Yellowstone National Park articles in the wiki

[ka3jjz]

Just a thought here, as it would make maintenance on that page a lot easier...

If the Yellowstone database entry were to be split apart like we now have the wiki, one could use the extensions to pull the entries into the wiki, which would then be surrounded by all the explanatory material.

With one link at the bottom (the refreshpage template, which is highly suggested when you use the extensions), anytime maintenance on the database is applied, the wiki would then be updated. That way you don't need to update in 2 places.

Thoughts? Mike

 

[SCPD]

OK I've edited the tables and inserted the freq information from the first article into the second. Before I wipe out the freq listings on the first article, if someone would proof it to make sure I didn't miss anything, that would be helpful

I can then go ahead and wipe the freq listings on the first Yellowstone article, and we can put a fork in this, and mark it done :.>>

Mike

I've not had the time to visit this site for a couple of days otherwise I would have replied sooner. In my initial messages I mentioned that a couple of repeaters were missing from the tables. I added those repeaters when I updated the repeater/frequencies information on my page. If you followed that information rather than just import the tables from the first page, then it will be accurate.

 

[ka3jjz]

Well when you say 'my page', you mean the Yellowstone article I see you're editing now, then we should be good to go. I'd appreciate a proof read before I blow the freq information away off that article.

What do you think of my suggestion about setting up the database and just extracting the data? The maintenance would be very simple - just click on the refreshpage link (once the extensions are installed) and all the new information in the database (once it's updated) will be reloaded to the wiki

Mike

 

[SCPD]

Well when you say 'my page', you mean the Yellowstone article I see you're editing now, then we should be good to go. I'd appreciate a proof read before I blow the freq information away off that article.

What do you think of my suggestion about setting up the database and just extracting the data? The maintenance would be very simple - just click on the refreshpage link (once the extensions are installed) and all the new information in the database (once it's updated) will be reloaded to the wiki

Mike

Go ahead and delete the article with the tables. I did not mean to imply that the article we are saving as "mine," but I had lost track of which was first, which was second.

I hope I'm understanding you correctly that you are going to delete the article with the tables showing the frequency information and having the one I've been editing retained.

I think linking the database with this wiki page is a good idea. It will be so if the database is maintained correctly and editors filter out submissions made by inexperienced listeners.

 

[ka3jjz]

I'll take care of this - I'll blank the linked page and have Bob drop it. However, before I do that...

I'm going to use that page to demonstrate how to pull frequencies in from the database. There are 2 commands - the freqsubcat and refreshpage commands - which make this happen.

The refreshpage command serves a very similar purpose to refreshing the cache that's in your browser. Normally the wiki speeds up posting the page to the user by posting the last stored image of the page in a cache (which you can control to a certain extent). The trouble is that this includes the last execution of the freqsubcat command, so any changes that had occurred in the meantime wouldn't be extracted.

Refreshpage forces the wiki to pull a new copy of the page, and when it does so, it also causes the freqsubcat command to re-execute, pulling the new version of the data into the wiki. The syntax of the command is a bit obtuse, hence the coding of this command as a template. You simply substitute the URL of the page you want refreshed and the commands take care of the rest.

Once the database is set up the way the freqs in your article is, then all it would take would be 4 or 5 freqsubcat commands, one refreshpage and you're done. You would get the category number from the database - and that's explained in the RR Wiki Extensions article.

I'll take care of this tonight, then wait a couple of days so you can see the coding (It's so simple even a caveman could do it...). Then once you let me know that you've seen it, I can have the page blanked and dropped

The reason I was using tables is that doing so allows software packages like FreeScan and many (if not all) BuTel packages to extract the data via, basically, a copy to clipboard/paste routine so data entry into scanners is a whole lot easier. In FreeScan, the function is called EZ Grab - I know that the BuTel packages has something similar.

Mike