Category talk:Issues (Firefox): Difference between revisions

From MozillaZine Knowledge Base
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 18: Line 18:


Yes, the category:Firefox is organized by subject.  It supposedly lists all articles, but it contains only 18 entries, while this page that supposedly has only articles on frequently encountered issues has 39 entries.  And missing among those frequently encountered issues are memory use, CPU use, firewall, "can't connect", and other common complaints.  The organization is sufficiently screwed up that I have a hard enough time finding stuff that I know is there.
Yes, the category:Firefox is organized by subject.  It supposedly lists all articles, but it contains only 18 entries, while this page that supposedly has only articles on frequently encountered issues has 39 entries.  And missing among those frequently encountered issues are memory use, CPU use, firewall, "can't connect", and other common complaints.  The organization is sufficiently screwed up that I have a hard enough time finding stuff that I know is there.
I notice also that the listing of articles has hardly anything that comes under the subcategory:Page Display.  And Page Display has a bunch of stuff that seemingly has nothing to do with page display, and that is not even in the alphabetical listing of articles.  If it were up to me, I'd completely dump this default Wikipedia notion of subcategories and alphabetical listing.

Revision as of 23:43, 8 February 2006

What a mess this is.

1. The organization and assortment of topics is pretty much random, without any discernable organization. It's pretty daunting to find anything here, and this is pretty much the entry point for someone who's troubleshooting.

2. The alphabetical arrangement is illogical. For example, bookmarks problems are filed under, L, M, and B. Extensions are filed under U (3 places) and P.

3. There's only one subcategory. What the? And why should we have a separate section on subcategories? Shouldn't the whole thing be divided into categories?

4. Sprinkled among miscellaneous issues, I find an article "Issues with Firefox". I thought that's what the whole page was supposed to be. The title, after all, is "Issues (Firefox)".

5. That page, "Issues with Firefox", is actually organized. Something like that should take the place of this page.

6. At one point it was somewhat organized. I don't know what happened, but this seems like several steps backwards.

AnotherGuest.

Organization here. --Np 23:10, 8 February 2006 (UTC)


Yes, the category:Firefox is organized by subject. It supposedly lists all articles, but it contains only 18 entries, while this page that supposedly has only articles on frequently encountered issues has 39 entries. And missing among those frequently encountered issues are memory use, CPU use, firewall, "can't connect", and other common complaints. The organization is sufficiently screwed up that I have a hard enough time finding stuff that I know is there.


I notice also that the listing of articles has hardly anything that comes under the subcategory:Page Display. And Page Display has a bunch of stuff that seemingly has nothing to do with page display, and that is not even in the alphabetical listing of articles. If it were up to me, I'd completely dump this default Wikipedia notion of subcategories and alphabetical listing.