User talk:Quenty/WikiStandardization
Look, according to the categories, your page is a disambiguation page, a read-only property, a property, a page that should be deleted and a protected member...
I think you need to learn to use the nocat parameter...
Also, I completely agree with you on the first point. Rounded templates just don't look good. Yes, rounded corners can look nice, but stacks of rounded boxes don't look good, and, often, these boxes do end up stacking on each others, making it look ugly. I think we should stop rounding everything and use more normal, rectangular, boxes.
Also, Wikipedia is up to this day the most successful encyclopedia that has ever existed, as well as the most successful wiki that has ever existed, and it is one of the most visited websites in the world.
Copying from them is definitely the right thing to do. I mean, if we do want a model, it'd certainly be Wikipedia. I mean, after all, it is the most successful wiki on the web and you just can't deny that.
Other than that, I noticed that MediaWiki has built-in support for giving links to the Wiktionary. Perhaps that could be interesting, or something? You can give Wikt:links to Wiktionary:words on the Wiktionary:Wiktionary like I just did simply by prefixing the word by "Wiktionary" or "Wikt". --JulienDethurens 00:10, 3 May 2012 (EDT)
While I agree that those templates could use revising, I would consider it lower priority, because it's related to appearance (not on top in my list, at the moment). It's not difficult to change the appearance, but it can be difficult to come up with an appearance that works. Does the style you suggest work with the rest of the site? Maybe the entire site needs an overhaul? Who knows? I don't; once again, not on top in my list.
As for tutorials, standardization isn't much of a problem because there's hardly any content to standardize. I'd rather give writers the freedom to write in whatever style they want before limiting them to a certain standard, so that something can be written.
What should be established is what. We need to figure out what kind of articles need to be written, instead of just having everyone make their own Lua guide. I'd like to see more articles about class, or groups of classes. What they do, how they work, how they can be useful. Tutorial:Animations was inspired by this. It describes what Animations do and how they work. More work could easily be done on it, such as describing how the interpolation works. More articles could probably be written about Animations in general, such as "Animation Techniques" or "Animation Tool Manual", if a proper tool were to ever be made. These, of course, are just examples. But it suggests what kind of articles could be written.
An easy way to come up with a subject for an article is to just consider what you're currently doing in Roblox. If someone is making a game, they could write about something interesting they implemented, like an inventory GUI, or how they got the client and server to communicate with each other. Or, if they've created a tech-demo of a new object Roblox added, they could write about that. It doesn't have to be a how-to, they can just explain the concepts behind what they did.
As an example, I could make an article about scroll bars, since I've worked with them quite a bit. In that article, I might talk about how the thumb's size can be a scaled representation of the scrolled content's size, or various methods for scrolling the content.
If anything, it can be written like a blog post. Since this is a wiki, it can always be edited to fit whatever standards. The point is merely to get some content. --Anaminus 05:23, 3 May 2012 (EDT)
Bots
I'm not sure bots is really a good idea. Protection built in MediaWiki, like what the AbuseFilter extension would offer, would not have to be constantly monitoring the wiki. The reason Wikipedia uses bots is because it wouldn't be exactly a good idea to make them check every change to every page in their wiki. But, in this case, since there aren't 25 edits per second in our wiki, filters would do a better job. --JulienDethurens 14:13, 5 May 2012 (EDT)
