[rt-users] Wiki conventions?

[Barton Chittenden]

Alex,

The RT-Wiki was ported from Wikia to Mediawiki last year. There are still
quite a number of rough edges, particularly regarding the formatting of
code blocks.

My general feeling with a wiki is that the history is there; if you somehow
make it worse, it can always be reverted, and I've never seen anyone
complain about corrections to grammar, spelling and clarity.

I just added https://rt-wiki.bestpractical.com/wiki/LowHangingFruit, which
gives a sed script which can be used to clean up some pretty ugly code
blocks using <nowiki> tags, which seem to give mediawiki's code formatting
bad indigestion. Copy the wiki text into a file, run the sed script, copy
the text back, and view the results. If they look good, save it.

--Barton

On Fri, Dec 30, 2016 at 5:08 PM, Alex Hall <ahall at autodist.com> wrote:

> Hi all,
> I've finally created an account on the RT wiki. This has been a really
> great resource for me, but there are a lot of pages I've read in the last
> few months with formatting mistakes, grammar problems, outdated information
> that's not marked as not working under 4.x, and so on. I don't know how
> much time I'll have to edit things, but I hope to try to contribute where I
> can by fixing mistakes when I find them. I might add my own pages
> eventually, but for now I'll stick to edits.
>
> What are the conventions by which Best Practical likes people to operate?
> For instance, if a page is understandable but could do with better grammar,
> is it considered polite to correct it, or should it be left alone? What
> other rules and conventions exist that I should keep in mind? Thanks.
>
> --
> Alex Hall
> Automatic Distributors, IT department
> ahall at autodist.com
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bestpractical.com/pipermail/rt-users/attachments/20170109/a77cb8fd/attachment.htm>