Hi. I recently put a lot of work on OpiWiki because I feel it could potentially become something huge.

However, I need some guidance. And support!

What do you think of this: [Pearl Jam]?

I created everything you see, from the band and its present/past members' pages to the complete studio discography. I also added a few singles ( see [this album] ).

As you can see, I also added database links whenever I could, and I added bold characters for the important details in the description ( on most occasions: the actual name of the person/thing being presented ). I think this should be mandatory to ensure we have great descriptions which are reading and browsing-friendly.

I also chose to stop including birth/death dates in the description, since it already figures on the left side of the screen when you do a proper creation anyway.

I've encountered a few issues while creating all of this, but luckily they are quite minor and shouldn't be much of a problem.

First of all, I quickly noticed that if I would link all the lower items to one thing, it would make a total mess of the higher item's page. For example, let's take the [Eddie Vedder] page. I chose only to include the band ( Pearl Jam ) and the albums he has worked on. At first, I began adding the singles from the said albums as lower items as well... But I realized there would be too many of them on Eddie's page. So I chose to show DIRECT lower items only, in some sort of pyramidal kind of thinking.

To make it short, here's my view on things: Musician/Singer ( main item/person ) should only have direct lower links, such as band(s) and album(s). The singles should only be linked as a lower item to the specific albums in which they can be heard.

The same should go with anything else, whether it be music or science or sports or else, you'll end up with a huge pile of database links in the lower items area.

Right now, it's not an issue but that's only because OpiWiki doesn't have enough items. But, if the website is successful, it could be a big problem in the future.

One way to solve the problem could be to add various degrees of lower items, which could work pretty much like how the rankings currently work. For example, right now, the singer ranking is higher than the studio singer ranking ( very good idea by the way ). Maybe we could do something similar with lower links to add more subordination between each items.

I also encountered what might be the first situation in which two articles share the same name. Pearl Jam ( the band ) made a self-titled album. I had previously added the name info for the band and so I did the same for the album. I think the name info should be mandatory for ANY item. Example, right now we only have one Barack Obama. But it would still be wise to add "politician" as name info anyway, just to make sure.

I also have two very, very minor issues concerning the box in which we type description ( the one I'm using right now ).

1- Whenever I want to add a database link, the link goes at the very beginning of my description. This forces me to copy/paste the link to the desired location in my text instead of just clicking on the link in the box and having it immediately lay exactly where I want it as I am typing. It's the same thing for all the other tools ( italic, underline, bold, etc. ). Not sure if I'm being clear enough here, but if you understand what I'm trying to explain, you'll have to agree that this is an issue for people who want to make quality descriptions.

2- The area in which we type is too small, I constantly have to scroll up and down whenever I'm making the descriptions ( mostly due to the issue I just talked about in #1 ).

So, yeah, I'm looking forward to some replies now... I spent a bunch of hours on OpiWiki, but now I want to know if I should invest more time on it in the future.

added by X Abrupto
1 opinions, 2 replies
Add your opinion:
(mouse over or touch to update)
Add your opinion
1 vote
Oct 16, 2015

At first I wasn't sure about bolding keywords in items' description, but eventually I think it's a good idea. Will be added to our guidelines.

The birth date is useful for other pages, e.g. rating area. I know it's a bit redundant, but please keep adding it also to the description. I think it makes the description more encyclopedic, which works to the advantage of the site.

Right now, it's not an issue but that's only because OpiWiki doesn't have enough items. But, if the website is successful, it could be a big problem in the future.
Exactly because of this, this issue doesn't have the highest priority at the moment. Of course it will be much improved in the future. I will take your ideas into consideration.

I think the name info should be mandatory for ANY item.
I disagree on that. Barack Obama (politician) is collateral, superfluous. However, for some types for items, I agree that it would be good to add name info for all, e.g. for songs or music albums (as it has been). For now, please use the format according to our guidelines.

Issue #1: Seems like a bug, I'm unable to reproduce it. I'd need an additional info. What environment are you on?

Item description area
Issue #2: You're free to enlarge the area. It may vary accross the browsers, but in general just drag it with your mouse.
Big thanks for the great work you've already done. Keep it up.

main reply
1 vote,
Oct 17, 2015

Oh well, it appears the brand new Microsoft Edge browser won't allow me to expand the box...

I'll try another browser at some point and give you the feedback on this... Issue #1 is probably also because of Edge.

Edit: Yep, it's an issue only found with Microsoft Edge.

Also, thanks to you for creating the website... I'm the kind of guy who loves filling up forms, surveys, etc. and this website has been a blessing for me - I've been bedridden almost all week long and didn't know what to do with my spare time.

I'm aware I still need to improve some of my work. I'll try to do better in the future. I think your website could potentially be the bane of other sites such as IMDB, Metacritic, etc. since it pretty much could do anything they can do, plus a lot more. We just need a bunch of dedicated users who are willing to spend time adding more depth to the whole database.

0 votes,
Oct 22, 2015

Thanks, I'll take a look into Edge and see what can be done with this bug. What surprises me though, is that a browser named "Edge" does not support such a basic function like textarea enlargement.

And again, the work you do is outstanding.

Add your opinion
Challenge someone to answer this topic:
Invite an OpiWiki user:
Invite your friend via email:
Share it: