Why is this a separate article?
This page adds precisely one sentence and one link to what is already in the LDS Monitoring article. It seems like it would make more sense to just make a small section in the LDS Monitoring article to contain this information. That would make the information more accessible. The only reason for having separate articles is if there will soon be a significant amount of content specific to Unnoc. Is that the case? -- Aebrown 19:32, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
- There was a PDF file just uploaded with a ton of information about the implementation; however, I do not see it linked to yet. But I would agree that if there isn't going to be any more content or explanations on this single page beside a link to the PDF, then I would move it back to the main Monitoring page. -- Mike Murray 19:41, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
- The only PDF file I see related to LDS Monitoring is the one that is indeed linked to from this page. Perhaps you didn't think there was a link, because until I just fixed it, this article used an external link for that PDF, which of course MediaWiki would not know about and thus the File:Unnoc-Setup.pdf would not show any linked articles. -- Aebrown 19:52, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
Now the problem is compounded by yet another new page LDS Monitoring - Unnoc - Modifications. I really don't understand why these tiny amounts of information are now scattered on three different pages. User:petterborgca, please respond soon as to why this unusual article structure is required for this topic. -- Aebrown 15:51, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
This is a preliminary setup to see if it will work for the dissemination of information in conjunction with a presentation at the end of August by Kyle Martin to the VMWorld conference. We do not have all the information available to be added to the site yet, therefore it is sparse. We wanted to see if there would be any limitations here that would impede us. If there were, then we would need to find another way to supply this information to the conference attendees. As it appears so far, the mechanism seems to be useful to us. If you would prefer we not put this information here, please let me know and we can probably find another way to give out the information online.-- PetterborgCa
- Please don't assume that I have any problem with the information being here. As near as I can tell, that is quite appropriate, and I hope I did not give an impression that the information should be removed. My only concern was that the information was being added in a way that required a reader to follow multiple links just to get a few sentences of information. If there will be several paragraphs of information on each page, then the structure you have created would be appropriate; if it's less than that, it might be better to have it all on one page.
- If we do end up keeping the multiple pages, then we need to link the pages with a category, and perhaps with an index page such as the LUW Index template. I wouldn't go to the work of adding these if we're going to end up consolidating back into one page. -- Aebrown 22:38, 6 August 2009 (UTC)