New T2W Traderpedia

[blackcab]

Okay on second thoughts - lets go with a traditional purple.

Thanks Sharky. The purple links look very similar to the blue links on my screen btw (in monobook) - I have to look quite hard to tell them apart. How about #963696 rather than #5A3696?

Nice RSI equation Should p be forced to be positive though, as in:

where p = ABS(the average gain of N days /average loss of N days)

Hey, it's a wiki, I can change it myself (But I'm not 100% sure of that ABS)

 

[frugi]

One comment so far is searching - I tried to search for ADX (not knowing what it was) but it drew a blank.
I couldn't do a text search since I had no idea what it was. Had to search elsewhere and then come back. How does one edit some text to make it searchable if it's not automatic?
(I tried to put this comment on the FAQ section but couldn't see how to do it - am I missing something obvious or is something obvious missing?)

Ale,

All text is automatically searchable, you do not have to specially designate it so.

The search engine does not index words it thinks are common, such as "and, but, when, each" which is sensible enough. Trouble is, this seems to exclude acronyms for indicators and the like, such as ADX, CCI etc. which explains why you couldn't find ADX even though the word ADX was mentioned in the Average Directional Indicator page. That's rather annoying of it, I admit. One way round this problem is to ensure redirects are in place for words of this nature. So I have added a page titled "ADX" which simply redirects the user to the "Average Directional Indicator" page. The code for doing this is #REDIRECT [[Average Directional Indicator]].

 

[Sharky]

I think the reason why it can't find ADX is because it's a three letter word. I think it has to be four letters minimum - but I can probably change this as there are quite a few 3 letter words I can think of that members will be searching on. Otherwise all words are instantly searchable - so Ale, you don't need to do anything special.

One thing people may not realise is that below the search box in the Traderpedia, the "Go" and "Search" buttons do different things. The "Go" button does an "exact search", but if it fails to find the term, it reverts to a "full text search". The "Search" button skips the exact search and just does the "full text search".

You can see the difference yourself by simply searching for something like "SETS" and seeing what happens when you click each button.

Blackcab: I purposely made the links look subtely different, but perhaps there too similar (I'll experiment with your suggested colour). As for the RSI equation, I'll have to consult various sources.

 

[ale]

Thanks Frugi / Sharky

Although people are asked to avoid acronyms they will be used.
Should we have an Acronyms List page on the site?

Can you add a 'mouse over' facility on the Go and Search buttons?
Ale

 

[trendie]

when using acronyms, could we adopt a protocol of, say adding an underscore infront of the acronym, making it easier to search / filter on ?

this would filter out "the jelly sets in the mould" from _SETS.
or "there was an aCCIdent" from _CCI.
or "sardonic" from _SAR.

 

[Sharky]

I think anytime that an acronym is commonly used we simply add a redirect page from that aconym to the full page, as described by Frugi above. That would get round all the problems - because you could easily go straight to the page, using the "Go" button.

A mouse over is a good idea - normally it's on an image, but I think we can probably do it on a button too - I'll look into it.

Trendie, I think it would be counter-productive to adopt such a protocol - the logic makes sense, but I can just see too many downsides to it. There is more information about searching available here: http://www.trade2win.com/traderpedia/T2W_Traderpedia:Searching - there may be a way to only search whole words, and not parts of words, but I'm not sure what it is. I tried enclosing it in quotes, but that didn't seem to work.

 

[JillyB]

Hi Everyone,

Just wanted to ask a question, but no-one seems to be around today on the Traderpedia site.

I'm in the middle of adding text and diagrams about Triangles, Flag and Pennants, but I had a thought about subdividing the main section where these are into 'Continuation Patterns' and 'Reversal Patterns'. So 'Double Top' , 'Head and Shoulders' etc would go into 'Reversal Patterns' and the Triangles, Flags and Pennants would go into 'Continuation Patterns'.

Any thoughts on this?

Didn't want to do this without the ok - plus will need a bit of assistance to set up the new sub-heading if you think this is acceptable.

 

[Sharky]

Jill that sounds like an excellent idea.

As the Traderpedia evolves and more information is added on particular topics, it makes sense to divide these topics into more specialist topics - to make easier to read, naviagate and link to more relevant content . So in your example, we started with Price Patterns in the Technical Analysis page, and the Chart Patterns category - as a broad topic of Technical Analysis - but now as we begin to describe those patterns it quickly becomes apparent that they can conveniently by split into two groups - 'reversal' and 'continuation' patterns which tells us something important about the pattern straight away.

Don't worry about getting the okay either (not necessary) - I can assure you we'll be around and assisting where needed. John (Rhody Trader), has been off on holiday last week - but I'm sure that this week he'll be eager to give a helping hand to all contributions and help to ensure they meet the guidelines set out in the Checklist. The single most important thing for us at the moment is to just get people involved.

Finally, if you want to discuss specific content or formatting issues of any page in the Traderpedia, you may want to try using the 'discussion' facility - it's a tab along the top of any (article/word/term/page), that acts as a place to discuss that page. By adding '--~~~~' to your comment it will also display your name, and a timestamp - conveniently there is a button on the edit form to include this signature if you forget this syntax.

Thanks Jill.

 

[Sharky]

Now that folks have had a chance to explore the Traderpedia, we'd be grateful for any feedback about what your think of it, how we can improve it, and how to encourage greater participation. So please share your views with us... Thanks!