Difference between revisions of "Talk:Introduction"

From The Authentic D&D Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
 
(3 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
=== Schedule ===
+
[[User:Tao alexis|Tao alexis]] ([[User talk:Tao alexis|talk]]) 22:26, 29 October 2023 (UTC) Hey, if you want a real nightmare to tackle, I have one for you.  There are 3,822 wanted links that haven't been made into a page.  A great many of these are near duplicates of one another (for example, there's a link for "The Barony of Yak'Margug" and "The Barony of Yak-Margug")One is wrong ("Yak'Margug" is correct).  There are ones like "Rat Catcher" and "Rat Catcher (profession)" — the latter is correct.  Some are errored links for existing pages: "Read & Write" is a wanted link for example, where the correct would be "[[Read & Write (sage ability)]]".
'''1. New Special Pages:''' Create spell or sage study pages with the greatest number of [[Special:WantedPages|wanted links]]Total "don't review" pages (243) divided by 50 = 5 pages to create.
 
  
'''2. New Wanted Pages:''' Create "new wanted" pages equal in number to the "special pages" above.
+
The problem, of course, is knowing which one is right and which one is wrong.  Obviously, anything that's a bad link for an existing page is easy to fix.  I've changed my mind too many times about how to title geographical regions.  As I've been moving forward on this review, I'm correcting links that have the political title: "The Barony of Yak'Margug" should just be "Yak'Margug." "Kubanistan, Emirate of" should just be "Kubanistan."
  
'''3. Move Old Wiki Pages:''' Total number of old wiki pages (799) divided by 50 = 16Concentrate on spells first, then sage abilities, then monsters.
+
There's a way of copying the whole list into word to clear some of the formatting, then into excel so it can be sorted, and near-errors more easily identified and fixed.  It's your choice if you want to wade in ... the process is both important and mind-wrecking. Your choiceI'll be here if you want to throw "which is right?" questions at me.
  
'''4. Random Edits.''' Total pages (1007) minus "don't edit" pages (243) = 764; divided by 50 = 15 pages to edit.  While searching, update 2022 "don't edit" pages; any fix of at least 400 characters counts as an edit.  Any page that wasn't formerly in a "don't edit" category counts as an edit.
+
[[User:Maxwell|Maxwell]] ([[User talk:Maxwell|talk]]) 22:57, 29 October 2023 (UTC) I'm willing to wade into this at some point, but not just yet. Good point about clearing and sorting to help identify near errors.
 
 
'''5. Oldest Page Edits''' Edit same number of "oldest" pages as last random edits (15).
 
 
 
'''6. Links:''' Correct [[Special:WantedPages|wanted links]].  Total pages minus "don't review" pages (970-243=727), divided by 10 = 73 links to fix; multiple links on a given page count as 1 fix.
 
 
 
Start again.
 

Latest revision as of 22:57, 29 October 2023

Tao alexis (talk) 22:26, 29 October 2023 (UTC) Hey, if you want a real nightmare to tackle, I have one for you. There are 3,822 wanted links that haven't been made into a page. A great many of these are near duplicates of one another (for example, there's a link for "The Barony of Yak'Margug" and "The Barony of Yak-Margug"). One is wrong ("Yak'Margug" is correct). There are ones like "Rat Catcher" and "Rat Catcher (profession)" — the latter is correct. Some are errored links for existing pages: "Read & Write" is a wanted link for example, where the correct would be "Read & Write (sage ability)".

The problem, of course, is knowing which one is right and which one is wrong. Obviously, anything that's a bad link for an existing page is easy to fix. I've changed my mind too many times about how to title geographical regions. As I've been moving forward on this review, I'm correcting links that have the political title: "The Barony of Yak'Margug" should just be "Yak'Margug." "Kubanistan, Emirate of" should just be "Kubanistan."

There's a way of copying the whole list into word to clear some of the formatting, then into excel so it can be sorted, and near-errors more easily identified and fixed. It's your choice if you want to wade in ... the process is both important and mind-wrecking. Your choice. I'll be here if you want to throw "which is right?" questions at me.

Maxwell (talk) 22:57, 29 October 2023 (UTC) I'm willing to wade into this at some point, but not just yet. Good point about clearing and sorting to help identify near errors.