Help talk:Table editing

I brought the table editing page over from the metawiki pages. I have done so within full compliance of the terms of use, and the guidelines I was directed to follow before (it being on the GWW space). I am going through each section and fixing, adjusting, and editing any parts necessary to make it more GWW friendly. 42 - talk 01:51, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Finally got done fixing the links and making some edits of the included information to be more GWW friendly. Sorry for the length of time it took to make it happen. 42 - talk 03:38, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Relevance/necessity

I don't think we should have this page on this wiki, for various reasons. Meta has internal links to other subjects in a lot of detail, it will be updated more often over there, and I guess it goes into too much detail - it's too complex for the average user looking for help on tables. It's kinda redundant having our own copy. I think a simple external link on some relevant help page would suffice; it doesn't need to be ported over directly. -- pling 17:26, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

The meta page is linked on Help:Editing. I would agree this is too detailed for a GWW page. As with the meta pages, new users often find this much detail intimidating. A simplified version, showing basic table structure would be more appropriate. -- Wyn talk 17:36, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

This page is in compliance with the use licensing, and there does need to be a table help (I think) on the GWW help page. I do not have the skill level yet to compile a table guide, besides which, this has the needed information which can be used by beginners and more skilled people who might not know all of the little ins and outs. The idea of the help page is to help people, not have someone else determine for them what level of help they need to have. 42 - talk 18:02, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Been considering how to explain this so that others who seem to have a problem understanding the reason for a visible link to the actual metawiki table guide, and/or having our own version. The purpose of the help page is to guide people to resources on how to do things, look up information, etc. Tables are a big part of this wiki (a big enough part to need it's own section in help), and the information about making and understanding of tables should be a prominently listed help topic.

(Reset indent)
The intent behind the wiki, as I have said before, is to be helpful to the people who make use of it. Uselessly removing a prominent link to that help, under the argument that the link is somewhere else already, goes against the intent of the wiki, and against the idea behind the help page (which is to HELP people) to be a resource for people to use. You could apply that same argument to much of the rest of the wiki that people have no problem with making use of. All of the information in the help page is already somewhere else, so why link to any of it?
I would prefer to have a link to the existing metawiki information on tables, as that would be updated when it was, and the link would point to the updated information automatically. I have been pushing for this link instead of the half-assed solution I am forced to attempt to work with. Us having our own copy on GWW, to me, makes less sense, as any updates on the original would not automatically be applied to the copy. I did this copy because that was a supposedly acceptable alternative to the preferred method of having a link on the main help page to the table help page.
Us having a smaller guide also makes less sense, as it would just be repeating the same information available on the main table help. The format, order, and quantities of the examples might be fewer, but it would still be a basic repeat of the same information already available. This isn't like I am trying to get a guide for how to edit the wiki program itself. It is making the user aware of another tool available to them, and making it easily accessible. Most of the people who would make use of a link to a table help page would be willing to take on that information, and would want to know more about it than a basic bare-bones guide would provide. 42 - talk 18:43, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

No, the intent behind the wiki is to document Guild Wars. The help files are a courtesy. There is a reasonably accessible link to the meta help page on the basic editing page. Very few users need or want the level of detail that is on this page, not to mention since it is just a copy/paste of the meta page, it contains information that is really not relevant, plus is full of links to wikipedia, and meta. A simply how to create a basic table guide would be find for a GWW help page, not this confusing and intimidating thing. If you wish to have a VISIBLE link, put it on your userpage (which you already have done). These pages need to be geared for the average GWW user, and this is not. -- Wyn talk 18:49, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

I have another idea, and I will look into it for myself as well, but if anyone knows if this can be done in the wiki, I think I might have a solution that would make it so that the problem of the detail level is solved, and the problem with the updates being done or not is solved as well. I know you can use wiki transclusion to "transplant" one entire page to another, and when the original page is updated, the "transplants" get automatically updated when the containing page is reloaded or reopened. Is it possible to transclude certain sections of a page?

That way, we can make use of the metawiki table page, and only use the sections we would need. That would solve the problem of the updates, and also the copying of the table page. I checked through the metawiki table page, and I see that the majority of the sections would be usable on a local GWW table page. The specific sections like the one about square monitors we don't need here obviously. I am working on an example page to show the changes and removals I think could and should be done, located at my SmTableGuide page. It is in progress right now, so give me a few to finish saving the adjustments. 42 - talk 19:38, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

"I would prefer to have a link to the existing metawiki information on tables, as that would be updated when it was, and the link would point to the updated information automatically. I have been pushing for this link instead of the half-assed solution I am forced to attempt to work with. Us having our own copy on GWW, to me, makes less sense, as any updates on the original would not automatically be applied to the copy."

That is my preference and opinion too. An external links section on Help:Contents could include a link to the Meta page, instead of having a 'copy' on this wiki. I think the objection to having a link there was because it was already linked at Help:Editing... but that's simply a stupid reason - we don't restrict a link to being on one page only. The creation of an external link section would clearly show it's something.. well, external. Alternatively, we could link to Help:Contents on Meta, as a sort of counterpart/more detailed version of our contents page.

I think we should still have a simple table-help page here, though, for new users just looking for the fundamental information. Similar to how we have Help:Templates and also link to the more complex Help:Template on Meta. It wouldn't be a pointless repeat of information - just a more compact, simple, and easier to understand version.

Interwiki transclusion isn't possible. -- pling 19:57, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

The thing is, the style of the link could be made noticably different. For example, the following two links are to the same page, and look totally different.

[http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Table Metawiki table help]
[[m:Help:Table|Metawiki table help]]

Metawiki table help

Metawiki table help

The other issue is, much of the information that is already on the metawiki table page is very useful to someone making and working on tables, and it doesn't matter which wiki they are making those tables for. Please use the link I made in my previous post to see my example. I made a TOC list at the beginning to show my notes compactly, and also within the main area of the page (copied from the metawiki, that is why the links don't work right). 42 - talk 20:14, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

"The intent behind the wiki, as I have said before, is to be helpful to the people who make use of it." and "No, the intent behind the wiki is to document Guild Wars."

It would seem to me that the easier it is for the people who are taking on the work of the documentation, then the better a job could be done making that documentation available to the users who use this information (the game player). So, by extension, the purpose of the wiki actually is to help people. That documentation is how that help is provided. An accurate and organized source of information is, in my experience, very helpful. This is an additional easily accesible tool. I seem to remember someone commenting on the extent (quantity) of the jobs that sysops have to take on. I would think that the easier things are made for people to help on here, then the more likely people who aren't sysops would be willing to take some of those things (that they can do) on, and relieve some of the burden from the overloaded sysops. 42 - talk 20:22, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm confused about anything you're doing, so I'm just gonna go... I think we both agreed that this page should be deleted and a link placed somewhere to Meta's table help, and I'd be happy with that. -- pling 20:30, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

(Reset indent)
Pling, I have been pushing for a link to table help from the beginning. I was basically told that the issue was that it was an external page, and because of that, that link shouldn't be on GWW. I went looking for that talk page, to post the quote here, but I cannot find it. The other argument against the link I had was that it (the link) was already somewhere else (personally I think that is a lame excuse). My attempted solution to address both of these supposed issues was to have that page (a copy of that page) on the GWW namespace, to conform with those issues. I now get told that that my solution to the problem isn't acceptable either. It seems that the only thing being said (by many others) is what is wrong with the solution to an issue that I am presenting, and nothing about how to make it work. I even try doing what is suggested as acceptable to find out it now isn't. My issue is that if something is allegedly there (on the help page no less) calling itself a help, then it should be, and here's a wild idea, HELPFUL. Having help that you cannot find is not helpful at all, and is borderline totally useless. 42 - talk 20:45, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

A smaller, compact help page that doesn't contain things like "class=wikitable" (since that's not used here) and does not contain endless links back to wikipedia, and meta as examples, and doesn't go into the intense detail that the meta page does is fine. I personally don't like having a list of external links on our help center, especially when they are already available on the help pages themselves. The help center, imo, should relate directly to the GWW help files, rather than sending people off to technically challenging help pages like those on meta. -- Wyn talk 20:55, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Then please go through my example SmTableGuide, and on that page's talk, let me know specifically, what should go, what should stay, etc., and also why you think so for each. Hack the hell out of it, let me know specifics here.

I am trying to provide access to a useful tool for some of the regular people who might be interested in helping out with things. I honestly think having a table page with insufficient information would be worse than not having a local one at all. The end result, in my opinion, would end up being more hack jobs that would need to be gone back through and fixed later. If your only issue is because it has references not used on GWW, we can comment about that on the specific sections. There is no reason to deep-six the rest of the useful (and already done) information and examples because of some references that don't happen to apply. 42 - talk 22:55, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Instead of using the meta page and removing content from there, better rewrite the whole thing. Because as it is now, it's not very useful and just too complicated and too specific on things that simply do not apply here. poke | talk 22:57, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Tables apply here Poke. It is like having a guide that teaches someone how to drive a car. You can learn how to drive a Dodge Challenger on a generic guide that shows you how to drive a car. Someone is not going to need a guide to learn how to drive a Chevy Nova, then when they want to learn how to drive a Ford Taurus, have to go look at another guide. There may be things in that guide that apply to a specific model or not, it doesn't make the rest of the information useless. The same thing applies to a table guide, it doesn't all need to specifically apply to GWW tables, because the relevant information is still there. Tables are tables. 42 - talk 23:41, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

General operator's licence =/= commercial driver's license. What we need here is a regular guide, not an advanced guide like metawiki has. --JonTheMon 00:07, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

(Reset indent)
"If you wish to have a VISIBLE link, put it on your userpage ..." Me having the link on my user page does nothing for the visibility issue as no other people who would be able to make use of this link without still having to go looking for it, which is the whole point. Jon, I have even suggested (if possible) just having the sections that are usable in GWW. And actually your argument isn't even valid, because there is still a lot more information that isn't covered on that table page. Your example is more like barebones guide = how to ride a kiddycar, regular license = usable table help as it (mostly) exists on the metawiki table page. The level of detail that is possible that isn't covered on that page is immense. Probably in comparison, what you are suggesting for simple guide to that one, that is missing again that much what is possible. 42 - talk 00:47, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

See User_talk:42/SmTableGuide I have put a table of the discussion points on if this page and/or link is needed. It is in the talk page so others can post any points I might have missed. 42 - talk 00:50, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

User:JonTheMon/Sandbox/Help:Tables for a proposal for Help:Table editing --JonTheMon 01:22, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

So, if there are no objections (I've run it by some other users), I'll go ahead and push my changes to live soon. --JonTheMon 06:44, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

I like your page Jon, I believe it fits with what is needed though you might want to add a little something about {{STDT}}. -- Wyn talk 07:21, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Added a little something about STDT. --JonTheMon 14:37, 12 November 2009 (UTC)