Talk:Wiki organization

Please feel free to comment, but remember to sign your message to make it easy to follow the flow of the conversation. (You can do this by typing -~~~~)

First or third person?

Some pages (such as Building GCC4) are being written in the first person, as a series of 'I did this, I did that' statements. Given that most of these pages don't have a name attached I think that this reads very strangely, and it would be be much better if it were rewritten in a tutorial style. Clearly this doesn't apply to user's talk pages as it's obvious who they belong to. -Andrew j w 17:51, 1 December 2005 (GMT)

Quality of English

While I don't want to bash people's command of the English language, especially if it's not their first language (and mine is certainly not perfect!) Earlier today I removed the line 'Hardware Questions is the eponymous page where you can help a brother out.' from a page. Phrases like that would really make me doubt the credibility of the information on the rest of the page... -Andrew j w 17:51, 1 December 2005 (GMT)

Yes you are right. Some people even seems to abuse the wiki as their personal blog or as website for their projects. I try to type a clean English even though I am no native speaker. - Synkro 18:36, 1 December 2005 (GMT)

I'm not against people using their talk pages to detail their current work, however I agree that pages such as How no skill set up a devkit and ported spout have no place on the wiki. I also am not against developers keeping a page on the wiki to show the current status of their project, I'm doing that for my GL2x page. The wiki isn't a blogging tool though so there is a line people shouldn't cross... -Andrew j w 11:07, 2 December 2005 (GMT)

Yeah, this page could be removed. I planned to add this as guideline to get started instead of the (imho, back then) bloated getting started page. However with the user guide we don't need this anylonger. One should check if there ain't some viable information before deleting.

What is the Wiki for?

I doubt the usefulness of pages such as Hardware Questions. I feel that questions like the ones on that page would be best asked on a forum, and the wiki used as a repository of information. If the page was turned into a list of frequently asked questions on the GP2X's hardware with answers then that would be much more useful. If the wiki becomes cluttered with unanswered questions then it'll become much harder to find the wealth of useful information that is already building up here. -Andrew j w 17:51, 1 December 2005 (GMT)

I see that the same way, a wiki is a place for answers not questions. Even so I think we should focus on development. Simple usage questions, long lists of software that 'may be' ported or 'may be' WIP is just plain ridicilous. There are many pages which are just there but refernceded from nowhere ... here is a lot to fix, but most people are not willing to discuss issues here for once ... *sigh* - Synkro 18:43, 1 December 2005 (GMT)

I see the wiki as being a bit more general than that. The wiki should hold plenty of information for developers, but I'm not against it also helping out users. I think a page per game/emulator is reasonable. I agree that the list of emulators is a bit silly, as is the list of compatible games for the NeoGeo emulator. I hope noone is planning on doing that for a SNES emulator... The work in progress page could be a useful page, but I'm not sure how accurate it is and unfortunately there a more pages that are just lists than there are pages with useful information which is definitely the wrong way round... -Andrew j w 11:07, 2 December 2005 (GMT)

Maybe you are right keep just as much as possible helpful information for everyone, but keeping those kind of lists up-to-date will be difficult maybe even impossible. A NeoGeo (or other emu) compatibility list is indeed silly. For systems like the SNES things will go mad. I propose to quit such activities. -Synkro 11:50, 2 December 2005 (GMT)

Such pages are helpful as long as the emulator is in a beta stage where only a few games run. (no_skill)

Page styles

Looking around the wiki, there are a number of different styles in use for laying out info, i.e. the Main Page, the emulation compat pages, and the game/utility/emulator etc infoboxes. Does anyone have a preference? I think it would be better if they were all the same style. As always, comments welcome. Justthisguy 03:27, 7 June 2007 (PDT)

I agree individual program pages should all follow the same style but the compat pages and main page are exceptional cases really and it would do more harm than good than to try and standardise absolutely everything. The compat pages are already fairly streamlined with just one or two potential tweaks for ease of navigation (e.g. link to go back to system page from 'letter' pages). The main page has been improved a lot the last few days, but it's an ongoing project - things can only change as the individual content pages are cleaned up. For written articles, Emulators is an example of what I think is a good layout (clearly, I wrote it :D). Oh, and I'd like to scrap the 'Port Quality' and 'Emulator Quality' fields from those infoboxes if we can, they add no information and are just a source of aggravation for developers (they were mentioned briefly in #gp2xdev the other day). Orkie 15:09, 7 June 2007 (PDT)

ok. I just started off thinking that the current infoboxes looked a bit old and blocky, and thought I should maybe see if I can get them to look more up to date - got wondering as to whether all of those similar elements (i.e. the look of the emulator compat boxes or an individual Main Page box) should have the same look. I'll have a look at improving the infoboxes, though. Do you think they need it? -Justthisguy 22:59, 7 June 2007 (PDT)

Can we also remove the "Game Quality" fields from the game infoboxes? That is an opiniotive thing, one person may hate puzzlers and thus rate my game "2/5" where as another may rate it "4/5". It's just a silly idea. - --Sam Fisher 23:14, 7 June 2007 (PDT)

I have the idea from long time ago to remove the quality info but don't see if anyone would be agree :D. Now removed ;) - --Yod4z 09:20, 8 June 2007 (GMT+1)

Yes, making them look nicer would be good :) Orkie 04:58, 8 June 2007 (PDT)

Wiki's structure

Why don't we structure this wiki as Wikipedia? We should have 9 wikis: 8 per language, 1 for images, linked togheter by interlinks (as Wikipedia). --Airon90 02:35, 13 April 2009 (PDT)