Wiki Discussion

From MUCSA Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

Subject Pages

I've noticed that a few of the subject pages have reviews/opinions in them. My concern is that they are right at the top of the document. While this is fine if they are once off small quotes or something, when there are more of them, they can't all be at the top of the page. What do you all think of a review subsection under the subject information subsection where we can house review and people's opinions on the subjects?

-Ryan Briscoe

Hey Ryan, you've raised a good point. It's a bit presumptuous that we're the only ones with opinions on subjects and beyond that, it assumes that our opinions are important enough to place on a page which should actually be detailing a subject.
I think it's best we just remove the quotes. I realise I've already placed one on the 313 page, so this seems hypocritical, but I think they should all be dropped.
I think the quotes are best kept to the forum.
-Tom G
I like the idea of the reviews, we are not meant to be documenting the details of the subjects (the handbook does that), but I think Ryan's idea of segregating fact from opinion is really good. The reason it is good to have them on the wiki, and not the forums is forums tend to get spammed with well... everything, and no one tries to put together coherent documents. But, I often ask later-years students what they think of subjects I am considering taking, the handbook doesn't say that eg: you don't need to go to 252 lectures, but you do need to go to labs or that a particular lecturer mumbles incoherently and buying the textbook is absolutely vital.
--DUFFMAN Dear god, it's me... DUFFMAN! massage DUFFMAN, in a very sexual way 00:12, 20 September 2007 (MST)
I must confess that I kind of pushed Tom towards this idea. The idea was for a bit of a quirky quote or fun fact from the subject just to make some of the pages a little bit more interesting. A kind of tongue-in-cheek abstract for the flavor of the subject. If you've ever seen Uncyclopedia's Oscar Wilde quotes at the top of there pages you might sort of get the idea. (That's why they were added at the top in quote tags rather than as 'article content').
My two main examples would be 255 and 253 pages. They're were really just to keep the subject light and not let the Wiki become too much like another Wikipedia entry. Again, they were intended to be more interest than reviews - Just something to catch peoples eye and maybe wake them up a little that there's a bit of fun to all the subjects.
That's my two cents - Carry on with the discussions, I look forward to hearing what others think.
dcoles (contribs|talk) 04:07, 20 September 2007 (MST)
What if we have an OPINIONS header at the very bottom, and limit the top of the document to one quote. Thus further quotes can be at the bottom, under the opinions header. Further opinions could be added there. This distinguishes fact from fun, but keeps all the flavour we would want on a student society wiki.
--DUFFMAN Dear god, it's me... DUFFMAN! massage DUFFMAN, in a very sexual way 22:35, 4 October 2007 (MST)

Past projects

What do people think of putting up some past projects of each of the subjects? It sometimes gives a pretty good idea of what to expect, and it's interesting and is content. :P --DUFFMAN Dear god, it's me... DUFFMAN! massage DUFFMAN, in a very sexual way 22:25, 4 October 2007 (MST)

I agree. Matt 20:46, 13 November 2007 (MST)
I agree in principle. However, the practise is that these projects are copyright, and so you would probably be unwise to include such things without permission (I personally have copies of all the projects I did, and also look at the proejcts for other subjects to decide what they are doing, but holding them for public distribution is a bit different). Jmmorgan 17:11, 15 November 2007 (MST)

URL formatting

I'm thinking it may be nice to have URLs similar to WP's, mucsa.org/wiki/page_title or somesuch. Any objections to me changing it? Qnguyen 04:38, 23 September 2007 (MST)

Certainly no qualms here - While a little bit nasty to set up, it's far nicer in the long run. dcoles (contribs|talk) 05:38, 28 September 2007 (MST)
I certainly don't object, but good luck. I tried a lot of different things and had no luck. It doesn't seem to recognise .htaccess files that aren't in the root folder, among other things. --Rbriscoe 11:28, 1 October 2007 (MST)
I did it on my wiki elsewhere, I can't quite remember how but I'm sure I can figure it out. The only thing is that because you've set up the wiki on /wiki/, it's going to be something like /wiki/wiki/Page. Perhaps we should move the wiki to wiki.mucsa.org? Also, I really really want to get off GoDaddy D: --Qnguyen 08:56, 20 October 2007 (MST)
I'm glad I'm not the only one that hates ugly URLs... I always use pretty URLs everywhere (http://www.smfmods.org/wiki/Main_Page for instance), and it isn't too hard to set up. And yes, GoDaddy's web hosting sucks, but the .htaccess files should still work fine. What problems were being encountered? --Daniel15 (Talk/Contribs) 02:07, 6 October 2007 (MST)

SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM BACON AND SPAM

So, was all this spam editing of existing pages or just making new pages? Because there is some way to ban unregistered users from creating new pages. We could try and do that, and be less nazi and all that. --DUFFMAN Dear god, it's me... DUFFMAN! massage DUFFMAN, in a very sexual way 17:57, 5 October 2007 (MST)

Looks like it was both new pages as well as editions to existing pages. But note that if unregistered users are unable to edit the pages, the spam bots will just make an account and then spam it. Some sort of CAPTCHA implementation is needed to stop those evil bots.
Oh, and someone please delete the pages @13764107295代考雅思代考雅思枪手QQ：27939721 and 雅思枪手13764107295雅思代考雅思, they were both spam in Chinese.
--Daniel15 (Talk/Contribs) 02:04, 6 October 2007 (MST)

Collaborative Answers Scheme for Past Exams

This was an idea I saw on the discussion board for 352 this year by Marco and others. Because there are stacks of past exam papers with no answer keys, a discussion board or a wiki can be a good place for students to get together and discuss the answers to past exams papers. It worked really well on the LMS discussion board, although not many replied (but I bet heaps of people used it) and the lecturer helped out. But that board gets wiped at the end of the year.

It's too late to be of any help to us this year, but if we could post the answers we got to our practice exam papers this year in dedicated wiki pages, then we could create a valuable resource for future students, and a way to attract people to the site. Admittedly the MM might see all the subjects rewritten, but 3rd year subjects will be around for a few years yet. Matt 20:46, 13 November 2007 (MST)

I have started on one as an example. 433-303 2002 Exam Matt 21:30, 13 November 2007 (MST)

I think that would be a great use of the Wiki. I know a few lecture's don't like the idea of giving out solutions for past exams for various reasons. But to have a way to discuss answers with others and see what you might have missed is really quite sensible. dcoles (contribs|talk) 03:54, 15 November 2007 (MST)
We have discussed this before. My view would be that I have no objection to doing it, so long as there are the necessary disclaimers attached. I can think of just too many cases where people would choose to memorise answers rather than going for understanding, and they memorise the wrong answers. I would also discuss it with the lecturers for the particular subjects involved, so that they are at least aware of what is happening. Jmmorgan 17:14, 15 November 2007 (MST)
Retrieved from "http://www.mucsa.org/wiki/index.php?title=Wiki_Discussion"