Remove the manual from website and port to wiki

[NAS]

Ive had a go at integrating the suggested formatting changes.

 

I also tweaked the wording and removed Toms disclaimer from the front page and added it to the wiki disclaimer section. This may not sit well with Tom  but to my eye its more than enough.

 

This is a first pass as i am no expert on wiki advanced formatting. In the past all ive cared about is content and not how pretty it looks but the front page is very important as you guys say.

 

 

[WeeboTech]

Looks good. I think we need one more tweak.

When I went to the page looking for the hardware compatibility, I was immediately drawn to the boxes...

But then was perplexed as I could not find a link there..

Perhaps the titles in the boxes have links.

 

In addition this line "This wiki contains two types of content, Official and Unofficial documentation."

Should probably be consistent with the top list.

 

This wiki contains two types of content:

• Official documentation
  
• Unofficial documentation
  

 

[SSD]

The wiki project is really coming along.  I am starting to see evidence that it is actually being used.  I recently noticed a first time poster that posted his syslog!

 

I wonder if we should change the term "Unofficial documentation" to "User contributed content".  Unofficial has a somewhat more negative connotation IMO.

[NAS]

We could but Tom has already signed of on the terms and I would need to catch him again.

 

The opposite of Official Is Unofficial and I think it basically a sematic argument otherwise. But IMO as ive said before content is king. Give the Unofficial side time to mature and people wont care if its called a purple aardvark if it full of good info.

 

WeeboTech "I was immediately drawn to the boxes... " i dont get that bit. If you can expand a bit i can see if i have enough rights to change it to what you need.

[WeeboTech]

> i dont get that bit. If you can expand a bit i can see if i have enough rights to change it to what you need.

 

The boxes are colored, your eyes are drawn to it right away.

Make the titles of the boxes a click able link to the page segments.

 

Also instead of having

 

This wiki contains two types of content Official documentation and Unofficial documentation

 

 

Change it to be a list and look like the top section. (Consistency)

 

 

This wiki contains two types of content:

 

    * Official documentation

    * User Contributed documentation (lol had to slip that in there  )

 

 

--------

 

> I wonder if we should change the term "Unofficial documentation" to "User contributed content".  Unofficial has a somewhat more negative connotation IMO.

 

I agree here. I really hate the unofficial term.

User contributed content sounds/reads much better/friendlier.

[NAS]

> i dont get that bit. If you can expand a bit i can see if i have enough rights to change it to what you need.

 

The boxes are colored, your eyes are drawn to it right away.

Make the titles of the boxes a click able link to the page segments.

 

 

Tried that already it looks really bad cause of visited links color changes etc.

 

 

> I wonder if we should change the term "Unofficial documentation" to "User contributed content".  Unofficial has a somewhat more negative connotation IMO.

 

I agree here. I really hate the unofficial term.

User contributed content sounds/reads much better/friendlier.

 

OK you win. Changed the homepage but Im not going to change the rest of the page names or links until Tom gets back to me if you dont mind. I really dont have any real say in this all ive got is more wiki rights cause of coincidence only.

[WeeboTech]

It looks good. 

[RobJ]

Inspired by NASUser's changes to the Unofficial Documentation page, I changed the layout a little, added some descriptive text, added additional user nudging, and the disclaimer at the bottom.  It's only a start, and I'm quite sure others can improve both the layout, and the descriptive text.  My role lately seems to have become the 'instigator', one who helps start things and others finish/improve.  [i still feel (with apologies to NASUser and Tom) that most of this page should be on the top/start wiki page.]

 

I added the disclaimer at the bottom as an idea for NASUser.  I disagree with the removal of it from the start page.  With all my issues with the official/unofficial terminology, I was in no way disagreeing with the need for appropriate disclaimers, appropriately displayed.  And personally, I believe it should be on the very top page, although in no way 'in your face'.  If the disclaimer can't be in finer print, then add considerable white space, and make it almost drop into the 'footnotes' section at the bottom.  I think the copyright too should be on this page, not hidden in a link.  One additional consequence of removing the disclaimer and copyright text, is that now Lime Technology does not appear at all on the wiki page, except in a navigational link among the system links on the left, with no apparent relation to unRAID.  That doesn't seem right to me, and I would prefer Lime Technology to be big at the top of the page, as well as listed with the legal stuff at the bottom.  After all, what gives the word Official its authority, but the clear delineation of the entity behind it?

 

I really like the quote I added, and I suspect I'll use it again!

[WeeboTech]

Looks good..

Pssstt.. I'm Being BOLD

[RobJ]

Big kudos for the User contributed content change!

 

I really like many of the changes here, but...  To me, the links embedded in the boxes are practically invisible.  I prefer the way you had it, just before you moved the links within.  That looked organized and very readable.  And I've commented above about the Disclaimers link/info, and about the need for more LIME Technology visibility.

 

The following is just my personal thoughts, from someone without any particular skills here.  The blue seems too strong, and doesn't seem to coordinate with anything else.  I'm wondering if our browsers have different styling showing, as the only real color that stands out on the left, in my Firefox browser with default settings, is primarily the green of the Lexar flash drive, and then the blue glowing LED.  The background of the left and elsewhere is a light sand color.  The small font text and links there are the usual black, blue, and purple, and those links are very subject to the browser used and user preference.  My example had green only because that was what I copied from a sample, but now, I think I would prefer a lime green motif for everything.  Don't know how to accomplish it though.  I like blue, but perhaps a bit muted would be better, with the current look.

 

[Thanks WeeboTech, for a big laugh!]

 

[NAS]

What i need is right to edit the main navigation box. In there we can put the big direct links we need and the quick links. Unless I am missing something i dont have that many perms.

 

I am in two minds about the disclaimer bit. It is linked at the bottom of every page on the wiki so if we are going to add it to the page content it should be in them all otherwise its half hearted. Think about the situation where a user is linked direct to a page. Tricky one cause adding it to every page is just messy.

 

I wouldnt worry about overall style too much this now. In time 2 things will happen:

 

1. the style will evolve a feel all on its own

2. we will get better at styling pages

 

I guarantee we could discuss the style for days only to find a better way once we get some more formatting skills.

 

Our big push which a few of us has already started inadvertently at the same time is to get users to add content.

 

Can I suggest something we discussed previously....

 

if you help someone in the forum suggest they can pay the community back by spending an hour on the wiki. Its not alot to ask and if 1 on every 5 people work on it in this way it will quickly become quite significant.

[SSD]

Three suggestions ...

 

1.  Rework the user contributed content section

 

From:

User Contributed Content is written and proofed principally by the unRAID community 

It may be less accurate and diverge from normal unRAID system usage 

It will show you how to enhance unRAID by adding extra components or improving existing ones 

Before using the User Contributed Content please read the Disclaimers 

Access the User Contributed Content here 

 

This is not going to encourage someone to click the link.  It sounds like "Warning Will Robinson!".

 

Suggest the following kinder, gentler message.

 

Answers to common questions provided by knowledgeable unRAID users.

Provides solutions to many problems based on actual user experiences as reported through the forums.

Saves hours of forum reading by finding many answers all in one place!

Enhance unRAID performance, add new features, get the most out of your unRAID investment.

Normal disclaimers apply - link

Enter user contributed content section - link

 

2.  Links to the forum should be de-emphasized.  Instead of having a link to the forum under quicklinks, add a link to the user contributed content page.  Move the link to the forum TO THE BOTTOM of the user contributed content page.  As soon as a person hits a link to the forums, the chances of coming back to the wiki anytime soon are pretty low.  Make it the last thing they'd get to so they've reviewed the wiki first.

 

3.  Add a prominent [GET HELP NOW] link on the main wiki page that would take you straight to the "how to capture a syslog" or "troubleshooting page" on the front page of the wiki.  You want them to hit THAT button before the forum button so they know how to take a basic syslog, at least.

[RobJ]

Move the link to the forum TO THE BOTTOM of the user contributed content page.

Done.  Well, I moved it somewhat lower.  Are you sure you want it at the very bottom?  I do agree with the idea though.

 

I heartily agree with all of Brian's suggestions, great ideas!

 

[RobJ]

Added a How-To called Improving unRAID Performance.  Feel free to add, edit, and expand what little is there.

[SSD]

Added a How-To called Improving unRAID Performance.  Feel free to add, edit, and expand what little is there.

 

Excellent!

[NAS]

Added a How-To called Improving unRAID Performance.  Feel free to add, edit, and expand what little is there.

 

Superb. I predict this is going to be one of the main pages of the wiki. We should all spend 10 minutes on this one when we get a chance

[SSD]

I had a thought for quickly increasing the information available in the wiki and encouraging a higher degree of usage and participation.

 

We could create a "Best of the Forums" section.  Within it could be an organized (by Category like "Troubleshooting", "Interesting Addons", "Active Research", "Tweaks", "USB Key Issues", "Tom's Tomes", ..) set of links to forum threads or articles.  Each link could have a descriptive one-liner comment.  As threads are created that forum members believe are "worthy" to be included, links to those threads can be added.  This is much less time consuming than trying to summarize a thread or write original content, and almost as good in many cases.  I know that I have several that I sometimes search for (while cursing under my breath for not creating a favorites link last time I found it!)  I think this feature would be used most by the senior members of the forum trying to find posts they remember.

 

Thoughts?

[WeeboTech]

That's a great idea!

However, I think that when time permits it should be summarized in the wiki.

What IF (big if there) the forum gets moved to new software or something else happens, then all the information is lost.

I only mention this because it's happened to me in other communities. years and years of posts lost.

[RobJ]

I really like a "Best of the Forums" as you've described it, although most of the links I immediately think of adding there should probably have a corresponding wiki article, and then their wiki link added here, which would be good as a transitional or way-station tool.  Anyone thinking of contributing to the wiki, but unsure what to do, could check for links here without corresponding wiki links, and consider adding the content to the wiki.

 

Although I like "Best of the Forums", it seems too ambitious to me, as it carries expectations of a complete analysis and selection of the best of the forums.  Until someone had the time and actually did produce a complete selection of the best topics, it would be disillusioning to turn to.  Perhaps a less attracting, but more appropriate and less ambitious name, like "Good Forum Links" or "Selections from the Forums", could be used...

 

It could over time become a simple unRAID site map or index, to the best of the forums and the wiki.

 

Brian, I've been hoping you would add some or all of the 'Hard drive failures' section of the Troubleshooting page to the FAQ.  I don't see any problem at all with rehashing the same info, because the objectives of each section are a little different.  In one, the user is proceeding through a series of troubleshooting steps.  In the other, the user is searching for the question most relevant to his problem.  Redundancy of info can be a good thing, if each is searched and worded a little differently, as it may better help them to find and understand the solution they need.

[WeeboTech]

Although I like "Best of the Forums", it seems too ambitious to me, as it carries expectations of a complete analysis and selection of the best of the forums.

 

Rome was not built in a day.

I say, anytime a question comes up where you know the answer is in the forum and you happen to post a link, Add it to the Wiki Best of Forum link list.

 

At least this is how I've been updating things. I see redundant questions and instead of answering them, I add it to the Wiki and provide a pointer.  What we need now is a link on the forum page directly to the Wiki.

 

I loved how Infrant (now Netgear) had a green highway sign on the upper right that said,, This way to the Wiki.

[SSD]

http://lime-technology.com/wiki/index.php?title=Best_of_the_Forums

 

Okay - I created the page and loaded some startup links.

 

I encourage everyone who has participated in the forums to at least go through their own recent posts and add "Best of" links to this page.

 

WeeboTech, I was uncomfortable linking some of your scripts because I didn't know what was the most current versions and didn't know exactly how to label them.  Please add them.  I know they will be some of the most popular links!

 

Thanks!

 

(RobJ, I will try to add the requested content later this week)

[WeeboTech]

Looks really good!!! REALLY GOOD! 

 

WeeboTech, I was uncomfortable linking some of your scripts because I didn't know what was the most current versions and didn't know exactly how to label them.  Please add them.  I know they will be some of the most popular links!

 

I don't know where to begin with this.

If you link anything in, just post it, I'll review it for the latest and greatest versions.

I'm considering just posting them up on my website in a project directory.

 

I've just been a lil delayed, got that Norco DS-520G Friday and I've been playing with it all weekend.

[RobJ]

http://lime-technology.com/wiki/index.php?title=Best_of_the_Forums

 

Okay - I created the page and loaded some startup links.

 

Wow!  Just wow!!!  My qualms about 'Best of...' are all gone.  Good work!

 

[NAS]

I am in 3 minds about this page. Please dont think its a critisiscm in any way it REALLY isnt:...

 

Mind 1

 

Its a great resource. Easy to find stuff and full of vital information.

 

Mind 2

 

It doesnt really add alot to just searching the forum. Users still have to read entire threads which often contain lots of trial and error and incorrect or misleading information until a proper conclusion is reached. Many new users wont have the skills to properly digest this type of discussion and we are in danger of leading them down the road to damnation.

 

Mind 3

 

Best of type threads usually contain funny or stupid posts. It might be ignored by a small percentage because of this.

 

 

How about this as a good long term plan:

 

We use the best of thread as a holding point for pages that need compiled into wiki format. That way we have the power of the page as it is this now, a good mechanism to instruct people that want to help where they can do so (i.e. please convert these threads to wiki pages) and anything we can do to get info on the wiki is a good thing.

 

Whatcha think? Its really just a case of adding a wiki link beside each forum link on this page along with adding "please help by converting these threads" comment to our signatures and the wiki Unofficial jump page.

 

Two points that are slightly OT:

 

Can we in general try and keep the page names down to a few words. There are some pages that are going to have to be renamed as they are too long for general wiki use i.e. "Mounting an external USB drive having an existing NTFS file system in READ/WRITE mode to transport files from/to unRaid server"

 

The sign of a good wiki is cross references. What i mean by this is if you talk about something and theres a page dedicated to this something link to it.

 

A good way to do this is to use the [[Whatever you want to call it|Actual wiki page name]] markup. This allows you to use the link in your normal language such as:

 

You can [[backup|Backing-up_'config/super.dat'_and_'config/disk.cfg'_Files]]  blah blah by making keeping a copy of a few files.

 

Would show as:

 

You can backup  blah blah by making keeping a copy of a few files.

 

with the word backup highlighted as a link. This is where wikis come into their own by allowing drill down into more detail.

[SSD]

Thanks RobJ and WeeboTech!!!

 

EVERYONE - PLEASE ADD LINKS TO RECENT POSTS YOU MADE.  There are way too many posts from me, probably the least qualified person here!

 

NASUser, 3 minds?  I have a hard time not losing the 1 I have! 

 

I think it is a good thing and will be low maintenance for many of us.  The effort to convert a thread to a post, some 5 minutes and some 45+, is considerable when you think about the number of interesting and relevant posts.  Although I think it makes sense to write wiki articles for certain things, I think that the posts will remain the only repository for others.  Writing wiki articles can be somewhat thankless.  I'd rather continue to focus on answering questions wtih the limited time we have, and make contriubting to the wiki easy.  Otherwise I fear the wiki will quickly become dated.  (Just my $0.02)

 

Many of my links are NOT to the entire thread, but links to INDIVIVIDUAL messages within the threads.  Some of the links have nothing to do really with the main forus of the thread.  I only linked the entire thread if I thought it was instructive (e.g., troubleshooting techniques).  I did notice that my browser did not always bring the indivivdual message links to the top of the browswer window (if the message was towards the bottom of the page).  Not sure how to fix that.

 

Can we in general try and keep the page names down to a few words. There are some pages that are going to have to be renamed as they are too long for general wiki use i.e. "Mounting an external USB drive having an existing NTFS file system in READ/WRITE mode to transport files from/to unRaid server"

 

The sign of a good wiki is cross references. What i mean by this is if you talk about something and theres a page dedicated to this something link to it.

 

A good way to do this is to use the [[Whatever you want to call it|Actual wiki page name]] markup. This allows you to use the link in your normal language such as:

 

You can [[backup|Backing-up_'config/super.dat'_and_'config/disk.cfg'_Files]]  blah blah by making keeping a copy of a few files.

 

Would show as:

 

You can backup  blah blah by making keeping a copy of a few files.

 

with the word backup highlighted as a link. This is where wikis come into their own by allowing drill down into more detail.

 

Good info.  Still learning wiki'ish.  But did I create long page names or anything?