tagline: From openSUSE
Welcome on my "Discussion" subpage!
You can 'talk' to me here.
Please add new issues with a new headline and maybe with a link to the related article.
If you write me in English I will respond in English. Wenn Du mir auf Deutsch schreibst, werde ich auch auf Deutsch antworten. If you write me in an other language I will try to understand and write back ether in English or in German (make a wish).
Please use your signature with time stamp: use the button above the editing field or use
--~~~~ to make something like: --Pistazienfresser 08:56, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
We have one article that explains acronyms. The other stuff belongs into SDB. There you can have a category SDB:Introductions or something where pages like Gui belong to. Remember, documentation and the like belongs into SDB:.
- Hello Hennevogel,
- if this is your opinion about the namespace SDB you should do something to change its definition.
- And thanks for the example of the sense of redirects for technical terms (including acronyms and their variating writings) above.
- Greetings --Pistazienfresser 10:58, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
- P.S.: You do not need to write to me on my discussion page if I wrote on your discussion page - I will add your discussion page (automatically) to my watchlist, will answer there and the discussion could easily be followed.--Pistazienfresser 10:58, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
Sorry about the Boot categories mess - it seems I haven't seen that there was some discussion ongoing about it. I saw that we had [ [ Category:Boot troubleshooting]] while all other "HOWTOs" categories are named [[ Category:SDB:<topic>]]. I tried to correct it by adding a "SDB" for consistency, and I shortened the name at the same time. Seems I totally failed as I didn't saw the ongoing discussion about the boot category. :/ --Spyhawk 23:01, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
- I think the issue with the SDB Categories should be discussed generally and after that done generally - or left like it is. I do not know a good reason why you should be personally to blame for that (more more than less than users). Your (partly) re-categorisation was logical.
- I do not care much about the ways of categorization of booting articles - but I hope the user will find what she or he is looking for.
- I recognized that the summery line and the discussion pages are not much used in this wiki - maybe this could be changed a bit as I rate it a openly and project related way of discussion.
- Good night/good morning --Pistazienfresser 00:14, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
RE:Organization etc. category dimension/tree/bush?
Well, I just thought, all Mozilla articles where part of category:application:internet (or at least should be) and some where member off category:Mozilla. So I added all those articles to category:mozilla and made catgory:mozilla member of category:application:internet.
I would agree to you opinion if Mozilla is publishing software that is not related to the internet. (eg a text editor or whatever)
Unless, we think of a structure which allows categories per software developers... but this could be quite labor intensive. --Muhlemmer 13:12, 4 October 2010 (MDT)