lists of what Aaron thinks is important for the wiki Re: Idea for navigation

Note, I have been dealing with many different issues with this wiki, one of 
the least of which is backlinks.

* I have this separated into three sections, however the one that I think is 
most valuable is:

1 Experiment with the wiki!

2 and make the protected pages have readable source. the /edit function does 
not show the contents of the page.

*  i have 8 points on why I am unwilling in most cases to put stuff into the 
==See Also== Section instead of my one line construct

* I have a list of some tasks that would be nice to see done

**********
My points (see that my arguments need refinement, I stupidly thought they were 
self evident)

1. Respect others work by saving it. Saving it means linking to it from the 
page that it was on.  The history, or deletion bucket doesn't count. We don't 

2.  Don't delete stuff that you don't understand.  If you don't know why 
somebody put a link between two pages, ask, or leave it. (unless it's on 
another topic completely)  (see topic 5)

3.  General names are natural seeds, they don't need any plunge ahead note, 
Once  a page like.. Media has become non-dense, then break it up into audio, 
video, and what not, to keep it navigateable. 

4. the case sensitivity of wikipedia is unfortunate.  is there a work around?

5.What is on topic?
  talks about the current wiki, linux questions, and linux, and software that 
runs on linux are all ON TOPIC, and deserve to be MOVED if they are in a very 
inconvenient spot

6. Links are content.

-----
getting personal here,
1.  I have been hit by all of the above topics.

2.  I am especially annoyed about bug reporting -- feature request links being 
removed.  Try going to kde.org and asking for a tiny feature that you'd like 
to see... and don't do it over their bugzilla software...

3. A one line See Also: line that is designed to be unobtrusive, and 
immediately accessable to a user

Tasks
-----
1. Experiment!!!  i have done so, and i am relaying the results of those 
experiments  to you all.  You don't take my word for it, so open up a little 
and play with the wiki.   this is not plunging ahead, this is trying other 
wikis, playing with format, playing with style.. untill you find one that 
works. best.

2. Make protected pages be source readable!  I can't clone/ fork a page to 
show you guys what i mean, because I not only can't submit changes to it, I 
can't see the source to the page.

2.
un-protect the main page, or do some work on it.  Specifically, it needs 
expanded info on how to use the wiki.  etiquite (sp), conflict resolution, 
etc.  I've looked over your pages, and I'm still stumbling across new 
formatting thingies.

3.  backlinks are most usefull when they can be seen WITH the content, page 
flipping is nasty on web pages.
  Things I think we will find addequate:
  1.   Blank pages show what links to them, rather than the edit page.
  2.  a reminder to click what links here occasionally (the link to the 
baclk_links pages were not intended to be complaints, but be markers and 
serve as a reminder, and be a question on how to implement them)
  3. implement a wiki action that offeres this functionality.
  4. an expanded what links here in the side bar.

4 is something i'd like to see experimented with, would satisfy me, and is 
proably the easiest to implement, I don't know how hard it would be on your 
server though.
1 and 2 is the minimum I'd be happy with
1 and 3 would become redundant if 4 is implemented.
1 is extremely cool, and is highly recommended and, would shut me up for a 
while.
1 and 3 are what I expect from a wiki.

***********

> 	What do you think about moving the "What links here" to the Browse
> nav box?
A good start, but doesn't allow for seeing the content at the same time as the 
links.  Having an expanded "what links here" in the side bar would be very 
nice.

Thanks for asking this,
> 	I am still not clear why you are unwilling to put what you have
> been putting on the top of the page in "Backlinks" and "Member of" links
> into the standard ==See also== section.  I have also not see anyone remove
> content you have put into a ==See also== section.

1. I believe that hyperlinks belong right next to where they were referenced. 

2. I believe that the peers of the page define a page as much as the page 
content does  (taken from my dad observing politicians to see who their fund 
raisers are rather than their outward appearance)

3. Long pages need an instant way out of.

4. It's really short being only one or two lines, and it solves multiple 
parents

5. once it's in the standard See Also section, people will want to put it back 
there if I move it out again.

6. There is a difference between member of, and see also, the distinction has 
use.   (member of is typically very short, I experimented with paths, but I 
can drop that, or condense them)

7.  Multiple navigation systems do not harm a wiki, the multiple navigation 
systems are the web,  I don't think of a cross referenced books as being much 
of a web.  (I'll expand later

8.  People VERY often enter the wiki  at where the search engine drops them, 
all pages need to serve as a minimal "table of contents" to the rest of the 
wiki.


>
-- 
509 332 7697
ICQ 2302806