The Apple Wiki:Community portal

This is the place to post tasks that need to be done on the wiki. Also this is the place for proposed changes. I heard about people wanting a favicon and arranging the main page into categories.

More Esser Info
i0nic's slides from his CanSecWest presentation have been released. Where should we link to them from? --beej 17:38, 17 March 2012 (MDT)

iPhone-Elite
I think we should include all this old stuff before it gets lost: code.google.com/p/iphone-elite/. I mean the wiki articles there. Most infos should be already here, but I'm sure a lot of things are missing too. --http 15:02, 26 June 2012 (MDT)

Theme
Several people are compaining about the theming/style change 1 2. I wasn't involved in this change (except the new image), but I think there was no discussion about changing the default style. Can't we switch the default style back to how it was and for those that like a fancy new theme can still have the new one? -- http 16:37, 9 March 2012 (MST)
 * The way to add new themes would be to have access to the server. Thats why we did this. What we can do is get geohot to copy Vector.php, Vector.deps.php, and Vector/ to iPhone.php, iPhone.deps.php, and iPhone/ and modify some variables. I can do that. Then just move Mediawiki:Vector.css to Mediawiki:iPhone.css. --5urd 17:05, 9 March 2012 (MST)
 * Second this. In fact, seeing as it'll have the same base html/css/js as vector, geohot can copy Vector.deps.php&rarr;iPhone.deps.php, save this to iPhone.php, put $wgDefaultSkin="iphone"; in LocalSettings.php and then move the css the  kirby  lover  02:01, 13 March 2012 (MDT)
 * As I've tweeted about since last night, I decided to give the current iOS-like theme a bit of a makeover. Here's how it looks in Chromium. The theme also works in Firefox for Windows, except the left navigation tabs aren't shifted closer to the center. I haven't gotten around to testing it in other browsers just yet, unfortunately. Thoughts on this? -- Dialexio 18:32, 12 March 2012 (MDT)
 * Looks great, though as I mentioned on twitter, the heading should be put somewhere in the title bar area so it looks more realistic. Maybe something similar to the "other network" window under Wi-Fi settings. the  kirby  lover  02:01, 13 March 2012 (MDT)
 * That'd be nice, but I don't want the page heading to overlap the tabs. -- Dialexio 13:46, 13 March 2012 (MDT)

I added my modifications to the theme. It works as desired in all (desktop) browsers except IE… I'll make an attempt at improving the theme in IE 7/+. -- Dialexio 21:05, 8 April 2012 (MDT)
 * Looking great :) I tested in IE8 and 9, doesn't look too bad, barring the unselected tabs due to the solid background; you can use the longer filter/-ms-filter syntax like so for IE gradients the  kirby  lover  09:06, 15 April 2012 (MDT)

I created more modifications that I'd like feedback on before the possibly get implemented. Both of these are meant to further help emulate the iOS look. I was thinking of giving the sidebar and header bar fixed positioning, so they stick around regardless of where you scroll. (Screenshot) I also created some CSS that makes some headers (particularly those on the Main Page and Special pages page) look like iOS… sections? (I don't recall the correct term for it.) Here's a screenshot since I suck at describing what I'm trying to say. :P Thoughts on these changes? -- Dialexio 19:39, 11 September 2012 (MDT)
 * They're section headers :) and they look great, but maybe some negative margins (like ) could be used to make them extend to the edge of the page area and look more iOS-y. The top bar could go well with some fixed positioning, but I don't think the sidebar should.  the  kirby  lover  19:51, 11 September 2012 (MDT)
 * I didn't really want the sidebar to be fixed either. However, the title bar actually stretches across the complete width of the page, and scrolling down on long pages can reveal that. Currently, that section of the title bar is hidden by applying the linen background to the logo, hence why I currently have the sidebar fixed. Any ideas on how deal with the title bar? -- Dialexio 13:04, 14 September 2012 (MDT)
 * One small issue I noticed with making the title bar fixed is that, when you click on an anchor link, the title bar will cover up the header for the section you're looking at (and some content as well). You can always scroll a little up to see what was being blocked though. To combat this problem, I entertained the idea of making just the area where page content is displayed the part that scrolls. I don't think that a lot of people (especially those with small screens) would like this change, so I'm expecting heavy criticism. I plan on using the previously-mentioned method for the fixed title bar instead of this newer method, unless everybody actually prefers the newer method. :P (Note that the scrolling area is not for the whole page, just the content area.) -- Dialexio 20:13, 16 September 2012 (MDT)

Firmware page
I know I just created the iPad mini and iPad (4th generation) entries on the Firmware page, but I was thinking… Instead of keeping the firmware tables unique to each model, could we keep the firmware tables divided by generation instead? (i.e. Instead of editing three pages for the iPad mini to add a new firmware, there would be just one page that holds the three firmware tables.) It'd certainly help keep the amount of changes made with each new firmware to a minimum. -- Dialexio 19:50, 30 October 2012 (MDT)
 * That would certainly reduce the amount of edits. They were separated as the source was getting ridiculously long. I'm for it. --5urd 20:00, 30 October 2012 (MDT)
 * As long as no information gets lost, feel free to change it. But I wonder how you want to put all this into a horizontal design. I think it won't fit or you'd have to remove infos. Can you explain further? --http 00:31, 31 October 2012 (MDT)
 * I think you might be misunderstanding a bit; I'm planning on, as one example, copying all of the iPad 2 firmware tables into one embedded page, instead of having four different pages that require editing. Everything's still going to look the same. :P -- Dialexio 01:21, 31 October 2012 (MDT)
 * Yes, I misunderstood you. I thought you wanted to regroup the lists by iOS version. Yes, just grouping more devices together seems like a simple change and seems to be useful. --http 04:06, 31 October 2012 (MDT)
 * Maybe we could do it like Beta Firmware where all current devices are on the page while deprecated devices are separated off. --5urd 18:45, 31 October 2012 (MDT)

iPad mini
Me and Alex were chatting on Twitter and the topic of what to do with the iPad mini and two solutions came up: The problem I see with the new page is there are three different models and when we have multiple models for a device, we make the page with that name a disambiguation page. Maybe we could have iPad mini have a note at the top to a disambiguation page (iPad mini (disambiguation) or iPad mini (first generation))? I don't want iPad mini 1G as we don't list the key pages with the 1G in the title (Wildcat 7B500 (iPad)). Any thoughts? --5urd 09:51, 25 October 2012 (MDT)
 * New section on iPad
 * New page: iPad mini
 * So let's see what we have right now for all the other categories:
 * iPhone -> m68ap for 1st gen, n82ap for 2nd gen, n88ap 3rd gen, iPhone 4 with different models n90ap, n90bap, n92ap, etc.
 * iPod touch -> n45ap for 1st gen, n72ap for 2nd gen, etc.
 * iPad -> k48ap for 1st gen (both Wi-Fi and 3G), iPad 2 for 2nd gen with k93ap, k94ap, k95ap, k93aap, etc.
 * Apple TV -> k66ap for 2nd gen
 * iPad mini -> ? for 1st gen with kap123 etc. for the different models
 * So previously we didn't have the problem, because:
 * 1st gen iPhone was only available in one model, m68ap
 * same for iPod touch, only one model, n45ap
 * for iPad, both models (Wi-Fi and 3G) had the same model number, later devices have different numbers.
 * for Apple TV, the first iOS version was 2nd gen, so the name without a version number can be used for the device category
 * For me it's clear that iPad mini is for the category of device and must be a separate page. As long as we have only one model, we can add all infos to there and don't create another page between the category and the individual models.
 * So the question comes up what to use later when there are more generations, what to use as disambiguation page between the category page iPad mini and the individual models, something that describes the first generation. We can't use iPad mini, because that's for the category. Why not use iPad mini 1 or iPad mini 1G? I mean the only problem is that it doesn't match the key pages. So either we start the key pages to include the generation as well, or we simply ignore this difference. I mean why is this a problem if this single page to describe the specifics of the first generation iPad mini has a generation number in the page title? Everybody knows that leaving this 1G away gets you to the device category page iPad mini. So I don't see a problem here. And as long as there is no 2nd generation, we don't even need such a page. Ok, so I suggest:
 * create iPad mini for the device category
 * while no 2nd generation exists, put all links onto that same page iPad mini
 * when 2nd gen iPad mini comes out, create a page iPad mini 1 and iPad mini 2 (or with the "G" if you wish)
 * the key pages can be with our without the "1G", I don't care

--http 14:46, 25 October 2012 (MDT)
 * I went ahead and moved the stuff to iPad mini with a possible link to iPad mini 1G. I kept the G because everything else has it. I also put a note up on iPad for the link. The key pages should be determined on how they are with other devices:
 * One model type (like iPad 1G)
 * Multiple (all else)
 * I don't think we should put the  on the key pages as we don't use ,  , or  . --5urd 21:38, 25 October 2012 (MDT)
 * I don't think we should put the  on the key pages as we don't use ,  , or  . --5urd 21:38, 25 October 2012 (MDT)
 * I don't think we should put the  on the key pages as we don't use ,  , or  . --5urd 21:38, 25 October 2012 (MDT)
 * I don't think we should put the  on the key pages as we don't use ,  , or  . --5urd 21:38, 25 October 2012 (MDT)
 * I don't think we should put the  on the key pages as we don't use ,  , or  . --5urd 21:38, 25 October 2012 (MDT)

Baseband Chip Pages
This has been discused before, but why do we use the marketing name for the earliest three baseband chip pages? Because we list the processors under their internal name (not marketing) and the device pages are their internal, not marketing (n82ap instead of "iPhone 3G"; n72ap instead of "iPod touch 3G" or "iPod touch (third generation)"). We even have the key pages by code name and build number, not version! Those three pages are the only ones that are listed under their marketing name, not internal. --5urd 10:24, 25 October 2012 (MDT)

Key Pages for iPhone 4 GSM
Currently, we list the GSM varient's key pages with  with the Rev A ones at , but if Apple decides to release another version of the CDMA varient, then we would have: I think we should move the original GSM ones to  like we do for other pages such as Firmware (GSM/GSM Rev A/CDMA) and Beta Firmware (GSM/CDMA). This was proposed back about a month after the CDMA version came out, but we left it.
 * iPhone 4
 * iPhone 4 GSM Rev A
 * iPhone 4 CDMA
 * iPhone 4 CDMA Rev A

Maybe just four or five pages a day? It will take a few weeks, but it could be done. --5urd 16:02, 31 October 2012 (MDT)
 * Being the person that initially proposed this change, it sounds good to me (as I said on Twitter). Since there are quite a lot of key pages, it would definitely be best to spread out the change over several days (or weeks). -- Dialexio 23:01, 31 October 2012 (MDT)
 * The extension  was fine when there was only one iPhone 4. But now, with the CDMA, Rev. A, etc. we need the differentiation. So yes, I agree with the change. But I would rather change all pages at once (if everybody agrees to the change itself). Preferably during a quiet time, when there were no other edits for a week or so. And by the way, for the iPhone 5, Apple refers to the two models as A1428 and A1429, not Global and GSM:  --http 01:33, 2 November 2012 (MDT)

Server error
Is this server playing up? I ask this because it loads very slow and a lot of the time the pages do not show correctly. --Adaminsull 12:16, 7 December 2012 (MST)
 * Found out that its the CSS not loading. --Adaminsull 15:59, 8 December 2012 (MST)