Help us get to over 8,748 articles in 2024.

If you know of a magician not listed in MagicPedia, start a New Biography for them. Contact us at magicpediahelp@gmail.com

Difference between revisions of "Talk:MagicPedia Development"

From Magicpedia, the free online encyclopedia for magicians by magicians.
Jump to: navigation, search
m
Line 15: Line 15:
 
If you browse the structure that currently exists on MagicPedia,
 
If you browse the structure that currently exists on MagicPedia,
 
someone seeking "magic books" can go through [[Close Up Magic]] to [[Close Up Magic Books]].  From there, they have books indexed by [[Close Up Magic Books Indexed By Author | author]], [[Close Up Magic Books Indexed By Publisher | publisher]], [[Close Up Magic Books Indexed By Title | title]], [[Close Up Magic Books Indexed By Artist | artist]], and potentially [[Close Up Magic Books Indexed By Date| date]].  As the wiki grows organically, ''all natural cross-references'' will be added.  Someone seeking "magic books" need not go through every "Books by XXX"...
 
someone seeking "magic books" can go through [[Close Up Magic]] to [[Close Up Magic Books]].  From there, they have books indexed by [[Close Up Magic Books Indexed By Author | author]], [[Close Up Magic Books Indexed By Publisher | publisher]], [[Close Up Magic Books Indexed By Title | title]], [[Close Up Magic Books Indexed By Artist | artist]], and potentially [[Close Up Magic Books Indexed By Date| date]].  As the wiki grows organically, ''all natural cross-references'' will be added.  Someone seeking "magic books" need not go through every "Books by XXX"...
 +
 +
Of course, the idea that 'if someone researches "card magic" they should get entries including those magicians who do card magic and find through those biographies the published works of that magician.' is very reasonable.  However, this structure ''need not'' preclude additional structure.  The very best and most useful wikis are '''not''' those that copy wikipedia, but rather are those whose ''structure'' is as much a community project as its ''content''.  Imposing style and structure constraints at this stage in the game is stifling.
  
 
(Doug P.)
 
(Doug P.)

Revision as of 10:10, 25 October 2007

"Correct style should hold those minor pages into the overall Paul Harris biography page." -- please explain: what makes this style "correct" apart from the fact that it is closer to a print encyclopedia? If I was researching "magic books", I would prefer a page called "Books by XXX", which was linked to the bio of XXX rather than having to wade through every bio to find book information. Please reconsider this imposition of questionable style.

Separate Or Equal?

It's not a rule by any means.

I do see your point of seeking "magic books," but by your logic someone seeking "magic books" will still have to go through every "Books by XXX Magician."

My idea is that if someone researches "card magic" they should get entries including those magicians who do card magic and find through those biographies the published works of that magician.

(Brad A.)

"my logic"

If you browse the structure that currently exists on MagicPedia, someone seeking "magic books" can go through Close Up Magic to Close Up Magic Books. From there, they have books indexed by author, publisher, title, artist, and potentially date. As the wiki grows organically, all natural cross-references will be added. Someone seeking "magic books" need not go through every "Books by XXX"...

Of course, the idea that 'if someone researches "card magic" they should get entries including those magicians who do card magic and find through those biographies the published works of that magician.' is very reasonable. However, this structure need not preclude additional structure. The very best and most useful wikis are not those that copy wikipedia, but rather are those whose structure is as much a community project as its content. Imposing style and structure constraints at this stage in the game is stifling.

(Doug P.)