Tolkien Gateway

Talk:Main Page/Development

(Difference between revisions)
 
m (Forgot the "http://" part)
Line 4: Line 4:
 
* '''Which color scheme is most Tolkien-ish?''' I would say most definitely green.
 
* '''Which color scheme is most Tolkien-ish?''' I would say most definitely green.
 
* '''Is the old introduction text necessary or does it take up too much room?''' I would say it would be nicer if it were a bit shorter, but I do believe it to be necessary.  Perhaps if it were in a box on the right rather than directly under the title?
 
* '''Is the old introduction text necessary or does it take up too much room?''' I would say it would be nicer if it were a bit shorter, but I do believe it to be necessary.  Perhaps if it were in a box on the right rather than directly under the title?
* '''Should Tolkien Gateway be more prominent?''' Definitely.  The trouble is getting it there.  Forums such as [forum.barrowdowns.com the Barrow-downs] don't allow "advertising" but even one editor here that would be prominent there could say much for it and perhaps get a little more involvement.  Due to complications unfortunate to say the least I was unable to register there.  I don't know about other forums or other Tolkien sites.  It is sort of nice to have a small circle of editors where everyone-knows-everyone, but a lot of our projects require either a lot of work, or a lot more people.
+
* '''Should Tolkien Gateway be more prominent?''' Definitely.  The trouble is getting it there.  Forums such as [http://forum.barrowdowns.com the Barrow-downs] don't allow "advertising" but even one editor here that would be prominent there could say much for it and perhaps get a little more involvement.  Due to complications unfortunate to say the least I was unable to register there.  I don't know about other forums or other Tolkien sites.  It is sort of nice to have a small circle of editors where everyone-knows-everyone, but a lot of our projects require either a lot of work, or a lot more people.
 
* '''In the live version we will format the content in such a way that it utilizes subpages to separate the content.'''  Could you elaborate on that a little?  Will there be a "main page" for each type or article that has links to all its subpages or something like that?
 
* '''In the live version we will format the content in such a way that it utilizes subpages to separate the content.'''  Could you elaborate on that a little?  Will there be a "main page" for each type or article that has links to all its subpages or something like that?
 
* '''Top contributors might become prone for abuse with lots of useless edits (such as myself), maybe we should change it to a Featured editor?'''  Featured editor is a good idea (especially if we could have more people voting on it).  I'm not sure what you consider "useless" edits.  I can see people changing the wording of stuff just to get more edits.  I see what you mean, though.  Some editors will spend a tremendous amount of work writing, revising, and expanding articles, and will only get a small number of "edits".  Others would spend a large amount of time correcting spelling mistakes.  This would also take a lot of work, though of a different kind, but still get more "edits" for it.  Others might just make minor edits here and there, and not spend a whole lot of time on it but still get edits.  I find that I am quickly convincing myself against awards for the number of edits.  "Featured editor" would be nice, but I think awards for specific work would be better.  For instance, suppose someone wrote a great article of high size and quality, or on a particular article spent a lot of work, there would be voting open for two weeks as to whether or not that editor deserved the award.  Or there would be another for an editor who spent great time undoing the work of vandals.  You get the picture.  But I should really be discussing this on the "User awards" thread in the forums. . .
 
* '''Top contributors might become prone for abuse with lots of useless edits (such as myself), maybe we should change it to a Featured editor?'''  Featured editor is a good idea (especially if we could have more people voting on it).  I'm not sure what you consider "useless" edits.  I can see people changing the wording of stuff just to get more edits.  I see what you mean, though.  Some editors will spend a tremendous amount of work writing, revising, and expanding articles, and will only get a small number of "edits".  Others would spend a large amount of time correcting spelling mistakes.  This would also take a lot of work, though of a different kind, but still get more "edits" for it.  Others might just make minor edits here and there, and not spend a whole lot of time on it but still get edits.  I find that I am quickly convincing myself against awards for the number of edits.  "Featured editor" would be nice, but I think awards for specific work would be better.  For instance, suppose someone wrote a great article of high size and quality, or on a particular article spent a lot of work, there would be voting open for two weeks as to whether or not that editor deserved the award.  Or there would be another for an editor who spent great time undoing the work of vandals.  You get the picture.  But I should really be discussing this on the "User awards" thread in the forums. . .

Revision as of 18:05, 23 July 2006

Well, I've got some suggestions and comments for the questions given:

  • Incorporate another search box? What exactly do you mean?
  • Which color scheme is most Tolkien-ish? I would say most definitely green.
  • Is the old introduction text necessary or does it take up too much room? I would say it would be nicer if it were a bit shorter, but I do believe it to be necessary. Perhaps if it were in a box on the right rather than directly under the title?
  • Should Tolkien Gateway be more prominent? Definitely. The trouble is getting it there. Forums such as the Barrow-downs don't allow "advertising" but even one editor here that would be prominent there could say much for it and perhaps get a little more involvement. Due to complications unfortunate to say the least I was unable to register there. I don't know about other forums or other Tolkien sites. It is sort of nice to have a small circle of editors where everyone-knows-everyone, but a lot of our projects require either a lot of work, or a lot more people.
  • In the live version we will format the content in such a way that it utilizes subpages to separate the content. Could you elaborate on that a little? Will there be a "main page" for each type or article that has links to all its subpages or something like that?
  • Top contributors might become prone for abuse with lots of useless edits (such as myself), maybe we should change it to a Featured editor? Featured editor is a good idea (especially if we could have more people voting on it). I'm not sure what you consider "useless" edits. I can see people changing the wording of stuff just to get more edits. I see what you mean, though. Some editors will spend a tremendous amount of work writing, revising, and expanding articles, and will only get a small number of "edits". Others would spend a large amount of time correcting spelling mistakes. This would also take a lot of work, though of a different kind, but still get more "edits" for it. Others might just make minor edits here and there, and not spend a whole lot of time on it but still get edits. I find that I am quickly convincing myself against awards for the number of edits. "Featured editor" would be nice, but I think awards for specific work would be better. For instance, suppose someone wrote a great article of high size and quality, or on a particular article spent a lot of work, there would be voting open for two weeks as to whether or not that editor deserved the award. Or there would be another for an editor who spent great time undoing the work of vandals. You get the picture. But I should really be discussing this on the "User awards" thread in the forums. . .
  • Speaking of editors, what are we called? There's Wikipedians, Wookieepedians, Tolkien Gatewayers? Tolkien Gatewayians? TGers? TGites? I favor Tolkien Gatekeepers, or for short, Gatekeepers. Say "Gatekeepers" outloud. Sounds nice, doesn't it?

Anyway, those are my thoughts. --Narfil Palùrfalas 14:03, 23 July 2006 (EDT)