OLPC talk:Cleanup

This page is for "chatter". Short conversations. The main page should be used for discussion which will be of interest for more than a day or two.

Babel-XO design converstation

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Userboxes

How about something like:

• {tagsboxtop} Like userboxbottom. maybe even a redirect.
• {tagsboxbottom}
• {tags|a|b|more=}

  {tags}

  {tags|more=}

  {tags|a|b}

• {Tag more=} blank template so tags more= works.
• {end of tags}

  As in {tags|...|more=} ... {end of tags}

  this may just be a redirect to tagsboxbottom

• {more tags|a|b}

  Like tags, maps a and b to Tag_a and Tag_b.

  So you can do {tags|a|b|more=} {Tag c} {more tags|d|e} {Tag f} {end of tags}

• {Tag this} and {Tag that} like userboxes {Tag math} {Tag science} {Tag grade|3} {Tag release status beta} whatever

And finally, maybe topical:

• {activity tags|foo=a|bar=b|c|d|more=}

  Like {tags...}, but takes some topical named arguments.

  This allows us to constrain the order of boxes. And complain about missing required arguments.

  So activities could always have name first, then status, then... .

What do you think? MitchellNCharity 08:28, 5 July 2007 (EDT)

Apologies if this is the wrong page to ask in. I've been looking though the talk pages and a lot of the questions are out of date and have become irrelevant. Such as this one which talks about 128MB of RAM problems. [Link] I was wondering if I should leave it as it is, answer it, or just delete it? Crazybus 04:44, 8 July 2007 (EDT)

overzealous merge tags

I think that the list of pages to be merged is really rather overzealous. Many of those pages are brief summaries of information that are relevant to OLPC in some way. While they could be replaced with pointers to Wikipedia in many cases, that defeats the short summary nature of the pages. It also loses the OLPC relevancy.

Of course, perhaps the intention is to lump all the content together in some larger page. This defeats the Wiki indexing system which allows people to type in a word or two and go direct to the relevant page. In some cases, these pages tagged for merge could include better links to related content, but that does not require merging to do.

I really think that the merge tag should be limited to pages that are truly redundant, and then the specific pages should be listed here so people know which pair of pages are at issue. In that case, a third merged page can be created to hone the content as a first step. Second step would be to demote the pages with merge tags, then rename the third merged page to its real title. Then after some time when people have the opportunity to check all three versions, the demoted pages can go on the deletion list. Then eventually they will be deleted like any other page.

Also, when tagging and editing pages, please remember that there are different audiences for this content which have different levels of understanding and different needs. It is often good to have pages that are somewhat redundant. Perhaps one is linked in a web of developer-oriented material and another is linked in a web of educator-oriented material. And those are not the only two audiences. I ran into problems with this when I tried to create separate pages for educational content that can be included in an OLPC distro and content for educators who wish to leverage the OLPC in an educational scenario. Sometimes the obvious page title end up being ambiguous and the solution is not to merge pages, but to carefully, and thoughtfully retitle the pages. --Memracom 13:17, 19 February 2007 (EST)