An Tir Culture Wiki:Community Portal

This page needs some Cleanup. Check the 'discussion' tab for details.

It might need:

• to have its spelling or grammar fixed.
• to have its content edited for clarity.
• to be reorganized.
• links fixed.

Community discussions are held here.

Announcements

OP Adds Links to Wiki

(Maintaining the Wiki's history, as well as the Kingdom's)

From: Jacyntha
Date: 2006-08-16 14:00

Greetings unto Their Majesties, King Amalric and Queen Caia
And to Their Highnesses of the Summits, Prince Tjorkill and Princess Sylva
And to Their Highnesses of Avacal, Prince Wernar and Princess Tatiana
And to Their Highnesses of Tir Righ, Prince Kheron and Princess Ksenia
And to all of the other gentles here gathered

From Duchess Jacyntha Argentarius, Dexter Gauntlet Herald

It pleases me to notify you of a major change in the An Tir Order of Precedence.

When you look at the Roster Pages to an individual's listing you will notice that there is now a link to that person's An Tir Wiki page! Please take some time and add thoughts and memories to your page and your friend's pages. Let's make the Wiki be representative of this, the greatest Kingdom in the Knowne World.

My warmest regards,

Jacyntha
Jacyntha Argentarius, Duchess An Tir
Dexter Gauntlet Herald
Kingdom of An Tir

http://www.antirheralds.org/awards/OP/op.html

Wiki Work

Want to help, but don't know where to begin? Here are some good places to start:

• Pages that need more content
• Pages that need some cleanup
• Pages that need to be created
• Wiki Work (Read about this page in "Discussions" below).
• Templates

An Tir Wiki Opens its Doors

29 Aug 2005. Somebody write that down. I know I wish I'd written down the day the Steps list was first created. --Elizabeth Braidwood 23:43, 29 Aug 2005 (EDT)

Kudos

From time-to-time, I get complimented on the An Tir Wiki and although I always reply that I'm not the only one doing the work, you're not getting to see the compliments that are coming our way. So I'm going to post them here for all to share. --Elizabeth Braidwood 17:53, 25 Jul 2006 (EDT)

---

25 July 2006

I would also like to thank you, and the rest of the people who are working so hard on this project. You've all done a tremendous job.

Thank you, Brighid

Discussions

Royalty

The way this section is set up seems chaotic I think because it first is done by couples, which is the first complication since there are a number who have different partners from reign to reign, then its organized by reigns leaving the couples page fairly blank and then on top of it there isnt much info on individual Royals themnselves. My suggestion would be to do away with the whole pair of people and organize the Royalty into the seperate reigns (which might have interesting synergy with the OP) and then link to the names of the people themselves, the pair of royals pages seem redundant.--P. Darius Corvinus (Corvyn) 03:04, 21 May 2006 (EDT)

Ideally, the reigns should appear in the order they ocurred, no? Like on http://www.antir.sca.org/Pubs/royalty.html. Is there any way to add a category:royalty tag that would do that? -- sort the reign by date? Or would the main royalty page have to be built by hand? --Elizabeth Braidwood 11:49, 23 May 2006 (EDT)

I've polled a few knowledgeable folks about their preferences on the layout of the Royalty page. So far all three have liked the ordered-by-name arrangement. One said it was easier to find a given reign, another said that there were already two versions of the chronological list and having a different list was nice. FWIW. --Elizabeth Braidwood 19:06, 22 Jun 2006 (EDT)

Images Policy

There's a query about our images policy over in Talk:Riderless_Horse_Ceremony. Anybody have any comments? --Elizabeth Braidwood 13:47, 16 May 2006 (EDT)

Wiki Work

At Corvyn's suggestion (we had a great f2f talk at Investiture this past weekend; thanks to Sir Yusuf for introducing us), I'm going to post raw wiki data in a page called Wiki Work. This data needs to be distributed to the appropriate pages with the appropriate mark-up. Do as much as you can, when you can. If we all contribute bits, the work will get done. --Elizabeth Braidwood 13:47, 15 May 2006 (EDT)

Wiki/OP Connection

Corvyn also suggested that we build a connection between the OP and the Wiki -- essentially a button on the OP next to a person's entry that will create a default person page on the Wiki, complete with template. Just fill in the blanks. It was Corvyn's idea. Yusuf will be contacting Krenn and working with Quentin to set up the details. It's very cool. --Elizabeth Braidwood 13:47, 15 May 2006 (EDT)

Households

I was wondering also if it would be alright to create a new category for hosueholds because they seem to be quite a major factor in generating new intrest in the society. There are quite a few and have neat histories not to mention the fact htey some depth to the SCA culture. For instance, the Innars (I have no idea how to spell that lol), Wolfpack, Trubadors, Al-Cabila, my dads household the Darians etc etc--P. Darius Corvinus (Corvyn) 00:37, 15 May 2006 (EDT)

I think a household category is a great idea. Go for it. (It's spelled "Einars" -- after "Einar, known as Oak".) And I think Al Kabeelah is spelled with a K and an H somewhere in it. --Elizabeth Braidwood 13:47, 15 May 2006 (EDT)

House Elphinstone should be added to household category when you build it.

You might also want to take a stab at writing a Household entry in Category:Glossary as well. --Elizabeth Braidwood

As a member of Ravenstead Household, I've talked to both our members and the SCA-household Yahoo list about the lack of a definition here. Thing is that households are not an official SCA designation, so there's no "official" information about them. I'm willing to help out with the "household" entries.  :) I'd like to see a "Households" category, too. --Hjordis Olvirsdottir

The great thing about having no definition or no official information about them is that you can make them into whatever kind of "group of people" you want or need.

Category:Household added. Though I'm not sure if it should be "Household" or "HouseholdS". Comments? Very rough definition added too. --Elizabeth Braidwood 12:08, 23 May 2006 (EDT)

Household sounds good to me. I wonder if they should have a template, but they may vary enough to make that hard.

Templates

One thing I was noticing is incoherency a little. I think it would be swell if we put some collective effort into templates for various page types. Right now the only one I have found, although I havnt spent an increadable amount of time looking, is an event template and so all these different pages about similar topics are sorta chaotic. This could potentialy be daunting to new users or even just curious people looking for information.

Some examples of templates im talking about are like People, Events(done already Im pretty sure), Awards(for these ones we cant reprint what is already on the An Tir web site but would we be able to give at least summaries on them, also histories would be wicked(for example explaining the chains and spurs and belt of a knight)), Branches etc.

Tell me what you think :D --P. Darius Corvinus (Corvyn) 23:44, 14 May 2006 (EDT)

You can find a link to a list of Templates at the bottom of Wiki_Editing_Help. Not the most intuitively obvious place, I agree. Go ahead and add a link in a more obvious place. --Elizabeth Braidwood 13:47, 15 May 2006 (EDT)

Oh there they are but there are a few that are not there that would be good to have like People or Awards or Positions/Offices--P. Darius Corvinus (Corvyn) 02:56, 21 May 2006 (EDT)

Got any templates you like from other wikis or have designed yourself? Add them. --Elizabeth Braidwood 11:50, 23 May 2006 (EDT)

I created a new branch template. I'd like others to take a look at it and see what they think. Template:BranchTemplate Tomas 22:46, 14 Jun 2006 (EDT)

Categories

I was thinking that we need some new categories to make browsing the Wiki easier. Somehow I think we're going to get Linux syndrome instead of Wiki syndrome here. Everyone wants to create new content, no one wants to organize.

One article that should maybe become a category is Associate or Student. I think we should turn Student into the category because while an associate is a student, a student isn't necessarily an associate.

For what purpose? I mean -- what would be a member of category:associate? --Elizabeth Braidwood 19:10, 22 Jun 2006 (EDT)

Hmmm... I suppose on second thought that that catagory wouldn't be so nesicary, as there are only about 6 items in it Tomas 19:18, 22 Jun 2006 (EDT)

We should probably have some sort of overarching design to how things work. Tomas

Another category we might want to think about is SCA Jargon. For phrases like Dragon and Smalls. Tomas 21:09, 21 Jun 2006 (EDT)

We have category:glossary... I'd actually rather see a "(Jargon)" notation inside on the page. --Elizabeth Braidwood 19:10, 22 Jun 2006 (EDT)

(Jargon) notation it is. --Tomas 19:18, 22 Jun 2006 (EDT)

Locking Down the Main Page

Should we restrict access to the Main page, or leave it open? --Elizabeth Braidwood

I don't see why people other than the Moderators need access to the main page, are there any updates/changes that it would be benificial to have the main page open for? --Tomas 19:20, 22 Jun 2006 (EDT)

Aveloc R&D page

We know this is going to be a controversial issue, so I've gone ahead and asked Groa to write up her/Aveloc's side of the story. Does anyone have a recommendation as to who we should ask to write up the alternate view? In an ideal world, we'll be able to merge the two stories into a single article in a neutral voice. If that proves undoable, I propose we simply publish the two stories side-by-side and then stand back and carefully monitor any subsequent page changes.

As a starting point, I've created a personal page for Aveloc the Younger which contains pointers to an Aveloc R&D page as well as to pages for his two reigns.

--Elizabeth Braidwood 18:44, 3 Aug 2005 (EDT)

User identification

Do we want any kind of requirement that people create the accounts with their SCA names, and describe themselves on their user pages?

If we don't, I could envision "Joebob" coming along and editing some page, which gets reverted because nobody knows who they are, and it turns out to be some old duke that was putting in their own information. --Krenn

I think this is a terrific idea. Let's implement it as a community standard first. I'd rather not hardwire it into the site configuration unless necessary. --Elizabeth Braidwood 18:09, 29 Aug 2005 (EDT)

I have created an account with my SCA name, and have completed my user page. Now how do I add my name to the list of those on the Categories:People page and link to my userpage? --Aislinn O'Connor

What goes where?

Thanks to everyone inovled in putting this together. I had thought about putting more of this kind of stuff on Cunnan but it feels better for a Kingdom to have its own. One thing I saw happen with Cunnan that I think would be good to think about early is how to not reinvent content that is elsewhere, or would make more sense elsewhere. E.g., I would propose that we promote a community standard that SCA level stuff that isn't specific to An Tir go on Cunnan, and that historical stuff go on Wikipedia. It is easy to link to a Wikipedia article, just put in [[wikipedia:chess]] for wikipedia:chess or [[wikipedia:chess|chess]] for chess. There doesn't seem to be a similar setup for Cunnan ... yet. So you would have to use [http://cunnan.sca.org.au/wiki/Chess chess] to link to chess. --IasonVorax 11:11, 30 Aug 2005 (EDT)

Interesting suggestion (re "SCA stuff that isn't specific to An Tir should go on Cunnan"). Cunnan is certainly extensive, but while exploring it I've found a definite Lochacian slant. If it were more generically SCA and more tolerant of differences in rite and language, I think I would be more interested. I can certainly get behind the proposal that historical stuff go on or be linked from Wikipedia. --Elizabeth Braidwood 23:21, 30 Aug 2005 (EDT)

I think much of that Lochac slant comes from the fact that they started it and were the bulk of the early contributors. Anyone who finds such a slant can fix it or mark it with {{rpov}} (the regional point of view tag). Otherwise if each Kingdome does its own version of how the SCA as a whole works, that will dilute a lot of energy 18 ways. Part of what makes Wikipedia a success is that it is very clear about what it is not. -- IasonVorax

It should be possible to implement our own quickwords. I'll poke around in the guts to see how to do it. --Krenn

Moving Old An Tir Handbook Material to Wiki?

I'm thinking that the old An Tir Handbook material that currently lives on the main An Tir website should be relocated to the wiki where it can be kept more up-to-date. That is, of course, if we can contact the original authors and get their permission to move their work to the public domain.

Whaddaya think?

Along those same lines, I'm wondering about the advisability of similarly moving/duplicating the Champions' List here to encourage ongoing maintenance. (I keep envisioning Sir Historic Fighter coming across the list late some night and noticing that the details aren't quite right. On the wiki, he'd be able to make the update. On the website he can't.) --Elizabeth Braidwood 16:02, 2 Sep 2005 (EDT)

I like the idea of using the wiki for maintenance items in general, but that list is a bad example. It's already fed from a backend program that culls the information from the OP database and generates the pages we see on the site. The practical upshot is that it's maintenance, like most of the OP site, is already trivial once the information itself is in the OP database. -- Quentin Martel

Yup, I realize that the page is fed from the OP database. Actually I was thinking of wiki-izing the Champions' lists in terms of using the wiki information to feed the OP. The Champion list is over 20 years out-of-date... hold on. It's in reverse chronological order. Okay, now it's not a wiki issue and this discussion should be taken elsewhere. --Elizabeth Braidwood 18:15, 2 Sep 2005 (EDT)

Vanity Entries

I was wondering about the policy on vanity entries. I think that peers and above should have their own entries, but I was thinking that unless a person has accomplished Great Deeds(tm) or have passed on and have been entered into the Scroll of Honor - An Tir Remembers they should not have an independent page. I feel that this is what user pages are for. Any thoughts? Tomas 15:10, 22 Jun 2006 (EDT)

I don't have a problem with ordinary folk having their own pages. As a matter of fact, I've been encouraging it. I like reading people's descriptions of themselves and having a reference point for interests and affiliations. I really enjoy seeing pictures of them. (Mostly because I have an abysmal memory for names and faces.) And as a peer, having discreet access to someone's SCA resume is invaluable during candidate discussions. --Elizabeth Braidwood 19:21, 22 Jun 2006 (EDT)

Makes sense. Especialy since I doubt that all of the people in An Tir will create user accounts, this way if you need to know something about someone you can just look it up here. Good stuff. --Tomas 20:01, 22 Jun 2006 (EDT)

Oh, FWIW -- I've been naming category:people pages based on the person's entry in the OP. As "official" a reference point as any we've got. --Elizabeth Braidwood 19:25, 22 Jun 2006 (EDT)

I like that format as well. That way all names are unique --Tomas 20:01, 22 Jun 2006 (EDT)

Admin request? Page deletion

I'm not sure where to request this, but the page Rivers Region could maybe be deleted as now there is a Rivers Region category in the Branch category instead. Wenyeva atte grene 00:18, 1 Dec 2005 (EST)

Done. Good point, we should create a "DeleteMe" tag... hold on, that sounds familiar. (It didn't pop up in my memory until I typed it.) Yup, we already have one, albeit really, really hidden -- sorry. See: Templates --Elizabeth Braidwood 16:15, 5 Dec 2005 (EST)

Ah, ok, cool. Thanks! -- Wenyeva atte grene 20:46, 5 Dec 2005 (EST)