The hamsters will correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe articles are now slotted automatically, based on their tags. So you have to play with the tags until your article lands in an appropriate category.
If Chris is listening, I predict that this scheme will eventually go the way of the Wool Reserve Price.
When you edit an article, there is a section at the top for adding tags. You can add them manually, by checking boxes, or automatically, by clicking on a button. I believe the automatic approach looks for keywords in your article. If you never added any tags to your article, I'm guessing that they were added automatically.
EDIT: I quickly looked at all your articles, and they all have tags. Some make sense, and others...
EDIT: I tried and seems hamsters are acting up again. Changed the tags for Stern-Brocot Trees and their Applications to "Algorithms" and "C++" making sure I don't press "Detact tags automatically". The end results is: "C++", "XML", "Objective-C", "Algorithm"
It's been a few years since I was active on Codeproject. And I've noticed a change, or it might just be a feeling. Is it so that people don't engage so much on other developers' work these days?
There used to be lots of comments on every new article.
I think that the feedback, and the discussions are one important drive to make developers share code and articles, anyway.
I believe that articles are now categorized based solely on their tags. This is a very recent change and may still be in flux. There is no longer a way to explicitly categorize an article yourself. All you can do is play with your tags until your article ends up in the category that you think appropriate.
Thanks, but as per Greg's suggestion, I was trying first to fix this myself.
I moved most of my articles to "Desktop Programming", which is an improvement. But I think a better location is "Desktop Programming / Windows Forms", but I don't know what tag(s) will get it to that new location. I expected to find some tag referring to WinForms under Technology, but no luck.
Currently the tags are: C#, .NET, Intermediate, controls, Dev, desktop.
As for my article "A Tale of Two Timers", I'm not sure where it should go. It's about Windows internals, and the programming in the article is a side issue. Currently it's in the section "Time", which you cannot get to using the articles menu. Is that a different bug?
How do I get my article into the section "Desktop Programming / Windows Forms"?
I checked other articles already there, and the key tag seems to be "WinForms". Could not find the tag (should it be under "Technology")? I added it manually, but my article is still only in the section "Desktop Programming".
I added a WinForms tag to your articles and that put them in the desired section. As for your Time article, I gave it a C# tag that put it into the C# category (the language topic is meant to be a catch all if all else fails).
Alas, the articles with the WinForms tag are still in the section "Desktop Programming". If I select Articles -> Browse Topic -> Desktop Programming, the articles are all there. Also each article is noted as being in "Articles / Desktop Programming".
Regarding the Tale of Two Timers article, would it not make sense to have OS specific sections (e.g. Windows 7, Windows 10, MacOS, etc)? Some articles pertain to the OS and are language independent.
I have checked and there are just minimal changes (i.e. size in the pic, &-quot versus " oder Tab versus spaces).
I can't really understand what does these changes bring after 14 years
Or am I missing something?
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
Not sure what you're getting at. I sometimes make minor edits to my articles but can now publish them without moderation. But I only check the "Mark article as updated?" box if the article or its code has been meaningfully revised. Otherwise it would put the article on the front page for no reason, which is abusive. If a revised article that requires moderation is always treated as if it should go onto the front page, I'd call that a site defect rather than deliberate abuse by its author.