| |
Frantic
Registered: Mar 2003
Posts: 1648 |
C64 Codebase
Hello!
It was a while ago now that C64 Codebase Wiki opened its doors. I would just like to encourage good coders sympathetic with this project to actually add some code there. This is important in order to keep the quality of the site. I feel that the quality is somehow fading a little with the stuff that has been added during the last 6 months, to generalize a little.
If you are a decent coder: Just think for a moment about all those sources that you have lying around on your C64 disks and PC harddrives. Codebase needs you!
http://codebase64.org/doku.php
If someone feel like donating some cool stuff, I could use that as prices in some kind of add-good-stuff-to-codebase-competition or so.
A good codebase is a good base for the future C64 scene! ;)
|
|
... 127 posts hidden. Click here to view all posts....
|
| |
Celtic
Administrator
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 807 |
@Frantic: how about approaching a lot of different great coders and asking them for just 1 subject/article. Nothing more, just 1. It might get you somewhere. |
| |
Frantic
Registered: Mar 2003
Posts: 1648 |
I've done that already. New/better strategies are needed. :) ...but one could always try again, of course.
Anyway.. Another starting point could be to identify what sort of information people actually want/need most, that they do not feel that they can find on Codebase (or elsewhere) already. |
| |
Oswald
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 5094 |
so, there could be a wanted section on codebase. the problem with that is, that if ppl wanting info, and ppl willing to add articles will find that page :) |
| |
HCL
Registered: Feb 2003
Posts: 728 |
Agree with Oswald and others..
Perhaps some kind of rating on the information on codebase would be useful. I sometimes think i should add or improve some article on codebase, but since i don't know if anyone has interest in that particular topic, my inspiration often fails..
If there was the possibility to mark pages with "don't understand this article" or "i need this urgently", "please explain better" or something, then people who has the knowledge about it may find it more urgent to improve the article. |
| |
Frantic
Registered: Mar 2003
Posts: 1648 |
Some sort of system for rating and commenting on page contents would be nice indeed. I had a look now on available plugins, because one would expect plugins like that to exist. I tried a bunch of plugins now but unfortunately none of them really provided the functionality of rating pages as such. This surprises me since one would think that this would be a commonly requested feature on wikis. It is not necessarily extremely complicated to write your own dokuwiki plugins but I don't have the time to do it right now. If someone else feels that they have the skills required to do something like this, please let me know. In any case, I will think about this a little more, and then see what I can do about it. I agree that some well chosen improvements along those lines could make a huge benefit for the wiki as a whole.
EDIT: Just realized that I can probably use some more general php script for voting, with a little customization, even though there does not seem to be any specific "vote 15 for this page" plugin available for dokuwiki. |
| |
Martin Piper
Registered: Nov 2007
Posts: 722 |
Doesn't matter if an article is signed, it is a wiki. It is meant to be edited by many people. |
| |
Oswald
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 5094 |
I think a simple article request page would create more activity, than voting. No one will vote, and no one will care. |
| |
Frantic
Registered: Mar 2003
Posts: 1648 |
Oswald: There IS a page for requests: http://codebase64.org/doku.php?id=wishlist
Nobody really uses it though. I added a note about the wish list page on the front page of the wiki now to encourage people to use it.
You got a point concerning the voting. It is indeed not clear that a lot of people would start to contribute more to the wiki just because there are votes on this and that article which state that "this is a bad article" or such. HCL's suggestion of more content-loaded statements (rather than number-votes) is perhaps a key here a way to leave feedback rather than just some general voting. Perhaps I should look into re-enabling the discussion plugin again. Last time I tried it it ended up being exploited by "hackers"/spammers.. Perhaps some bugs are fixed by now..
That being said, I don't see any reason to panic regarding the state of Codebase64. Fact is that a lot of people seem to find it very useful, even though everything in this world can of course always get better.. :) |
| |
Count Zero
Registered: Jan 2003
Posts: 1932 |
Frantic: is there some special pages as mediawiki provides them? can the "trace" be disabled? :)
Another approach in adding to the content would be to add selected articles from transactor, magic disk and others to the mags section - or at least list them more direct than: "DL it all here and see for yourself" :).
|
| |
Frantic
Registered: Mar 2003
Posts: 1648 |
@C0: Sorry.. didn't understand your question. Can you rephrase?
Regarding mag articles as a source for content I think that is a good idea. Many mag articles are quite short and perhaps not that up to date though... but still. There is this other wiki which is focusing on transcribing old c64 mag articles. If someone has the time to dive into that to find those articles that are relevant for codebase64, that would be very nice. |
| Previous - 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 - Next |
