We seem to have ended up with two help pages:
They seem to have (by and large) the same information, but I agree with Robin that the layout on Help:Contents needed revising. I'm somewhat satisfied with the way it now appears, but its redundant with Help. Which do we keep? Bill 16:51, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- Bill, you have a memory that's less than 99.99% perfect. I suppose 3 months is a bit long! See http://genealogy.wikia.com/index.php?title=Help&diff=prev&oldid=24040 and the first item on Talk:Help. They are different pages and I expect them to stay that way. Do what you like to Help. Leave me (and any other formalists we have here) to make Help:Contents look like a table of contents as it is in most MediaWiki sites.
- Yes, clearly so. I can look at the page history and see that I have actively edited "Help Content"---but to be honest, I can't even remember editing it last week. Whatever, I will leave it nicely to you---especially since I don't understand its purpose.
- And on a related matter, I have been working with the main Help page trying to figure out why it shows up peculiarly from time to time. Someone called the problem "Fickle", which I sort of like---the "Fickle Page Problem", aka FPP. My first thought was that perhaps the TOC was creating the problem---so I eliminated that. We'll see if that does the job. ALong the way I realized I needed to reogranize the components of the page, making it simpler to use (especially w/o the TOC to act as a guide. So I moved a bunch of things onto subpages, and added links in a box labeled "Other Helpful Pages". This may give users a clear view of where to go to solve certain problems. I've also added a link for a couple of non-existent articles that I thought might be useful. Will work them as time permits.
- Along the way I also found that I can re-create part of the fickle page problem if I make just the right typos. For instance typing "?td> will sometimes trigger it---but not exactly, as you can't make it goaway by opening the page to edit and then closing.--but page looks similar. So the thought strikes me that perhaps where this is occurring is on large complex pages where an undetected typo has occurred. Bill 02:33, 24 June 2007 (UTC)