JustSolve:To Do
From Just Solve the File Format Problem
(Difference between revisions)
AndyJackson (Talk | contribs) (→Stuff That Would Be Good To Do: s/plain/plan/ !) |
(→Stuff That Would Be Good To Do) |
||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
*** I would like to keep the direct-linked hierarchy we are building and encourage that people build massive amounts of categories to allow cross-discipline linking that otherwise would be confusing to others. --[[User:Jason Scott|Jason Scott]] ([[User talk:Jason Scott|talk]]) 21:34, 29 October 2012 (UTC) | *** I would like to keep the direct-linked hierarchy we are building and encourage that people build massive amounts of categories to allow cross-discipline linking that otherwise would be confusing to others. --[[User:Jason Scott|Jason Scott]] ([[User talk:Jason Scott|talk]]) 21:34, 29 October 2012 (UTC) | ||
**** Good plan - I've started adding some simple navigation. [[User:AndyJackson|AndyJackson]] ([[User talk:AndyJackson|talk]]) 00:07, 30 October 2012 (UTC) | **** Good plan - I've started adding some simple navigation. [[User:AndyJackson|AndyJackson]] ([[User talk:AndyJackson|talk]]) 00:07, 30 October 2012 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | * '''Rank articles by completeness.''' Highlight articles that are excellent, as well as those that are "decent", (above stub level). This is probably best done with categories, which will make all pages appear in a central place based on the categorization. Actually, categories are useful for a lot of stuff. TBC... [[User:Nitro2k01|Nitro2k01]] ([[User talk:Nitro2k01|talk]]) 00:34, 3 November 2012 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 00:34, 3 November 2012
Stuff That Would Be Good To Do
These are tasks large and small that could be good to do. If you think you want one, sign your name to it (with a timestamp) and get cracking. If you fall idle, you'll be pinged and maybe overtaken. Or you'll finish it and be a hero!
- Just keep adding new formats and sub-headings. Right now the priority is to mostly get a good skeleton going. As we go, we're cleaning up hierarchies (especially when there's duplicates in two different sub-trees), but for the moment, we're trying to expand out in every direction.
- The Navigation of the Various Heirarchies is sub-par and could use beautification. Some nice layout for FIRSTLEVEL => SECONDLEVEL => ITEM would be good.
- Would this work more easily if we switched to using Categories for the main hierarchy? Does the UI autogenerate? Would it be okay? Anyone mind if I try it out? AndyJackson (talk) 15:47, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
- I would like to keep the direct-linked hierarchy we are building and encourage that people build massive amounts of categories to allow cross-discipline linking that otherwise would be confusing to others. --Jason Scott (talk) 21:34, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
- Good plan - I've started adding some simple navigation. AndyJackson (talk) 00:07, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
- I would like to keep the direct-linked hierarchy we are building and encourage that people build massive amounts of categories to allow cross-discipline linking that otherwise would be confusing to others. --Jason Scott (talk) 21:34, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
- Would this work more easily if we switched to using Categories for the main hierarchy? Does the UI autogenerate? Would it be okay? Anyone mind if I try it out? AndyJackson (talk) 15:47, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
- Rank articles by completeness. Highlight articles that are excellent, as well as those that are "decent", (above stub level). This is probably best done with categories, which will make all pages appear in a central place based on the categorization. Actually, categories are useful for a lot of stuff. TBC... Nitro2k01 (talk) 00:34, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
