Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
MacRumors Launches 'Mac Guides'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Well, I just made my first contribution to the Guide - an entry for Roxio's Toast Titanium 7. That was easy! I may have to do more of these... 
Looks like someone posted the Wikipedia iBook contents
http://guides.macrumors.com/IBook
A very complete article but also very different from the PowerMac Dual Core article:
http://guides.macrumors.com/Power_Mac_G5_Dual_Core_(2005)
Admittedly, a different take on it. The Wikipedia acts more of an encylopedia of all things... so people looking for an article on the iBook might want more cultural/historical aspect of it's existence, while someone looking here might want more practical (specs, tips, troubleshooting) issues.
Just something to think about...
arn
http://guides.macrumors.com/IBook
A very complete article but also very different from the PowerMac Dual Core article:
http://guides.macrumors.com/Power_Mac_G5_Dual_Core_(2005)
Admittedly, a different take on it. The Wikipedia acts more of an encylopedia of all things... so people looking for an article on the iBook might want more cultural/historical aspect of it's existence, while someone looking here might want more practical (specs, tips, troubleshooting) issues.
Just something to think about...
arn
It's a really cumbersome license, and even the Wikimedia folks have expressed regrets at times for having chosen it. CC wasn't as well cooked when they started as it is now, but it would have avoided a lot of that; but switching isn't an option for them now.Blackheart said:
arn said:
I think that's a good point arn, and something everyone should consider. Of course, since the Guides are now just in their infancy, I'm sure we'll see all sorts of interesting takes and approaches, and resulting entries in the upcoming months, but I'm sure they'll sort themselves out eventually.
But yes, I agree. Perhaps if people are interested in the history of Mac machines, they should simply consult the Wikipedia itself. I was going to suggest creating another Category for "History" or something along those lines, but again, these are supposed to be guides, not historical repositories.
Nonetheless, as you say, a different take, and there's nothing wrong with that. It is something members should keep in mind though when making entries.
arn said:
I briefly panicked when I saw that one. A ton of stuff that didn't match the rest of the pages at all.
Seems like Kalisphoenix is working on it though.
Copying a whole article from Wikipedia is stupid
Copying a whole article from the wikipedia is stupid. Just do [[Wikipedia:iBook]] and be done with it - or make a piped link and have it go to [[Wikipedia:iBook|Wikipedia entry about iBook]] to make it read better.
I think that the restriction that only new people with 20 posts can edit the wikis is absolutely retarded. That really hinders new development from outside sources - people who don't like to banter around on forums all day but may know more about a certain program than the person who wrote the article.
Locking content down like that violates a major principle of wikis. It really turns off new people from editing. Not allowing anonymous users to edit your wiki I believe is a bad idea.
That being said, I hope that lots of good guides come from this. Should be an interesting project. The hardest part about a wiki is always seeding it with good content and then pruning it as you go.
Copying a whole article from the wikipedia is stupid. Just do [[Wikipedia:iBook]] and be done with it - or make a piped link and have it go to [[Wikipedia:iBook|Wikipedia entry about iBook]] to make it read better.
I think that the restriction that only new people with 20 posts can edit the wikis is absolutely retarded. That really hinders new development from outside sources - people who don't like to banter around on forums all day but may know more about a certain program than the person who wrote the article.
Locking content down like that violates a major principle of wikis. It really turns off new people from editing. Not allowing anonymous users to edit your wiki I believe is a bad idea.
That being said, I hope that lots of good guides come from this. Should be an interesting project. The hardest part about a wiki is always seeding it with good content and then pruning it as you go.
a problem for the phatness
both my user name and password incorporate a underscore (_)
bah! i can't login (even after making it Phat Pat)
confusion!
both my user name and password incorporate a underscore (_)
bah! i can't login (even after making it Phat Pat)
confusion!
Rye Brye said:
Hmm... you may be right. As mentioned, anyone who registered before this weekend has editing abilities without any post requirement. That's 60,000+ users.
It was a balance between being freely editable and not encouraging spamming.
Maybe we'll reconsider it depending on how things go.
arn
arn said:
With 60,000 users - you should easily be able to detect spam and remove it. You just have to get enough admins to have the "revert to" version available to them and you should be fine... Although with 60,000 users you might not need anybody else, either
As a side note, it seems your InterWiki map isn't loaded right - or isn't the most recent version. In my user talk page I tried to link to my other wiki (that is in the interwiki map) but it didn't work. Then I tried the most common one - [[Wikipedia: ]] and it wasn't working either. Interwiki links are really convenient - especially to things like the Wikipedia.
Good idea on the guides. I'll try to contribute when I have time. I'm very familiar with the MediaWiki format - even the esoteric topics as templates, tables, and redirects.
You may want to put a link on the main page to the [[Special:Wanted pages]] - which shows all of the pages that are linked to - but contain no content. People writing pages should link to whatever they think deserves a page - and people who are looking for what they should create can look at the "wanted pages" and start creating a page for that topic. It makes for efficient editing.
I would have put the link on the main page, but some paranoid person locked it
Rye Brye said:I would have put the link on the main page, but some paranoid person locked it
heh... thanks for the tips. The front page is actually not really a wiki page, it's dynamically generated due to the recent content. I hear you can do modules but haven't figured those out yet.
lemme look into the interwiki issue.
arn
arn said:
Oh, that makes sense about the front page. I was jealous, because I haven't really figured out how to make my front page have those kind of categories... etc. show up on it
I took a small stab at creating some articles (mostly just some common-knowledge type stuff)- but I'm off to bed now. Sounds like a worthy project. Should be fun once it gets humming.
Ryan
ifjake said:
It can't be done ffs. At least not without serious hacking and breakage.
It's a MediaWiki issue. That's why there's the text in italic, on top of the page.
ifjake said:
I believe that's a technological limitation though, and cannot be changed. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong...
As of right now, some articles seem un-editable. Why
EDIT: I guess they are...I was just expecting a "edit" button for the top section of the page, but that was before I found the "edit" button at the top (near 'discussion', etc.)
EDIT: I guess they are...I was just expecting a "edit" button for the top section of the page, but that was before I found the "edit" button at the top (near 'discussion', etc.)
EricNau said:As of right now, some articles seem un-editable. Why
Which one are you thinking of?
I'm getting annoyed about something...
It seems to me there is a mad rush out there to create as many articles as possible, but the ones people are making are useless.
For example, at the moment, the 'Apple CEO' article says...
"Category:Apple CEOs
(There is currently no text in this page)"
Why not just focus on one good article, instead of making hundreds of useless ones.
(Sorry if I offended anyone - I'm in a bad mood because I can't figure out how to use that stuff!)
It seems to me there is a mad rush out there to create as many articles as possible, but the ones people are making are useless.
For example, at the moment, the 'Apple CEO' article says...
"Category:Apple CEOs
(There is currently no text in this page)"
Why not just focus on one good article, instead of making hundreds of useless ones.
(Sorry if I offended anyone - I'm in a bad mood because I can't figure out how to use that stuff!)
My first work
I hope all you iMac G3 users like my submission. The complete guide to getting video back after installing OS X. Please feel free to add!
http://guides.macrumors.com/Fixing_No_Video_on_iMac_G3_After_Mac_OS_X_Install
I hope all you iMac G3 users like my submission. The complete guide to getting video back after installing OS X. Please feel free to add!
http://guides.macrumors.com/Fixing_No_Video_on_iMac_G3_After_Mac_OS_X_Install
Just to clarify (since a few comments have been aimed in my general direction):
Don't freak out if you see a Wikipedia page inserted in the article that I'm working on. It just means that I'm still working on it and using the Wikipedia page as one of my sources. Also, don't freak out if a new page is created with absolutely no content, because I'm probably working on it.
What MediaWiki needs is a little beacon on each page that beeps and flashes and says "Kali's Phoenix, a noted slowpoke, was recently seen clicking on the Edit button. Be calm, folks, you're in good hands."
I guess I'll put that in my disclaimer too ;-)
I'm tired -- gonna fix up Gil Amelio, the Apple CEOs, and some other stuff and then hit the hay.
Don't freak out if you see a Wikipedia page inserted in the article that I'm working on. It just means that I'm still working on it and using the Wikipedia page as one of my sources. Also, don't freak out if a new page is created with absolutely no content, because I'm probably working on it.
What MediaWiki needs is a little beacon on each page that beeps and flashes and says "Kali's Phoenix, a noted slowpoke, was recently seen clicking on the Edit button. Be calm, folks, you're in good hands."
I guess I'll put that in my disclaimer too ;-)
I'm tired -- gonna fix up Gil Amelio, the Apple CEOs, and some other stuff and then hit the hay.
Sorry - I did something to something of yours (I know not specific - I'm just so confused). I tried writing a message to you in a page you said "Don't Touch" - anyways I think I fixed it. (I was trying to tell you I had a pic of the iMac if you needed one). Hope I didn't mess anything up.kalisphoenix said:
Some of the stubs are going to be a by product of other people creating pages. Some organization will rise from the chaos in time. Once there are enough useful articles out there, there can be more consolidation in categories and the like.
I do want to remind you of a few things:
- You can't copy copyrighted content from other websites.
- Wikipedia is under a different license... but regardless I think we can offer a lot more than just copying wikimedia content. If you want to reference a Wikimedia article - just link to it.
- It's not a race!
Macmaniac, thanks for the article.
arn
I do want to remind you of a few things:
- You can't copy copyrighted content from other websites.
- Wikipedia is under a different license... but regardless I think we can offer a lot more than just copying wikimedia content. If you want to reference a Wikimedia article - just link to it.
- It's not a race!
Macmaniac, thanks for the article.
arn