Difference between revisions of "Category talk:Expedition outcomes"
imported>Robyn (Yes, could work.) |
imported>Joannac (→"Failed" Should Be "Thwarted") |
||
Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
::On a different note, the '''failed''' indicates you failed to reach the coordinates. Is there something I'm missing, or are people really that upset with having the word "failed" on their pages? --[[User:Joannac|joannac]] 21:04, 24 March 2009 (UTC) | ::On a different note, the '''failed''' indicates you failed to reach the coordinates. Is there something I'm missing, or are people really that upset with having the word "failed" on their pages? --[[User:Joannac|joannac]] 21:04, 24 March 2009 (UTC) | ||
:::The latter. Someone goes and has a glorious day and writes about it and someone comes along and tells them they failed. Thanks for checking. -[[User:Robyn|Robyn]] 21:16, 24 March 2009 (UTC) | :::The latter. Someone goes and has a glorious day and writes about it and someone comes along and tells them they failed. Thanks for checking. -[[User:Robyn|Robyn]] 21:16, 24 March 2009 (UTC) | ||
+ | ::::It's a '''you failed to reach the coordinates'''. Nothing to do with the actual expedition (in fact, there are failed expedition reports that are vastly more entertaining than successful reports). The '''failed''' also may have nothing to do with you (Mother Nature, No Public Access, wrong date, etc). It's just referring to the fact you didn't make it to the coordinates. I don't understand why there is such a problem with it. --[[User:Joannac|joannac]] 21:30, 24 March 2009 (UTC) | ||
::Wait, I was temporarily stupid. We could REDIRECT the Failed categories to equivalent Thwarted categories. I say yes. Virgletati says yes. Anyone object to this? We'll give it at least a week. -[[User:Robyn|Robyn]] 21:20, 24 March 2009 (UTC) | ::Wait, I was temporarily stupid. We could REDIRECT the Failed categories to equivalent Thwarted categories. I say yes. Virgletati says yes. Anyone object to this? We'll give it at least a week. -[[User:Robyn|Robyn]] 21:20, 24 March 2009 (UTC) | ||
:::I like both. -- [[User:relet|relet]] 21:23, 24 March 2009 (UTC) | :::I like both. -- [[User:relet|relet]] 21:23, 24 March 2009 (UTC) | ||
+ | :::The redirect won't change what's displayed on the user's page though... will it? Also, '''Redirecting a category page is possible, but almost certainly won't have the desired effect (it can be abused for other purposes).''' --[[User:Joannac|joannac]] 21:30, 24 March 2009 (UTC) | ||
::There are only 123 page which are categorised "Failed - Mother Nature". Changing all those links wouldn't take too long, especially if several people did some each. -- [[User:Benjw|Benjw]] 21:24, 24 March 2009 (UTC) | ::There are only 123 page which are categorised "Failed - Mother Nature". Changing all those links wouldn't take too long, especially if several people did some each. -- [[User:Benjw|Benjw]] 21:24, 24 March 2009 (UTC) | ||
:::But look at all the other "Failed" categories, like [[:Category:Failed - No public access]]. Not to mention people's habits in using those tags. We can do both a redirect and change links. -[[User:Robyn|Robyn]] 21:28, 24 March 2009 (UTC) | :::But look at all the other "Failed" categories, like [[:Category:Failed - No public access]]. Not to mention people's habits in using those tags. We can do both a redirect and change links. -[[User:Robyn|Robyn]] 21:28, 24 March 2009 (UTC) |
Revision as of 21:30, 24 March 2009
Hey Thomcat, a nice project you have going here. I will categorize my previous and future ones (you did two for me!). I'm probably just lazy, but I find creating a new expedition page really time consuming. Is anyone working on a page generator? It would save us all time, and guarantee properly constructed and categorized pages. Juventas 02:53, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
- I don't know of an auto-expedition-generator, but it would be a good app. Not sure if it can both create the page AND post into the contents of the page. Wiki research is in order... --Thomcat 03:18, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
- Nope, I had never have seen that page until now. :( I see it was added to the "Help" sometime after I was first here figuring this stuff out. I tried it as a preview, but I guess you can't see the editable page until after it's published.
- I spent the evening re-learning forms and created this: [1] It's non-functional, except the URL button is partially. All the fields I filled in would represent values that could be pulled from the user's PC or a cookie. As far as I can see, after a few clicks, everything would be generated except for image names and some achievement details. It seemed cool until I saw that expedition template, which is pretty similar. Juventas 08:46, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
- I'm wondering how automated Thomcat had in mind when he answered your question no. Maybe it is a TSR (or whatever they are called these days) that downloads the daily coordinates, monitors your movements and then automatically uploads an expedition report if you make it there. I wouldn't like reading expedition reports that were that automated! -Robyn
"Failed" Should Be "Thwarted"
Hi Thomcat, it's really nice you take the time to organize and categorize all our stuff. But! I'm going to change the Failed - Did not attempt on 2009-03-21 41 -87 to Failed - Mother Nature. We didn't have a boat, and if it weren't for this I wouldn't even have gone at all. I would also like go a little further and suggest the word "Failed" be replaced by "Thwarted". It is more accurate and less anti-celebratory. I would like to help to do this myself but I do not know how many links would have to be changed. Virgletati 20:23, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
- I totally second the wording "Thwarted". I know that the answer to changes is "hundreds if not thousands" unless there is an admin ability to change a category name. I'll ask JoannaC. -Robyn 20:27, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
- The only way to move a category page is to manually change all category tags that link to the category, and copy the editable part. There is no automatic way to move a category page in the way one moves an article page..
- On a different note, the failed indicates you failed to reach the coordinates. Is there something I'm missing, or are people really that upset with having the word "failed" on their pages? --joannac 21:04, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
- The latter. Someone goes and has a glorious day and writes about it and someone comes along and tells them they failed. Thanks for checking. -Robyn 21:16, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
- It's a you failed to reach the coordinates. Nothing to do with the actual expedition (in fact, there are failed expedition reports that are vastly more entertaining than successful reports). The failed also may have nothing to do with you (Mother Nature, No Public Access, wrong date, etc). It's just referring to the fact you didn't make it to the coordinates. I don't understand why there is such a problem with it. --joannac 21:30, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
- The latter. Someone goes and has a glorious day and writes about it and someone comes along and tells them they failed. Thanks for checking. -Robyn 21:16, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
- Wait, I was temporarily stupid. We could REDIRECT the Failed categories to equivalent Thwarted categories. I say yes. Virgletati says yes. Anyone object to this? We'll give it at least a week. -Robyn 21:20, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
- I like both. -- relet 21:23, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
- The redirect won't change what's displayed on the user's page though... will it? Also, Redirecting a category page is possible, but almost certainly won't have the desired effect (it can be abused for other purposes). --joannac 21:30, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
- There are only 123 page which are categorised "Failed - Mother Nature". Changing all those links wouldn't take too long, especially if several people did some each. -- Benjw 21:24, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
- But look at all the other "Failed" categories, like Category:Failed - No public access. Not to mention people's habits in using those tags. We can do both a redirect and change links. -Robyn 21:28, 24 March 2009 (UTC)