Just curious, but why is all this content being lumped into one and not being added to their specific articles? Doesn't this defeat the purpose of creating specific wiki articles on all ranges of topics?--Galbijim 15:18, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

There's a place called Wikihow that takes care of subjects like this that Wikipedia doesn't cover. Since our wiki functions somewhat like Wikipedia, Wikibooks, Wikisource and Wiktionary all at the same time I think this Wikihow-type aspect will work too. In any case the interwiki links keep everything connected so I don't see this ruining the use of any of the other articles. mithridates aka 데이빛 15:52, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

I can see the WikiHow idea for 'how to shop for a bed in Korea', but this is a HUGE area that we are now condensing into one article. We're going to be going down the road now of Daves bits-and-pieces FAQ, which is what the wiki was supposed to be the opposite of. I really think this is a bad idea, but it's your call. I just don't want to be the guy that has to go and take all the growing content in this new article and ensure that the individual articles are being updated with it, as well. I've got enough work going on.--59.10.49.74 15:59, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Okay, let's hear some opinions from people on the forums and then decide. 90% of the work on Wikipedia itself is just taking care of badly-written work, incorrect information and badly-formatted pages, but eventually it's become 'the site that has absolutely everything' and I think that would be nice to see for us over here. But they do have a system to merge articles into others if they're too similar to another or not notable so if that's the way people want to do it we could just merge the info here into another article(s). mithridates aka 데이빛 16:03, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

This all needs more thinking. I think something good could come out of this, if we nudge the concept along and give it more thought.--Galbijim 16:24, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

FWIW, when I started this thread on the board, I envisioned it as maybe a 2 screen briefing on the most essential things to know, an article so consise and useful, and people will be compelled to read it all the way through, then start looking frantically for the "donate money" link. As it stands, people say, "Go do Dave's, and poke around the forums. There's lots of good info there." If you're not a forum poker, that won't appeal to you. Now, if there were a super-dense, accurate and kick-ass briefing on one page here, people would start saying, "Go to Galbijim, and search for 'simple advice.' It's short and bang on. Everything else you need to know is linked to that." Then, Galbiwiki could position itself as the first Internet stop for noobs.

The way this page is going now though, within a few weeks, nobody is going to want to sit down and read all the way through. If we like this idea, I think renaming it to "Essential Advice" or something like that would keep us more on track. Atkinson 12:59, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

There is definitely a gem of an idea lurking beneath the surface here, but we haven't been able to quite grasp its fullness yet. I'm slowly picking away at something similar with the Accommodation and ESL advice directories. Everything that we are talking about here is going to boil down to organizing it in such a way so it doesn't look redundant and overwhelming. I'm really not content with the directory set up on the mainpage either. With the amount of newbs that are going to be coming through here, we need to come up with some better means to organize and have some form of directory, because Categorization and text-links only cover two aspects of user search preferences. Directory search is a bonafide search preference, hence why Yahoo, Google, Alexa, etc, make sure that they have that element on their portals, to accommodate those kinds of users who are not deft with accurate Googling skills.--Galbijim 14:37, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Category:How to could be a solution, with plenty of redirects.--Hater Depot 18:10, 3 September 2006 (CEST)

[edit] keys for apartments

I've seen lots of postings about changing the locks on your apartment and a few bad stories.

In most apartments I've had in the US the landlord puts in a new lock when the old tennant moves out and that allows the maintenance staff access to your apartment when you are at work. Although I've heard there are some lower class apartments in Kansas City where that might not be a good idea. Maybe the best bet is to have two locks. One that you have a key to and one that the apt has a key to. You can then leave your own lock unlocked for a day when the maintenance people need in? Maybe? Is this really a big deal in Korea or just message board hype? --Dogshed 17:55, 3 September 2006 (CEST)