NDWiki talk:Building plans - Revision history

Mike: /* Soon one year */ new section

2009-10-04T06:44:40Z

Soon one year: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:44, 4 October 2009
Line 54:		Line 54:
	::Thanks for your thoughts. Should I make a template for URL-references? (as used in Wikipedia)? /[[User:Mike\|Mike]] 15:59, 9 August 2009 (UTC)		::Thanks for your thoughts. Should I make a template for URL-references? (as used in Wikipedia)? /[[User:Mike\|Mike]] 15:59, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
	:::{{done}} I'ts done. I called it {{tl\|Webref}}. /[[User:Mike\|Mike]] 15:35, 26 August 2009 (UTC)		:::{{done}} I'ts done. I called it {{tl\|Webref}}. /[[User:Mike\|Mike]] 15:35, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

			== Soon one year ==

			NDWiki celebrates one year soon! I'm planning to put temporary celebration picture on the front page. More ideas? /[[User:Mike\|Mike]] 06:44, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Mike: Comment about the "guideline"

2009-09-20T06:13:41Z

Comment about the "guideline"

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:13, 20 September 2009
Line 43:		Line 43:
	:It comes naturally as most of our information is in the form of paper documentation. If we have any other sources, for example ex employees I think that they shouldn't be stopped by any arbitrary rule. Calling it guidelines is a good way as that leaves room for creativity, keep the '''rule'''-word away from any such article. If you want to formulate some guidelines, go for it, but I think the best way to do it is lead by example as many new pages starts as a copy of an existing one. Btw, the guidelines you posted are good.		:It comes naturally as most of our information is in the form of paper documentation. If we have any other sources, for example ex employees I think that they shouldn't be stopped by any arbitrary rule. Calling it guidelines is a good way as that leaves room for creativity, keep the '''rule'''-word away from any such article. If you want to formulate some guidelines, go for it, but I think the best way to do it is lead by example as many new pages starts as a copy of an existing one. Btw, the guidelines you posted are good.
	:As for what we can and can't do here compared to wikipedia. One good example is the [[NDWiki:Trading\|Trading]] page. A small objection against that you can't do anonymous editing, I would say that you can do it. You need an account, yes, but that is just as anonymous as an IP-number. Maybe even more, as the IP-number isn't shown when you edit articles. No one is forcing you to reveal who is behind an account.[[User:Gandalf\|Gandalf]] 12:16, 7 April 2009 (UTC)		:As for what we can and can't do here compared to wikipedia. One good example is the [[NDWiki:Trading\|Trading]] page. A small objection against that you can't do anonymous editing, I would say that you can do it. You need an account, yes, but that is just as anonymous as an IP-number. Maybe even more, as the IP-number isn't shown when you edit articles. No one is forcing you to reveal who is behind an account.[[User:Gandalf\|Gandalf]] 12:16, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

			::Some part of this "guideline" is included in the [[Help:Introductory_guide#Style_Do's]]. /[[User:Mike\|Mike]] 06:13, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

	== Sources ==		== Sources ==

Mike: /* Sources */ Forgot to sign

2009-08-26T15:35:18Z

Sources: Forgot to sign

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:35, 26 August 2009
Line 51:		Line 51:
	:I think that is enough for adding it as a reference. We have the original paper referenced and a link to the OCR:ed page online. If we are too strict on the references than we are loosing a lot of information. There isn't that much easily accessed data. [[User:Gandalf\|Gandalf]] 11:54, 9 August 2009 (UTC)		:I think that is enough for adding it as a reference. We have the original paper referenced and a link to the OCR:ed page online. If we are too strict on the references than we are loosing a lot of information. There isn't that much easily accessed data. [[User:Gandalf\|Gandalf]] 11:54, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
	::Thanks for your thoughts. Should I make a template for URL-references? (as used in Wikipedia)? /[[User:Mike\|Mike]] 15:59, 9 August 2009 (UTC)		::Thanks for your thoughts. Should I make a template for URL-references? (as used in Wikipedia)? /[[User:Mike\|Mike]] 15:59, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
	:::{{done}} I'ts done. I called it {{tl\|Webref}}.		:::{{done}} I'ts done. I called it {{tl\|Webref}}. /[[User:Mike\|Mike]] 15:35, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Mike: /* Sources */ template Webref

2009-08-26T15:34:38Z

Sources: template Webref

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:34, 26 August 2009
Line 51:		Line 51:
	:I think that is enough for adding it as a reference. We have the original paper referenced and a link to the OCR:ed page online. If we are too strict on the references than we are loosing a lot of information. There isn't that much easily accessed data. [[User:Gandalf\|Gandalf]] 11:54, 9 August 2009 (UTC)		:I think that is enough for adding it as a reference. We have the original paper referenced and a link to the OCR:ed page online. If we are too strict on the references than we are loosing a lot of information. There isn't that much easily accessed data. [[User:Gandalf\|Gandalf]] 11:54, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
	::Thanks for your thoughts. Should I make a template for URL-references? (as used in Wikipedia)? /[[User:Mike\|Mike]] 15:59, 9 August 2009 (UTC)		::Thanks for your thoughts. Should I make a template for URL-references? (as used in Wikipedia)? /[[User:Mike\|Mike]] 15:59, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
			:::{{done}} I'ts done. I called it {{tl\|Webref}}.

Mike: template for URL-references?

2009-08-09T15:59:56Z

template for URL-references?

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:59, 9 August 2009
Line 50:		Line 50:
	It got dates and page numbers. Can we copy the reference without actually reading the page refered to? Policy? /[[User:Mike\|Mike]] 08:38, 9 August 2009 (UTC)		It got dates and page numbers. Can we copy the reference without actually reading the page refered to? Policy? /[[User:Mike\|Mike]] 08:38, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
	:I think that is enough for adding it as a reference. We have the original paper referenced and a link to the OCR:ed page online. If we are too strict on the references than we are loosing a lot of information. There isn't that much easily accessed data. [[User:Gandalf\|Gandalf]] 11:54, 9 August 2009 (UTC)		:I think that is enough for adding it as a reference. We have the original paper referenced and a link to the OCR:ed page online. If we are too strict on the references than we are loosing a lot of information. There isn't that much easily accessed data. [[User:Gandalf\|Gandalf]] 11:54, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
			::Thanks for your thoughts. Should I make a template for URL-references? (as used in Wikipedia)? /[[User:Mike\|Mike]] 15:59, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Gandalf: Re: references

2009-08-09T11:54:12Z

Re: references

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:54, 9 August 2009
Line 49:		Line 49:

	It got dates and page numbers. Can we copy the reference without actually reading the page refered to? Policy? /[[User:Mike\|Mike]] 08:38, 9 August 2009 (UTC)		It got dates and page numbers. Can we copy the reference without actually reading the page refered to? Policy? /[[User:Mike\|Mike]] 08:38, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
			:I think that is enough for adding it as a reference. We have the original paper referenced and a link to the OCR:ed page online. If we are too strict on the references than we are loosing a lot of information. There isn't that much easily accessed data. [[User:Gandalf\|Gandalf]] 11:54, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Mike: /* Sources */ new section

2009-08-09T08:38:54Z

Sources: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:38, 9 August 2009
Line 43:		Line 43:
	:It comes naturally as most of our information is in the form of paper documentation. If we have any other sources, for example ex employees I think that they shouldn't be stopped by any arbitrary rule. Calling it guidelines is a good way as that leaves room for creativity, keep the '''rule'''-word away from any such article. If you want to formulate some guidelines, go for it, but I think the best way to do it is lead by example as many new pages starts as a copy of an existing one. Btw, the guidelines you posted are good.		:It comes naturally as most of our information is in the form of paper documentation. If we have any other sources, for example ex employees I think that they shouldn't be stopped by any arbitrary rule. Calling it guidelines is a good way as that leaves room for creativity, keep the '''rule'''-word away from any such article. If you want to formulate some guidelines, go for it, but I think the best way to do it is lead by example as many new pages starts as a copy of an existing one. Btw, the guidelines you posted are good.
	:As for what we can and can't do here compared to wikipedia. One good example is the [[NDWiki:Trading\|Trading]] page. A small objection against that you can't do anonymous editing, I would say that you can do it. You need an account, yes, but that is just as anonymous as an IP-number. Maybe even more, as the IP-number isn't shown when you edit articles. No one is forcing you to reveal who is behind an account.[[User:Gandalf\|Gandalf]] 12:16, 7 April 2009 (UTC)		:As for what we can and can't do here compared to wikipedia. One good example is the [[NDWiki:Trading\|Trading]] page. A small objection against that you can't do anonymous editing, I would say that you can do it. You need an account, yes, but that is just as anonymous as an IP-number. Maybe even more, as the IP-number isn't shown when you edit articles. No one is forcing you to reveal who is behind an account.[[User:Gandalf\|Gandalf]] 12:16, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

			== Sources ==

			How strict should we be when using sources? I have found a reference to ND-5000 (AFTENPOSTEN 28 Jan 87 p 48) in http://74.125.77.132/search?q=cache:cB01u2wGxMIJ:handle.dtic.mil/100.2/ADA356024+%2B%22Norsk+Data%22+%2Besa&cd=13&hl=sv&ct=clnk&gl=se

			It got dates and page numbers. Can we copy the reference without actually reading the page refered to? Policy? /[[User:Mike\|Mike]] 08:38, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Gandalf: reply

2009-04-07T12:16:52Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:16, 7 April 2009
Line 41:		Line 41:
	## What you ''can't'' do on Wikipedia, ''can'' be possible here.		## What you ''can't'' do on Wikipedia, ''can'' be possible here.
	Some text describing the each "rule" is needed. /[[User:Mike\|Mike]] 08:13, 6 April 2009 (UTC)		Some text describing the each "rule" is needed. /[[User:Mike\|Mike]] 08:13, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
			:It comes naturally as most of our information is in the form of paper documentation. If we have any other sources, for example ex employees I think that they shouldn't be stopped by any arbitrary rule. Calling it guidelines is a good way as that leaves room for creativity, keep the '''rule'''-word away from any such article. If you want to formulate some guidelines, go for it, but I think the best way to do it is lead by example as many new pages starts as a copy of an existing one. Btw, the guidelines you posted are good.
			:As for what we can and can't do here compared to wikipedia. One good example is the [[NDWiki:Trading\|Trading]] page. A small objection against that you can't do anonymous editing, I would say that you can do it. You need an account, yes, but that is just as anonymous as an IP-number. Maybe even more, as the IP-number isn't shown when you edit articles. No one is forcing you to reveal who is behind an account.[[User:Gandalf\|Gandalf]] 12:16, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Mike: guideline for articles

2009-04-06T08:13:18Z

guideline for articles

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:13, 6 April 2009
Line 29:		Line 29:
	::Yes, that's good and useful if you know what a 3104 or 3005 is. But is there any other document describing what the cards do? /[[User:Mike\|Mike]] 15:25, 13 February 2009 (UTC)		::Yes, that's good and useful if you know what a 3104 or 3005 is. But is there any other document describing what the cards do? /[[User:Mike\|Mike]] 15:25, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
	:::I think that ND-100 functional description have some info. I guess that there is some other info out there but I don't know of it, haven't searched for it. I don't have the drawings in front of me but I think that the memory card is covered in the print set. [[User:Gandalf\|Gandalf]] 18:18, 13 February 2009 (UTC)		:::I think that ND-100 functional description have some info. I guess that there is some other info out there but I don't know of it, haven't searched for it. I don't have the drawings in front of me but I think that the memory card is covered in the print set. [[User:Gandalf\|Gandalf]] 18:18, 13 February 2009 (UTC)


			== guideline for articles ==
			Should we have some general guideline for articles? I think we already follow these "rules":
			# The ND paper documentation is the main guide:
			## We use the same terms as in the documentation.
			## We follow (as far as reasonable) the same structure as in the documentation.
			# Wikipedia has a familiar look:
			## Readers (and editors) of Wikipedia should feel familiar with the look and functions.
			## What you ''can'' do on Wikipedia, you should also be able to do here (''except anonymous edit'').
			## What you ''can't'' do on Wikipedia, ''can'' be possible here.
			Some text describing the each "rule" is needed. /[[User:Mike\|Mike]] 08:13, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Gandalf: Hardware description of cards: Reply

2009-02-13T18:18:39Z

Hardware description of cards: Reply

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:18, 13 February 2009
Line 28:		Line 28:

	::Yes, that's good and useful if you know what a 3104 or 3005 is. But is there any other document describing what the cards do? /[[User:Mike\|Mike]] 15:25, 13 February 2009 (UTC)		::Yes, that's good and useful if you know what a 3104 or 3005 is. But is there any other document describing what the cards do? /[[User:Mike\|Mike]] 15:25, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
			:::I think that ND-100 functional description have some info. I guess that there is some other info out there but I don't know of it, haven't searched for it. I don't have the drawings in front of me but I think that the memory card is covered in the print set. [[User:Gandalf\|Gandalf]] 18:18, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:35, 26 August 2009
Line 51:		Line 51:
	:I think that is enough for adding it as a reference. We have the original paper referenced and a link to the OCR:ed page online. If we are too strict on the references than we are loosing a lot of information. There isn't that much easily accessed data. [[User:Gandalf\|Gandalf]] 11:54, 9 August 2009 (UTC)		:I think that is enough for adding it as a reference. We have the original paper referenced and a link to the OCR:ed page online. If we are too strict on the references than we are loosing a lot of information. There isn't that much easily accessed data. [[User:Gandalf\|Gandalf]] 11:54, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
	::Thanks for your thoughts. Should I make a template for URL-references? (as used in Wikipedia)? /[[User:Mike\|Mike]] 15:59, 9 August 2009 (UTC)		::Thanks for your thoughts. Should I make a template for URL-references? (as used in Wikipedia)? /[[User:Mike\|Mike]] 15:59, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
	:::{{done}} I'ts done. I called it {{tl\|Webref}}.		:::{{done}} I'ts done. I called it {{tl\|Webref}}. /[[User:Mike\|Mike]] 15:35, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:34, 26 August 2009
Line 51:		Line 51:
	:I think that is enough for adding it as a reference. We have the original paper referenced and a link to the OCR:ed page online. If we are too strict on the references than we are loosing a lot of information. There isn't that much easily accessed data. [[User:Gandalf\|Gandalf]] 11:54, 9 August 2009 (UTC)		:I think that is enough for adding it as a reference. We have the original paper referenced and a link to the OCR:ed page online. If we are too strict on the references than we are loosing a lot of information. There isn't that much easily accessed data. [[User:Gandalf\|Gandalf]] 11:54, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
	::Thanks for your thoughts. Should I make a template for URL-references? (as used in Wikipedia)? /[[User:Mike\|Mike]] 15:59, 9 August 2009 (UTC)		::Thanks for your thoughts. Should I make a template for URL-references? (as used in Wikipedia)? /[[User:Mike\|Mike]] 15:59, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
			:::{{done}} I'ts done. I called it {{tl\|Webref}}.

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:59, 9 August 2009
Line 50:		Line 50:
	It got dates and page numbers. Can we copy the reference without actually reading the page refered to? Policy? /[[User:Mike\|Mike]] 08:38, 9 August 2009 (UTC)		It got dates and page numbers. Can we copy the reference without actually reading the page refered to? Policy? /[[User:Mike\|Mike]] 08:38, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
	:I think that is enough for adding it as a reference. We have the original paper referenced and a link to the OCR:ed page online. If we are too strict on the references than we are loosing a lot of information. There isn't that much easily accessed data. [[User:Gandalf\|Gandalf]] 11:54, 9 August 2009 (UTC)		:I think that is enough for adding it as a reference. We have the original paper referenced and a link to the OCR:ed page online. If we are too strict on the references than we are loosing a lot of information. There isn't that much easily accessed data. [[User:Gandalf\|Gandalf]] 11:54, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
			::Thanks for your thoughts. Should I make a template for URL-references? (as used in Wikipedia)? /[[User:Mike\|Mike]] 15:59, 9 August 2009 (UTC)