of it. Is there anything you can think of before it vanishes?
- And there IS still a date problem but a function of the latest Release of SMW Forms. If the day is not completed then an error is printed on the page, in red, right after the template info
Expression error: Unexpected < operator.. As before, it's OK if just the year is completed or if day month and year are completed. See File:King Family File Transcript.pdf for an example. No sweat to wait for a fix with next release though --Peter P (talk) 15:58, 26 January 2014 (GMT)
Video display problem
Can you have a look at Template:MainPageVideoArchive and Template:MainPageVideo2 , neither of which display video correctly following your mods to Template:Video. The issue concerns the new subtext field and is apparent on The green fields of France video currently on the Main Page and first on Main Page/Videos. I've spent ages on it and can't figure it out. I need it working properly before changing the forms and doing something similar for the Main Page Images display and archive --Peter P (talk) 07:01, 13 September 2014 (IST)
Just sent a message to your Unwelcome Guests account re system issues.
Potentially useful tools
The Mobo project looks potentially useful for SMW development.
Is there still an issue with email?
Hi Robin, what's the easiest way to message or mail you?
FI. Just rebooted the server.
@ 16:45 ish RAM started to fill up, then virtual memory memory bound in less than 5 minutes! First time in 3 weeks. Still don't know what's causing it but now suspect the job queue when updating a page that has one of the Lua cite errors on it. --Peter P (talk) 17:01, 23 October 2014 (IST)
Suppressed Lockerbie evidence ignited 9/11 attacks
Robin, in moving the above WS article to User:Patrick Haseldine/Suppressed Lockerbie evidence ignited 9-11 attacks, you omitted the final sentence of the lede (which I've now corrected) and The 9/11 timeline (which I can't correct). Grateful if you could retrieve it and the rest of the Contents for me:
Contents [hide] 1 The 9/11 timeline 1.1 05:00 a.m. 1.2 06:00 a.m. 1.3 07:00 a.m. 1.4 08:00 a.m. 1.5 09:00 a.m. 1.6 10:00 a.m. 1.7 11:00 a.m. 1.8 12:00 p.m. 1.9 13:00 p.m. 1.10 14:00 p.m. 1.11 15:00 p.m. 1.12 16:00 p.m. 1.13 17:00 p.m. 1.14 18:00 p.m. 1.15 19:00 p.m. 1.16 20:00 p.m. 1.17 21:00 p.m. 1.18 22:00 p.m. 1.19 23:00 p.m. 2 References 3 Further reading 4 External links
Also, because 9/11 becomes 9-11 in the new title, it is difficult to navigate from the deleted article. Could you please therefore install a redirect from one to the other. Thank you.--Patrick Haseldine (talk) 15:37, 10 July 2015 (IST)
Pearse Redmond and Tom Secker have asked me to delete their articles I started on InfoGalactic so I am asking the administrators to do what I don't have privileges for. I don't know if I am betraying them, my conscience, or my efforts by telling you this. I'm a mixed up fanboy. You may scrape their InfoGalactic articles before they vanish or delete their Wikispooks articles as well. ~ JasonCarswell (talk) 21:43, 27 June 2017 (IST)
I was an admittedly enthusiastic fanboy of Pearse and Tom. After the admin of InfoGalactic, at my request, kindly deleted the articles I wrote, Pearse called me a troll and told me to fuck off (despite promising me a journal and some bonus shows) and Tom had become such an intolerable curmudgeon that I'd already ceased correspondence with him. I wasn't publishing anything that wasn't in their published work. I don't care about their feelings anymore. They are assholes that happen to do terrific work. ~ JasonCarswell (talk) 03:53, 23 July 2017 (IST)
Updating the Wiki
Hey Robin, are there any plans to update the Wikipedia to the newest version WikiMedia offers, so that it is more comparable in usability to Wikipedia? Things like mobile browser views and updated user interfaces make the site both more appealing to viewers and editors alike. LissanX (talk) 05:51, 24 September 2019 (UTC)