Off-line
--------
Two main sets of edits
Simon the Sourcerer
Railway, continuation of previous work in sandbox (under usernode)

 - Route diagram for Cheltam
 - Turning nonexistant page into stub
 - Sandbox now redirs to actual page
 - Adding templates which generate railway network diagrams
 - A grid of icons made out of templates
 - Creating a stub in sandbox: bit of text and references from google to go with diagram
 - Text includes fact with 'citation needed'; felt vague
 - Knew fact but couldn't get proper dates (just 'closed later') or reliable citations
 - Get the gist in and let somebody else fix it
 - Citations are mostly "people's websites", but better than nothing
 - All prepared in sandbox to "get it reasonable", then moved it over
 - Do a bit of work, and then the railway nerds come along and fix it for you
 - Copied and pasted to 'move' from sandbox to new article
 - Lots of differently-spelt red links to this article (Bambury -> Cheltam railway)
 - Fix all those to be consistent; go to nonexistant page and use what links here to ensure got six or seven pages linking in
 - Makes sure that 'everything' that's going to point is going to point in
 - Found those pages by physical connections: nearby railway stations; also searching

 - Adding a reference to a branch line
 - No historical pictures of the railway before in external links; only modern
 - Found photos first, then wondered if WP would have any; didn't, so added

 - Found out about the diagram by looking at existing railway articles
 - "Ooh, there's a pretty diagram, I wonder how they do that"
 - View the template by copy-pasting template names to search box with "Template:" prefix
 - Use the template documentation that directs you to
 - Catalogue of icons for these railway diagrams
 - On Sandbox because don't want to keep pressing preview
 - Takes time to build up this diagrams; if mess something up, want the history, or screwed
 - Want local history: don't want to show half a diagram on public page

<10:10>
 - Information that can't fit in article, so dump on discussion page in case someone wants to work it in
 - e.g. to list stations on the line
 - Given link got information from
 - Created article, this is something accumulated in notepad while preparing article that didn't get worked in

 - Random article poking (using the feature); change 'unreferenced' to 'improve references' (correction)
 - Cut out uncited 'drivel' with wrong tone for encyclopedia
 - Unreferenced for months (half-year?), nobody has come along to try and justify it
 - General copy-editing: often do that (esp. to make sound more encyc)

<13:14>
Simon the Sourcerer
 - Take these edits as a set (at least 20)
 - Spread across a few different pages
 - Wikified "pointy hat", it exists, searched "I wonder if there's an article for this; I bet there is", there was
 - Search over other mechanisms because faster, might pick up other suitable targets ("wizard's hat")
 - Added proposal to split apart template to an article about several games in a series
 - Already one game split out
 - 4th game is small, 3rd is 'not big enough yet', not splitting those out
 - 3rd might split out at some point after more work
 - 3rd quite long (comparable to 1); didn't have chance to look through text; let's leave it until decide it's a good article
 - Copy editing first to make reasonable quality /then/ move
 - Found split-apart template via WP:TEMPLATES cheat-sheet
 - Also uses these for categories, etc.; shortcuts via search box
 - Talk page has reasoning and "if no objecting in next few days"
 - Got 'good idea' feedback from previous primary editor on board, so happy to make change
 - Looked at history of article to see that this commenter was prior editor; not at editor's page/contribs at all
 - 'Discourage trivia section' template; don't tend to remove right away
 - Cutting down text of 2nd game in series article because 2nd game already has main article (5 paras -> 2)
 - Put 'in use' template on series, which sort-of claims an advisory lock (other users asked not to edit; changes might get lost)
 - Knew to even /look/ for it because just read through the help a long time ago; scanned through templates on cheat-sheet before
 - Created 'Simon the Sourcerer (videogame)' for 1st game and started stubbing out; 'Simon the Sourcerer' was a disambig page
 - Changed mind part-way through ("got in a bit of a mess"), got rid of new node, redirected back to StS, changed StS to the article about game 1
 - To make StS(vg) article, created link, then clicked when red
 - Copy-paste all text from series page
 - Line at top to say 'go back to series'
 - Got template from other game article which had a 'go back series', "'cos it's easier"
 - Removed 1st game text from series article
 - Categories and external links moved out of series to specific games
 - Did this incrementally; several edits; often found missed some, or re-ordered to put most relevant at top
 - Changed external ScummVM link to internal; "seen it done elsewhere as well"; do prefer---going to get more encyclopedic information
 - Seen that ScummVM node existed previously
 - Corrected wrong node name in back-to-series link, parentheticals
 - Added couple of templates to StS(vg) before moving it on top of StS disambig so is prepared; 'this is X, for StS (person) see Y' and 'this is part of series Z'
 - Splattered it on top; looked for way to do this while preserving history
 - Not terribly important in this case; not much history
 - But otherwise, you have to be an admin, and can merge histories if so
 - Would have used if allowed to
 - Was using preview, but because working with two pages (in multiple tabs, and a tab for cheat-sheets) lots of little edits
 - Redirect markup for StS(vg) found via help (guessed 'WP:REDIRECT', and it worked)
 - Updated main link on series article to not point to redirect
 - Copy-editing to 2nd game node reflecting what done in series summary; made some links ('wikification'); keep house style
 - Taken out split-apart and in-use templates
 - Few small tidyups afterwards; documented what done on Talk page, signed off with "let me know of any problems"
 - Linked 'parody' because "not everyone might know what a parody is"; "I try not to overdo it"
 - Added See Also as well as 'part of series' template to game 1


On-line <30:50>
-------
[Shelf] <31:30>
 - Uses What Links Here
 - Open them in new tabs; go back to disambig page to see list of what we've got
 - Go to first link found, search in page for shelf
 - Read text for context to determine meaning
 - Check against specific types to find match
 - Copy article name from disambig page
 - Edit section and paste that in with piped link
 - Preview; hover to test target; on own account has hover-preview boxes enabled, useful for this
 - "fix disambig" comment; minor "no big changes"

[Multiple Units] <34:44>
 - Create new tab, copy page addess, edit address bar to create new page, with underscores, edit to create
 - Starts with links back to main articles, using the main article template already known (see StS off-line edits)
 - Quick preview to test that
 - Add couple of section headings; copied text of article titles for this
 - Preview again; "I do preview very often"
 - Have look at original articles for some useful text to include; scan first para or so
 - Lots of lists, not wanted in summary pages
 - Not a lot of information in introduction
 - Not sure what to use for summary
 - Take text from later section instead, talking about the history, good enough for now for speed; real WP would review more
 - Taken all of that section wholesale; copied rendered page rather than markup first time but noticed mistake; edited section to copy
 - Quick preview
 - Would do same for other; save w/ comment 'short summaries for ...', putting links in actual comment, because then they're in history as links
 - Generally would save the rough cut /then/ go back to copy-edit; get structure right first
 - Might first make article states better, rather than propagate copy-editing back
 - "Starts getting fun" when people correct summaries; people might be aware of where it's shared
 - A 'See Also' would help for that
 - Once got to four/five countries, worth creating a navigation box template
 - Categories also useful but rely on people to "go and check it out", not "imposed upon them" to go and edit related articles that "should be kept in synch"
 - Template better than that because it's more visible (colourful!)

[London Underground] <43:24>
 - Look through introduction; could put in history section (as well); but quite a notable, important fact, so belongs in first para
 - Puts in top in suitable place in text; edits whole page because doing two sections; would put in history
 - Would add citations; did add {{fact}}
 - Major edit, "quite important at the top"
 - Check that it's gone into text.
[TiL]
 - Sees that contents has link to LU, which links to what just edited with main article link
 - Right at front as historical; edits section
 - Same comment in summary, major edit and {{fact}} again

[Belgium] <47:40>
 - Edit page to look at source
P: Now, my first thought is "is there a specific, uh, label I can use for that?"
I: Ok.
P: So I'm going to copy-and-paste the template name, which I believe is /that/... <I: Yep> ...and I'm going to use the same trick, er, "Template:" in the search box, followed by that name, and I'm going to go and have a look.
P: This isn't going to work, is it.
I: Takes a second.
P: Oh, it will work, ok. There we go.
 - Searches through documenation for 'EU'
P: Accession EU date...sounds like what I'm going to need.
 - Looks for anything better to be sure, but is pretty sure has found it
 - Copies from template doc and pastes into template; doesn't think ordering matters
 - Follows same date format
 - Previews, as not quite sure what it's going to do
 - Searches for the year to find if it's appeared, which it hasn't (outside the source)
P: Have I made a mistake?
...
P: Well, maybe I've made a mistake.
P: Ah, I think I have, because I've put it inside a---I've put it inside a citation I think. <another template>
I: Whoops.
P: I've made a mistake.
I: Two templates next to eachother in the source.
P: Well I think they're nested.
I: Oh they are, aren't they.
P: They're nested, that's why, so I've nested it wrongly, and it's disappeared.
 - Puts it 'a bit higher up' to make sure in right template
P: Good job I used preview.
 - Searches again; finds it. Happy.
 - Summary, minor edit

[Cake] <51:45>
 - Straight into editing, but what I might do before that...
 - New tab for WP for searching (uses real WP, test that pages exist)
P: I'd go and check these things actually do exist first. Before I even preview I'll go and check that.
 - Reads through
 - Wouldn't use colouration of links in preview, "gets annoying", hides that blue link might be disambig
 - Always goes and searches to check link target is good, or uses popup on preview configured
 - Test flour exists, non-disambig, links
P: There's an awful lot of things I /could/ link to here.
I: Such as?
 - Sweetening agent, binding agent, etc.
P: but we're going to overload the user with...with, er, information here, so I'm just going to link to some of the ingredients.
 - Sugar, flour, keep density of links down, relevance up
 - Awful lot of them; link just a few of the most important ones
 - Skip over non-primary ingredients
 - Would probably cut down intro
 - Yeast becuase slightly unusual, lots of encyc information about it
 - Baking powder no, "less exciting"
 - Dough, because scientific, expect information
 - If doing properly, might go back for another pass, adding a few more links
 - Make sure only got first instance
 - "wikify" comment, quick preview, minor edit

[Villains] <55:55>
 - Quickly review text on both of these
 - Noticing by clicking between tabs that text is identical
 - Duplicated content is "unfortunate"
 - Tempted to just fix in two places
 - Refactoring going to be tricky
 - Could link to Jaws, assuming that he has own page
 - Test and link if so, move information to there, 'main article'
 - Very heavy on pictures and infoboxes for a 'list of' node; should be mostly for click-through to main articles
 - Wary of making big changes now, so would just edit both
 - Then go to talk page and propose what just said; scrap most of this and move to separate articles
 - Would consider splitting out Jaws even if it didn't exist
 - "More than enough for an article"; take piecemeal
 - Check with authors first (same as StS)
P: Because this is quite a large change to make, people are going to get upset if you're not careful.

[Conclusions] <59:17>
 - Liked slipping up on template; templates are nasty
 - Don't like WP syntax at all, esp. templates
 - Use preview far too much, too much back-forth with server
 - World of syntax pain
 - Multiple tabs to create workflow inside browser as WP doensn't provide anything like that
 - JS plugins for hover previews to try to make workflow less painful
 - Often editing multiple things at once, moving content between
 - Results
 - Amazon

