Talk:Main Page - Revision history

Trollebas: /* Russian translate */ new section

2016-08-14T17:24:34Z

‎Russian translate: new section

Pm: /* Addition */

2009-02-17T18:09:54Z

‎Addition

Pm: /* Addition */ discussion: junctionary: renaming?

2009-02-17T18:09:37Z

‎Addition: discussion: junctionary: renaming?

Pm: /* Addition */

2009-02-17T17:31:06Z

‎Addition

Thraxian at 13:46, 17 February 2009

2009-02-17T13:46:40Z

ODM: /* Addition */

2009-02-17T12:42:14Z

‎Addition

ODM: /* Addition */ new section

2009-02-17T12:37:18Z

‎Addition: new section

Osai at 19:36, 26 October 2008

2008-10-26T19:36:56Z

Thraxian at 15:44, 21 October 2008

2008-10-21T15:44:22Z

Ammler: anonymous suggestions removed

2008-04-01T16:32:14Z

anonymous suggestions removed

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:24, 14 August 2016
Line 19:		Line 19:

	:::Hm... I created a new category "stationary", but I'm not entirely satisfied with that. It would fit still into the junctionary - if the junctionary wouldn't propose by the word that it deals with junctions. Maybe we could rename it to something more fitting. "Building guide" or "building examples" is boring. "Junction- and Stationary" maybe?--[[User:Pm\|planetmaker]] 18:09, 17 February 2009 (UTC)		:::Hm... I created a new category "stationary", but I'm not entirely satisfied with that. It would fit still into the junctionary - if the junctionary wouldn't propose by the word that it deals with junctions. Maybe we could rename it to something more fitting. "Building guide" or "building examples" is boring. "Junction- and Stationary" maybe?--[[User:Pm\|planetmaker]] 18:09, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
		+
		+	== Russian translate ==
		+
		+	Пожалуйста,кто нибуть,переведите вики,статьи я некоторые сам отредактирую,переведу

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:09, 17 February 2009
Line 18:		Line 18:
	::I'm also all for this idea. The idea of a stationary (in addition to the junctionary) is IMO a good one. Also the snrw is a concept now proven a few times to work well and shouldn't miss in the wiki.--[[User:Pm\|planetmaker]] 17:31, 17 February 2009 (UTC)		::I'm also all for this idea. The idea of a stationary (in addition to the junctionary) is IMO a good one. Also the snrw is a concept now proven a few times to work well and shouldn't miss in the wiki.--[[User:Pm\|planetmaker]] 17:31, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

−	:::Hm... I created a new category "stationary", but I'm not entirely satisfied with that. It would fit still into the junctionary - if the junctionary wouldn't propose by the word that it deals with junctions. Maybe we could rename it to something more fitting. "Building guide" or "building examples" is boring. "Junction- and Stationary" maybe?	+	:::Hm... I created a new category "stationary", but I'm not entirely satisfied with that. It would fit still into the junctionary - if the junctionary wouldn't propose by the word that it deals with junctions. Maybe we could rename it to something more fitting. "Building guide" or "building examples" is boring. "Junction- and Stationary" maybe?--[[User:Pm\|planetmaker]] 18:09, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:09, 17 February 2009
Line 16:		Line 16:
	:I would recommend updating the [[Main_Page/editcopy\|editcopy]] to add these new links. Then, we will update the main page with the editcopy. -- [[User:Thraxian\|Thraxian]] 13:46, 17 February 2009 (UTC)		:I would recommend updating the [[Main_Page/editcopy\|editcopy]] to add these new links. Then, we will update the main page with the editcopy. -- [[User:Thraxian\|Thraxian]] 13:46, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

−	I'm also all for this idea. The idea of a stationary (in addition to the junctionary) is IMO a good one. Also the snrw is a concept now proven a few times to work well and shouldn't miss in the wiki.--[[User:Pm\|planetmaker]] 17:31, 17 February 2009 (UTC)	+	::I'm also all for this idea. The idea of a stationary (in addition to the junctionary) is IMO a good one. Also the snrw is a concept now proven a few times to work well and shouldn't miss in the wiki.--[[User:Pm\|planetmaker]] 17:31, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
		+
		+	:::Hm... I created a new category "stationary", but I'm not entirely satisfied with that. It would fit still into the junctionary - if the junctionary wouldn't propose by the word that it deals with junctions. Maybe we could rename it to something more fitting. "Building guide" or "building examples" is boring. "Junction- and Stationary" maybe?

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:31, 17 February 2009
Line 15:		Line 15:
	:I think that's a fabulous idea. We do need to spend a bit more time updating the Junctionary, and I love the idea of a Stationary. Nice play on words!		:I think that's a fabulous idea. We do need to spend a bit more time updating the Junctionary, and I love the idea of a Stationary. Nice play on words!
	:I would recommend updating the [[Main_Page/editcopy\|editcopy]] to add these new links. Then, we will update the main page with the editcopy. -- [[User:Thraxian\|Thraxian]] 13:46, 17 February 2009 (UTC)		:I would recommend updating the [[Main_Page/editcopy\|editcopy]] to add these new links. Then, we will update the main page with the editcopy. -- [[User:Thraxian\|Thraxian]] 13:46, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
		+
		+	I'm also all for this idea. The idea of a stationary (in addition to the junctionary) is IMO a good one. Also the snrw is a concept now proven a few times to work well and shouldn't miss in the wiki.--[[User:Pm\|planetmaker]] 17:31, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

@@ Line 11: / Line 11: @@
 *Self-Regulating Network, as it is a good concept, with a nice blog article, but no wiki.
 *Stationary, as a counter to the Junctionary, to split stations from junctions. Can be subdivided in ro-ro/terminus/srnw/more?
-I don't mind filling or even making them, but what do you guys think?
+I don't mind filling or even making them, but what do you guys think? (previously unsigned comment by [[User:ODM|ODM]])

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:37, 17 February 2009
Line 5:		Line 5:
	If this method of using the editcopy is not desired or necessary, then we should remove the editcopy page. Keep in mind that not everyone has write access to the main page, so some other method would need to be designed to suggest changes to the frontpage. Several wikis I visit use this editcopy policy, and it appears to work very well. -- [[User:Thraxian\|Thraxian]] 15:44, 21 October 2008 (UTC)		If this method of using the editcopy is not desired or necessary, then we should remove the editcopy page. Keep in mind that not everyone has write access to the main page, so some other method would need to be designed to suggest changes to the frontpage. Several wikis I visit use this editcopy policy, and it appears to work very well. -- [[User:Thraxian\|Thraxian]] 15:44, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
	:I totally agree --[[User:Osai\|Osai]] 19:36, 26 October 2008 (UTC)		:I totally agree --[[User:Osai\|Osai]] 19:36, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
		+
		+	== Addition ==
		+
		+	I suggest adding two Topics to the Advanced Building concepts column.
		+	- Self-Regulating Network, as it is a good concept, with a nice blog article, but no wiki.
		+	- Stationary, as a counter to the Junctionary, to split stations from junctions. Can be subdivided in ro-ro/terminus/srnw/more?
		+	I don't mind filling or even making them, but what do you guys think?

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:36, 26 October 2008
Line 4:		Line 4:

	If this method of using the editcopy is not desired or necessary, then we should remove the editcopy page. Keep in mind that not everyone has write access to the main page, so some other method would need to be designed to suggest changes to the frontpage. Several wikis I visit use this editcopy policy, and it appears to work very well. -- [[User:Thraxian\|Thraxian]] 15:44, 21 October 2008 (UTC)		If this method of using the editcopy is not desired or necessary, then we should remove the editcopy page. Keep in mind that not everyone has write access to the main page, so some other method would need to be designed to suggest changes to the frontpage. Several wikis I visit use this editcopy policy, and it appears to work very well. -- [[User:Thraxian\|Thraxian]] 15:44, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
		+	:I totally agree --[[User:Osai\|Osai]] 19:36, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

← Older revision	Revision as of 15:44, 21 October 2008
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+	== Making Changes ==

	+	Please remember to use the [[Main_Page/editcopy \| editcopy]] to make changes to the main page. At such time as is necessary, the entire editcopy page should be copied over to the Main_Page. If we don't follow this policy for updating the frontpage, the editcopy may become out-of-sync (edits done to main not reflected in the editcopy), and changes may become lost when someone does move the editcopy contents onto the main page.
	+
	+	If this method of using the editcopy is not desired or necessary, then we should remove the editcopy page. Keep in mind that not everyone has write access to the main page, so some other method would need to be designed to suggest changes to the frontpage. Several wikis I visit use this editcopy policy, and it appears to work very well. -- [[User:Thraxian\|Thraxian]] 15:44, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:32, 1 April 2008
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	~~What about a seperate news page like this: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_News~~

−	~~And the mainpage http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/MediaWiki is awesome, too.~~