If you have any questions about making wiki edits, or any other aspect of the wiki, please ask them in this thread.

BTW - Anyone who can help fill out this page a bit, it will be appreciated: Wiki Markup and Formatting Help (http://elsmar.com/wiki/index.php/Wiki_Markup_and_Formatting_Help)

I've been trying to get the math function formating to work but Mediawiki doesn't seem to be translating it. Is there some add-on that needs to be included?
Wikimedia article on math formulas (http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Formula)
For example:
<math>\sqrt{1-e^2}</math>
Should produce this image:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/math/8/f/e/8fe612e4076e4860a10c82f224610a52.png

I'll have to check on what the math functions need to work. I think I have to have a program (LaTex?) installed on the server. I will look into it tonight and get back with you. Math functions are important, I know.

BTW - Anyone who can help fill out this page a bit, it will be appreciated: Wiki Markup and Formatting Help (http://elsmar.com/wiki/index.php/Wiki_Markup_and_Formatting_Help)

I've started - added pictures to the Image Tutorial (http://elsmar.com/wiki/index.php/Wiki_Markup_and_Formatting_Help#Images).

I have started
http://elsmar.com/wiki/index.php/APQP
please can I have some feedback

Looks good to me.

Thanks just wanted some feed back before I went to far

Scott,

You suggest "You may want to keep this page open in a separate browser window for reference."

Is it possible to make a printer friendly page where sections are not cut off randomly?:)

Sue

Hi Sue,
The wiki software has a style that gets applied when you print, but it doesn't seem to break up the document very well.
If you want you can add:
<br style="page-break-before:always;">
to the text in strategic locations to force a break.

<span style="page-break-before:always;">&nbsp;</span>
should also work and won't add a line to the displayed text.
See examples here:
http://elsmar.com/wiki/index.php/Wikipedia:Sandbox

Both methods worked for me in IE6 and Firefox 1.5.

Aaron

Scott,

You suggest "You may want to keep this page open in a separate browser window for reference."

Is it possible to make a printer friendly page where sections are not cut off randomly?:)

Sue,

I'm sure there is, but my wiki-fu isn't that good yet.

I did notice Akehrer had some mark-up in the Sandbox that might work. I'll try something and let you know when to give it a try.

I have started
http://elsmar.com/wiki/index.php/APQP
please can I have some feedback
Hi, Howard. I just had a look and agree it looks good. Is there a format we want to work to so:
Starting at basic principles - APQP based of the cross functional team approach to handling projects
Overall aims - reduce development time, reduce defects etc.

OK, I added the mark-up Aaron supplied to the start of each of the larger sections at the help page (http://elsmar.com/wiki/index.php/Wiki_Markup_and_Formatting_Help).

So the larger sections will start on a different page.

I haven't printed it yet, but in print preview it looks like it worked.

Scott

I've been trying to get the math function formating to work but Mediawiki doesn't seem to be translating it.
I have to get a program installed. It may be next monday before I can get that done but I'm arranging to get the correct software installed. I'll keep everyone updated.

(Marc asked me to talk about this subject.)

Before creating a page, do a search to see if someone has already started one.

The search function works pretty well - it first displays page names that contain the search term, then page text that contains the term. Capitalization doesn't matter, either. Also note that it only searches the articles, not User pages.

Try it out on "Pareto" - you'll see what I mean.

(yes, we have two pages on Pareto (the person). I need to merge the information and delete one page)

If you don't find anything, feel free to make a page. If there's something already there, take a look and see if you can add anything.

Scott

Thanks for the info, Scott. I didn't realize the Search there was not case sensitive.

Another thing I was thinking about - If you (anyone, actually) sees an index page of terms (where all terms starting with a specific letter are listed) and a term is missing (remember this started out as a general list of quality terms), add the term or ask me or Scott or someone to add it to the listing on that page.

Are all the pages based on the index?
When I decided to start with APQP I went to the index and say that it was not there. Is it possible that there is a page on a subject not linked to the index?

Are all the pages based on the index?
Not necessarily. Technically you can start a page on anything and it does not *have* to be in the index. But - it is preferable that we list the quality terms in the index pages. For example, if APQP is not on the 'A' index page, it is easy to add it there.

I think I'm answering what you're asking.

Exactly it was not in the index and I added it.
This was the base of my assumption that there was no listing
Thanks

OK - Thanks, Howard!

Made a page for Quality Circles (http://elsmar.com/wiki/index.php/Quality_Circles) at the wiki and did a search on the forums to see if I should link any applicable forum topics.

Instead, I discovered that I could link to the search terms (http://elsmar.com/Forums/search.php?searchid=373745) in total.

Marc, does the database remember each search performed? In other words, will that search link live 'forever'?

Scott

Instead, I discovered that I could link to the search terms (http://elsmar.com/Forums/search.php?searchid=373745) in total.

Marc, does the database remember each search performed? In other words, will that search link live 'forever'?

Scott No, it doesn't - Each search is unique. That type of link will not work. Note it has 'searchid=<number>' at the end.

I'll see if I can figure a way to make that type of link.

As an additional thought, when I do a Search, I start off by asking it to look at thread titles only to keep the results focused.

I'll have to check on what the math functions need to work. I think I have to have a program (LaTex?) installed on the server. I will look into it tonight and get back with you. Math functions are important, I know.

If not mistaken I think most things can be done using HTML.

Is this not working?

I've been trying to get the math function formating to work but Mediawiki doesn't seem to be translating it. Is there some add-on that needs to be included?
Wikimedia article on math formulas (http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Formula)
For example:
<math>\sqrt{1-e^2}</math>
Should produce this image:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/math/8/f/e/8fe612e4076e4860a10c82f224610a52.png

I dont know if this issue has already been solved for you but if you want to try using HTML then please see here (http://elsmar.com/wiki/index.php/Wikipedia:Sandbox)

No - I haven't gotten LaTex installed yet. So - You can do the same stuff with html, eh?

I dont know if this issue has already been solved for you but if you want to try using HTML then please see here (http://elsmar.com/wiki/index.php/Wikipedia:Sandbox)


That's true. I had the issue come up when I wanted to do the pmf for the Binomial Distribution and couldn't represent the combinatorial. I still think having LaTex avaliable would be good.

Aaron

Instead, I discovered that I could link to the search terms in total.
To put a search in a link, you have to use something like this: http://Elsmar.com/Forums/search.php?do=process&query=quality+manual
which, as a link, would be Search for "Quality Manual" (http://Elsmar.com/Forums/search.php?do=process&query=quality+manual) and would look like this: Search for "Quality Manual" (http://Elsmar.com/Forums/search.php?do=process&query=quality+manual)

.... if you want to try using HTML
I did some searches and found these. I will probably put them in the wiki as reference for people wanting to put in formulas.

Mathematical formulae and the Web (http://www.univie.ac.at/future.media/moe/formeln.html)
Stef's HTML Equation Generator (http://people.hofstra.edu/faculty/Stefan_Waner/equation/codeindex.html)
Math in HTML (and CSS) (http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/math/)

I do plan to get LaTex installed. I'm looking at the wiki docs today. Either way, formulas in a web / wiki page will not be simple.

To put a search in a link, you have to use something like this:
<snipped>


Is there a way to format the query to just look in thread titles?

Is there a way to format the query to just look in thread titles?
I've asked that and am waiting for a reply.

Is there a way to format the query to just look in thread titles?

Try:
http://Elsmar.com/Forums/search.php?do=process&query=quality+manual&titleonly=1

Example:
http://Elsmar.com/Forums/search.php?do=process&query=quality+manual&titleonly=1

That's it: http://Elsmar.com/Forums/search.php?do=process&titleonly=1&query=quality+manual

As you can see, add &titleonly=1 to the query string. I'm not sure sequence is important, but it may be.

That's true. I had the issue come up when I wanted to do the pmf for the Binomial Distribution and couldn't represent the combinatorial. I still think having LaTex avaliable would be good.

Aaron

OK you may be right. But I suggest Marc have a good look at the pros and cons against the effort put in to install LaTex (and likely maintenance). At least have a good look at the current bug list (I presume there is one).;)

I wanted to increase the size of the alphabetical index that's on the main page and the top of each 'letter' page. (I have sometimes hit the wrong letter because they were pretty small - no, I was never very good a video games, either) I found a way to do that, but then I had 27 pages to change.

I thought there had to be a better way - and there is - Templates! Templates are an easy way to put the same content across many pages.

Here's how they work, make a page called [[Template:name]] where 'name' is the name of the template you want to make. On this page, make whatever it is you want to repeat. Then, after saving the page, the wiki markup for a template is {{name}} - this will insert the content that is at [[Template:name]].

So I've made a template for the alphabetical index: [[Template:Indexalpha]] (http://elsmar.com/wiki/index.php/Template:Indexalpha), pasted in the larger index mark-up, then I still had to insert {{Indexalpha}} into 27 pages, but if we ever want to change the format of the index, we onlyl have to modify the Template page and it will propigate to wherever {{Indexalpha}} is on a page.

Neat! Thanks!

Kyle Hamar posted the following to my talk page at the wiki. I thought it was a good question and that we all should hash it out.

"Where do you see the wiki needing priority attention? Do we have a set of guidelines or other framework to follow for structure?"

I've been thinking about this also and was wondering if we should develop a 'to-do' list for everyone to work off of.

Here's what I see as priorities:

1. Formatting the glossary pages so that they have a consistent look.

Using Abilene Paradox as an example, at the glossary level (http://elsmar.com/wiki/index.php/Quality_Assurance_Terms_Glossary/A), there is the term itself which links to a page for the topic. Terms with pages are blue, those without are red. We need to get rid of the red links.

After the term is a one-sentence summary. Anything more should be on the page. If there's not a lot more, that's fine, but we should have something for each term so that the glossary pages all look the same.

2. From there, we should expand the pages to include other pages to help explain each term. Taking Abilene Paradox (http://elsmar.com/wiki/index.php/Abilene_paradox) as an example again, on the page are also red and blue links that are not in the glossary, but help explain Abilene Paradox (Paradox (http://elsmar.com/wiki/index.php/Paradox) and Groupthink (http://elsmar.com/wiki/index.php/Groupthink) in this case). Whether we want to include them in the glossary is up for debate, but it adds to the wiki when concepts are explained.

3. A good-looking main page. I've been working on it (increase size of glossary strip, adding to the 'Do you know' section) but my wiki-fu hasn't progressed to using nice-looking tables and other fancy formatting. I can fake it enough by copying what others have done.

Anyway, that's my two cents. We need input from others and then Marc can define some guidelines or prioritize a to-do list.

Scott

That sounds good to me.

I plead guilty to falling behind on the wiki. I got busy here and have to dedicate a few days to it.

As to the tables and such, that's how I have been learning stuff other than what you have pointed out - Looking at the code in other wikis.

Here's what I see as priorities:

1. Formatting the glossary pages so that they have a consistent look.
After the term is a one-sentence summary. Anything more should be on the page. If there's not a lot more, that's fine, but we should have something for each term so that the glossary pages all look the same.

Judging by the last sentence of your point number 1, the higher priority is not the "look" but the content. To this I would agree.

However as far as the "look" goes, my suggestion is to remove all the Blue or Red linking from the main glossary word and simply have them as Black Bold. For those words with more information and with its own page, change the link in the index with a substitute word(s) such as "More..." eg.

Acceptable Quality Level - aka AQL - The maximum percentage or proportion of non-conformities in a lot or batch that can be considered satisfactory as a process average. More...

If this is "more" acceptable then lets hear it and we can work on changing it.

Judging by the last sentence of your point number 1, the higher priority is not the "look" but the content. To this I would agree.

However as far as the "look" goes, my suggestion is to remove all the Blue or Red linking from the main glossary word and simply have them as Black Bold. For those words with more information and with its own page, change the link in the index with a substitute word(s) such as "More..." eg.

Acceptable Quality Level - aka AQL - The maximum percentage or proportion of non-conformities in a lot or batch that can be considered satisfactory as a process average. More...

If this is "more" acceptable then lets hear it and we can work on changing it.

I'm not sure this is the best way to go. The more our format matches well-established wikis (such as Wikipedia) the more accessible it will be for users.

There's no reason we cannot expand upon any of the terms in the glossary - even a little bit - so that each term has a page of its own. Seeing red links will motivate editors to create pages.

I'm also worried about 'definition creep' if we switch to the format you suggest, folks may just start adding to the definition without an easy way to get to a page for it and glossary pages will start to bloat.

It just seems like there would be less maintenance or administration involved if we keep it the way it is for now.

Anyway, just my thoughts, Marc can make the call.

However as far as the "look" goes, my suggestion is to remove all the Blue or Red linking from the main glossary word and simply have them as Black Bold. For those words with more information and with its own page, change the link in the index with a substitute word(s) such as "More..." eg.
I really want the words to be links rather than just bold black text. In part I'm looking at this from an SEO position. The page title (such as Gage_R&R) generated when a word changes to blue plays a good role in search engine relevance.

When this was started it was a raw list with brief definitions, which is fine. But I would like the raw word to link to its own page where we can address details. If you use 'More...' search engine relevance due to the page title is lost.
********************************
Last night I started a reply to Scott's post 36 above but my friend stopped by and I never sent the reply (forgot and closed browser after talking for an hour or so...) What I was thinking of is sub-page 'outline' structure such as a procedure has.

I was thinking something like:

===Definition===

===Links to Forum Discussion Threads===

===Links to External Web Pages===

----> Last night I had some better details as I had thought this out a bit (too bad I screwed up and forgot to send what I'd written). I'll try to focus on it again, but this should help relaying the idea.

Scott,
Actually, when you posted about the formating, I thought of replying to you along the same lines you have done to me! :rolleyes: So I must have misunderstood you. I gather now that content is the priority, which is right.

What threw me off was your first line
"1. Formatting the glossary pages so that they have a consistent look."

Much of the formatting is already in place, what is in need now is for content so that instead of red links we will see blue links. I think this is what you are saying right?

Folks, I see from the forum pages some good stuff that could go into the glossary, or could be linked from the glossary, this is the tedious work which must be done as priority.

So how to encourage ppl putting stuff on the wiki/glossary? I think you don't necessarily have to. You already have the "standalone articles" forum, although we can harvest data there, some information may require permission from authors or even futher vetting for accuracy etc not to mention some articles are in ppt format or some other format we cannot readily cut and paste. How about specifically request articles for putting on the glossary there?

Just my two cents.:tg:

Sorry this hs been languishing for a while. I've been doing a few things here and there but got intosome other things and this sorta slipped to the back burner, so to speak.

Much of the formatting is already in place, what is in need now is for content so that instead of red links we will see blue links. I think this is what you are saying right?

Folks, I see from the forum pages some good stuff that could go into the glossary, or could be linked from the glossary, this is the tedious work which must be done as priority.
Correct.

UPDATE: I have just installed a MediaWiki hack which should auto-magically log you in with your forum user name and password when you (registered visitors) visit the Wiki.

NOTE: Several of you already have an 'account' which I manually set up for you. I'm not sure yet how this will affect you. Since I'm also a manually entered user, as soon as I figure that out I'll post here.

Just to remind everyone, the Elsmar Cove BOK Wiki (http://elsmar.com/wiki/) is integrated so if you are registered you can help. You will be 'auto-magically' be logged in --> Your forum user name and password are the same (in short, no log-in needed) if you are logged into the forum.

For those of you who know wiki markup, your help will be very much appreciated. I think the wiki can really help out if we can get some momentum going.