Community Meeting Agenda 26 January 2010

To Attend the Meeting:


 * 1) Go to 26 Jan meeting or MeetingPlace Home and enter the Meeting ID 8531 and click the "Attend Meeting" button.
 * 2) Select the desired "Connect Me" options and enter the phone number that you want MeetingPlace to call you at
 * 3) Click the Connect button

To Attend the Meeting Without Using your Computer:


 * 1) Dial into 801-240-2663 (Local/International) or 877-453-7266 (US Toll-free)
 * 2) Follow the prompts to enter the Meeting ID 8531 and join the meeting

= Agenda and Notes =

Recognition
Nice article on James Anderson in the January 2010 LDSTech newsletter (see the Community Spotlight section).

How to Register Demo
CK Whipple 18:57, 26 January 2010 (UTC) See: FamilySearch Wiki:Registration Demo

New Featured Articles
CK Whipple 18:57, 26 January 2010 (UTC) See Featured Wiki Pages

Time Out
Not even 2 minutes? That is what happened early Monday morning. I wasn't even 1 minute into editing when the 2 minutes warning notice came up to save. (reported to Forums) dsammy 08:37, 25 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I got on about 1pm, no real problem with it, in fact, it seems to be a longer period before it goes out now. JamesAnderson 23:39, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
 * What is dsammy's experience right now? -Fran 18:19, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Un-portal conversions &amp; redirects
Would it be a good idea to add a redirect from the portal page to the unportal page so users get sent to the new page automatically, or would it end up being a bigger hassle for the sysops when trying to locate and delete pages? Redirects do mean knowing how to get to the edit page differently than standard methods. Adding a redirect would be easy to do and updating the instructions is no big deal either - I'm just wanting to find out the potential pros and cons to doing so. Laralee 17:01, 25 January 2010 (UTC)


 * We don't want any redirects connected with the Portals. WE are trying to wipe them out of existence. Delete template on portals like you have been doing so far so good. One of the sysops get the notices of delete requests to take care of. dsammy 18:13, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree that we are trying get rid of portals. It is confusing to see both a portal and a regular article for the same location. Someone reported their confusion on this matter in the forum. Maybe it would be helpful to delete the old information when it is taken over and the delete template is inserted. I do not think it would be bad to put a note in the portal that says where the new article is though. It may help eliminate confusion. Thomas_Lerman 20:22, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Inconsistencies
We have some inconsistency within the Wiki regarding the terminology used when referring to sites on the internet. It is NOT cleared up on the FamilySearch Wiki:Manual of Style page. Is it websites, web sites, Web sites, or some other term or spacing of words? Jimmy B. Parker 23:24, 25 January 2010 (UTC)


 * This quirky question can be answered at this site "Should it be Web site or website?" . So if it is heading it is simply "Web Sites" since it is very clear and to the point. If it is in the article it is simply either web sites or websites. Take your pick. dsammy 03:32, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

That is already widely known, I've been putting in the word 'website' for 'web sites' for some time, and this also helps search engines too, as they often don't understand the context of the separated words 'web site' or 'web sites'. But in Google, if you ask for 'web' it will pick up 'website' or 'websites'. Originally it was 'web site', but it has evolved so that the compounded word 'website' is more accepted, and often is considered correct in many other settings now. JamesAnderson 18:28, 26 January 2010 (UTC)


 * This may be read about at Chicago Manual of Style, where they suggest 'website' for informal writing. Another question may be brought up about the capitalization of 'Internet'. I would rather see web pages in the Wiki be called 'articles' instead of 'pages'. I believe most would think that sounds less techy and more user friendly. While I am at it, I would rather see one space instead of two spaces after periods, etc. The extra space causes some problems or funny viewing during a preview. I personally believe it is an old standard with two spaces that were used with monospace typewriters. The University of Chicago Press through the Chicago Manuel of Style discourages this as well. Thomas_Lerman 20:22, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

ACTION: This matter should be added to the Manual of Style. Perhaps it should be discussed on the discussion page for the Manual of Style.Jimmy B. Parker

Stay Informed
Stay informed by visiting the FamilySearch Wiki Forum and by viewing the following pages:


 * Wiki Product Backlog
 * Wiki Known Issues