The Joe Frank Wiki talk:Chatter

Here all the most best pharmacy! Pharmacy Search.com Best regarts, Bob Doe

2000 commercials

You see these? [1] Spblat 17:21, 5 Feb 2005 (PST)

"Index of first lines"?

I'm going to start quoting the first sentence of programs to include at the top of the program write-ups. Sort of like an "index of first lines" in a poem collection. Starting with At the Border (remix). Thoughts?

Spblat 22:00, 24 Feb 2005 (PST)

Sounds good. I just happened past the Joe Frank Finder today, and discovered that they've already compiled exactly that list. Might be worth asking him to contribute it to the wiki. (Or to let someone else do it.) Here's a link

Shiro 05:40, 6 Mar 2005 (PST)

Hello?

Maybe it's because I just finished listening to Emptiness, but it's kind of lonely in here. Am I the only one who's interested in this project?

Spblat 22:02, 3 Mar 2005 (PST)

Well, I'm certainly still interested, for whatever that's worth. Just super busy the last couple of weeks. Haven't had time for much of anthing recreational.

Did notice the detail you've added to the style guide. Looks great!

Shiro 16:07, 5 Mar 2005 (PST)

Woooo! Nice flurry of activity! I guess it's pretty silly to expect this site to be as vibrant as wikipedia or even hrwiki. As long as we're adding content faster than Joe can create it, we win, right?

Spblat 23:05, 6 Mar 2005 (PST)

What-Links-Here Wiki Bug?

I spent a few minutes hunting for bad links, and there seems to be a problem with the Whatlinkshere indexing. For example, I fixed the work in progress template to refer to the properly styled program name Building a Church.

But, the "What Links Here" page for the incorrect name still lists 52 hits. I've looked through a bunch of them, and they all seem to have been modified to reflect the new name. Sure enough, the "What Links Here" page for the correct name lists only 4 hits: the template, and three pages with hand made links.

Any idea what's going on here? Is there some sort of periodic re-indexing involved? The template page disappeared from the list instantly after being changed, so it doesn't seem that way.

Special:Whatlinkshere/Building_A_Church Special:Whatlinkshere/Building_a_Church

Shiro 22:42, 7 Mar 2005 (PST)

That's interesting. I am no expert with mediawiki, but it's a decent theory that some periodic reindexing may fix this. But it's been awhile. If more than a day goes by I guess I'd have to call it a bug.

Spblat 09:17, 8 Mar 2005 (PST)

I did find a reference to link indexing on some random mozilla related site, but now details. Will look into it if the problem persists. (Maybe reindexing happens automatically on a page change, but not when a template called from within a page changes?)

Shiro Wed Mar 9 20:13:37 PST 2005

A little more info -

It looks like there is some indexing which isn't happening. I edited one of the pages which links through the template (Nausea), and saved it without making any changes. Sure enough, it was dropped from the old whatlinkshere page and added to the new one immediately.

I'm hunting for some discussion of how pages get indexed. So far, the only relevant material is here, but it suggests that links from a template shouldn't be included in the first place.

Shiro 00:01, 10 Mar 2005 (PST)

Hmmm. Has some content vanished?

I seem to recall that a few weeks ago I made a page called something like all_series, which was just all the series templates stuck together, and linked to it from the main page. I also made some rambling comment somewhere about creating additional series-like categories.

What's more, I could swear that there was an positive comment from spblat on the talk page in response to both those items.

But now all of that seems to have vanished. The main page history shows no trace of it, the all_series page is gone, and my user contributions page shows neither.

Was there a reversion to backups a couple weeks ago? Am I losing my mind? (It has been a very busy week...)

Shiro 14:51, 9 Apr 2005 (PDT)

Aw, hell. No, you're not losing your mind. I thought it was awesome, and you're correct that I said so. There was an emergency with our server a couple weeks back, and it seems clear to me now that we reverted back a few days at that time. Now I'm wondering what else was lost. There's no getting it back, so we'll have to stumble forward best we can. In the future, when any server changes appear in our future, I'll lock the database to prevent changes until it's stable again. Sorry everybody, Spblat 09:12, 11 Apr 2005 (PDT)

New Version

Just upgraded MediaWiki to 1.4.2, let me know if you see anything weird. Spblat 13:26, 25 Apr 2005 (PDT)

Indeed, we're seeing something weird. When I upgraded, Special:Recentchanges broke--just came up blank. I found a way to fix it (/usr/local/php/bin/php rebuildrecentchanges.php), but three days later it happened again. I think I have fixed it. Please e-mail me if you see the problem again.

About Chat

This should be in reverse cronological order....

Jaanton 10:45, 12 May 2005 (PDT)

Perhaps. But clicking the "Click here to say something" link automatically creates a new section at the bottom, and that's pretty much a Wiki standard. What many wikis do is to archive old chatter on sub pages. As this page grows we can do that too. For now I've added a note at the top of this page that new stuff can be found at the bottom. Spblat 12:01, 12 May 2005 (PDT)

We need a remix labeling policy.

Hi Folks -

There seems to be some confusion about which programs get a "remix" tag, no doubt inherited from the labeling scheme at joefrank.com. As far as I can make out, they use "remix" in four different situations:

1. programs which have the same title as previous shows (eg. Red Sea remix)
2. programs with unique titles but which include large amounts of material taken from previous shows (Brothers remix)
3. programs which share text but not audio with other shows (Fat Man Down remix)
4. programs which seem to have been rebroadcast without change (eg. Policemans' Ball remix, if the non-remix version isn't simply a mistake).

I say this is needlessly confusing and we'd do well to pick a better system. I propose the following guidelines. Feel free to raise objections or add ideas. Once there's some consensus about the plan, we ought to place it in the style guide.

• programs which have the same name as previous shows but content which is not identical get the tag "remix," or in cases where a convention already exists, a year. Thus, Red Sea (remix) keeps its title.
• programs which only contain audio taken from more than one previous program get no special tag, but they get added to the category "compilations."
• programs which only contain a remix of material from a single previous program but were broadcast with a new and unique name don't get any special tag, but we make a note of the relationship. Thus, Brothers (remix) becomes Brothers, and it gets a note about Jerry's World in the article.
• Programs which are rebroadcast without change in more than one series get two pages. The main article should have a title with no extra tag and include the template for the earlier series. Then, we add "title (rebroadcast)" to the template for the second series, and make that article a redirect. In the body of the main article we mention both series.
• When joefrank.com uses the word "remix" but we do not, mention that at the top of the article. For example, "Brothers, also called Brothers (remix), is the name of a program. . . "

Any thoughts? Shiro 03:48, 13 May 2005 (PDT)

Works for me. I don't understand it as a huge problem, but that's just 'cause I'm not paying much attention. I've seen you guys experiencing frustration on the matter. If this will help, go for it. Spblat

Okay - I've added it to the style guide and will start using it. If anyone objects, let me know. Shiro 15:34, 14 May 2005 (PDT)

Music notes

Here's a big project that will take a lot of work and a long time: noting the music in a show where possible.

The owner of this site has re-posted the collection of info already compiled by someone else. With this individual's cooperation maybe we could start incorporating that info here.

I'll try to do some if other people want to. Don't think I can do it all, though. Pete 19:05, 18 May 2005 (PDT)

Hi Pete - Beau, the current music site maintainer, is already on board. Check out (and feel free to add to) the discussion here --Shiro 01:24, 19 May 2005 (PDT)

Spammers

This recent spam activity means we may be forced to permit only registered users to edit pages. Hopefully it won't come to that, but if past experience is a guide, the spam comes first as a trickle, then as a torrent. :-(