Not signed in (Sign In)

Categories

Vanilla 1.1.8 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

Welcome Guest!
Want to take part in these discussions? If you have an account, sign in now.
If you don't have an account, apply for one now.
  1.  

    “Recent Comments [2] [2].”

    It did that for me too. And now it says “Recent Comments [3] [3] [3].”

    •  
      CommentAuthorKyllorac
    • CommentTimeFeb 20th 2012 edited
     

    I’ve removed the count from the navigation until either Sly or I can figure out why it broke.

    Considering I have no clue what’s going on with it even when it works normally, Sly’s probably going to be the one to figure it out. XD

    •  
      CommentAuthorswenson
    • CommentTimeFeb 20th 2012
     

    What’s next, Recent Comments [4] [4] [4] [4]?

    •  
      CommentAuthorSoupnazi
    • CommentTimeFeb 20th 2012
     

    No, it’s [1100].

    I think a quick “about” page would be good to get up, so that those who aren’t familiar with the site won’t be confused or decide not to stick around ‘cause, well, of confusion.

    •  
      CommentAuthorKyllorac
    • CommentTimeFeb 22nd 2012
     

    About bios, submissions, and an about/FAQ page:

    As far as I’m aware, unless they have an account with the permission of Staff Writer or higher, they cannot edit their own bios or articles once posted (sorry, Inky). If you want to start the thread, Platy, go right ahead. :kitty

    As for submissions, I honestly have no clue how they work with regards to first-time contributors. I’ve always been able to post my own articles without having to wait for approval, so someone else (like Sly) should probably handle the submissions page, unless we want to make a new submissions process.

    As for the about/FAQ page, I think it should be something we come up with as a community, alongside the front-page phrases. If someone would like to take charge of that, feel free.

    —-

    Things left to do:

    + Organize tags.

    I showed the site to a designer friend of mine to get some input, and her reaction upon seeing the Tags page was OHMYGOD. O_O And then I told her my plans to clean them up, and she was all “Oh. Good. You need to.”

    A lot of tags (especially the redundant ones) will be cut, and more consistent tagging will be replaced. For instance, one of the tags on chapter sporkings will be “chapter #” rather than two separate tags for “chapter” and “#”.

    If you’ve noticed any tags that could use cutting or adding, feel free to point them out. Retagging all the articles will take a while, and I’d rather have a clear idea of what to keep/delete/add so that the retagging can be done in one fell swoop.

    + Reorganize articles.

    The Critique category will be renamed to something less confusable with the Criticism category, suggestions welcome. I’m also thinking of adding a category or few, in addition to possibly renaming some categories and clearing out some others (namely the old NaNo by user ones).

    One of the categories I’m thinking of adding is Self-Published, to distinguish from criticism/sporkings of legitimately published works. If you have any other categories or sections you’d like to see, feel free to pipe up.

    + Write up article tagging and/or titling guidelines.

    Once we’re finished cleaning up the tags page, we’ll need to keep it clean. Having some sort of guideline for when to create tags should help keep the tags page nice and tidy. Also, consistent titling just looks nice. ;P

    —-

    Things that are still driving me nuts:

    + The Search page.

    I can find no reason code-wise WHY the entire Search page is misaligned. The search results display just fine, and they use the exact same coding. :headache

    + The comments count.

    It’s broken, and I can’t fix it. Sly! Halp!

    •  
      CommentAuthorInkblot
    • CommentTimeFeb 22nd 2012
     

    WHYYYY do I not have the power?!

    whine

    •  
      CommentAuthorswenson
    • CommentTimeFeb 22nd 2012 edited
     

    What is the difference between “Category” and “Section”, precisely? Looking at what kind of stuff is in them, it seems like we could just combine the two. Say we have a section/category for criticism (both positive things like book suggestions and negative ones like sporks/etc.), one for humor (Kitty’s comics), reviews (shorter, less in-depth articles than the criticism category; again can be good or bad), advice/education (writing tips, direction to good writing resources, falconempress’s articles on birds of prey, etc.), original (any short stories or whatnot).

    More specific categorization could be in the tags, so if it’s a movie review, it’d be tagged “movie”; if it’s an Inheritance article, it’d be tagged “Inheritance”; and so on. All author tags and tags that are already covered by the categories (“review”, for example, or “humor”) would be removed and Jeremy would be sent to steal all your shinies if you try to use them.

    Here’s an example, if this system were used. Let’s say Rorschach is posting his latest Maradonia spork, Law of Blood Spork Part 10: Purple Crocodiles in Space. He would put it in the Criticism category/section, and then tag it with “maradonia”, “spork”, and maybe “law of blood” and “gloria tesch”.

    Does this seem like it would work, or am I missing something important about categories? At this point, there just doesn’t seem to be a reason why we need separate categories and sections.

    EDIT: Also, do we really need chapters at all in the tags? I doubt people are commonly going to go “hmm, I want to look up the sixth chapter of every single spork” or anything. If they want to read every article in Nate’s Twilight & Philosophy spork, they can just click on the “twilight & philosophy” tag. (which doesn’t exist, by the way :P)

    •  
      CommentAuthorKyllorac
    • CommentTimeFeb 22nd 2012 edited
     

    Sections and categories work on separate axes, with sections being broader in scope than categories. For example, we could have an article in the Writing section with the categories of Pitfalls and Technique. Depending on whether you went through a category (like Pitfalls) or the section, you’d get different listings of articles since not all articles categorized as Pitfalls may be placed under the Writing section. Articles can belong to two categories at a time, while they can only belong to one section.

    The categories are useful for cutting down on the number of tags, which can accumulate really fast. Right now, a lot of tags are redundant considering they are the names of the categories the articles belong to (and I’m assuming most of the tags were used before the categories were created).

    There’s also the matter of how the section-category setup is part of the very structure of the site. Using only sections would be very difficult to manage, and going only categories is impossible without breaking pretty much everything.

    As for chapter tags, it was an example. :P We probably could do away with chapters in the tags with the existence of the archives.

    What could probably be done is (with how an article can belong to two sections), one section could list the title of the article series (when relevant), the second category being the main aim/tone/whatever of the article, and tags for the rest. If I were to move Spork up to its own section (there’s enough articles thanks to Rorscharch alone for that), then, for example, Lord Snow’s Everything Wrong with Twilight series would go under the section Spork, first category Everything Wrong With, second category Parody (or something), and be tagged Twilight. I’d then be able to organize the archive page to display articles by article series, which isn’t possible if we use tags (at least, not without much pain and hair pulling on my part).

    •  
      CommentAuthorswenson
    • CommentTimeFeb 22nd 2012
     

    OK, that makes more sense, if articles can be in multiple categories but only one section.

    I’m excessively bored right now (like, excessively bored; basic stats is a remarkably dull topic), so I’m going through all of the tags and figuring out how many articles actually use it, what the point of the tag is in the first place, and whether or not it’s actually useful. The idea is that this way, we can look at what we have and say “what kind of tags are or aren’t useful?”

    It’s all in an Excel spreadsheet right now, and so far, I’m up to the C’s. If you think it could be useful, I could put it up on Google Docs or somesuch so you can see what I’m doing (and I’ll try to keep the snarky comments in the spreadsheet to a minimum).

    •  
      CommentAuthorKyllorac
    • CommentTimeFeb 22nd 2012
     

    It’s all in an Excel spreadsheet right now, and so far, I’m up to the C’s. If you think it could be useful, I could put it up on Google Docs or somesuch so you can see what I’m doing (and I’ll try to keep the snarky comments in the spreadsheet to a minimum).

    YESPLEASE.

    If you do, you will join Platy in that special little corner of my heart reserved for the people I call “MY HERO <3”.

    •  
      CommentAuthorswenson
    • CommentTimeFeb 22nd 2012
     

    OK, here’s the link. Anybody can view/edit it if they have the link, so I’m hiding it.

    Little bit of explanation: first column is the tag name (as copied from the Tags page), second is the number of occurrences (except for ones with a LOT of occurrences, which I didn’t feel like counting up), third is the “meaning” of the tag (why was the article tagged with that, etc.), fourth is whether or not it seems like something useful that should be kept, and fifth is anything I wanted to make note of.

    In regards to the “keep” column in particular, ‘n’ means “don’t keep”, ‘y’ means “definitely keep”, ‘y)’ means “keep, but with caveats” (a parenthesis is easier to type than “keep with caveats” :P), and ‘m’ means “maybe keep”. Obviously, these are all very much my own opinion, and the same goes for the notes! Change/update/add any columns as you see fit; this is for your help, after all!

    • CommentAuthorSlyShy
    • CommentTimeFeb 22nd 2012
     

    I fixed the comments count problem. :) And this organization effort is truly impressive. I never dared to cleanse the Augean stables. :grin

    •  
      CommentAuthorKyllorac
    • CommentTimeFeb 22nd 2012
     

    And I just nuked the NaNo categories. It should be much easier for you guys to categorize things now, without that massive list. ;P

    I’ve also taken the liberty of replacing the square brackets with parentheses to better match the design.

    •  
      CommentAuthorswenson
    • CommentTimeFeb 22nd 2012
     

    Comments fixed, yay!

    •  
      CommentAuthorswenson
    • CommentTimeFeb 22nd 2012 edited
     

    Done with tags, thank everything. Toward the end, my comments get shorter and shorter and I put more down as just “maybe” because I don’t want to think about them anymore, but they’re all in there, they’ve all be counted up, and they all at least have a preliminary impression on them.

    After going through all 283 tags (which is like 900 articles), I have a few things I’d like to suggest. First, any review/spork should be tagged with the work’s title (be it movie, TV show, book, etc.), the author’s name, and the series title as appropriate. If the article is part of a series (Everything Wrong With Twilight, Adapt or Die, etc.), then that should be listed as well. In all cases, the tag should be the FULL title or name, not a separate tag for every word, and not an abbreviation or acronym.

    Tags that shouldn’t be used are character names, unless the article truly is about that character (like the Sloan essay), the writer’s name (you can already search by author), anything already covered by a category/section (“review” or “critique” or something), repetitive tags (“poem” and “poems” and also “poetry” seems a bit overkill; go with whichever one has been used more in the past), the article title, and anything identifying which part of a book it comes from (chapter, prologue, preface, introduction, etc.).

    Things that need to be sorted out are genre classifications (do we use them? If so, then about 95% of all articles are going to be “fantasy”. Or do we only tag articles that AREN’T fantasy, assuming all the rest are?), co-writers (it seems overkill to have them all in the tags, but recognizing them would be nice. Maybe a co-writers tag?), joke tags (a joke in the tags can be funny, but if we’re trying to cut down on the number of tags, this may need to go), vague tags (yes, it may be what an article is about, but if it’s not very specific, then is it really useful to people looking for articles?), and punctuation in tags (not just dashes, but things like the book Hawkmistress! Should it be tagged “hawkmistress” or “hawkmistress!”?).

    If you write a set of guidelines, please encourage people to check for similar tags that already exist before creating a new one! There’s the plural/punctuation problem (which is why we have both “hawkmistress” and “hawkmistress!” as tags, as well as “spork”, “sporks”, “sporking”, and “sporkings”), there’s the issue of multiple only vaguely-different tags (“avoiding” should be classified as “pitfalls”, for example), and so on.

    •  
      CommentAuthorPuppet
    • CommentTimeFeb 24th 2012
     

    You know, I’m starting to think that a FAQ page would be largely useless for the main site because the number one question people ask is, “How do I submit my articles?” I could just write up a quick article that would basically say, “Please submit your articles to impishidea@gmail.com. Thank you.” I should be able to set it so it won’t appear on the front page, and then Kyllorac could work her magic and add a “Submit” button to the navigation bar.

    As for tagging etiquette I’m not exactly sure how we would let everyone know since not everyone who submits visits the site regularly (or the forums for that matter). If you need help with retagging articles I would be happy to help.

    Also, I still think the comments section would look better with a single line above the author’s name instead of two above and below it. :P

    •  
      CommentAuthorKyllorac
    • CommentTimeMar 2nd 2012
     

    Went through and tweaked a couple of things with how the articles display.

    Got rid of the navigation at top. It looked nice, but it really distracted from the article considering it came between the article title and the author info. It also felt a bit redundant since the logo links back to the front page, and the author’s name now links to all their articles (which makes continuing series much easier than archive diving).

    Also put a different color behind the article tags to make them more visible, and also to make the end of the article and beginning of the comments more apparent. It also ties into the blockquotes, which were feeling a bit lonely color-wise.

    And I’m going still through the tags, sifting out which ones to kill, which ones can be bumped up to sections/categories, and such.

    If there’s any sections/categories you’d like to see, speak now. For instance, a section for original works. How much would you guys use it (because I do have plans for a project to jump-start it if it were to be added)?

    •  
      CommentAuthorInkblot
    • CommentTimeMar 2nd 2012
     

    I’d like to see your project.

    •  
      CommentAuthorKyllorac
    • CommentTimeMar 3rd 2012
     

    Basically, monthly round-robin short story feature with trope challenges. As in “You must include X, Y, and Z tropes in one cohesive and coherent short story”.

    •  
      CommentAuthorKyllorac
    • CommentTimeMar 8th 2012 edited
     

    It’s still in outline form, but here are the basic article guidelines.

    Tagging Guidelines

    - Full name for authors ALWAYS

    - Character names ONLY when article is analysis of character

    - Full book title if not part of a series, otherwise tag with SERIES name, ex: Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets should be tagged as Harry Potter

    - Check to see if a tag already exists that will suit

    - Use Co-written category if co-written (no article author tags); name in Writer = poster; make sure co-writer credited early in the article

    Category Guidelines

    - Category 1 = article type/medium or subcategory

    - Category 2 = article series (if applicable), else secondary type/medium or subcategory

    - If writing a new series of articles, contact Kyllorac (or whoever else wants to volunteer) to make a category

    Section Guidelines

    - Derivative – all works derived from preexisting works, i.e. fanfiction, overt parodies, rewrites

    - Original – all original works, i.e. covert (general) parodies, original pieces

    - Writing – articles about writing

    - Sporks – all sporks go here

    - Criticism – all non-spork criticisms/analyses go here, as well as articles on how to criticize/analyze/etc.

    - Reviews – reviews of various things go here

    - Editorials – all personal opinion/discussion pieces, ex: The Issue with Science Fiction Nowadays

    - Misc – for the stuff that won’t fit elsewhere, ex: Impishidea Merch!

    —-

    The way the updated categories will work is that there will be four main categories – Article Series, Advice, Type, and Medium – with subcategories listed beneath them. I’m still going through the tags and such to figure out which tags to promote to categories/sections and which to nuke/rename/merge, so yeah. Hopefully I’ll be finished with that soon so we can get down to the actual reorganizing.

    It’s going to be quite involved, what with the whole re-section/-categoriz-/-tagging all at once thing. Volunteers would be muchly loved.

    •  
      CommentAuthorPuppet
    • CommentTimeMar 8th 2012
     

    I can help with the “re-section/-categoriz-/-tagging” thing.

    •  
      CommentAuthorswenson
    • CommentTimeMar 8th 2012
     

    That sounds like some very solid guidelines. If you can just make sure everyone actually follows them, I think it’ll be very helpful! There were some interesting and useful old articles I found when I was collecting all the tags, but they were impossible to find because they weren’t categorized or tagged very well. This could really help with that.

  2.  

    Ya know the news that’s on the front page?

    Me like.

    •  
      CommentAuthorInkblot
    • CommentTimeMar 9th 2012
     

    Wow, the main site looks awesome now. Great job, you guys. Seconding approval of the news widget.

    In the “Sporking” tag, on the first page is Steph’s first podcast announcement, which probably does not belong there.

    •  
      CommentAuthorPuppet
    • CommentTimeMar 9th 2012
     

    Mm, I moved it to “Writing” for now.

    •  
      CommentAuthorKyllorac
    • CommentTimeMar 9th 2012 edited
     

    There are many things in the Sporkings category that do not belong but have yet to be moved. It was just easier to rename Humor to Sporkings rather than move every single sporking in existence over to a new category.

    looks at a certain R-named person

    And rather than 4 main categories, I merged Advice into Type, so now there’ s only three. And all the sections are in place. Still picking out tags to promote to categories, though.

    So many tags. :ugh

  3.  

    I like the new “news” thing on the front page. Are you planning to make old news articles available to be seen in a news section somewhere? And are you intending to have news articles again?

    There are many things in the Sporkings category that do not belong but have yet to be moved. It was just easier to rename Humor to Sporkings rather than move every single sporking in existence over to a new category.

    Where do you want them moved to? Are you going to make a new generic humor section?

    •  
      CommentAuthorKyllorac
    • CommentTimeMar 11th 2012
     

    Are you planning to make old news articles available to be seen in a news section somewhere?

    Maybe.

    And are you intending to have news articles again?

    They never went away. There just was no way to see them.

    As for regular news updates, not sure. I think we’d need to broaden what would fall into the News section to get any semi-regular updates going there. Though we could probably use it as a place to announce/generate interest for new article series/closing thoughts on them.

    Where do you want them moved to?

    Whichever other section best fits the article.

    Are you going to make a new generic humor section?

    No. Humor was comprised of pretty much entirely sporks, and what non-spork pieces there were tended to be parodies. Humor will stick around as a renamed category, though.

    •  
      CommentAuthorKyllorac
    • CommentTimeMar 11th 2012
     

    And there is now not only a way to see past news posts, but to comment on them. Yay!

    And we are getting oh, so very close to the actual reorganizing. As some of you may (or may not) have noticed, I’ve included an article ID at the top of every article. It is temporary and shall aid in the elimination of tags. All one needs to do is click on a killitdead designated tag, snag the ID, and append it to this URL:

    http://impishidea.com/textpattern/index.php?event=article&step=edit&ID=

    Voila! Easy access to article editing and tag killing!

    Now, to go over the tag lists for the bajillionth time to make sure everything’s consistent and coherent. >.>

  4.  

    So, can we get rid of all the “spork” tags (and variations thereof) now that sporks have their own section?

    EDIT:
    And I’m pretty sure that only sporks and articles related to sporks are in the spork section now.

    I used the “derivative” section for creative works (such as parodies) that use an already established book or series (such as Twilight) as there basis. I used “original” for creative works that have no basis in an established book or series (such as Kitty’s sketches of II members). I used “editorials” for articles that are not directly about writing techniques but are more about issues (such as Ty’s “Never Too Many”) that relate to writing or something else. I used “writing” for articles related to how to write (duh). And I used “misc” for articles that don’t fit into any other category that I could see (such as Kitty’s “Place Your Bets” comic and a lot of the game-type articles that appeared early on in the site’s history).

    •  
      CommentAuthorKyllorac
    • CommentTimeMar 12th 2012
     

    The Spork section is for sporks themselves. Articles about how to write sporks would go under the Writing section. Otherwise, the other sections were spot-on, and you are AWESOME.

    Now, to start with the tags.

    Kill these on sight without remorse!

    Make sure the articles are in the proper section/category before deleting. For article series, the Article Series name belongs in Category 2 (if it isn’t already there). For Category 1 (and 2, if open), Medium takes priority over Type, which only really applies to original/derivative works and Kitty’s comics at the moment. Most articles will not fall under a Medium category.

    These tags are in need of merging. Bold is what the tags need to be renamed to.

    There are more tags to be modified, but they’re a bit more involved (lots of tagging untagged articles), so I think it’d be best to come back to them in a second sweep.

    •  
      CommentAuthorPuppet
    • CommentTimeMar 12th 2012
     

    I’ve already gotten rid of “abridged” and I’ll start working on the others, but I’m a little confused as to what to do with Category 1. For article series such as “Twilight: Abridged and Annotated” the title is already in Category 2, but Category 1 is blank. Should I just leave it that way?

    •  
      CommentAuthorKyllorac
    • CommentTimeMar 12th 2012
     

    I’d leave it blank, personally.

    •  
      CommentAuthorPuppet
    • CommentTimeMar 12th 2012
     

    I’ve gotten up to and partway through “spork,” but I’ll have to finish that sometime later today.

    •  
      CommentAuthorPuppet
    • CommentTimeMar 12th 2012
     

    Alright, I killed all the tags without remorse, but I still need to do the tag merging.

    •  
      CommentAuthorKyllorac
    • CommentTimeMar 12th 2012
     

    Just a note, it is important to have the Article Series selected for Category 2 (and only Category 2) where applicable, leaving Category 1 blank if necessary. It will make any future reorganization much easier since I’ll be able to make a number of changes on a by-category level rather than sift through individual articles (like we’re doing now).

    Also, don’t forget to make sure the articles are in their proper category/section when you kill the tag. I’ve run across a couple of articles that are no longer tagged, but aren’t properly placed, either.

    •  
      CommentAuthorPuppet
    • CommentTimeMar 12th 2012
     

    Yeah, I went back and moved one or two of the extremely old articles to more appropriate places. I also finished up what was left of the tag merging process.

  5.  

    MS Paint Moments in Eragon 2 and MS Paint Moments in Eragon 3 link to the same thing. I’m thinking one of these is supposed to be the “she smells like pine needles” one.

    Also, medium is supposed to be what the article is written in, right (if it’s a creative piece, that is)? Articles that are just about a certain medium should not be sorted into that medium, right?

    •  
      CommentAuthorswenson
    • CommentTimeMar 13th 2012
     

    Oh my word, the pine needles one. That’s almost as good as the Edward and Capri-Sun straw one.

  6.  

    That’s almost as good as the Edward and Capri-Sun straw one.

    That is the my favorite of the comics and should be on bajillions of T-shirts.

    EDIT:
    And all things Maradonia are now only tagged as “gloria tesch” and “maradonia (series)” (without the quotes of course).

    Can we nuke tags that are also series, sections, and categories (that haven’t been nuked already)? Like bft3k, parody, poetry, etc. I guess parody and poetry would work as tags that were about parodies and poetry but weren’t themselves parodies or poetry.

    And “twilight” has merged with “twilight saga.”

    And “inheritance” has merged with “inheritance cycle.” Also, I fixed the pine needles comic so it shows up now.

    •  
      CommentAuthorPuppet
    • CommentTimeMar 14th 2012
     

    Personally, I don’t think there should be a dedicated “News” section. Instead, I think we should just put whatever article is the newest in that section. That way the newest articles get featured (and it also leaves space for the article excerpts).

  7.  

    I like the “news” section, but I would rather have a “featured” article with an excerpt. I miss featured articles.

    •  
      CommentAuthorswenson
    • CommentTimeMar 14th 2012
     

    Wasn’t the featured article just the most recent one anyway?

    •  
      CommentAuthorKyllorac
    • CommentTimeMar 14th 2012 edited
     

    Also, medium is supposed to be what the article is written in, right (if it’s a creative piece, that is)? Articles that are just about a certain medium should not be sorted into that medium, right?

    Correct.

    Can we nuke tags that are also series, sections, and categories (that haven’t been nuked already)?

    Yes please. I was working on that, except friends dragged me off places and now I’m sore. XD

    As for the News vs. featured article, the News section once was a great place to announce new article series and feature certain individual articles/comments in addition to site updates. I’d like to restore the News section to its former usefulness, and a good way to do that would be to look up older articles and feature them in the News spot.

    I should also be able to make the article excerpts visible on the front page (or just for the first article listed on the page).

    [Edit] There are also some really good things in the News section that might otherwise be hidden, like this reminder.

  8.  

    the News section once was a great place to announce new article series and feature certain individual articles/comments in addition to site updates. I’d like to restore the News section to its former usefulness, and a good way to do that would be to look up older articles and feature them in the News spot.

    That sounds like a good idea.

    ...

    Nuked some more tags.

    •  
      CommentAuthorKyllorac
    • CommentTimeMar 17th 2012
     

    Added a couple of new categories. If you think there’s another category that could use adding, do tell.

    Phase 2 of the retagging involves going through all of the visible articles and tagging/categorizing them appropriately.

    •  
      CommentAuthorPuppet
    • CommentTimeMar 22nd 2012
     

    I’m not sure what happened, but I could have sworn that the comment counter disappeared from the news on the front page. It used to look like:

    Comment [1] ≬ Older News

    But now there’s nothing displaying the number of comments posted.

    •  
      CommentAuthorKyllorac
    • CommentTimeMar 22nd 2012 edited
     

    It was ugly, so I got rid of the count. Do we really need a count for news posts?

    •  
      CommentAuthorPuppet
    • CommentTimeMar 22nd 2012
     

    No, I was just wondering what happened to it. :P

    •  
      CommentAuthorswenson
    • CommentTimeMar 22nd 2012
     

    Ah, I was wondering too!

  9.  

    I know right now when you look at the archives, you can click “older” and “newer” buttons to navigate through articles. Could you also add “oldest” and “newest” buttons? I just think it would be easier to get to the first or last page of different archives than repeatedly clicking the button. Particularly with series, if you want to start at the beginning or see the latest stuff.

    Also, I think it might be nice if series archives were put into ascending order from oldest in the series to newest (like it is on the writer pages) in case people are trying to start at the beginning and because people looking into the archives of a particular series are probably either browsing and wouldn’t have read any articles in that series yet or are looking at older stuff of series they already like. I think that newest first works with the rest of the archive sections, though.

    If you don’t agree with any of this, then never mind, but it was just some thoughts I had when poking around the archives.

    I really like what you appear to be doing with the news section (highlighting old stuff), by the way.

    •  
      CommentAuthorKyllorac
    • CommentTimeMar 23rd 2012 edited
     

    Could you also add “oldest” and “newest” buttons?

    I’m not sure if that’s possible, but I’ll check and see.

    I think it might be nice if series archives were put into ascending order from oldest in the series to newest

    So do I, but it’s not cooperating with anything I’ve tried, and I figure working archives are better than no archives at all, right? XD

    •  
      CommentAuthorKyllorac
    • CommentTimeApr 9th 2012
     

    Mwahahahaha!

    Pagination has now been added. The double arrows at either end of the lovely page numbers function as First and Last (or Oldest and Newest) buttons respectively. I had text originally, but the arrows look much cleaner.

    I’ve also fixed some things in the archives. Everything should be appearing in ascending order now, except for the articles on the author pages. Those should be first grouped into their respective categories alphabetically (1 first, then 2) and then organized by ascending order. This means the articles in a series are now grouped together not only on the series archive page, but also the author’s, and it also results in category-less articles being featured at the top of their respective authors pages.

    This also means that if you don’t make sure the series is selected for Category 2 (and not 1), the list of articles on the author’s page will be messed up.

    looks at Rorschach

    His page makes for a pretty example of the reorganization with all the different articles on it.

    I’ve also spiffed up the error page, which you can see by going here.

    •  
      CommentAuthorPuppet
    • CommentTimeApr 9th 2012
     

    One thing…

    •  
      CommentAuthorKyllorac
    • CommentTimeApr 9th 2012
     

    Yeah… I just fixed that.

    Evil typos. >.>

  10.  

    Are The Epistler’s articles supposed to be posted? If so, he needs an author page.

    EDIT:
    So those articles actually just link to a page about why they were removed. Anyway, the error page nice. I like it.

    •  
      CommentAuthorKyllorac
    • CommentTimeApr 9th 2012
     

    So those articles actually just link to a page about why they were removed.

    Yeah. That’s why she doesn’t have an author’s page. I’ve also fixed the link to the explanation page.

    •  
      CommentAuthorswenson
    • CommentTimeApr 9th 2012
     

    Yay, we have a new “page not found” page.

    •  
      CommentAuthorPuppet
    • CommentTimeJun 5th 2012
     

    Just going to quote NP here:

    The ratings system doesn’t seem to be working quite right. Asahel rated his article as “E,” but it’s still showing up as “N.” Then I went in and edited to “Everyone” to see if that worked, but it still showed “N.” It’s been put back to “E” now in textpattern, but the main page still says “N.”

    Also, if we’re going to be actively using a ratings system it might be a good idea to add a “By Rating” section in the Archives. I could help rate older articles if needed.

    •  
      CommentAuthorKyllorac
    • CommentTimeJun 5th 2012
     

    I had a nice explanatory post all typed up, and then my touchpad went evil and closed the window. No more post.

    Ratings aren’t really that useful by themselves to organize articles as far as I can see. Also, unrated articles wouldn’t show up in the Archives.

    I don’t think rating older articles is necessary (except for maybe the You Slay Me spork), but if you want to, go right ahead.

    •  
      CommentAuthorswenson
    • CommentTimeJun 5th 2012
     

    Will the ratings post be accessible from the front page once the news article changes? I’m wondering if there could be an About/Support/Help page and then link to all the articles on various site-related topics there, like the ratings post and information on how to submit articles.

    •  
      CommentAuthorKyllorac
    • CommentTimeJun 5th 2012
     

    I’m working on it. Right now, it’s the only article in the About section, though. Might as well add it to the navigation now. XD