User talk:Lumenos/RationalWiki:LiquidThreads

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This page has things the power elite keep deleting from RationalWiki:LiquidThreads. (It is mostly Nx)


Advantages of LiquidThreads[edit]

  • Traditional talk pages are an enormous waste of hard disk space. With each edit, the entire talk page is saved, resulting in a lot of redundant threads. LiquidThreads eliminates this overhead. (This has been a limiting resource at RationalWiki. [1][2])
  • Indentation, signing, and thread creation are handled automatically.

Disadvantages of LiquidThreads[edit]


  • Can only edit/access the wiki markup of one post at a time:
    • Lumenos doesn't know how to save more than one post to a personal backup or copy it to another wiki (particularly a wiki without LiquidThreads installed). If a hacker or someone with server/backup access, were to alter the edit history, there would be less of a chance that an editor would have a backup. Editors may also loose their work due to system backup failure or service termination.
    • You can't edit more than one post at a time which is sometimes useful for important corrections/strikeouts.
  • Although you can create subtopics/subsections within a single LQT post, this will probably not be customary and therefore subtopics/subsections will not be used to organize things. In the Contents you get a list of threads with no indications of relationships between them (other then timestamps). (If you "split" a thread is there an automatic indication that you have done so, or does it just pull out all "replies" to a certain comment, and make this a new thread?)

Temporary disadvantages?[edit]

"Bug" reports[edit]

The latest bug reports will probably be somewhere on this page.

Status reports of bug fixes may be on the preceding page or on bug-fixer's todo list... wait what's this say?!?!


  • At least three times LQT would not post or preview a comment, and would not indicate any problem. (The posts and edit window were still available when clicking "Back" in the web browser.) (evidence)
Bugs fixed?[edit]
  • Enabling LQT resulted in erroneous edit histories and prevented access to the wiki markup.[3]
Nx claimed this was fixed, and it appears to be. ~ Lumenos (talk) 07:19, 12 January 2011 (UTC)


  • Scripts were required to rearrange threads on a page although a programmer has pledged to make it work without scripts.. (Scripts can be a security risk.)
I don't think I can rearrange threads without scripts at this time, but no biggie. ~ Lumenos (talk) 07:17, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
  • Users familiar with traditional MediaWiki talk pages may have a hard time adjusting to the new system.

Noted changes[edit]

  • With LQT, replies are more chronologically ordered, so that new replies appear closer to the bottom of the page. After other replies have been made, the only way to make a new "reply" appear next to the comment, is to edit the comment itself. You can indent and put your own signature inside someone else's "comment box" (and copy their signature up to their "comment") but this will likely be considered to be bad netiquette, particularly on more formal wikis. It may also be confusing because it may seem that someone copied the comment with your signature.
  • You have both thread edit history and page edit history. I think it is supposed to be able to show you the conversation (as threads) at any point in time. ~ Lumenos (talk) 07:10, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
  • Eeearrrum it seems to be hiding my last posts more often than anyone else's. (Perhaps the meaning of the promised "feature" we find at User:Nx/todo.) So you better not be talking back! ~ Lumenos (talk) 16:43, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Feature requests[edit]

  • Make post preview bump to the post instead of the top of the page. (Although less of a need for preview since much is automatic and there are no edit conflicts (well except maybe when it was/is losing posts).)
  • Hard:
    • Hide things at the beginning/top rather than always at the end. Have it hide things you've read already.
    • Simulating undent: Add a checkbox to the option "split to thread" to automatically create links linking the split point and the new thread. (You could probably use the undent tag and move it back to the first post but this doesn't help with the pages being too long. We still get walls of text, it is easier to find the edit window but less posts fit and there is more whitespace on the page.)


I hear you. LQT is gonna happen whether we like it or not, the question is, will the implementation support the "wiki way"? ħumanUser talk:Human 03:33, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
I don't know if you were referring to [javascript] specifically but I put your comment in this section because I am editing the "article" above. What is the "wiki" way? ~ Lumenos (talk) 09:36, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
I do not know if you were here or not, but we tried using LQT for main-space talk and were quickly reverted. ТyTalk. 15:49, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
Not sure how I missed that. If there was some discussion of this it might be added to the Discussions section. ~ Lumenos (talk) 16:21, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
Goonie tried, SusanG quickly eliminated it. Go to the use "LQT in saloon bar" discussion and scroll down to the bottom to see what happened. As I don't feel like reading through your maze of conversation, do you like or dislike LQT?ТyTalk. 16:24, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
(EC)To be honest, as bad an idea as I thought putting it on the Saloon Bar was, I think the Main Page traffic is just about right at least to get more of the kinks worked out and to see if my concerns pan out. I'd support putting it there, if the question comes up again. Like Human, I can see it as inevitable, but I'd like to see small steps rather than going for the big targets early. -- User:Kels@school
The thing is that the question never came up. Nothing is ever solved. Everything that is done seems to be done on some poor schuck's own initiative. ТyTalk. 16:29, 24 February 2011 (UTC)