muzik wrote:Should we have a page for every single still life under 14 or 17 cells?
No, I don't think so.
I'm less concerned about clutter than Dave is. Wikis aren't paper, and this is just another one of your "will ${PROJECT} ever have ${FEATURE}" questions; it's not like you will actually create high-quality articles (or even low-quality stubs, for that matter) for all those still lifes. And noone else will either.
(This isn't to say I'm entirely unconcerned about clutter
in principle. 5000+ still life articles would be overkill; many don't even have names and have (probably) not been used or seen anywhere outside of automatic enumerations and soup searching. So why give them entries?)
That said, I do think we've got much bigger fish to fry on the wiki. For instance, there's no pages for a whole lot of other, much more
interesting patterns. The POTY page might be a good starting point, and there's quite a few red links elsewhere as well.
danny wrote:Idea (probably not practical): A lifeviewer where you can draw an object and hit a button on the side and it will display some basic information about it, at least the Catagolue page, and names for some.
This, on the other hand, sounds quite cool. I don't think it's altogether unreasonable either, though you'd have to talk to rowett into adding the necessary functionality to the LifeViewer codebase. Once that's done, both the wiki, the forum, and any other place that uses the LifeViewer would benefit.