|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| − | {{Sign1}}
| |
| − | ==Articles to feature in newsletter and carousels==
| |
| − | I'd like to feature some wiki articles in the Hotrodders.com image carousels and weekly newsletter. Suggestions? Needs to be a good article that has been either recently started or recently improved upon significantly, with a really good pic.--[[User:Jon|Jon]] 11:51, 11 March 2012 (MDT)
| |
| − | :Let me give it some thought; I should be able to come up w/a few suggestions within the next day or two.--[[User:Cobalt327|Cobalt327]] 21:28, 11 March 2012 (MDT)
| |
| | | | |
| − | =====Continued from Jon's talk page=====
| |
| − | Not as easy as I had first thought. Here are two that might work, but I'll keep looking into this. In the meantime, the first two are relatively recent:
| |
| − | *[http://www.crankshaftcoalition.com/wiki/1940_Ford_Pickup_recessed_tail_lights 1940 Ford Pickup recessed tail lights]
| |
| − | *[http://www.crankshaftcoalition.com/wiki/Adjusting_hydraulic_lifters Adjusting hydraulic lifters]
| |
| − | The second pair are good articles IMHO, not that new though:
| |
| − | *[http://www.crankshaftcoalition.com/wiki/Choosing_a_trailer Choosing a trailer] and
| |
| − | *[http://www.crankshaftcoalition.com/wiki/Chrysler_Hemi_engine Chrysler Hemi engine]--[[User:Cobalt327|Cobalt327]] 08:08, 14 March 2012 (MDT)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | :Here are a few more to consider:
| |
| − | :*[http://www.crankshaftcoalition.com/wiki/Gear_ratio_check Gear ratio check]
| |
| − | :*[http://www.crankshaftcoalition.com/wiki/Metal_shaping Metal shaping]
| |
| − | :*[http://www.crankshaftcoalition.com/wiki/Mopar_tapered_axle_rear_brake_conversion Mopar tapered axle rear brake conversion]
| |
| − | :*[http://www.crankshaftcoalition.com/wiki/Pilot_bearing_and_bushings Pilot bearing and bushings] (still have photos to format)
| |
| − | :*[http://www.crankshaftcoalition.com/wiki/Rust_removal_with_Ospho Rust removal with Ospho]
| |
| − | :*[http://www.crankshaftcoalition.com/wiki/Narrowing_a_rearend Narrowing a rearend]
| |
| − | :--[[User:Cobalt327|Cobalt327]] 22:08, 18 March 2012 (MDT)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | ::And
| |
| − | ::*[http://www.crankshaftcoalition.com/wiki/T-350_transmission_rebuild_tech T-350 tranny rebuild tech]--[[User:Cobalt327|Cobalt327]] 14:39, 19 March 2012 (MDT)
| |
| − | :::Also
| |
| − | :::*[http://www.crankshaftcoalition.com/wiki/Hot_rodding_the_HEI_distributor Hotrodding the HEI distributor]--[[User:Cobalt327|Cobalt327]] 05:18, 24 March 2012 (MDT)
| |
| − | ::::I've finished going through the pages in the Best articles category. The above articles are at this time what I'd consider the most eligible. Do you want to continue adding to this as articles are submitted/edited?--[[User:Cobalt327|Cobalt327]] 04:07, 27 March 2012 (MDT)
| |
| − | :::::Yes, definitely continue adding. I've already featured some of the above, and many of them are older articles. I'm looking for something fresh, with good pics.--[[User:Jon|Jon]] 10:21, 27 March 2012 (MDT)
| |
| − | ::::::[http://www.crankshaftcoalition.com/wiki/Cylinder_head_identification SBC cylinder head identification] has gotten revisions that include more text, photos and links along w/being moved from ''Cylinder head identification'' to '''''SBC cylinder head identification'''''. While the original page dates from 2009, it was only recently (2-2012) expanded into an actual page. I am open to constructive criticism and/or suggestions on how to improve it so it might be used in the newsletter or a carousel.
| |
| − | ::::::Same thing for [http://www.crankshaftcoalition.com/wiki/Building_an_inline_6_Chevy_250_engine Building an inline 6 Chevy 250 engine]; it too was recently revised into an actual article from a stub dating from 2009. And suggestions are welcomed here, as well.--[[User:Cobalt327|Cobalt327]] 09:52, 7 April 2012 (MDT)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | ==Consolidating similar articles==
| |
| − | I've been mulling over how to go about consolidating some articles that have similar titles and contents like on Q-jet carbs and RPO codes to name two.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | I (and others) have gone to linking the various articles to each other but this is a temporary solution at best, IMO. It will take some time to do this right, but in the end it should result in much easier navigation to the subjects.
| |
| − | :How about more categories and subcategories? "Quadrajet carburetors" would make a good category. That would at least hold us over until a full and thorough merge of interrelated topics could be completed--[[User:Jon|Jon]] 12:18, 8 February 2012 (MST)
| |
| − | ::Jon- I've been talking to 'lt1silverhawk' (who I've invited to add his thought here) about doing something along those lines (you may recall he started a page "How to Rebuild a Rochester Quadrajet 4MV Carburetor"). We had discussed, and subsequently discounted, the idea of combining '''all''' the Q-jet info into some huge single "Master Article", the thinking being it would be too unwieldy and cumbersome for someone looking to ID their carb or do a simple rebuild, etc. I have almost 1 GB of "raw" Word docs on Q-jet carbs (72 folders and 906 files) and another 5.5 MB in jpg images that I'd like to eventually have available here after it's been edited.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | ::Now when you say to make "Quadrajet carburetors" a category, would that be like "Engine" or "Transmission"? Let me know if I've misunderstood this.--[[user:Cobalt327|Cobalt327]] 8 February 2012
| |
| − | :::Yes, that's correct, make it a category like "Engine" or "Transmission". Agreed on avoiding a huge unwieldy page. One strategy is to do a "Master Article" that links out to the sub-articles. For example, check out [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy the Wikipedia article on "Energy"]. Many of the article sections have headers like: "Main article: Conservation of Energy", etc., that lead the reader to other full articles.--[[User:Jon|Jon]] 14:33, 8 February 2012 (MST)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | ::::Hello Jon and cobalt. Thank you for inviting me to this discussion. As cobalt mentioned, he has been in touch with me and we have talked about the various ways of taking many articles on similar subjects and merge them into a few detailed articles. I did take a thorough look at the ''"Energy"'' article you linked. If I understand correctly, you wish to see one master article that that branches out to several main articles, all on one page. Is that correct?
| |
| − |
| |
| − | ::::I believe the best approach is to have a master article on one page that covers every related topic in a general manner, and to have the specifics covered on other pages and linked to the master article. From my perspective, both as a user and an editor, few inter-related articles are not as overwhelming as an all-in-one. Chances are that if someone is looking for procedures on something, he or she is not going to want to skim through everything else first.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | ::::For example, sticking with the Quadrajet, the page titled ''"Quadrajet"'' can cover every thing related to the carburetor in a general sense: history, variations, applications, pros and cons, significance, etc. More specific sub-topics that require detailed explanations can be given their own pages: how to rebuild specific versions (2bbl, 4bbl), identification, tuning. Also, anything that can be covered in a general sense should be spared a specific page. For example, if someone decides to do a page on cleaning carburetors, there is no need to cover it again in any other page.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | ::::I look forward to reading any thoughts you guys may have. - --[[User:LT1Silverhawk|LT1Silverhawk]] 20:17, 9 February 2012 (MST)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | :::::Agreed on all counts.--[[User:Jon|Jon]] 20:28, 9 February 2012 (MST)
| |
| − | ==Q-jet categories==
| |
| − | Cobalt, there are now two category pages for the Quadrajet carburetors. The original is titled "Quadrajet", and the one you created is titled "Quadrajet carburetors". We will have to decide which one to stick with.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | My opinion is that we use "Quadrajet" category, as it has been is use for some time. The other can be used to create a fresh master article on the Quadrajet carburetors,. Once its ready, the contents can then be transferred over to the original article on Quadrajets: [[Quadrajet]]. What are your thoughts on this? Thanks. --[[User:LT1Silverhawk|LT1Silverhawk]] 15:14, 15 February 2012 (MST)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | :I like it.--[[User:Cobalt327|Cobalt327]] 18:08, 15 February 2012 (MST)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | ==Cleanup and deletions==
| |
| − | Just wanted to catch up on recent deletions. Most are junk and it's nice to see them eliminated. What's your position on the 'stub' articles -- basic frameworks like [[Ignition]], etc. Do you think they encourage future additions? Make the wiki look sloppy overall?--[[User:Jon|Jon]] 21:57, 9 June 2012 (MDT)
| |
| − | :I believe preexisting stubs that contain no information- if placed in the main Article categories- don't encourage contributions. Instead I believe the Article categories should contain only articles (or stubs) containing at least ''some'' information, the more the better. However, bare-bones stubs could be kept in the Undeveloped articles category so they don't disappoint someone doing a search for info.
| |
| − | :But that said, I am open to ANY tactic that would generate interest. Some options:
| |
| − | *compiling some basic framework stubs and submitting them individually into the 'active' article Categories (i.e. adding the stubs to the Brakes, Cooling, etc., categories, I could add some basic info as a start)
| |
| − | *adding the framework stubs to the Undeveloped articles
| |
| − | *adding the stubs as a category unto itself (like "Articles needed"), to the categories TOC (along with Brakes, Cooling, etc.)
| |
| − | *adding the Undeveloped articles page to the 'active' categories TOC
| |
| − | :By the way, I added a link to the Undeveloped articles on the Start a new article page.--[[User:Cobalt327|Cobalt327]] 06:16, 19 June 2012 (MDT)
| |
| − | ::Agreed that preexisting stubs with no information don't encourage contributions. They may even '''dis'''courage contributions, because they make the wiki look like it has no content. Agreed on keeping stubs with some information, but keeping them out of the main categories. In looking at your recommendations above, I think one of the best options might be to add an "Undeveloped" sub-category to each of the main categories.--[[User:Jon|Jon]] 11:59, 19 June 2012 (MDT)
| |
| − | :::Re "add an "Undeveloped" sub-category": Sweet; better visibility while at the same time keeping the stubs separate from the active articles. So, I'm thinking the sub-categories would be taken from the Undeveloped articles as well as any obvious subjects that may be missing, while leaving the Undeveloped articles page intact so the links to it will stay valid? --[[User:Cobalt327|Cobalt327]] 13:56, 19 June 2012 (MDT)
| |
| − | ::::Yes, that's what I had in mind. Something like "Undeveloped engine articles" as a subcat of Engine. Or "Undeveloped", or whatever looks correct on the category pages, and sticks out. Another option is to '''not''' make it a subcat, so it doesn't appear in the alphabetized subcategory list, and instead link to the Undeveloped category in each category description. Etc. Whatever looks and feels correct, and I'm sure we'll adjust and tweak it over time anyway. As long as we start moving away from just lumping in the undeveloped articles with the good ones.--[[User:Jon|Jon]] 14:13, 19 June 2012 (MDT)
| |
| − | :::::I'll set up one or two categories w/an "Undeveloped [engine or whatever] articles" sub-category to see how it 'feels' and we can go from there. Any thoughts on how to make this stand out from the other pages in the subcategory? I can turn 'em <span style="color:red">'''RED'''</span>! lol--[[User:Cobalt327|Cobalt327]] 16:29, 19 June 2012 (MDT)
| |
| − | ::::::Red actually might not be a bad idea. If it's possible, we might also try some sort of template, even if it's just for a boilerplate explanatory sentence at the top of each main category, that describes the Undeveloped category.--[[User:Jon|Jon]] 11:29, 20 June 2012 (MDT)
| |
| − | :::::::That could work. I'll give some thought to the template contents unless you already have something in mind.--[[User:Cobalt327|Cobalt327]] 11:52, 20 June 2012 (MDT)
| |
| − | ::::::::A few ideas can be seen [http://www.crankshaftcoalition.com/wiki/File:Undev_4.jpg here]. The Undeveloped sub-cat would appear just below the text. Still up in the air about how to word the sub-cat, but leaning towards a simple "Undeveloped [engine or whatever] articles". Is this even in the ballpark? I can also do a link, formatted similarly except directing the attention to the entire Undeveloped category, not to a sub-cat below the text. But that will take them to ALL the undeveloped articles, not just ones that match the selected category. That is, unless I divided up the Undeveloped category into separate categories... Input? Thanks.--[[User:Cobalt327|Cobalt327]] 12:04, 23 June 2012 (MDT)
| |
| − | :::::::::Definitely in the ballpark, and it will be easy to change if we do this with a template. Yes, making this work might require making an "Undeveloped" category under every category. BTW I'm having second thoughts about recommending red text, only because it's the default color that the wiki uses for links to new articles with no content. For example [[This link to a nonexistent article]] is red.--[[User:Jon|Jon]] 11:26, 25 June 2012 (MDT)
| |
| − | ::::::::::OK on the red text. Perhaps a different color or more weight and/or points for all or part... I'll play around w/it some more and see what comes of it.--[[User:Cobalt327|Cobalt327]] 12:07, 25 June 2012 (MDT)
| |
| − | ==Clean up and deletions, continued==
| |
| − | [http://www.crankshaftcoalition.com/wiki/Category:Electrical Here] is an interim save of the Electrical page w/some additions. The "Note:" directly below the main title is a template. I removed the redundant(?) title 'Electrical" from the field where I inserted the template. If different browsers require there to be the second title in that location it can be easily added back.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | You will notice I put the link to the Undeveloped Electrical articles above and separate from the subcategories- to me this works well because of how visible it is. Earlier I had it down in the Subcategories and it kind of got lost among the couple other sub-cats.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | For now, there's only one article added to the 'Undeveloped Electrical articles' page; there are more that haven't been added yet. I'm wondering if adding an (Electrical, or whatever) "articles needed" page might be useful? It could be added below the link to the undeveloped electrical articles and the 'Noteua' template changed to read "The articles below can be..." instead of "The Undeveloped articles below can be...". Or another different template could be developed for the "articles needed" . As you know nothing is in stone, and '''''any or all''''' can be changed if this isn't what's needed.--[[User:Cobalt327|Cobalt327]] 03:37, 3 July 2012 (MDT)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | :Hey, I like it. Eye-catching. "Electrical articles needed" (or "Whatever articles needed") is a good idea. You don't have to do them all at once either. The key is to use a template-heavy strategy in any decisions, so it's easy to update. FYI you can link to categories like this: <nowiki>[[:Category:Engine]]</nowiki> makes [[:Category:Engine]]. Or, <nowiki>[[:Category:Engine|This is a link to the Engine category]]</nowiki> makes [[:Category:Engine|This is a link to the Engine category]]. See here: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:Categories#Linking_to_a_category .--[[User:Jon|Jon]] 11:24, 3 July 2012 (MDT)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | ::Agreed on making it template heavy, I'll keep that in mind as I proceed. Thanks for the heads-up on linking categories. That'll come in handy!--[[User:Cobalt327|Cobalt327]] 12:21, 3 July 2012 (MDT)
| |
Your Privacy Choices