You are not logged in.

#1 2014-09-30 20:34:35

dhead
Member
Registered: 2012-09-26
Posts: 190

The Chromebook ArchWiki Page

The Chromebook ArchWiki page recently transformed into a generic Chromebook installation guide (much of the information imported from the Acer C720 page).

Due to the fact that Chromebooks were not intended to be running a standard Linux distro, the Chromebook wiki page includes some information that one usually don't expect to find on the ArchWiki.
Instead of finding out someday that the page brutally edited, I though it would be a good idea to try and reach here on the forums to the ArchWiki maintainers and ask what they think about the page.

The goals that guide me when editing the page:
* Have a generic installation guide to cover all the Chromebooks so we can limit duplicates in the specific model pages, that include also devices requires flashing a custom firmware.
* Give as much as needed details about firmware flashing and firmware write protection so users will have a basic understanding on these subjects.

Personally, I believe these are the topics that the maintainers might find them not suitable to the ArchWiki:

1. The Hardware Comparisons table that will probably only get larger.
I think it worth having all these models in the table, even if it means that the table might need its own page.

2. The Firmware Write Protection topic.
I think users need to understand how this works in order to be able to diagnose correctly problems when they messed up the firmware flashing process.
I do feel that we should prevent expanding the topic with more detailed examples so I added the note

The ArchWiki isn't the place for detailed hardware hacking guides so there is no sense in expanding this topic.

3. The Unbricking Your Chromebook topic.
Same as 2.

Offline

#2 2014-10-01 07:10:04

kynikos
Wiki Admin
Registered: 2010-12-28
Posts: 170

Re: The Chromebook ArchWiki Page

Um... The forums are not really the best way to draw the attention of the wiki staff: if Talk:Chromebook wasn't enough and wanted to specifically reach the wiki admins or maintainers, ArchWiki_talk:Administrators or ArchWiki_talk:Maintainers would have been better places.
That said, I don't see any particular issues in that article, except maybe for some Help:Style adjustments. However, the only way you have to avoid "finding out someday that the page [was] brutally edited" is to add it to your watchlist and keep looking after it and assisting any future contributors.

1. That table is not a problem IMO, even though Wikipedia already has a very similar one.
2. and 3. A better way to prevent a section from being expanded, instead of a note, is adding more external links to documents that cover those topics more in details, using the various keywords that are in the body.

Offline

#3 2014-10-02 15:27:26

dhead
Member
Registered: 2012-09-26
Posts: 190

Re: The Chromebook ArchWiki Page

@kynikos

Thanks for your response.
I'll read the Help:Style more carefully and review the Chromebook page again.
I already watching the page(s) and posting on the Talk page sugguestions and when I made a major change, a wiki seemed to me less suitable as communication medium (but this was my first big contribution to a wiki), I'll follow your advise and next time will use the wiki to communicate with a maintainer.

Regarding 1, Wikipedia's table doesn't include information that I believe is important to Arch users like the option to upgrade the storage and SeaBIOS availability in stock or custom firmware.
Also having Chromebook models listed in the table might push users to add details on SeaBIOS availability and upgradable storage (about these are unknown) and open a wiki page on specific models.
So my opinion is that we should continue maintain it.

Regarding, 2 and 3, yes you're right, in fact I did advised in the Chromebook Talk page to add links instead of expanding these sections.

Offline

#4 2014-10-03 14:26:19

kynikos
Wiki Admin
Registered: 2010-12-28
Posts: 170

Re: The Chromebook ArchWiki Page

As I said, I have nothing against that table, Wikipedia's article doesn't have any more "authority" over Chromebooks than an ArchWiki's article, and the latter is arguably a better place for specific technical details that may not be considered encyclopedic enough on the former.

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB