Esolang talk:Authors

1. A link to the author's userpage if one exists, or no link
2. A link to a page in the standard namespace
3. No link

As I said, I personally hate #1. I'd prefer #2 and would be okay with #3. --Graue 22:20, 10 Jun 2005 (GMT)

I think it would be too much to have a full page for each and every language author. But for some it might be interesting. Then again, if the author has a user page it kind of makes sense to use that one if there isn't a separate page... In other words, I'm not sure. --Rune 22:38, 10 Jun 2005 (GMT)

Does it make sense? To leave the safe, happy edited-by-all article namespace and enter someone's dubious personal homepage, with no warning? I think that's okay if you make the namespace visible, as is done on ODDBALL, but there should be a warning. --Graue 23:01, 10 Jun 2005 (GMT)

I don't like links to userpages from articles. I'd rather see a "real" (article) page for each author (giving their real name...) On that page could be a link to their user page, if they're a wiki editor. As well as other contact information, e.g. last known e-mail address. --Chris Pressey 23:17, 10 Jun 2005 (GMT)

I have no strong preference towards any of these. Perhaps for people like Urban Müller who are unlikely to come here and edit their own page it makes sense to add a page within the articles namespace; people who do have their page in the User: namespace can have a link to it. OTOH having different ways of doing the same may not be a good idea. A page for each author as suggested by Chris sounds a bit unmainteinable to me, but otherwise OK too. --pgimeno 23:22, 10 Jun 2005 (GMT)

Keep in mind the article for each author could be as short as "Andreas Boggswein invented the Bogofuck and BOGOL languages." followed by a link to his homepage. Then if we find out more we can add it. Just knowing what other languages were invented by the same guy can be worthwhile. This could also be the place for interesting trivia; for instance, David Morgan-Mar apparently also writes a rather well-known webcomic. --Graue 03:01, 11 Jun 2005 (GMT)

OK, after thinking a bit more about this I think I agree with graue and cpressey. Let's be consistent and use proper articles. That doesn't necessarily mean we should create an article for each and every language author, though. It is, IMHO, most important for people who has designed more than one language, or have otherwise done something worthy of notice... --Rune 10:31, 11 Jun 2005 (GMT)

I've just added a redirect from "Jeffry Johnston" to "User:calamari". This seems like the best solution for wiki users, otherwise I'd have to update two different pages for every change. Here is the code for a redirect:

#REDIRECT [[User:calamari]]

--Calamari 05:03, 12 Jun 2005 (GMT)

I totally disagree with this. It's even worse than #1. An article should not redirect to a user page. I replaced the redirect with an article linking to your user page. --Graue 13:32, 12 Jun 2005 (GMT)

Good job on the JJ page. Hmm, now that I think about it, I guess it's better that I not want to edit the page (at least not much), that way it's better NPOV and it's not filled with bloat.... --Calamari 23:33, 12 Jun 2005 (GMT)

I was originally a little baffled that you'd want two different pages along with all that redundancy, but I think I see the wisdom in it now. My user page can be filled with all sorts of stuff, and I wouldn't expect anyone to mess with it, but the named page is a condensed version that contains only the essentials, and doesn't have to be written by me (so things that I find objectionable can be added by someone else). I think it's probably best that I step back from adding new content, and only fix errors or keep vital information updated. For example, I added a couple missing links and my homepage. So yeah, I see the difference and it makes sense now.

I'd prefer 2 and 3. Some contributors would use their user pages as different from descriptions about the users themselves -- I'd like to use my user page as a personal workspace and temporary storage of texts, for instance. --Puzzlet Chung 16:30, 12 Jun 2005 (GMT)

I just found this talk page, after having pondered the question myself when trying to add credit to User:Ihope127, who has not to my knowledge revealed his real name, or made either type of page. I am just now setting up both kinds of page for myself. I seem to have gone with

• Add link to real name if known, otherwise to user page if known. What should we do if only a nickname outside the wiki is known?
• Create both real name and user page and link both ways

This seems to have been fairly close to the consensus? Ørjan 13:33, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

There are several people that we either don't know the real name of, or who don't wish that we use their real name. In those cases I think we should treat their nickname as a real name for every practical purpose. I don't think we should make an article for each person that is referenced in this wiki, so if there doesn't exist a page about them a "red link" is OK IMHO. Then if they appear high up on the Wanted Pages list they should get an article.

As for the case of Ihope I'm not sure what to do. Maybe we should use Ihope127 or ihope (which is what he calls himself on IRC).

User pages should, IMHO, only be created by the user himself (if he wants to). And they should preferably not be linked to in articles. --Rune 14:12, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

By the way, Ørjan: Are you the same Ørjan who sometimes came to the Hexagon gaming club in Trondheim? (I noticed that your home page is on NVG) --Rune 14:12, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

That would be me. :-) --Ørjan 00:14, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

It's a small world :) (And the world of esoteric programming languages is even smaller). I don't live in Trondheim anymore, so I haven't been there in years. --Rune 15:50, 18 May 2006 (UTC)