Talk:Brussels - Revision history

SomeHuman: Update link (with inline comment)

2020-05-03T11:41:49Z

Update link (with inline comment)

SomeHuman: /* Itinerary 2018 */ Pacific time is utterly irrelevant, in particular for an update within 24 hours before the ride.

2018-06-15T17:59:43Z

‎Itinerary 2018: Pacific time is utterly irrelevant, in particular for an update within 24 hours before the ride.

SomeHuman: /* Itinerary 2018 */ Update at 18:40 on the day before the ride

2018-06-15T17:19:51Z

‎Itinerary 2018: Update at 18:40 on the day before the ride

SomeHuman: /* Itinerary 2018 */ grammar/meaning

2018-06-15T11:43:38Z

‎Itinerary 2018: grammar/meaning

SomeHuman: /* Itinerary 2018 */

2018-06-15T11:19:15Z

‎Itinerary 2018

SomeHuman: Revert my last two edits: misunderstanding, apparently the entire edit history for 'Brussels' became normally available.

2010-03-08T09:05:41Z

Revert my last two edits: misunderstanding, apparently the entire edit history for 'Brussels' became normally available.

SomeHuman: Edits Histories require external linking

2010-03-08T08:55:26Z

Edits Histories require external linking

SomeHuman: Note at top about the damaged edit history of the Brussels page

2010-03-08T08:49:13Z

Note at top about the damaged edit history of the Brussels page

SomeHuman: /* Languages layout, and History */

2010-03-03T10:36:41Z

‎Languages layout, and History

SomeHuman: /* Languages layout, and History */ Considering loading times excludes an alternative solution

2010-03-03T09:47:18Z

‎Languages layout, and History: Considering loading times excludes an alternative solution

@@ Line 22: / Line 22: @@
 There are two issues that I think need to be dealt with, which have ramifications elsewhere (eg: [[Seattle]]). Since you're based in [[Belgium]] (?), perhaps [[User_talk:SomeHuman#Brussels|you]] could put your energy into addressing these points:
-* For the [[Brighton & Hove]] ride, I've set up pages for Photos, Video, Media Coverage, History (aka ride reports) etc that cover ''all previous years of the ride''. The benefit of doing this over making year-specific history pages (eg: [[Brussels 2009 history]], [[:Category:Brussels sub-page|etc]]) is that the number of sub-pages will stay more or less the same however many years the ride runs for. It also makes batch formatting of these sections easier.
+* For the [[Brighton & Hove]] ride, I've set up pages for Photos, Video, Media Coverage, History (aka ride reports) etc that cover ''all previous years of the ride''. The benefit of doing this over making year-specific history pages (eg: [[Brussels 2009 history]], [[:Category:Brussels sub-pages<!--2020-05-03 +'s': 'Brussels sub-page' moved to 'Brussels sub-pages'-->|etc]]) is that the number of sub-pages will stay more or less the same however many years the ride runs for. It also makes batch formatting of these sections easier.
 * The [[Brussels]] page is, by necessity, in three languages. However, this makes for a very cumbersome page. It would be much better to split the translations into [[Brussels]] (English), [[Fr:Bruxelles]] and [[Nl:Brussel]] (?). Do you agree? Could you set about doing this?
 – [[User:Nsayers|Nsayers]] 22:30, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
 :The colums for languages are a very common sight in Belgium (having officially German, French, Dutch, and often courtesy to English).<br/>
 :It is utterly impossible to maintain separate pages: The capital has no separate French-speaking and Dutch-speaking WNBRs, and none at all in English. Thus the content needs to be equivalent and synchronous in three languages. I can't imagine many speakers of French going to translate their edits into (in particular for readers who can't see the original) ''understandable'' Dutch and English: often unable, unwilling, or both. My apologies to the exception I would appreciate to make his/her acquaintance.

@@ Line 53: / Line 53: @@
 ==Itinerary 2018==
-The 2018-06-13 article 'Cyclonudista rijdt niet door Elsene' on Bruzz  [See bruzz.be/mobiliteit/cyclonudista-rijdt-niet-door-elsene-2018-06-13] questions the originally planned passage by Luxembourg and Flagey. It is then unclear where a press conference would be held. I put a note into the itinerary but will probably modify the latter, after the ride, according to the one actually perceived.<br />[[User:SomeHuman|SomeHuman]] ([[User talk:SomeHuman|talk]]) 04:19, 15 June 2018 (PDT)
+The 2018-06-13 article 'Cyclonudista rijdt niet door Elsene' on Bruzz  [See bruzz.be/mobiliteit/cyclonudista-rijdt-niet-door-elsene-2018-06-13] questions the originally planned passage by Luxembourg and Flagey. It is then unclear where a press conference would be held. I put a note into the itinerary but will probably modify the latter, after the ride, according to the one actually perceived.<br />[[User:SomeHuman|SomeHuman]] ([[User talk:SomeHuman|talk]]) 2018-06-15 13:08 (UTC+2)
-UPDATE according to a received email: The article got the new time schedule for the also updated itinerary, which contrarily to certain recent publications, does include a street in Ixelles/Elsene (Avenue de la toison d’or / Gulden Vlieslaan) but indeed skips both above-mentioned squares.<br />[[User:SomeHuman|SomeHuman]] ([[User talk:SomeHuman|talk]]) 10:19, 15 June 2018 (PDT)
+UPDATE according to a received email: The article got the new time schedule for the also updated itinerary, which contrarily to certain recent publications, does include a street in Ixelles/Elsene (Avenue de la toison d’or / Gulden Vlieslaan) but indeed skips both above-mentioned squares.<br />[[User:SomeHuman|SomeHuman]] ([[User talk:SomeHuman|talk]]) 2018-06-15 19:08 (UTC+2)

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:19, 15 June 2018
Line 54:		Line 54:
	==Itinerary 2018==		==Itinerary 2018==
	The 2018-06-13 article 'Cyclonudista rijdt niet door Elsene' on Bruzz [See bruzz.be/mobiliteit/cyclonudista-rijdt-niet-door-elsene-2018-06-13] questions the originally planned passage by Luxembourg and Flagey. It is then unclear where a press conference would be held. I put a note into the itinerary but will probably modify the latter, after the ride, according to the one actually perceived.<br />[[User:SomeHuman\|SomeHuman]] ([[User talk:SomeHuman\|talk]]) 04:19, 15 June 2018 (PDT)		The 2018-06-13 article 'Cyclonudista rijdt niet door Elsene' on Bruzz [See bruzz.be/mobiliteit/cyclonudista-rijdt-niet-door-elsene-2018-06-13] questions the originally planned passage by Luxembourg and Flagey. It is then unclear where a press conference would be held. I put a note into the itinerary but will probably modify the latter, after the ride, according to the one actually perceived.<br />[[User:SomeHuman\|SomeHuman]] ([[User talk:SomeHuman\|talk]]) 04:19, 15 June 2018 (PDT)
		+
		+	UPDATE according to a received email: The article got the new time schedule for the also updated itinerary, which contrarily to certain recent publications, does include a street in Ixelles/Elsene (Avenue de la toison d’or / Gulden Vlieslaan) but indeed skips both above-mentioned squares.<br />[[User:SomeHuman\|SomeHuman]] ([[User talk:SomeHuman\|talk]]) 10:19, 15 June 2018 (PDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:43, 15 June 2018
Line 53:		Line 53:

	==Itinerary 2018==		==Itinerary 2018==
−	The 2018-06-13 article 'Cyclonudista rijdt niet door Elsene' on Bruzz [See bruzz.be/mobiliteit/cyclonudista-rijdt-niet-door-elsene-2018-06-13] questions the originally planned passage by Luxembourg and Flagey. It is then unclear where a press conference would be held. I put a note into the itinerary but, after the ride, ~~will probably modify the latter~~ according to the one actually perceived.<br />[[User:SomeHuman\|SomeHuman]] ([[User talk:SomeHuman\|talk]]) 04:19, 15 June 2018 (PDT)	+	The 2018-06-13 article 'Cyclonudista rijdt niet door Elsene' on Bruzz [See bruzz.be/mobiliteit/cyclonudista-rijdt-niet-door-elsene-2018-06-13] questions the originally planned passage by Luxembourg and Flagey. It is then unclear where a press conference would be held. I put a note into the itinerary but will probably modify the latter, after the ride, according to the one actually perceived.<br />[[User:SomeHuman\|SomeHuman]] ([[User talk:SomeHuman\|talk]]) 04:19, 15 June 2018 (PDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:19, 15 June 2018
Line 51:		Line 51:
	:Seattle's multiple rides a year, may require another approach: I assume there will be very little new information between rides [a shorter period, well established info] and fewer photos etc because one has seen it all before, and not even a long time ago. It is the exception, and can not be the model for other locations. In fact, though I definitely appreciate your ''suggestion'', we should allow each location's group to ''decide'' what is best. Styles of presenting things might even be culturally determined - e.g. the for Belgians appropriate language colums could be awfully bewildering to monolingual cultures. Such might also apply for archiving methods, sectioning, etc.<br/>		:Seattle's multiple rides a year, may require another approach: I assume there will be very little new information between rides [a shorter period, well established info] and fewer photos etc because one has seen it all before, and not even a long time ago. It is the exception, and can not be the model for other locations. In fact, though I definitely appreciate your ''suggestion'', we should allow each location's group to ''decide'' what is best. Styles of presenting things might even be culturally determined - e.g. the for Belgians appropriate language colums could be awfully bewildering to monolingual cultures. Such might also apply for archiving methods, sectioning, etc.<br/>
	:[[User:SomeHuman\|SomeHuman]] 2010-03-03 01:08-10:36 (GMT)		:[[User:SomeHuman\|SomeHuman]] 2010-03-03 01:08-10:36 (GMT)
		+
		+	==Itinerary 2018==
		+	The 2018-06-13 article 'Cyclonudista rijdt niet door Elsene' on Bruzz [See bruzz.be/mobiliteit/cyclonudista-rijdt-niet-door-elsene-2018-06-13] questions the originally planned passage by Luxembourg and Flagey. It is then unclear where a press conference would be held. I put a note into the itinerary but, after the ride, will probably modify the latter according to the one actually perceived.<br />[[User:SomeHuman\|SomeHuman]] ([[User talk:SomeHuman\|talk]]) 04:19, 15 June 2018 (PDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:05, 8 March 2010
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	~~<div style="border:1px solid #993;color:#003;background-color:#ff9;padding:.3em 2ex .2em 2ex;font-style:oblique;">~~
−	At several occasions, the 'Brussels' page (and its talk page) were so-called '''moved''' in an inappropriate fashion. This talk page and its [http://wiki.worldnakedbikeride.org/index.php?title=Talk:Brussels&action=history edits History] seem well restored.<br/>For the '''edits History''' of the 'Brussels' page however, one should distinct three periods:
−	*The [http://wiki.worldnakedbikeride.org/index.php?title=Brussels&action=history current History] goes back till 23:05, 11 June 2007.
−	*The assumedly [http://wiki.worldnakedbikeride.org/index.php?title=Brussels&dir=prev&action=history earliest History] goes back till 6 February 2006, and ends at 06:31, 11 June 2006.
−	*In case there have been edits between 11 June 2006 and 11 June 2007, those versions and list of edits are lost forever.
−	<p style="margin-top:0;color:#66c;font-size:82%;text-align:right;">With thanks to [[Staff#Administrators\|administrator]] [[User:Nsayers\|Nsayers]] for his restoring as much as could be done, [[User:SomeHuman\|SomeHuman]], early March 2010</p></div>
−
−	~~==Sub sections==~~
	Wouldn't it be best to put the news items and photo reports apart? Now everything is together and it seems more logical to put photo's and video reports from participants an a reports section and news items (with or without photo's/video/audio) in a news/press section. Good idea or not?		Wouldn't it be best to put the news items and photo reports apart? Now everything is together and it seems more logical to put photo's and video reports from participants an a reports section and news items (with or without photo's/video/audio) in a news/press section. Good idea or not?

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 <div style="border:1px solid #993;color:#003;background-color:#ff9;padding:.3em 2ex .2em 2ex;font-style:oblique;">
-At several occasions, the 'Brussels' page (and its talk page) were so-called '''moved''' in an inappropriate fashion. This talk page and its [[Talk:Brussels&action=history|edits History]] seem well restored.<br/>For the '''edits History''' of the 'Brussels' page however, one should distinct three periods:
+At several occasions, the 'Brussels' page (and its talk page) were so-called '''moved''' in an inappropriate fashion. This talk page and its [http://wiki.worldnakedbikeride.org/index.php?title=Talk:Brussels&action=history edits History] seem well restored.<br/>For the '''edits History''' of the 'Brussels' page however, one should distinct three periods:
-*The current [[Brussels&action=history|History]] goes back till 23:05, 11 June 2007.
+*The [http://wiki.worldnakedbikeride.org/index.php?title=Brussels&action=history current History] goes back till 23:05, 11 June 2007.
-*The assumedly earliest [[Brussels&dir=prev&action=historyh|History]] goes back till 6 February 2006, and ends at 06:31, 11 June 2006.
+*The assumedly [http://wiki.worldnakedbikeride.org/index.php?title=Brussels&dir=prev&action=history earliest History] goes back till 6 February 2006, and ends at 06:31, 11 June 2006.
 *In case there have been edits between 11 June 2006 and 11 June 2007, those versions and list of edits are lost forever.
 <p style="margin-top:0;color:#66c;font-size:82%;text-align:right;">With thanks to [[Staff#Administrators|administrator]] [[User:Nsayers|Nsayers]] for his restoring as much as could be done, [[User:SomeHuman|SomeHuman]], early March 2010</p></div>

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:49, 8 March 2010
Line 1:		Line 1:
		+	<div style="border:1px solid #993;color:#003;background-color:#ff9;padding:.3em 2ex .2em 2ex;font-style:oblique;">
		+	At several occasions, the 'Brussels' page (and its talk page) were so-called '''moved''' in an inappropriate fashion. This talk page and its [[Talk:Brussels&action=history\|edits History]] seem well restored.<br/>For the '''edits History''' of the 'Brussels' page however, one should distinct three periods:
		+	*The current [[Brussels&action=history\|History]] goes back till 23:05, 11 June 2007.
		+	*The assumedly earliest [[Brussels&dir=prev&action=historyh\|History]] goes back till 6 February 2006, and ends at 06:31, 11 June 2006.
		+	*In case there have been edits between 11 June 2006 and 11 June 2007, those versions and list of edits are lost forever.
		+	<p style="margin-top:0;color:#66c;font-size:82%;text-align:right;">With thanks to [[Staff#Administrators\|administrator]] [[User:Nsayers\|Nsayers]] for his restoring as much as could be done, [[User:SomeHuman\|SomeHuman]], early March 2010</p></div>
		+
		+	==Sub sections==
	Wouldn't it be best to put the news items and photo reports apart? Now everything is together and it seems more logical to put photo's and video reports from participants an a reports section and news items (with or without photo's/video/audio) in a news/press section. Good idea or not?		Wouldn't it be best to put the news items and photo reports apart? Now everything is together and it seems more logical to put photo's and video reports from participants an a reports section and news items (with or without photo's/video/audio) in a news/press section. Good idea or not?

@@ Line 43: / Line 43: @@
 :[[User:SomeHuman|SomeHuman]] 2010-03-03 01:08-01:36 (GMT)
-:About presenting Brussels' previous rides, in short:<br/>
+:About presenting Brussels' previous rides:<br/>
 :With your method, one might already with the current few rides, have to crawl through long lists of 'Brussels photos' – thus requiring a separate page for the 'Brussels videos', etc. People tend to be interested in seeing both of a ''same'' year's event, ''and'' read the reviews about it too. If anyone ever has a look at the old rides, that is.<br/>
 :The current linking between Brussels pages, is just as easy to use but less cluttering than between 'Brussels photos' section 2009, 'Brussels videos' | 2009, 'Brussels media coverage' | 2009, 'Brussels reviews' | 2009, 'Brussels presentations' | 2009, 'Brussels other matters' | 2009 – and such for each year in each topic's page. Having the 'Reviews', 'Photos', 'Videos' and 'Media' sections at top of each 'Brussels 20&lt;nn&gt; history', allows keeping the for ''most'' readers hardly interesting lengthiest parts (often largely repeating former years), out of sight.<br/>
 :Nevertheless, there is no risk that any page would ever grow longer than main 'Brussels', thus no risk that one will ever need to revise the method. The style of sectioning what we like to distinct today, may well become outdated: Wikis tend to evolve. That would cause no problem for the current method of archiving Brussels, but would probably require complex changes in Brighton & Hove's archives. Or Brighton & Hove might not follow the most modern, desirable trends as aptly and fluently, restraint by its sectional archiving method.<br/>
-:For instance, one might prefer showing for each year a selection of best 10 photos (five times 2 side by side) with 20 more thumbnails directly visible in a page, keeping the series of links to many hundreds of pictures to please the people that are shown in those. I, for instance, have to admit that I never looked at ''all'' the linked photos for Brussels' years before my participating... but I would like to see their well preselected ''best'' photos. No problem for current archiving of Brussels, but Brighton & Hove would need as many 'Brighton & Hove 20&lt;nn&gt; photos' as there are 'Brussels 20&lt;nn&gt; history' (provided a same number of rides occurred at both locations); thus it would keep having the number of topic pages ''more'' than Brussels requires. Note: Loading 'Brighton & Hove 1st decade best photos' with soon 60 photos at visually reasonable resolution and 120 thumbnails, would be unacceptably slow. There are never photos of 'Brussels' next ride: the selection would occur about a month after the ride together with the archiving; the main page loads fast. Each history page would have a nice loading time, especially because its limited selection of photos is often the reason for opening the page.
+:For instance, one might prefer showing for each year a selection of best 10 photos (five times 2 side by side) with 20 more thumbnails directly visible in a page, keeping the series of links to many hundreds of pictures to please the people that are shown in those. I, for instance, have to admit that I never looked at ''all'' the linked photos for Brussels' years before my participating... but I would like to see their well preselected ''best'' photos. No problem for current archiving of Brussels, but Brighton & Hove would need as many 'Brighton & Hove 20&lt;nn&gt; photos' as there are 'Brussels 20&lt;nn&gt; history' (provided a same number of rides occurred at both locations); thus it would keep having the number of topic pages ''more'' than Brussels requires. Alternatively, loading 'Brighton & Hove 1st decade best photos' with soon 60 photos at visually reasonable resolution and 120 thumbnails, would be unacceptably slow. There are never photos of 'Brussels' next ride: the selection would occur about a forthnight to a month after the ride together with the archiving, when most material arrived; the main page loads fast. Each history page would have a nice loading time, especially because its limited selection of photos is often the reason for opening the page.
 :Seattle's multiple rides a year, may require another approach: I assume there will be very little new information between rides [a shorter period, well established info] and fewer photos etc because one has seen it all before, and not even a long time ago. It is the exception, and can not be the model for other locations. In fact, though I definitely appreciate your ''suggestion'', we should allow each location's group to ''decide'' what is best. Styles of presenting things might even be culturally determined - e.g. the for Belgians appropriate language colums could be awfully bewildering to monolingual cultures. Such might also apply for archiving methods, sectioning, etc.<br/>
-:[[User:SomeHuman|SomeHuman]] 2010-03-03 01:08-09:47 (GMT)
+:[[User:SomeHuman|SomeHuman]] 2010-03-03 01:08-10:36 (GMT)