User talk:Dothebart
Welcome to Wikipedia!
[edit]Welcome!
Hello Dothebart, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Help pages
- Tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! -- ManekiNeko | Talk 00:04, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
Now, regarding Citadel/UX...
[edit]This is the reply I posted on my Talk page to the question you asked there:
Hello, It was basically that the Citadel page was already linked earlier on the page so it shouldn't be linked again, but there might be a better way to deal with that... (there are some circumstances where it's OK to link twice to an article.) I'll go look at the page again. -- ManekiNeko | Talk 00:06, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
OK, I looked at it, and looked at WP:STYLE to try to get a handle on the best way to deal with it, and added the link back as a "Main Article" link in the History section. It's basically saying that this history info is part of the overall Citadel history on the other page. I think that fits into the Wikipedia style pretty well. :) -- ManekiNeko | Talk 00:32, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
Your question on Sleepyhead81's Talk page
[edit]I saw your question on User_talk:Sleepyhead81 and posted a reply to you there -- you might want to go there to see it. Cheers, ManekiNeko | Talk 22:37, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
OK, I'm replying here now so as not to clog up Sleepyhead's Talk page. ;)
You said: "I wonder, why the under 'see allso' listed projects don't get these complaints too." I don't know; I haven't looked at them as they aren't in my area of interest. It might be that the articles are more neutral, or people think the products are more notable, or both. Or maybe it's just that no one has noticed them yet. :) I am interested in Citadel as I am a Citadel sysop (not Cit/UX, though), but I'm not interested in "groupware", etc. so I haven't looked at the other pages in See Also.
"But still Citadel offers this functionality. It has grown beyound this point without stripping of its roots." Yes, that is true. That doesn't really affect anything in the current situation, though, I think.
"It's not easy to see the outside of a house, if you're looking out of the window..." This is completely true! I know it is hard for me to be neutral sometimes too! :) -- ManekiNeko | Talk 00:20, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Citadels
[edit]You said on my talk page: "you notice that you use another citadel fork, Is it still available in source? and when were? under which license? Would you like to have something like a 'other citadel forks' on the citadel.org page?"
The citadel.org page used to have a lot of things about Citadels in general, but then it became all about Cit/UX and the other content went away, IIRC. :/ I am running a stable version of Citadel+, which is a descendant of the original Citadel via GremCit, etc. I know there is someone working on an OS X version of Cit+. A few people have been messing around with some small Cit clones around here but nothing that is ready for testing yet. Citadel/UX isn't exactly a fork, itself; it began as a Citadel clone. As far as "other citadel forks", I guess it's up to the various developers, but it wouldn't be bad to link to other Citadel versions. -- ManekiNeko | Talk 23:19, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
