Edit link curated resources gives 404

[hanneoberman]

Describe the bug Clicking 'Edit this page' for one of the resources is linking to a non-existing GitHub page.

To Reproduce E.g. https://forrt.org/curated_resources/361_introduction-to-simulations/ links to https://github.com/forrtproject/forrtproject.github.io/edit/master/content/curated_resources/361_introduction-to-simulations.md, which does not exist.

Expected behavior I wanted to edit the source, because the Google Drive link in the resource text is broken too: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1yt1m.. is incorrectly formatted and should be directing to https://drive.google.com/file/d/1yt1mcHyTGcwIzBBc8sfyZbsNwbabWUs6/view?usp=sharing

Screenshots NA

Additional context NA

[flavioazevedo]

Thank you for flagging this! It is appreciated.

I am tagging @SamGuay who likely can help understand how to fix it.

Also, regarding the change of the file URL, I can do that. However, I clicked on the link and I am still prompted to ask for permission. Can you fix that and I can edit the link please?

[hanneoberman]

Great, thanks! I'm not the author of the materials, so I'm prompted with the access request page too, and I'm not sure whether that is on purpose.

[flavioazevedo]

Alright, I sent the below message to the resource owner:

Hi there, we linked this resource to FORRT's curated resources and folks noted the link still requires access to them. You can see the issue in our GitHub page.

Do you know who is that person? Perhaps I can contact them directly.

[hanneoberman]

The accompanying lecture is by Dorothy Bishop

[github-actions[bot]]

This issue has been inactive for more than 90 days. If there is no further activity, it will be automatically closed in seven days time. You can reopen the issue if it is still relevant.

[LukasWallrich]

@flavioazevedo what fix do we want here? Do we want to offer an edit link to GitHub here? (Distinct from e.g. glossary where no such link exists.) If so, we need to fix them - otherwise, we can remove them.

Also, where does the information on curated resources come from? The specific content issue reported above needs to be fixed there.

[flavioazevedo]

The link is here (https://forrt.org/curated_resources/780_introduction-to-simulations/) which makes me think the links are not stable in se (because @hanneoberman above pasted a different link). In any case, the data is is under "FORRT Database 2.0" g-sheets at our FORRT G-Drive.

I tested the linked resource, video by DB, and it is indeed working for me: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LD5t57MAEB0&list=PLB_6juUbmewMfkdwM5cV_5n7Sroufo-Qb

So how do we mark this as 'solved'?

[LukasWallrich]

Thanks for checking. As I see it, there are two issues here, neither of which are solved:

• [ ] Edit links from each curated resources page are broken. They do not seem to be stable, but the current link (with the 780_) also fails. Do we care about these edit links, so that we need to figure out how to build them properly, or can we remove them. (Note that having dozens of 404 links on our page is likely to pull down search engine rankings as well.)
• [ ] The GDoc linked in the text of that resources does not exist. That is probably just a matter of deleting it in the text - @flavioazevedo could you check and possibly remove it?

[flavioazevedo]

Hm, I might be misunderstanding but as per the print screen below, the link with 780 works:

And the linked resource, which is a youtube video, also works:

So I don't think we should delete the entry.

re: do we care about the links? Yes, I would say we should care because people do use these.

[LukasWallrich]

I'm not suggesting deleting the entry - but there are two broken links in it (highlighted below). I doubt that people use the edit links frequently given that we seem to have received only 1 report that they are broken in nearly half a year ... so my tendency would be to remove them. The link to Google Docs should certainly go, unless we can find a working alternative.

When we touch the template, it would also be a good idea to fix/remove the date, but that is less of an issue ...

[flavioazevedo]

Oh, thank you for this print screen! I now understand it.

I have now removed the 'drive' link from the abstract. And edited the entry accordingly. The YT playlist is still there (because it words). I asked access to the Drive folder (and if granted access, I will re-edit it back), the original abstract is a copy of the YT author notes which we can copy back if the G-drive becomes public.

I now understand what you mean with "Edit links". I agree that if they are not helpful and lead of 404 pages, that's not great. On an ideal world, this was implemented so that folks with no github access or knowledge could make content changes. In fact, a lot of our website efforts have been on increasing people's ability to contribute content while not increasing the knowledge/training bar to contribute. All about that learning curve! In any case, we can remove it (especially if causing 404 issues impacting negatively how bots crawl/assess our website).

regarding the date from Jan 0001. Happy to scrap that field of info. That's not relevant or useful.

[github-actions[bot]]

This issue has been inactive for more than 90 days. If there is no further activity, it will be automatically closed in seven days time. You can reopen the issue if it is still relevant.

[github-actions[bot]]

This issue has been automatically closed due to it being stale for more than 7 days. Please feel free to reopen if you still want this issue.