Ghyll:Lexicon discussion
If you've any questions or suggestions about the wiki and its syntax, the Lexicon rules, Ghyll continuity errors, letting us know you're gonna miss a turn, etc., use this page to wax poetic. Be sure to sign your name (using either the second - from - the - right toolbar icon, or typing two hyphens and four tildes), which also includes the timestamp. Similarly, we'll probably end up using horizontal rules to seperate "threads" that develop. We'll cross that bridge when we get there. --Morbus Iff 11:32, 20 Aug 2004 (EDT)
The random page algorithm is clearly crap. Even though we only have like five pages now, I still got Agony Uncle roughly ten times in a row. @@ XXX FIXME XXX etc. --Sean B. Palmer 12:59, 20 Aug 2004 (EDT)
I disagree. A truly random algorithm could display the same thing 100 times in a row - that's the uniqueness of something being "random". Any algorithm that remembers previously displayed pages creates an expectation: that the next page you see will be one you've not seen before. When you can expect a certain result, that's decidedly not random. Regardless, I'd say this is very faw down on the list of FIXME's, solely because a) I don't really think it's broken and b) the longer the wiki is up, the less it'll be an issue. Thus, entropy rules. --Morbus Iff 13:45, 20 Aug 2004 (EDT)
Bah, talk about meta meta. What would a "Lexicon discussion" discussion be about? /me grumbles. --Morbus Iff 15:36, 27 Aug 2004 (EDT)
So I added a phantom category. I did so because I thought it'd be nicer that way to be able to directly see alphabetically which pages need filling in, though I must admit it's not much of an improvement over using the old use of Special:Wantedpages instead. On the other hand, I don't think there are any disadvantages: for example, it's still possible to find out what pages link to a phantom by using the what links here link in the page's toolbox; on the other hand, using a category and phantom boilerplate for each new entry tells the entry's creator what the initial citation to that entry is, as opposed to just links. For example, Folktown Records has two inbound links already, but which was the first one? In fact, it was Agony uncle and not Quezlarian numerals, but its what links here page, and hence the old Wantedpages approach, won't reveal that. The new boilerplate texts, on the other hand, do. --Sean B. Palmer 20:16, 27 Aug 2004 (EDT)
The alphabetical is nice, so I've changed the template over to it. I'm worried, however, that we're adding another "oops, I forgot" step for maintenance. Not only will people have to define their phantom, they'll also have to remove it from the Category. Similarly, someone who is creating a new entry now has the onus of "not yet dib"bing their created phantoms, which can easily be forgotten. Wantedpages, at least, handle all this stuff automatically. As for the "what links here" page, it looks like the order is, indeed, when the link was created - reference, for instance, the "what links here" page on Folktown Records. The first link was Quez, then my Agony, then this page. So I'm not sure why you're questioning the "which was the first one?" --Morbus Iff 20:33, 27 Aug 2004 (EDT)
