User talk:FrozenPlum

Add topic
From Miraheze Meta, Miraheze's central coordination wiki
Latest comment: 1 year ago by Borderman in topic Proofing software

Welcome to my talk page, please feel free to leave a message here.

Hi[edit source]

Welcome YellowFrogger (Talk Edits) 03:21, 16 October 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello YellowFrogger, thanks for the warm welcome and cheers! :) FrozenPlum (talk) 21:23, 20 October 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Shortcuts[edit source]

When creating new shortcuts to pages, please put {{shortcut}} at the pages the shortcuts redirect to. For example, vote redirects to Guidance for RFX voters, so there should be an {{Essay|shortcut=Vote}} if the page is an essay or {{Shortcut|vote}} if the page isn't an essay at the top of those pages.  Anpang📨  03:52, 19 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for making me aware of this template. By "creating shortcuts to pages," do you mean when creating redirect pages? My understanding is, redirects are not necessarily created to be shortcuts, sometimes they are alternative (incorrect) terms that new/novice users may search for, when they don't know the correct term to search (and are created as a redirect to aid usablity/wayfinding, not to create a shortcut). For example, "Open a wiki" is not a shortcut for "Request a Wiki" (users can't open wikis themselves, it would be factually incorrect to suggest they can via a shortcut, as far as I'm aware, they can only request a wiki be opened for them, and that's the reason it was redirected. I am a bit confused by the request to do so.
If for example I was creating "AN" (a short-form for Administrator's Noticeboard) page as a redirect to "Meta Administrator's Noticeboard," that I would consider to be a shortcut because it is both shorter, and faster to type--That is what my understanding of shortcut, but perhaps it means something different on Meta). I am happy to review my redirects to see if any of those meet the criteria of a being a shortcut. Thanks for any clarifications you can offer as to which pages you thought were shortcuts, I want to make sure I'm on the same page. | -- FrozenPlum (Talk / Email) 05:54, 19 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Also, if there is more than one alternative search term redirect created to the same page, what should the shortcut be? Per the template documentation, it does appear {{shortcut}} is intended to make typed terms shorter, one-word, or acronyms, and not intended to be used for all redirects created (per its documentation page)... unless there's another policy somewhere about this that I can't find yet (quite possible). | -- FrozenPlum (Talk / Email) 06:28, 19 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
{{Shortcut}} documentation provides the following examples for shortuct use, rather than when alternative/incorrect search term redirects are created. For clarification, the reason I'm creating almost all of these, is for alternative spellings, wordings etc., for commonly searched for terms, and incorrect terms, that fail to yield results without having to scroll or click through multiple search pages or archives, and are not intended for shortcut use. Regardless, I will review the redirects I created to see if any made follow that established precedent, for sure. Please let me know if you think I have missed one and we can discuss. Thanks! :) | -- FrozenPlum (Talk / Email) 06:28, 19 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
What? I'm just reminding you that you should do that when you make a shortcut. I'm not saying that you have made a shortcut and forgot the template.  Anpang📨  07:22, 19 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ah, I understand better now, thank you for clarifying. Apologies for misinterpreting, I thought I probably made one that inadvertently looked like a shortcut, without intending that (mistakes are where my brain lives lately), but had no idea which might be suspect. I was about to go looking, so your reply was timely, it saved me time searching. :) I'll try to familiarize myself with more templates, there are a lot I haven't seen or determined their use yet. I'll probably leave shortcuts up to the more experienced editors for a while (I'm a bit too green here), if/when I do though yours will be a helpful reminder, thanks! | -- FrozenPlum (Talk / Email) 08:00, 19 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I also realized that my writing seemed like you created a shortcut page without the template :P  Anpang📨  11:19, 19 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It's all good. :), I'm also bad at misreading sometimes (I have a condition that affects reading a bit) which doesn't help matters either XD. Tips are 100% appreciated. | -- FrozenPlum (Talk / Email) 21:43, 19 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Anpang: The problem is that the user created multiple redirects for just one page, hence, there is a chance of getting clogged up with just templates from {{shortcut}}. And, this is not mandatory, but I think you are referring to it as necessary. There are already helpful links in ManageWiki that lead to these tutorials. --YellowFrogger (Talk) 14:00, 19 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
For added clarification to repeat, these were not created nor intended to be shortcuts (nor do they meet the {{shortcut}} template documentation definition of a shortcut). In case it bears repeating (please disregard if this point is understood) I created the redirects because, for example, if different new/novice users typed various keywords, trying to find the same resource, into this wiki's search (often questions received in Discord all the time, even despite being located in ManageWiki), they formerly received an excessive number of archive page results (sometimes pages of unrelated results) rather than a link to the page intended to answer said question. From a search functioning perspective, this can be problematic. Some users are unlikely to take the time to sift through (sometimes many seemingly irrelevantly-titled pages: archive x, archive y, archive z) instead of quickly finding a seemingly relevant result (that redirects to the page intended to answer the question). When users find pages of many irrelevant page titles, often they will assume no such page answering the question exists, then proceed to discord to ask, creating extra work. It's a simple problem that redirects can solve. Please think of them not as shortcuts, but as search keywords--that is essentially what they are functioning as.
Meta seems to be a help area, some users will use the search feature here (if searching for something, many people will seek a search function, meta seems like a logical choice). It is common practice to go through server logs and check commonly used search terms, and if no pages exist that match those terms (or what is provided is a large number of unexpected results to sift through), to create redirects to assist in practical way-finding. I asked, in Discord before creating these, if it was welcome/advisable to do so (provided examples first), and received a strong affirmative. If users feel the redirects are unnecessary to help users find things easier, please feel free to delete them; however, I would ask that first there are efforts to understand the utility, practicality, and common practice of these before doing so (keeping in mind they do not relate to "shortcuts" at all): but rather are Alternative search terms/keywords for new/novice learners that don't already know the right terms to search for, or the right place to go to find the information (i.e., managewiki vs meta ManageWiki page. New users can't know what they come to know, before they know it). Sifting through many search result pages is not so useable. It is also an instructional design best practice to cater to new/novice learners in addition to intermediate and advanced users. Thanks. | -- FrozenPlum (Talk / Email) 21:37, 19 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This is already solved! And I'm not saying in the first post that it's nescessary for all redirect pages to include the template.  Anpang📨  00:43, 20 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Proofing software[edit source]

Just wondered what proofing software you have been using whilst updating pages on Meta. I would fine this helpful to tightened up the grammar on my latest wiki. Thanks. Borderman (Talk) 23:16, 14 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Borderman. :)
Right now, I'm using "LanguageTool" (premium), which is cheaper, but less advanced than "Grammarly". Both have free options and handy browser add-ons (can't remember whether that requires the paid version or not, sorry). I prefer LanguageTool because it's open-source, light-weight, and it meets my off-site wiki's basic needs just fine—we don't need advanced features for correcting the "tone" of messages etc. It switches easily to a wiki's chosen language variant, though has some quirks, but I like the lower cost. Grammarly is good too, I've also used it and it definitely more features. I hope that helps! | -- FrozenPlum 23:35, 14 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Almost forgot, LT can be downloaded for use offline too, the paid has better detection and more features, of course. | -- FrozenPlum 23:37, 14 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for the info. I always prefer to get recommendations before trying new software/apps etc. I also like that LT is open-source. I am usually ok with writing but sometimes I waffle and proofing will help with that. I'm not too bothered about tone as I know the tone I'm after. My brain works faster than my fingers when typing and that's when typos appear. I'll look into LT over the weekend. I think it will provide everything I need, thanks. Borderman (Talk) 23:48, 14 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You're welcome. My brain sometimes doesn't work... hahaha XD. So, proofing tools are necessary!
I figured if I was using it on our group's wiki, I could probably spare time to help with it on Meta.