Editing BattleTechWiki talk:Masthead
Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
The edit can be undone.
Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision
Your text
Line 2:
Line 2:
:It's generally the way it goes on a wiki; paperwork, paperwork, paperwork. While the bureaucracy can be a pain-in-the-butt, it introduces a level of accountability necessary once a wiki hits 'critical mass'. We're not there yet, but it's a good idea to have archival mechanisms in place before stuff like this piles up. I'd suggest an archive using [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_8601#Calendar_date ISO dates] e.g., 2006-22-11, or naming months (even then, will it be full name, or common abbreviations? What about Sep vs. Sept?, etc.); we do not want confusion about whether we're using mm/dd/yy or dd/mm/yy formatting. Either way, once we pick something it will need to be stuck to. Ideally, this is something that we'd put in our manual of style. --[[User:Xoid|Xoid]] 01:22, 22 November 2006 (CST) :It's generally the way it goes on a wiki; paperwork, paperwork, paperwork. While the bureaucracy can be a pain-in-the-butt, it introduces a level of accountability necessary once a wiki hits 'critical mass'. We're not there yet, but it's a good idea to have archival mechanisms in place before stuff like this piles up. I'd suggest an archive using [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_8601#Calendar_date ISO dates] e.g., 2006-22-11, or naming months (even then, will it be full name, or common abbreviations? What about Sep vs. Sept?, etc.); we do not want confusion about whether we're using mm/dd/yy or dd/mm/yy formatting. Either way, once we pick something it will need to be stuck to. Ideally, this is something that we'd put in our manual of style. --[[User:Xoid|Xoid]] 01:22, 22 November 2006 (CST)
::I'd recommend going with year-month archives done numerically (ex: 2006-11). And, I agree, we should make sure that any 'staff' pages are archived in whatever manner it is decided upon. --[[User:Revanche|Revanche (admin)]] 01:40, 22 November 2006 (CST) ::I'd recommend going with year-month archives done numerically (ex: 2006-11). And, I agree, we should make sure that any 'staff' pages are archived in whatever manner it is decided upon. --[[User:Revanche|Revanche (admin)]] 01:40, 22 November 2006 (CST)
+
+ ==Family Tree==
+ Just a quick question: I notice this is in the Family Tree category. Is that intentional, or a side-effect of formatting it? --[[User:Talvin|Talvin]] ([[User talk:Talvin|talk]]) 16:23, 23 February 2022 (EST)
The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision | Your text | ||
Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
:It's generally the way it goes on a wiki; paperwork, paperwork, paperwork. While the bureaucracy can be a pain-in-the-butt, it introduces a level of accountability necessary once a wiki hits 'critical mass'. We're not there yet, but it's a good idea to have archival mechanisms in place before stuff like this piles up. I'd suggest an archive using [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_8601#Calendar_date ISO dates] e.g., 2006-22-11, or naming months (even then, will it be full name, or common abbreviations? What about Sep vs. Sept?, etc.); we do not want confusion about whether we're using mm/dd/yy or dd/mm/yy formatting. Either way, once we pick something it will need to be stuck to. Ideally, this is something that we'd put in our manual of style. --[[User:Xoid|Xoid]] 01:22, 22 November 2006 (CST) | :It's generally the way it goes on a wiki; paperwork, paperwork, paperwork. While the bureaucracy can be a pain-in-the-butt, it introduces a level of accountability necessary once a wiki hits 'critical mass'. We're not there yet, but it's a good idea to have archival mechanisms in place before stuff like this piles up. I'd suggest an archive using [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_8601#Calendar_date ISO dates] e.g., 2006-22-11, or naming months (even then, will it be full name, or common abbreviations? What about Sep vs. Sept?, etc.); we do not want confusion about whether we're using mm/dd/yy or dd/mm/yy formatting. Either way, once we pick something it will need to be stuck to. Ideally, this is something that we'd put in our manual of style. --[[User:Xoid|Xoid]] 01:22, 22 November 2006 (CST) | ||
::I'd recommend going with year-month archives done numerically (ex: 2006-11). And, I agree, we should make sure that any 'staff' pages are archived in whatever manner it is decided upon. --[[User:Revanche|Revanche (admin)]] 01:40, 22 November 2006 (CST) | ::I'd recommend going with year-month archives done numerically (ex: 2006-11). And, I agree, we should make sure that any 'staff' pages are archived in whatever manner it is decided upon. --[[User:Revanche|Revanche (admin)]] 01:40, 22 November 2006 (CST) | ||
+ | |||
+ | ==Family Tree== | ||
+ | Just a quick question: I notice this is in the Family Tree category. Is that intentional, or a side-effect of formatting it? --[[User:Talvin|Talvin]] ([[User talk:Talvin|talk]]) 16:23, 23 February 2022 (EST) |