Talk:Roblox: Difference between revisions
→Capitalization Condratictions
>Tenal |
>JulienDethurens |
||
| (10 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown) | |||
| Line 178: | Line 178: | ||
:: It's not a fansite, LuaLearners as a site is helping us to accomplish our goal of educating people in Lua. If some people think the Wiki is too hard, it may help if they have a second site to go to other than the official Lua website. Adding a link to LuaLearners on the front page is a good idea. --[[User:OBF|OBF]] | :: It's not a fansite, LuaLearners as a site is helping us to accomplish our goal of educating people in Lua. If some people think the Wiki is too hard, it may help if they have a second site to go to other than the official Lua website. Adding a link to LuaLearners on the front page is a good idea. --[[User:OBF|OBF]] | ||
:::The wiki is standalone. I don't think doing so would be the best idea. [[User:Tenal|Tenal]] 16:56, 22 April 2012 (EDT) | :::The wiki is standalone. I don't think doing so would be the best idea. [[User:Tenal|Tenal]] 16:56, 22 April 2012 (EDT) | ||
::::The wiki is the only official source of help on scripting, but that doesn't mean we can't link to unofficial websites if it can help users. And the wiki isn't standalone; we work together with the blog and builderman's help page. The wiki is for help with scripting and building, the blog is for news and builderman's help is for help with ROBLOX. We also have the official Lua website which we can link to, including the reference, the book Programming in Lua which offers documentation of more advanced concepts and the source code. Then, we also have Wikipedia to document concepts that are too vast to be documented on the wiki, and we also occasionally add links to other websites. The wiki is certainly not standalone and its purpose is not to document everything, only building and scripting. The difference is that LuaLearners shares our purpose instead of having a similar, but different, purpose. Yet, I don't see why we wouldn't give a link to it. After all, as long as the intent of the site is to help and as long as the site is actually being helpful and useful enough to have an impact, linking to it can be useful. --[[User:JulienDethurens|JulienDethurens]] 19:28, 22 April 2012 (EDT) | |||
== [RESOLVED] Group Link == | |||
I've been wondering about the following for a while. "Want to help our great wiki team? Join [http://www.roblox.com/My/Groups.aspx?gid=127081 the wiki group] on Roblox to give suggestions to the people who write the wiki." The group article was deleted. {{User:Tomtomn00/Signature|date=18:53, 25 April 2012 (UTC)}} | |||
:That group never had an article... --[[User:JulienDethurens|JulienDethurens]] 23:32, 27 April 2012 (EDT) | |||
== Capitalization Condratictions == | |||
I've noticed throughout the main page some parts say Roblox and other parts say ROBLOX. Shouldn't it stick to either one or the other? <br/><div style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; color:#000000; font-size:10px">( [[User:SoulStealer9875|SoulStealer9875]] , [http://www.roblox.com/My/PrivateMessage.aspx?RecipientID=3827581 Send Message] on 16:47, 30 April 2012 (UTC)</div> | |||
:Both seem to be correct, as both are used on the website. The staff sometimes uses ROBLOX and sometimes uses Roblox. There doesn't seem to be any correct capitalization. --[[User:JulienDethurens|JulienDethurens]] 16:54, 30 April 2012 (EDT) | |||