It's a bit of a murky area. I've completely redone the descriptions for several pages based off of discussion page complaints that pretty much amounted to "I'm really not sure what this is supposed to describe." There's never been any complaints, probably because no one likes vague descriptions. This, of course, is my own experience as a primarily non-forum based troper. The impression probably differ depending on which part of the wiki an individual frequents.
I do bring topics up in Trope Repair Shop on occasion for larger page actions, but Trope Repair Shop in its current form is such a waste of time that I seldom pay much attention after the original post unless I want to verify I have the "consensus" to enact a fix.
See you in the discussion pages.In my experience, discussion pages seem to be mostly ignored. So while in theory they're a good venue for minor repair work, I think in practice you really need to use TRS for actual discussion and to get anything done.
Jet-a-Reeno!My experience is the same. Unless I got a PM every time somebody responded to one of my discussion edits.
That said, discussion is a nice place to dump X Just X and other stuff if it doesn't look good on the main page.
Fight smart, not fair.I've mentioned this before: one solution to visibility of TRS actions would be to flag tagged articles on watchlists, not just in the page header. If you live mostly in your watchlist, as I do, and mostly read article histories, as I do, you'll never see the flag.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Diagonalizing The Matrix
That's a good idea.
If we're going to go the route Eddie suggested earlier and give some incentive to TRS threads to actually reach some sort of conclusion, we had better come up with some method of conflict resolution that'll prevent the current system from becoming the same but with even more stall.
There's the practice of having a "case for" and "case against" summary in the crowner options. Maybe we should do more to encourage this sort of thing- this way instead of pages upon pages of "X!" "No, Y!" "No, X!" "No, Y!" we'll have a place where every good point is stated just once and the focus will be more on making a good case and less on trumping the person above you.
Pretentious quote || In-joke from fandom you've never heard of || Shameless self-promotion || Something weird you'll habituate toIf we can stop having emergencies long enough, I'd like to install that notification via watchlist item.
Seems to me that implementation of process here is better at the beginning, rather than in the crowner, which is near the end of the process.
Adding functionality to the create-conversation page is something we can do. For example, when the article title is entered, the system can run a 'related to...' in the background and present the total wicks and inbound counts at the top of the thread. We can't automate usage checks, but we can do at least that much.
Goal: Clear, Concise and WittyI think that at least putting the Inbound count and Wick count on the front of the thread is a great idea, as it will help us remember that we need to keep those things in mind.
Visit my contributor page to assist with the "I Like The Cheeses" project!![]()
![]()
Hmmm, I would have thought it would be a far simpler matter, like just checking the text of a link to see if it's encased in double brackets [[ and ]]. Of course, I know very very little of magic computer code, so I am very very likely to be very very wrong.
You'd have to parse the entire content of the wiki to figure it out, though. The only way it could work is if page save creates an index of wicks that can be polled. I actually thought it did that already...
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"The question occurred because I was changing all the wiks for And Now You Know The Rest Of The Story, and a significant portion of them looked like this:
rather than a trope entry. Similar to the way So Yeah was used.edited 28th Dec '10 4:43:29 PM by Deboss
Fight smart, not fair.Ok, so I think I get it. So with [[TropeName Text Here]], the only part that gets saved is the "TropeName" bit. Meaning that my idea would only work if you rewrote exactly what got saved.
edited 28th Dec '10 4:44:36 PM by TotemicHero
Expergiscēre cras, medior quam hodie. (Awaken tomorrow, better than today.)

I don't know if splits or fixer uppers are handled mostly on discussion pages, I always bring it up on TRS.
Fight smart, not fair.