[12:39:05] <LFP6> Nando, PM
[12:39:17] <LFP6> Unless you're available now, lol
[12:40:32] <Brourd> Latest bug report in, LFP6?
[12:41:28] <LFP6> Hope
[12:41:30] <LFP6> *Nope
[12:41:35] <LFP6> hehe
[12:41:39] <LFP6> Nando needs to chat
[12:42:05] <Brourd> He needs to? I believe he is busy with all kinds of stuff.
[12:43:12] <LFP6> He asked to speak with me about the Wiki, soo...
[12:43:13] <Brourd> Last time I talked to him, it was something about *mumble grumble* Brourd and his 40% adenine *mumble grumble*
[12:43:29] <Brourd> Already starting renovations?
[12:43:38] <LFP6> I expect more from you Brourd!
[12:43:42] <LFP6> Yep
[12:44:04] <Brourd> Nice. Hopefully it's not another algorithm war.
[12:44:11] <LFP6> Just wish Tomoe would show up while I'm here so I can tell her to throw in her stuff. ^.^
[12:44:24] <Brourd> Because nobody wins when that happens.
[12:45:58] <Brourd> Ha. Managed to convince tomoe into another project? Sly, if not expected of her to offer up her services for yet another thing :)
[12:46:31] <LFP6> Lol, she's like me in that regard
[12:46:40] <LFP6> I just want her opinion on the Wiki structure
[12:46:47] <Brourd> No kidding.
[12:46:52] <LFP6> Say, would you mind giving 5 minutes to share your thoughts on the matter?
[12:47:16] <Brourd> Well, anything to take my mind off of the derivative.
[12:47:26] <Brourd> What is your query?
[12:47:55] <LFP6> See current task: http://eternawiki.org/wiki/index.php5/Restructure_Planning
[12:48:38] <Brourd> I see a lot of "future task"
[12:49:08] <Brourd> I suppose my first bit of advice would be to put a far more tangible timeline in place.
[12:50:15] <Brourd> i.e. Landing Page [6 months]
[12:50:34] <LFP6> I'm just taking this one step at a time Brourd &gt;.&lt;
[12:50:45] <LFP6> Would you please just look at the current task?
[12:51:18] <Brourd> Although I can't recall if scheduling a stepwise series of tasks actually increased productivity.
[12:52:03] <Brourd> Yes. First suggestion 1. Add in a task timeline.
[12:52:10] <Brourd> Pretty obvious.
[12:52:33] <shardis-wolfe> if the individual task steps are small enough, completing one and marking it off gives a sense of completion and encourages you to move on to the next one
[12:52:35] <LFP6> Brourd, not the question i'm asking
[12:53:04] <LFP6> http://prntscr.com/6rofy9
[12:53:23] <LFP6> I'd suggest looking at the talk page
[12:53:45] <shardis-wolfe> I think LFP6 just wants to know if you think the first task he has on his list is a good starting point
[12:54:13] <Brourd> Oh. Yeah, talking about what needs to be done is an excellent starting point.
[12:54:33] <Brourd> If I understood Shardis Wolfe's interpretation of what you are asking, correctly.
[12:56:02] <Brourd> Based on what I see though, you are trying to bite off more than you can chew for "sections"
[12:56:42] <williamsc4> im so confused on this chlamydomonas reinhardtii
[12:56:47] <LFP6> No, I'm looking for Brourd to give his opinion on the first task as in: What does Brourd think the higherarchy should be?
[12:56:54] <LFP6> .chlamy
[12:56:54] <LinkBot> For a walkthrough explanation how to solve, click here: http://goo.gl/Y7MV6H
[12:56:55] <LinkBot> To go straight to the tutorial puzzle, click here: http://goo.gl/1bvYO
[12:57:41] <Brourd> Before you go and plan to do all new content, the things you should do first include the following.
[12:58:03] <Brourd> 1. Determine what you already have as far as content goes.
[12:58:48] <Brourd> 2. Ascertain whether that content is cited correctly, or is really just a whole lot of heresay and videos to random stuff.
[13:00:05] <Brourd> 3. Cut down on the Hierarchy list. You don't need to include every single possible exception to every concept that ever existed.
[13:00:31] <LFP6> ...
[13:00:54] <Brourd> You'll just bog yourself down with more and more work, until you suffocate beneath it all.
[13:01:18] <LFP6> I'm trying to redesign the wiki. Step 1 is what content we're including and how it should be structured. That's what this is. Coudl you pelase give your suggestion on what this structure should be?
[13:01:39] <LFP6> Or is this really a problem?
[13:01:59] <Brourd> The structure is simple: Science, Game, Wiki
[13:02:13] <Brourd> everything should fall into one of those three categories, or overlap.
[13:02:29] <LFP6> There's a section on the Wiki about the Wiki?
[13:02:38] <LFP6> That would be meta content and such, right?
[13:02:49] <LFP6> (Organization, user stuff, etc.?)
[13:03:05] <Brourd> If you want :D however, those are just categoies of content.
[13:03:28] <Brourd> Wiki would be the material you would see in a wiki. Well cited definitions and articles about specific terms and such.
[13:04:32] <LFP6> If Wiki is everything in the Wiki, how would puzzle and science include anything else?
[13:04:39] <Brourd> That can possibly include user profiles as well.
[13:04:58] <Brourd> Game refers to the material made about the game.
[13:05:23] <LFP6> But that's Wiki content, isn't it?
[13:05:26] <Brourd> Tutorials, chat logs, guides, tips, etc.
[13:05:55] <hoglahoo> maybe you want science, game, other eterna resources
[13:06:03] <shardis-wolfe> Being a new player, I would say have a general section on single-state puzzles with a simple and short getting started section (create accout, go do NOVA lab) and basic puzzle solving tips filtered from various entries in Tips
[13:06:12] <LFP6> I suppose the question is, how do you differentiate between wiki content and non-wiki content? I woudl say everything that's on the Wiki is wiki content, but you are presenting something else
[13:06:19] <hoglahoo> oh, I see.
[13:07:07] <Brourd> I believe you are confusing material that can be cited from material that is user generated.
[13:07:08] <shardis-wolfe> Then have section devoted to switches (with any tips specific to them not learned doing single-states).
[13:07:35] <LFP6> @B: So you're saying 'Wiki' is citable content, and everything else is UGC?
[13:07:55] <Brourd> Nope. I said there was some overlap, no?
[13:08:43] <Brourd> For example, the science side would focus more on technical details, including links to relevant papers, and UGC regarding the labs or other material unrelated to the game.
[13:09:31] <shardis-wolfe> then a section for Labs with a simple and short Getting Started, followed by any Lab-specific tips. Finally have a section on the Science for folks who really want to delve into details (problably with lot of external links)
[13:09:47] <Brourd> Currently, what you want to do is create sections for Term definitions Techniques Conclusions Instructions Links & References Archives Project Collaboration Communication Finding things to do Categorization and presentation of tutorials Categorization and information about projects, how to help, and latest updates Categorization of and information about pu
[13:10:18] <LFP6> And chat cuts off :P
[13:10:31] <LFP6> Brourd, these would be hierarchically organizaed some way
[13:10:33] <Brourd> That's how many sections are in your list.
[13:10:54] <LFP6> They're not meant to all be in the first level
[13:11:03] <Brourd> No wiki has 20 sections. At best these are content subcategories.
[13:11:09] <LFP6> I just listed them for other people to organizae. :P
[13:11:14] <LFP6> Exactly Brourd
[13:11:19] <shardis-wolfe> Also possibly have a section on Making Puzzles (again with short and simple Getting Started, followed by suggestions maybe on what sort of puzzles are desired or folks find interesting)
[13:11:29] <LFP6> I want to see how other people would subcategorize them
[13:12:02] <hoglahoo> there's not enough content to warrant many different levels
[13:12:04] <LFP6> @shardis wolfe Definitely a good thought, I know someone else has mentioned something similar
[13:14:02] <Brourd> Unfortunately, I spent too much time trying to understand why you have 30 different subcats for what we have, that I'm now late for a very important date. Anyway, try to limit the number of subcategories to whatever number sounds suitable.
[13:14:14] <LFP6> Hog, ~12 of those are new. The idea is to add each section one by one and add content for them
[13:14:42] <shardis-wolfe> So my thoughts on sections boils down to: Getting Started (Single-States), Switches, Labs, Puzzlemaker, Science.
[13:14:54] <hoglahoo> you only need like two levels
[13:15:22] <hoglahoo> high level: game, science, etc. low level: details therein
[13:15:47] <LFP6> Hog, could you give me a list of each of the high levels and what they would contain?
[13:16:23] <hoglahoo> sure. high level 1: science / high level 2: game / high level 3: other
[13:16:45] <hoglahoo> science would contain everything science related, game would contain everything game related, and other would contain everything else
[13:17:19] <LFP6> lol
[13:17:23] <LFP6> No subcats listed
[13:17:24] <hoglahoo> as the wiki content grows, the organization is expanded to fit the need
[13:17:35] <LFP6> Good point on that,
[13:17:49] <hoglahoo> it would be one thing if we already had a giant mess of too much disorganized content
[13:17:55] <shardis-wolfe> Since Game is so broad, that is the one section I would sub-divide at high level
[13:18:22] <hoglahoo> I wouldn't
[13:18:29] <hoglahoo> I'd divide below that
[13:18:30] <LFP6> @Hog: As I said, there are a number of new content types I would like to begin adding.
[13:18:54] <hoglahoo> that's cool
[13:19:14] <hoglahoo> would they not fit into game, science, or other?
[13:19:53] <LFP6> I didn't say that
[13:20:21] <LFP6> I was just interested on your thoughts about the subcats
[13:20:34] <hoglahoo> ah, I was just answering for high level
[13:20:40] <shardis-wolfe> Not major divide, just break it down into Single-States, Switches, Puzzlemaker, Labs. Each of those has info that is not relevant to the others, yet which folks would want to navigate to quickly.
[13:20:52] <LFP6> Id you could take a look at my list, are there any oof those that would warrent being nested if they had significant enough content?
[13:21:02] <hoglahoo> can you link it again :)
[13:21:11] <LFP6> http://eternawiki.org/wiki/index.php5/Talk:Restructure_Planning
[13:22:28] <hoglahoo> ty
[13:23:01] <LFP6> mp
[13:23:04] <LFP6> *np
[13:25:09] <LFP6> *Facedesk* I did it again. I sent a PM and forgot my chat was saved in this window...
[13:25:33] <LFP6> Hog, can you upgrade my brain?
[13:25:48] <hoglahoo> I only have outdated model :(
[13:25:55] <LFP6> lol
[13:26:03] <lroppy> recall time
[13:26:11] <LFP6> My dad jokes he's running on a 286 processor
[13:26:18] <LFP6> Hey Lrop
[13:26:27] <LFP6> py
[13:26:29] <lroppy> more like a z80 here
[13:26:36] <lroppy> or a 6502
[13:26:51] <lroppy> 286 is one generation up
[13:30:29] <Jieux> Good afternoon friends!
[13:31:01] <hoglahoo> LFP6: http://i.imgur.com/j5yphoC.png
[13:31:03] <hoglahoo> hi Jieux
[13:31:32] <Jieux> hey hoglahoo.
[13:31:41] <Jieux> how's flips?
[13:31:53] <hoglahoo> LFP6: the sections listed on the link you posted seem really overlappy for the most part
[13:32:10] <hoglahoo> not flipping the last few days, Jieux. kinda busy I guess :/
[13:32:19] <hoglahoo> or taking another short break
[13:32:35] <Jieux> I'm sneaking in 1/2 hour here and there... stuck on V2 of that series you suggested.
[13:32:52] <hoglahoo> oh yeah? good, a challenge then
[13:33:31] <hoglahoo> LFP6: a simple high level makes breaking it down easier
[13:33:33] <Jieux> for sure... attempt #4 right now :)
[13:34:03] <hoglahoo> so you don't need to be overly concerned about where does this or that particular thing go, it can naturally fit in as you get more content
[13:34:08] <LFP6> Hog, if you wouldn't mind, pastebin that whole conversatio for me? &gt;.&lt;
[13:34:16] <LFP6> Right
[13:34:19] <LFP6> Thanks for the input
[13:34:21] <hoglahoo> do you want me to add it to the talk page
[13:34:49] <LFP6> If you wish
[13:35:03] <LFP6> There's you, Brourd, and Shardis
[13:35:30] <LFP6> If you paste the pastebin, I can specify each approach later, unless you want to
[13:35:54] <hoglahoo> http://pastebin.com/HnN5b8KJ
[13:35:57] <LFP6> Not sure if Brourd actually had a structure approach or not, but...
[13:36:26] <hoglahoo> well, getting into comprehensive details is time consuming, maybe he's just wanting to help get it started down the right track
[13:36:29] <hoglahoo> or a good track
[13:36:42] <LFP6> Hog, I meant the chat conversation from when I came in ehre and started talking to brourd
[13:37:09] <hoglahoo> oh, did he hint at some other organization besides a structure approach?
[13:37:18] <hoglahoo> I don't even know what that would be
[13:37:34] <LFP6> lol
[13:37:41] <hoglahoo> wouldn't surprise me though :D
03[13:37:49] * hoglahoo sets mode: +o hoglahoo
03[13:37:49] * hoglahoo sets mode: +o LinkBot
[13:37:51] <LFP6> Not.... exactly what I meant
[13:38:59] <LFP6> But shardis dis have an aproach
[13:39:05] <LFP6> *did
[13:39:08] <LFP6> as well
[13:40:23] <shardis-wolfe> Hog's outline is pretty good. My only comment on it would be include a II-E heading for Puzzlemaker, and have a very clear and obvious Getting Started point
[13:40:27] <hoglahoo> well I think you could list on the wiki main page all the high level sections and the three or four most popular subpages for each section for quick navigation
[13:40:55] <hoglahoo> I think "search" would ideally be the quick way though
[13:42:15] <hoglahoo> and intrawiki hyperlinking be the reader's way of navigation for learning the bits that he or she sees in an article and wants to know more about, as one does when looking at wikipedia
[13:42:59] <hoglahoo> yeah puzzlemaker would be under game in my quick outline proposal
[13:43:04] <LFP6> A couple of examples I'm looking at: http://foldit.wikia.com/wiki/Foldit_Wiki
[13:43:23] <LFP6> (Not as related, but:) legomessageboards.wikia.com
[13:43:26] <hoglahoo> egads
[13:43:32] <hoglahoo> the foldit wiki is a mess
03[13:43:36] * Retrieving #global modes...
[13:43:43] <LFP6> A bit
[13:43:51] <LFP6> The Wikia ads don't exactly help!
[13:43:57] <hoglahoo> I don't even see thos
[13:44:12] <LFP6> Adblock?
[13:44:18] <hoglahoo> probably due to that yeah
[13:44:29] <LFP6> lol
[13:44:52] <LFP6> The LMB wiki is rpetty tho
[13:45:11] <LFP6> I think the foldit wiki just has a bad layout
[13:45:13] <hoglahoo> its cluttered
[13:45:30] <LFP6> ...Videos?
[13:45:31] <hoglahoo> the LMB wiki looks like the daily mail's website
[13:45:32] <shardis-wolfe> @LFP6 - check out the front page of http://lotro-wiki.com/
[13:45:38] <LFP6> Not a main page kind of thing imho
[13:45:55] <hoglahoo> @shardis-wolfe, yeah that one is better
[13:46:05] <LFP6> How about this? http://biosector01.com/wiki/index.php/Main_Page
[13:46:20] <shardis-wolfe> a simple table look like it lends itself well to a 2-3 deep hierarchy
[13:46:28] <LFP6> Scaling is a little off to me, but...
[13:46:47] <hoglahoo> yep this has a clear heirarchy http://lotro-wiki.com/
[13:47:03] <hoglahoo> easy to find section headings
[13:47:08] <hoglahoo> easy to find subsections
[13:47:12] <hoglahoo> and they make sense
[13:47:40] <hoglahoo> although I dont know the difference between monster play and gameplay, the first link under monsterplay is "what is this?"
[13:47:58] <hoglahoo> my eye isn't being drawn 50 different directions at once
[13:48:04] <shardis-wolfe> monsterplay is just lotro's version of pvp
[13:48:22] <hoglahoo> I'm just saying the page guides me so I don't feel confused or lost
[13:48:36] <hoglahoo> even though I'm not familiar with the lotr whatever
[13:48:45] <LFP6> Right
[13:49:11] <LFP6> Mainpage design is one thing I'm planning on mocking up after I have a general hierarchy idea
[13:51:01] <hoglahoo> have you looked at anything like this? http://community.wikia.com/wiki/Help:Making_a_successful_wikia
[13:52:31] <LFP6> No I haven't. Should've though. :$ Thanks for the link
[13:53:40] <hoglahoo> no problem! even if you dont agree with much of it, it can't hurt. might help you flesh out your own idea
[13:55:04] <LFP6> Hog, would you mind pastebining this whole conversation from when I started talking with B (as I was an idiot and sent a PM which refreshed the page)?
[13:55:20] <hoglahoo> k
[13:55:26] <shardis-wolfe> What is mentioned in the Update Design in Format is pretty much what you are doing now - deciding on Sections/Categories, and then designing a home page for them