Talk:Encyclopedia
Glossary: alphabetical -- direct
Does the division of the lexicon glossary into alphabetical subgroups really make sense? I think it only makes sense if you want to look up a term you know here (then you can find it faster), but in that case you should look under Wikipedia.
If you simply want to rummage which worth reading contributions there are still on Wikipedia on the subject, I think it is more meaningful to offer a direct listing of the links...
I would also be willing to take the writing work on me, if you agree.
mfg alex aka smartmind23
Grouping
Grouping would be useful for devices.
e.g. CD player CD recorder DVD player SACD player TOGETHER in a group
--LOWfi-HIGHend 18:24, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
Glossary more attractive
Missed the glossary or its content for the first time. Weighty content so hidden.
What should be a direct listing ??!
In addition to the alphabetical grouping, a thematic grouping should be tried. This of course can only start small and will take time to grow and will always be quite unfinished, nevertheless ...
In wikipedia often - at least for me - 'rare' article main headings are used. That could also ( possibly additionally ) be 'fixed' here.
E.g..
level indicator instead of level spoon
decibel (dB) instead of BEL
But what is urgently missing in the alphabetical listing is a NextSkipButton BELOW the list. So you can quickly get to the next item.
But how to program that ?!!!
But something else: there are topics that are not wanted in wikipedia, they would have to be here somewhere. Just not only device descriptions.
--AK45500 19:16, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
have corrected the glossary a little bit and spiced it up. Abbreviations should probably be given a resolution after all. But it's already solved quite well, it says the keywords you/fra are looking for instead of the Wikipedia complicated constructions.
faster navigation
If I have a lot of time ( is there such a thing ? ) I will provide all single glossaries with the 0 --- Z bar and put the successive letter link UNDER the list.
--AK45500 20:07, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
'A' has been beefed up, maybe someone has time and transfers the changes to the others accordingly ??!!!
--AK45500 20:21, 8 May 2010 (UTC)