User talk:Thebruce

Revision as of 12:22, 22 June 2007

Hey Thebruce, why are you creating separate articles for the images? You know that you can post info on the image pages themselves (ex: on http://halo.wikibruce.com/Image:Slide_Ref070107.jpg). Slade24 08:44, 22 June 2007 (MST)

yes, but it accomplishes two things: 1) reduces the load on parsing the pages (especially the Outline page) and 2) allows additional related information to be included along with the image. LInking straight to the :Image:XXX page only displays the image with limited description. Displaying the thumbnail does the same. Linking to the page itself (or using the thumbnail when necessary) allows all that information to be located in an easily referrable location. And for images, the full image can still be displayed as if viewing the Image:XXX page.

Plus it's much easier to give someone the url to http://halo.wikibruce.com/StarImage1.jpg or http://halo.wikibruce.com/Array_Recorder_Data.txt for instance, and be shown all relevent known information including the file itself.

- thebruce ;)

Just curious, how does it reduce server load?

I can kinda see the benefits of creating a page for the image as far as making the info easier to edit. However, you can edit the summary of the "Image:" pages, and I would assume (haven't tried it yet) that you can essentially add full article text there, it will just happen to appear below the image. Heck, the page even shows the metadata at the bottom.

The problem I see with your method is that we end up with two pages for the same thing, so users may end up confused as to which one to post to. Additionally, the thumbnails automatically link to the "Image:" pages, not to your hand-made pages.

Slade24 09:02, 22 June 2007 (MST)

1) server load: parsing wiki text. The Outline page is enormous, and I'm already considering breaking it up. the less wiki code is used, the fewer image resizings need to be done, the better. The cache is helpful, but it's not the problem solver, especially when there's enormous bandwidth and traffic usage.

2) editing the Image: summary pages is still nowhere near as flexible as simply linking to the page created to document anything and everything about the file itself, and the page content can be designed however one wishes. The "two pages for the same thing" is simply an issue of organizing the data. With the size of the Outline page, it's much easier on the website to not include all data and display all images on the single page, but offer summarized information and simple links to the content itself. For specific information, users will know where to link to - the subject in question. The Outline page should only be linked to when people are referring to the timeline, not specific individual subject matter. That may very well be what dramatically increased the traffic - the enormous length of the Outline page, the amount of wiki code needing parsing, and the amount of pure page requests coming to that specific page. If anyone wants to link straight to the image itself, that can still be done via the Image: links - but the links being used are standard wiki pages to display all documented information regarding the file and its contents.