Forum:The future

Forums: Index > Watercooler > The future

This wiki has grown extensively, especially over the past year and a half, espcially with the introduction of info pages. We have standardized page names and such, but not page formats. We have recommended the use of an infobox and have stressed the usefulness of info pages. When info pages were introduced, there was approximently 15,000 articles, probably about 12,000 of them being person pages. Now, we are approaching 30,000 articles, and I estimated that there could be as many as 23,000 person pages; over 4,300 of which (about 17%) are info pages. Several users have found the usefulness of info pages. I still see that there is much to be done about the info pages, especially with categorization. I believe we should standardize further. I do understand that not all users understand the workings of the info pages. That is what the Person template is for, to create a person page that resembles an info page. I do see in the future of this wiki that all person articles will have info pages. However, a quick transition may be harmful; so I have observed a gradual trend that has effectively improved the wiki without confusion:

• 2004/2005/2006/2007 - layouts in the form of many headings (Genealogy:People Template)
• Mid-2007 - beginning of the infobox - a neater way to display information.
• Late 2007 - introduction of info pages - uses a page to store a person's information that can be attained easier and neatly displayed from templates.
• 2008 - growth of Infobox pages and info pages; also, the decline of the old layout
• Late 2008/Early 2009 - extensive increase in the use of info pages.

At this point, I propose we retire the old layouts altogether, such as Genealogy:People Template and Genealogy:Person Template. I mean taking them off of Help:Alternative types of page for individual. I believe that an infobox should at least now became the minimum requirement on a person page. I also propose that we include on the sidebar "Add a person" or "Add an individual," which I believe is more inviting than "create a page."

I have another proposal. Take a look at Special:AncientPages. That page lists the articles that have not been edited in a long time. Which means, the original contributor has either not edited the article in a while or has stopped editing. Thus, any hesitation of a transition of format of these articles would be easier. My proposal? Info pages, to those who would be willing to help create them.

I am gong to go through the info page system and make it as easy to understand as possible, so that someday the info pages will become the standard, and later, required format. -AMK152^{(talk • contribs}) 20:22, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Excellent analysis, and I agree with most of your proposals. — Robin Patterson (Talk) 04:19, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Bulk creation of info pages

Before volunteers rush in, let's see if User:Phlox or anyone else can progress his idea that it can be done programmatically. — Robin Patterson (Talk) 04:19, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm not quite sure how it would transfer the info. I think that all non-info pages would have to be created manually. I do believe there is some possible way to automatically generate articles/info pages of people not on the wiki, but I don't know how. -AMK152^{(talk • contribs}) 03:52, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Sidebar

We discussed this a while ago, and I changed MediaWiki:Sidebar to produce an additional link, but it doesn't show on our tailor-made skin. Maybe it needed some css or js tweaking? The current lines are:

1. Help:Model page for person|Create page for person
2. Help:Starting pages for people, places, or surnames|Create other pages

but to encourage info pages we should direct the first one elsewhere.— Robin Patterson (Talk) 04:19, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

It wasn't applied to the Monaco sidebar. I just fixed it. -AMK152^{(talk • contribs}) 03:50, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Infobox layout

Can it be tweaked so that it's closer to info page layout? Can some programmer devise a way to create an info page to replace an infobox? — Robin Patterson (Talk) 04:19, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

This I see is possible but I wouldn't know how. -AMK152^{(talk • contribs}) 14:03, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Standardization of subpages

Currently, the subpages I have seen for people are: (excluding /info)

• /Ancestors
• /Descendants
• /Ahnentafel

There are many different genealogical charts, I propose that the subpages would make more sense if they were more specific as to what type of genealogical chart:

• /Decendants
• /Ahnentafel
• /Pedigree

I think "ancestors" is not specific as to what chart it is. These would be linked from the infobox automatically, if such a page exists.

Another thing: Should we use capital or lower case letters just like "/info"? Meaning:

• /decendants
• /ahnentafel
• /pedigree

? -AMK152^{(talk • contribs}) 14:01, 4 April 2009 (UTC)