Here's a quick tutorial on how to use images on Mediawiki (the software this and Wikipedia uses). It was taken straight from Wikipedia and hasn't been rewritten as I don't have time for that right now, but it explains how to do just about anything with an image. mithridates aka 데이빛 05:12, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Contents 1 x restaurants vs restaurants in x 2 Categories 3 Information on uploaded images 4 What to do when names conflict 5 Romanization 6 Photo by Skookum 7 Dave's 8 Why double up on categories? 9 Thanks 10 Romanization 11 Muju-eup 12 Categories 13 Naming conventions 14 It's Skookum! means... 15 Why sextuple up on posts? 16 Train stations 17 Category sorting 18 Undoing redirects 19 Sysop 20 Promotion

[edit] x restaurants vs restaurants in x

I was thinking about that a bit, having the adjective in the front might make it confusing for when we get on to Italian, Indian, and other sorts of restaurants. Italian restaurants in Gangnam sounds better than Gangnam Italian restaurants or Gangnam restaurants (Italian). Thoughts? mithridates aka 데이빛 13:21, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Hi, This is where breaking down the categories comes in useful. So that Seoul would have it's own restaurant listings, maybe the 구s would too...

Korea:
   Restaurants
      Cheongju restaurants
      Chungju restaurants
      Seoul restaurants
      Vegetarian

  Seoul restaurants
     Nowon-gu restaurants
     Gangnam restaurants
        Italian restaurants in Gangnam
        Kalbi restaurants in Gangnam
        Pat bing su in Gangnam
        Pizza in Gangnam
           in this dong
           in that dong 
           by that station over there (when that level of specialization is needed)

All restaurants in Seoul would only refer back to the next category up. The same for anywhere else, come to think of it. Then the next category would do the same, and so Italian restaurants in Gangnam would always be listed under Gangnam, which would in turn be listed under Seoul, etc., etc.

Now all this applies to geographic listings. We don't need a listing for all chicken places in Korea, one after another, but perhaps we do for Vegetarian restaurants. In which case we could have a referral back to vegetarian restaurants. So, maybe there should be a strictly geographical listing, say, under "Restaurants:Categories" and a food-type listing under "Restaurants: subcategories" Though I don't think we'd need many non-geographical categories, Korea-wide. That would be just about only the things that someone might want to go to a city especially 'cause of the existence of a particular restaurant. I can't think of anything beside vegetarian. Of course an outstanding restaurant might draw me to another town, but not many categories of food. Anyway, if we don't need a category, Korea ㄱRestaurants ㄱㄱItalian restaurants, well, would SeoulㄱItalian restaurants be useful. I don't live there so I don't know if someone would be likely to look for these places anywhere in Seoul or just by 구s or some other subdivision. Either way it could be done without being in the way of location listings.

Korea
   Restaurants
      Seoul
         Italian restaurants
            Italian restaurants in Gangnam
            Italian restaurants in Jongno

or just:

Korea
   Restaurants
      Seoul
         Gangnam
            Italian restaurants in Gangnam
            Slavonian restaurants in Gangnam

or both. But not:

Korea
   Restaurants
      Italian restaurants

The same would be true for everywhere in Korea. Even a small place has a lot of restaurants, and if we wanted a separate page Chicken restaurants in Jeomchon it could just refer back to Jeomchon restaurants. That way we could keep the town names first. Even then it will be densely-packed when we have restaurants in every town in Korea listed!

--Skookum 14:52, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Okay, looks like you have it planned out quite well. Also don't forget that a page can have an unlimited number of categories, so a page on Restaurants in x could be category restaurants, category x, and category restaurants in x all at the same time. Since there can be a large number of categories it's not so much a directory structure as a system by which similar pages are grouped, but if done well it can be both of course. mithridates aka 데이빛 15:14, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Categories can be numberically unlimited but they are less useful beyond a certain point. If you're looking for something beginning with "X" and you hafta click through "next 200" 15 times to get there it is a real pain. That's why having the hierarchy of concepts makes it easier to get to where you are going. A book index typically doesn't use more than 4 or 5 undifferentiated referrents 'cause people usually throw up their hands rather than looking up 10 or 20 or 100 pages. On-line of course we can break down everything into components since we have more space, but the same basic principle applies. --Skookum 15:31, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

What I meant was that some articles can apply to more than one category so we don't have to worry about thinking of the one perfect category for one article that might apply to more than one. Baldwin IV of Jerusalem on Wikipedia for example has three: 1161 births, 1185 deaths, and Kings of Jerusalem. A restaurant could theoretically be under 'restaurants in x', 'Italian restaurants', 'restaurants that employ H-1 visa holders' and anything else that doesn't have too many articles as you said, generally about a few dozen to a hundred or so before we should consider making smaller categories. Most people though find information through a keyword search and the categories are generally more for finding similar articles afterwards. mithridates aka 데이빛 16:45, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Categories

You might want to read here on how categories work because it explains it a lot better than I could. Not that I mind answering questions but I know they've explained it quite well. mithridates aka 데이빛 13:47, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the link; I'll study it.

[edit] Information on uploaded images

Hi, please make sure to write in who took pictures / where they came from for later on as images need to be uploaded by the person who has taken them or be able to be used under a free license under Wikipedia. I assume you've taken them but the average person won't know that without the info. mithridates aka 데이빛 14:42, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Then, is this sufficient --Skookum 14:53, 1 February 2006 (UTC) - on the page somewhere.

If it's taken by you then taken by me would be best - if from somewhere else you could just write from Wikipedia or whatever the site's name is. If you feel like it you could add a longer description for people later on doing an image search like Something restaurant in somewhere-dong, taken by me but a simple taken by me is fine. Thanks. mithridates aka 데이빛 15:01, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] What to do when names conflict

Hi, when you have two or more places with the same name the best thing to do usually is to make a disambiguation page - a page with the name and links to all the other pages that have the same name, that will usually have their description in parenthesis. Afterwards put this template on the bottom: {{disambig}} meaning disambiguation. That's what you do when the places are all about as noticeable as the other. When you have one place that's clearly more well-known than the other you can leave it as the main article (like in the case of Gwangju) and add a note in italics on the top that they may be looking for the other page of the same name. mithridates aka 데이빛 10:42, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

I see that you are categorizing the food directory. Good stuff. While doing so, could you also take the time to add a vegetarian category to those particular foods and dishes that you come across? Thanks.--Galbijim 15:45, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

'Spicey' category might be good to label, as well.--Galbijim 15:47, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

I prefer the correct spelling 'spicy' myself. 메렁! mithridates aka 데이빛 16:02, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

I'll do what I can with the vegetarian - pretty up-in-the-air due to the tendency of cooks to add clams to everything, or anchovies..... Spicy even worse - maybe better to have an article on bland Korean food, or on those foods that can be bland-ized by request. Though once I ordered maeuntang and the cook decided in spite of my protestations that I being oegukin couldn't possibly eat chile and served me a most unspicy version.... --Skookum 23:22, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Romanization

For consistency sakes, can you please focus on following Revised Romanization? We're going to have a lot of Korea newbies coming through here, and it's important that we stick with one romanization to avoid confusion. Thanks.--Galbijim 10:34, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Never mind. I'm just going to go back and do redirects for all the old or different romanizations. Can you make sure that you wikify all of your content, to ensure that we don't have to go back and look for unwikified content that has existing articles or should have articles? That'll be a big time-saver for us. :)--Galbijim 11:01, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Yeah that's right, redirects for all kinds of romanization are the best. I actually didn't know romanization myself until we started this wiki and I just wrote it the way it sounded. With redirects for all types of writing someone will be able to enter Busan, Pusan, or 부산 and still come to the same page. mithridates aka 데이빛 12:25, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Photo by Skookum

Hi - you only need the source for the image on the image page, and not the article itself. The rule of thumb is that the articles should give no sign of individual touches, but there should be info on talk pages and image pages for people who want to know how the article was made and what kind of edits it's had. To make it easier for feedback on your images though you might want to put your name in brackets so people can go directly to your page - on the image pare write it like this for example: Photo by [[User:Skookum|Skookum]]

Just in case you're not sure, on your individual user page you can write or put up anything you want - photos, blog links, whatever. Some of the user pages on Wikipedia are pretty detailed, and almost act as a kind of resume. One guy on Wikipedia who is only 17 had over 50 of his articles featured on the front page and got interviewed on BBC and that was thanks to being able to contact him through his page. mithridates aka 데이빛 20:40, 2 April 2006 (CEST)

[edit] Dave's

Hi - I see you haven't checked the pm I sent you on Dave's yet. Could you check it and then let me know your email address? Thanks. mithridates aka 데이빛 12:45, 6 July 2006 (CEST)

Actually on second thought, I decided I'd just put them here: User:Skookum/June edits You can see them when you hit the edit button. mithridates aka 데이빛 12:53, 6 July 2006 (CEST)

[edit] Why double up on categories?

I noticed you've put people in, for example, both Category:Models and Category:Notable people... put the models category is already in the notable people category... why the redundancy? It's just annoying to me.--Hater Depot 12:11, 18 July 2006 (CEST)

This enables someone to look for: 1. People who are models (or whatever), or 2. Individual people by name, without knowing their category.

Of course they can always "search" for individuals, but that assumes they would have the name down pat. It's nice to be able to browse, rather than rely on the search engine. We could eliminate everyone from "notable people" and just have the categories there, but then we do have the space for "articles". Or we could just put certain individuals under "notable people" but how do we decide who is so deserving as to be so chosen.

Another possiblity might be a "List of People who have articles in Galbijim." That would do the job adequately.

I see the information arranged as a network rather than as a strict hierarchy. So to my way of thinking, we'd have various ways of accessing information to accomodate different people's search styles. Sort of a multidimensional index for people who live in different realities, so to speak..... This said, there's no one holy way of making this wiki and as long as the info is readily accessible in browse as well as search (browsing without having to look through all the categories individually) then I don't mind how it's done. If you want to introduce another system (such as the abovementioned "list") then do so. We oughta figure how we want to standardize this before it gets too big and unwieldy to change.--Skookum 03:16, 19 July 2006 (CEST)

I think the word 'category' might have been poorly chosen from the start in MediaWiki - they seem to be more like flags, even though you can sub-categorize them. There really is no end to the categories though; on Wikipedia they even have the category fictional courtesans and prostitutes, and it's got a few dozen of them too. I just use the search engine myself so I can't claim to be all that sharp when it comes to categorization though. I think we can also install a Google search bar rigt below the MediaWiki one on the left too to give people an added dimension in searching. Maybe. I haven't seen one of those on a wiki for a while now but I used to before. mithridates aka 데이빛 17:30, 19 July 2006 (CEST)

The problem with all this double-dipping is that when it reaches a certain point it actually makes it less easier to browse. Look at the Food category for instance; with everything having been dumped into the top category, the sub-categories are spread over several pages, which is pretty inconvenient. What I think we should do is re-categorize into Category:Food by name, A, etc. We could do the same with people, which has the potential to have hundreds of thousands of entries, which at that size the utility of browsing by name is close to zero because there are just so many pages.

Now Category:Bundang is getting filled up in the same way.. it just makes things unwieldy rather than easier.--Hater Depot 06:09, 3 October 2006 (CEST)

Yes, we need something where all food items (or people) would appear on the same page, in somewhat the way the category list does. With internet speed increasing all the time, there's no need to have lists broken down into short segments (unless of course someone with a slow connection wants it that way.) I like to browse as well as search, and having it all out there in columns - no unnecessary double or triple line spacing.... I could always just make a list manually but that would get outdated fast, stuff would be missed, it'd be a lot of work. How is the "Category" list made, for example? Can we make that kind of thing three column?

--Skookum 09:21, 3 October 2006 (CEST)

Having Category:Food by name A, Category:Food by name B, etc., would instantly make it so that you could both browse and search. Finished browsing through A? Hit the back button and start browsing through B. And so on. No need to maintain manual lists, or fiddle with the category display pages. Even making it display in three columns wouldn't really alleviate the trouble that would ensure when Category:People grows into the thousands and beyond.--Hater Depot 10:55, 3 October 2006 (CEST)

But how is having "food starting with A" not worse than what we have now. Realistically we're not going to get tens of thousands of food listings - we've slowed down lately I notice. We could make it food A-D or such, dividing the entirety of it less, but we're in the same place we are now, having to click on something to move forward. Now with people, there is the possibility of thousands of entries, but not this year, or next..... And that may be the only one potentially of that size. When I look at the Category list I have to click on the "display 500 at a time" link before I can use it - why isn't that the default? Or just load it all at once - those with a lower connection-speed can make the choice to load a few at a time. It sounds like the wiki software is not keeping up with technological changes. This repeated click and wait, click and wait is so clunky.... So my question is, how can we put all listings for Category:Food, or all Category:Jeollanam-do (by whatever name we want to call it...), on one page?

Personally, I've never been a fan of the Categories list as being a viable search tool. I agree that it could stand to receive some optimization. We can talk with our mediawiki developer about it revealing a full list or 500 limit as the default. I also like what was done with the Category:Food and having subcategories (I should also add, can you guys remember to have the Korean language redirects to all the english food articles? I did all of that before we lost them during the encoding problem earlier in the year. And we also need to make sure that we have varying redirects for spelling. For example, I noticed that a search for 'galbijjim' doesn't produce an article, unless you spell it 'galbi-jjim'. And there's lots of other hyphened ones or ones that could have different romanization such as 'Kalbijjim', or making sure that we have 'Gaepiddeok' redirect to 'Gaepitteok', etc...) But as for enhancing category list navigation, we need more brainstorming or wait until Mediawiki releases a better solution for that. For now, it might just have to be the ugly duckling of our differing search capabilities. My personal preference is that we should focus more on template building and article cross-promotion, like what I've done with the esl content and medical content--Galbijim 05:16, 4 October 2006 (CEST)

[edit] Thanks

for noticing that. There already is a system for that, using the {{disambig}} template like on this page for example: Gajisan, which leads to other pages that are more specific. I'll go fix the page now. mithridates aka 데이빛 16:53, 5 August 2006 (CEST)

[edit] Romanization

Can you please try to keep the spelling of Korean to the post-2000 Revised romanization of Korean? Most people that will be searching on here will only know this version and have not been here long enough to know how Korean was romanized under McCune-Reischauer. If you must use McCune-Reischauer, can you please then remember to add the Revised romanization of Korean as a redirect? Thx--Galbijim 03:06, 7 August 2006 (CEST)

[edit] Muju-eup

Can you double-check a few of the place names in your content in the Muju-eup article. Particularly Sedcheon and Ancheon. Are you sure those aren't supposed be Seocheon and Incheon, or are they smaller burgs in the area?--Galbijim 02:55, 31 August 2006 (CEST)

[edit] Categories

Hi skookum. We can delete categories, you just have to have sysop permissions to do so. Which ones would you like to see deleted, these ones? If there are some others then just let me know and I'll get rid of all of them. mithridates aka 데이빛 08:45, 2 September 2006 (CEST)

[edit] Naming conventions

Hi - you don't need to rename pages in that way - we generally follow Wikipedia naming conventions except with some Korean terms.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_%28people%29

mithridates aka 데이빛 04:07, 6 September 2006 (CEST)

To get around the problem of alphabetization in categories, do category sorting, like so: [[Category:Foreigners|Karr, John Mark]].--59.14.58.133 04:27, 6 September 2006 (CEST)

[edit] It's Skookum! means...

When you modified the template a few weeks back you seemed to have removed a bracket which made all the content from the page go inside the template instead of to the left. We were trying to find out how it happened and it turned out that it was you. No big deal. mithridates aka 데이빛 19:36, 21 September 2006 (CEST)

[edit] Why sextuple up on posts?

Isn't this way out of hand?

[edit] Train stations

Yes, when I wrote those a long time ago I was working from something that had a lot of typos - I don't remember why but I remember thinking that there were a lot of errors that would have to be corrected eventually. When you hit the edit button of a page with a template you can see the templates below the edit window. Hitting that button will take you to the template page, and then you can edit from there. Here's one for example: Template:Chungcheong-do_rail mithridates aka 데이빛 16:38, 9 November 2006 (CET)

[edit] Category sorting

When you do some category sorting, like [[Category:Lists|Websites non-Firefox friendly]], it just puts it under the list of "W"... not making a "Websites" list in the category page. I think it's just going to confuse people who won't expect that page to be under "W" but likely rather under "N".--Hater Depot 10:44, 28 November 2006 (CET

Then we could put up a heading - look under major topic, or something - I'll try it.... There are some serious deficits in this wiki software, that doesn't allow one much flexibility - I tried to list entries using more than one keyword (when more than one applied, e.g. "Fishes of Seoul" , where it could reasonably be listed under both those nouns, but unfortunately only the last entry on the page would work.

--Skookum 07:23, 29 November 2006 (CET)

Ok, I see.. well, for now I'm just going to move them all back. It's just kind of confusing to me to see List of parks in Anyang listed under A rather than P. I'll put a note of some kind on the category page too.--Hater Depot 07:11, 2 December 2006 (CET)

[edit] Undoing redirects

After typing the redirect and winding up on the redirected page, click on the linked "redirected from XYZ" at the top. This will take you to the page where you've set the redirect and you can edit it to change the redirect to go to where you want.--Galbijim 14:32, 20 December 2006 (CET)

[edit] Sysop

Hi - we've decided to make you a sysop (that makes you sysop #5) since you deserve it anyway for being such a tireless contributor (we'd been discussing it for a while anyway) and I think it could help with any problems you have like this one. I don't see that url in the spam blacklist but maybe as a sysop it'll let your edits override the spam filter. If that doesn't work I think we'll have to try something else. mithridates aka 데이빛 18:27, 31 May 2007 (CEST)

This issue is my fault. Last week, we kept getting spammed by .edu urls, so I went and banned all .edu urls via the spam filter, without knowing if there was any .edu urls on our wiki. Looks like there is. I'll amend the spam blacklist to allow for that.--Galbijim 19:42, 31 May 2007 (CEST)

[edit] Promotion

Hi - no problem, you deserve it. The best place to get general information on what you can do now is here on Wikipedia. Not everything there is applicable here since the community's much smaller, so don't worry about things like 3RR violations and whatnot. Basically you can protect and unprotect pages, edit the main page (still be careful with that though of course), block ips and users if they're spamming and / or putting up false information etc. You can also see pages that other people have deleted too if you're curious about the content. There's also an extra button when looking at a recent change so you can revert it with a single click, which makes it easier to fight vandalism. Some other things too, but that's most of it. mithridates aka 데이빛 19:40, 6 June 2007 (CEST)