VIP, Automoderated users, Bureaucrats, Check users, Interface administrators, Suppressors, Administrators
18,476
edits
BetaWiki:Community portal: Difference between revisions
→Revamping the article naming system: new section
(→Revamping the article naming system: new section) |
|||
| Line 205: | Line 205: | ||
:Excellent. First featured article: [[Windows:1:DR5]]. [[User:Tau Ceti|<span style="color:seagreen;">Tau Ceti</span>]] ~ [[User_talk:Tau Ceti|<span style="color:darkred;">Windows 10 in 640K!</span>]] 23:25, 24 March 2017 (GMT) | :Excellent. First featured article: [[Windows:1:DR5]]. [[User:Tau Ceti|<span style="color:seagreen;">Tau Ceti</span>]] ~ [[User_talk:Tau Ceti|<span style="color:darkred;">Windows 10 in 640K!</span>]] 23:25, 24 March 2017 (GMT) | ||
:: I plan to start with featuring a beta for a month, as the wiki doesn't really have a lot of articles that we could show off. When that improves, I have no problem with weekly featured betas. --[[Special:Contributions/89.29.80.194|89.29.80.194]] 08:55, 25 March 2017 (GMT) | :: I plan to start with featuring a beta for a month, as the wiki doesn't really have a lot of articles that we could show off. When that improves, I have no problem with weekly featured betas. --[[Special:Contributions/89.29.80.194|89.29.80.194]] 08:55, 25 March 2017 (GMT) | ||
== Revamping the article naming system == | |||
In the last weeks I've been thinking a lot about radically revamping the article naming guidelines, which currently use semicolons to delimitate the operating system name, its version and the build. This system worked great for Windows when there was a major release every 2 years, i.e.: <code>[[Windows:8.1:9431:winmain bluemp]]</code>. | |||
This system [[Windows:10-TH2|does]] [[Windows:10-RS1|not]] [[Windows:10-RS2|adapt]] [[Windows:10-RS3|well]] to the constant updates to Windows 10 flowing from Microsoft in the last two years. Do we consider each update as a separate OS version? Or do we treat them as Service Packs? What about these special server releases that have an NT buildtag as well as a build number of their own? Which one do we use? | |||
The current Infoboxes partially depend on the current naming system. Meanwhile it is nice to have an automatic system, it doesn't save the editor an enormous amount of time as compared to filling the basic information to the template manually, not mentioning the fact the system always struggled with strange names like <code>[[Windows:HomeServer]]</code>. | |||
What replacement do I propose? I propose getting rid of the semicolons and relax the naming guidelines a little bit, but still keep a system. Let me first present my suggestion of how would my new system work with the 9431 I mentioned above: | |||
{{Code| | |||
1. Windows 8.1 build 9431<br> | |||
2. Windows 8.1 build 9431 (winmain_bluemp)<br> | |||
---- | |||
''Windows 8.1 Preview''<br> | |||
''6.3.9431.0.winmain_bluemp.130615-1214''<br> | |||
''9431.0.winmain_bluemp.130615-1214''<br> | |||
''Windows:8.1:9431:winmain_bluemp'' | |||
}} | |||
Let's take a look at the first three lines and ignore the rest for now. The basic idea is that the final name that's displayed within the OS gets combined with the magic word "build" and the build number + the revision number if it's not equal to 0 (#1). Obviously that would work as long as there aren't several known builds sharing [[Windows:Longhorn:4015:main|the]] [[Windows:Longhorn:4015:Lab06_n|same]] build number. This is where we need to specify the build lab and the suggested way is to mention it in a bracket (#2). Of course, there can even become a situation when we cover two builds with the same number, from the same lab, but with [[Windows:8.1:9600.16384:winblue rtm|a]] [[Windows:8.1:9600.16384:winblue_rtm:130822|different]] build time, which we should solve on an individual basis. I think can count such cases using the fingers of my hand. | |||
=== The Proposal === | |||
# As long as BetaWiki knows about just one build with a said build number + revision, the article would receive a name according to example #1 above. To maintain some degree of consistency, example #2 should redirect to example #1. | |||
# If BetaWiki knows about two builds with a said build number but from differing labs, the individual build articles would receive their names in accordance with example #2. A disambiguation will reside on a name formed according to example #1. | |||
# If the build has got an official name, we should redirect it to the main article. Windows 10 Insider Preview redirects to main Windows 10 article. | |||
# The full buildtag, both including and not including the major and minor version must redirect to the main article. 1175.1's schizophrenia is solved by [[1175.1]] redirecting to [[4.0.1175.1]] which would be a disambiguation. Buildtag conflicts between NT and 9x should be solved by disambiguations. | |||
# The old-fashioned name should redirect to the new article name for compatibility reasons for already existing articles. | |||
# Windows 1.x, 2.x and early NT 3.1 should be solved on an individual basis. We can't use build numbers when they don't have any. | |||
Some guidelines that would govern codenames should be probably added as well, would be nice to search for <code>Chicago 40e</code> and land instantly on <code>Windows 95 build 40e</code>. Currently the preferred article comes last in the results. | |||
I hope expressed my mind well enough, now it's your turn to hate me for this. --[[User:AlphaBeta|AlphaBeta]] ([[User talk:AlphaBeta|talk]]) 23:34, 18 April 2017 (BST) | |||