NDWiki talk:Building plans

First steps - proposal

1. Move personal stuff (who owns what) to personal pages. Such information can be confusing for external viewers.
2. A list of coding preferences for this wiki, special templates, categories should be in the Help: namespace, with links from this page and start page.
3. I don't think we need demo pages. We need one good page (article in WP lingo) in each area that we can make copies from and adopt.

/Mike 19:19, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

3. was exactly what I meant when I wrote demo page... :-)

I notised the missing help page, "Press help if you don't know how to start an article" and then got an empty edit page for the help page. that's humor!

Gandalf 22:08, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Classified pages

There is a way of classify pages by preventing a whole namespace from external view. Should I create a new namespace or should I do it on the NDWiki: namespace (where this page is located)? Mike 00:25, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Good to know it can be done, but is there a need? Can't we leave this page publicly available?Gandalf 13:06, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Hardware description of cards

Could we change from 3005 to 3006, 3015, 3018 or 3019 since we have pictures on them? /Mike 13:08, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Of course, that number was just picked because it was a simple card to describe. Compared to the floppy card or the CPU, the ram card has very few options. Same thing goes for the instruction. Gandalf 16:19, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

So, can we pick one? I think a picture is needed to complete the article. /Mike 23:37, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

In what documents are 3104 and 3005 described? I only find switches and LED indicators in Norsk Data Document ND–06.015 ND-100 FUNCTIONAL DESCRIPTION . /Mike 14:02, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

In that document, in the drawings and hands on hardware. Switches and LEDs is a good start, learn to crawl before walking. I basically picked those cards because a RAM card is the simplest card I could imagine and I have a 3104 just 2 meters away. Gandalf 14:32, 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? /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. 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":

1. The ND paper documentation is the main guide:
   1. We use the same terms as in the documentation.
   2. We follow (as far as reasonable) the same structure as in the documentation.
2. Wikipedia has a familiar look:
   1. Readers (and editors) of Wikipedia should feel familiar with the look and functions.
   2. What you can do on Wikipedia, you should also be able to do here (except anonymous edit).
   3. What you can't do on Wikipedia, can be possible here.

Some text describing the each "rule" is needed. /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 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.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? /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. Gandalf 11:54, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your thoughts. Should I make a template for URL-references? (as used in Wikipedia)? /Mike 15:59, 9 August 2009 (UTC)