Talk:Wiki Etiquette - Revision history

Jacky at 17:15, 3 September 2010

2010-09-03T17:15:21Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:15, 3 September 2010
Line 39:		Line 39:

	--[[User:NeilGood\|NeilGood]] 23:52, 2 September 2010 (UTC)		--[[User:NeilGood\|NeilGood]] 23:52, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

			Thanks Neil
			There is a page started by Caroline (who uploaded and wrote masses of information on running groups} called 'To do list' which in theory is where people are meant to note what needs doing. Jean has been looking at this and completing some of the work, I think, but no-one else is adding much to it by way of outstanding pages. This page is referred to on the main page, so in theory people can find it easily, rather than having to look for a category.

			I think the wiki has lots of potential as a really good tool for Freegle. We just need to get over people's reticence in using it and encourage more contributors. A dedicated moderator might help too, who could be there to answer questions and keep a regular check on changes.

			Jacky Barrett 3 September 2010

NeilGood: Response

2010-09-02T23:53:46Z

Response

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:53, 2 September 2010
Line 26:		Line 26:
	JackyBarrett 2 September 2010		JackyBarrett 2 September 2010

	Thanks Jacky.		Thanks Jacky.

	'''Re Blank Pages''' - maybe the answer is if you find it blank and have something to say, add it.....I have changed the remark above to be better in line with the sentiment on the Yahoo group thread.  Maybe the page should be tagged somehow - found blank and the date then if a month or so passes and nothing has happened, remove the page.  Generally, I think we are saying blank pages should be discouraged so either leave it as a link to a blank page or put at least a couple of sentences in there so others can add to it.		'''Re Blank Pages''' - maybe the answer is if you find it blank and have something to say, add it.....I have changed the remark above to be better in line with the sentiment on the Yahoo group thread.  Maybe the page should be tagged somehow - found blank and the date then if a month or so passes and nothing has happened, remove the page.  Generally, I think we are saying blank pages should be discouraged so either leave it as a link to a blank page or put at least a couple of sentences in there so others can add to it.

	Just had a look through Categories - is there something we do there to tag the blank pages? ~~ I thought [[~~Category:Housekeeping]] but that is Housekeeping associated with running a Group rather than the Wiki itself - WikiHousekeeping maybe?		Just had a look through Categories - is there something we do there to tag the blank pages? Category:Housekeeping I thought but that is Housekeeping associated with running a Group rather than the Wiki itself - WikiHousekeeping maybe?

	The real issue is '''deletion/removal of content'''.  I think we must encourage people to add their comments/thoughts/ideas either in the page or in the associated Talk page.  What you are saying is the a large scale removal of content causes upset....agreed....I would not like it!		The real issue is '''deletion/removal of content'''.  I think we must encourage people to add their comments/thoughts/ideas either in the page or in the associated Talk page.  What you are saying is the a large scale removal of content causes upset....agreed....I would not like it!

	'''Overall sentiment''' -I am a huge supporter of this way of working so would prefer to deal with people contributing but getting it a bit wrong rather than holding back.  This wiki with its front page and backing discussion page would seem perfect for now.		'''Overall sentiment''' -I am a huge supporter of this way of working so would prefer to deal with people contributing but getting it a bit wrong rather than holding back.  This wiki with its front page and backing discussion page would seem perfect for now.

	It is very nice to have a decent discussion like this.....		It is very nice to have a decent discussion like this.....

	--[[User:NeilGood\|NeilGood]] 23:52, 2 September 2010 (UTC)		--[[User:NeilGood\|NeilGood]] 23:52, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

NeilGood: Response

2010-09-02T23:52:10Z

Response

@@ Line 4: / Line 4: @@
 changes suggested, work in progress, etc)
 </pre>
-Conventional wiki wisdom positively encourages leaving blank stubs to pages that need to be created.
+Conventional wiki wisdom positively encourages leaving stubs to non-existent pages that need to be created.
 <pre>Check the history of a page before making any changes</pre>
 This is a good point - it should avoid repeated misconceptions
@@ Line 24: / Line 24: @@
 The sensitivity issue is real.&nbsp; People do get upset. So why not just be careful?
 JackyBarrett 2 September 2010

Jacky at 21:38, 2 September 2010

2010-09-02T21:38:02Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:38, 2 September 2010
Line 11:		Line 11:
	<pre>If you are about to make some more significant changes (e.g. entirely rewrite an important page,		<pre>If you are about to make some more significant changes (e.g. entirely rewrite an important page,
	or change the category structure), send a mail (to Central) saying so. That way you can flush out		or change the category structure), send a mail (to Central) saying so. That way you can flush out
	people who might also be intending to do that, also find people who might want to review the changes</pre>		people who might also be intending to do that, also find people who might want to review the changes</pre> <pre>Mail folk in the 'history' to ask if they want to review your changes</pre>
	<pre>Mail folk in the 'history' to ask if they want to review your changes</pre>
	For both of these points, perhaps a better thing would to encourage people to watch the pages they are interested in so the wiki will tell them when there are changes and they can view/disagree/amend		For both of these points, perhaps a better thing would to encourage people to watch the pages they are interested in so the wiki will tell them when there are changes and they can view/disagree/amend

	People watching the more important pages can enquire why the changes were made and revert to the previous version if need be but we should operate on the basis most people try to make changes in good faith and should not be too afraid to make changes.		People watching the more important pages can enquire why the changes were made and revert to the previous version if need be but we should operate on the basis most people try to make changes in good faith and should not be too afraid to make changes.

	--[[User:NeilGood\|NeilGood]] 20:52, 2 September 2010 (UTC)		--[[User:NeilGood\|NeilGood]] 20:52, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

			Quoting convential wisdom is fine, but most wikis (I think) have at least one moderator.  This one doesn't other than a monthly check for spammers, so this isn't a standard wiki facility.  Freegle is also feeling it's way forward and consideration along the way really helps when we are probably dealing with a majoriy who haven'tever written anything on a wiki.

			The issue about creating blank pages is that they have sometimes been created but the content already exists under another page title.  If new pages were genuinely needed and that is flagged up in the 'to do' list that would be fine.  But that isn't what has happened so far.  They are just left as a link with nothing on the the other end.  Which is one of the reasons people have given for not using this wiki - there are too many blank pages.

			The sensitivity issue is real.  People do get upset. So why not just be careful?

			JackyBarrett 2 September 2010

NeilGood: Formatting

2010-09-02T20:56:01Z

Formatting

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:56, 2 September 2010
Line 1:		Line 1:
	From the eMail discussion, we seem to disagree on a good few of the points below:		From the eMail discussion, we seem to disagree on a good few of the points below:
	<pre>Don't leave blank pages without a declaration that you are intending to come back at some point to do it - and do so!		<pre>Don't leave blank pages without a declaration that you are intending to come back at some point to do it - and do so!
	(Each page has a discussion page which is intended for discussion about the content of that page: changes suggested, work in progress, etc)		(Each page has a discussion page which is intended for discussion about the content of that page:
			changes suggested, work in progress, etc)
	</pre>		</pre>
	Conventional wiki wisdom positively encourages leaving blank stubs to pages that need to be created.		Conventional wiki wisdom positively encourages leaving blank stubs to pages that need to be created.
Line 8:		Line 9:
	<pre>and be sensitive about editing other people's work</pre>		<pre>and be sensitive about editing other people's work</pre>
	nothing is lost and operating on the basis that most people will be making changes in good faith, let them carry on!		nothing is lost and operating on the basis that most people will be making changes in good faith, let them carry on!
	<pre>If you are about to make some more significant changes (e.g. entirely rewrite an important page, or change the category structure), send a mail (to Central) saying so. That way you can flush out people who might also be intending to do that, also find people who might want to review the changes</pre> <pre>Mail folk in the 'history' to ask if they want to review your changes</pre>		<pre>If you are about to make some more significant changes (e.g. entirely rewrite an important page,
			or change the category structure), send a mail (to Central) saying so. That way you can flush out
			people who might also be intending to do that, also find people who might want to review the changes</pre>
			<pre>Mail folk in the 'history' to ask if they want to review your changes</pre>
	For both of these points, perhaps a better thing would to encourage people to watch the pages they are interested in so the wiki will tell them when there are changes and they can view/disagree/amend		For both of these points, perhaps a better thing would to encourage people to watch the pages they are interested in so the wiki will tell them when there are changes and they can view/disagree/amend

	People watching the more important pages can enquire why the changes were made and revert to the previous version if need be but we should operate on the basis most people try to make changes in good faith and should not be too afraid to make changes.		People watching the more important pages can enquire why the changes were made and revert to the previous version if need be but we should operate on the basis most people try to make changes in good faith and should not be too afraid to make changes.

	~~<br>~~		--[[User:NeilGood\|NeilGood]] 20:52, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

	--[[User:NeilGood\|NeilGood]] 20:52, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

	~~<br>~~

NeilGood: Formatting

2010-09-02T20:54:34Z

Formatting

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:54, 2 September 2010
Line 1:		Line 1:
	From the eMail discussion, we seem to disagree on a good few of the points below:		From the eMail discussion, we seem to disagree on a good few of the points below:
			<pre>Don't leave blank pages without a declaration that you are intending to come back at some point to do it - and do so!
	*<pre>Don't leave blank pages without a declaration that you are intending to come back at some point to do it - and do so!		(Each page has a discussion page which is intended for discussion about the content of that page: changes suggested, work in progress, etc)
	~~</pre>~~		</pre>
			Conventional wiki wisdom positively encourages leaving blank stubs to pages that need to be created.
	(Each page has a discussion page which is intended for discussion about the content of that page: changes suggested, work in progress, etc)		<pre>Check the history of a page before making any changes</pre>
			This is a good point - it should avoid repeated misconceptions
	**Conventional wiki wisdom positively encourages leaving blank stubs to pages that need to be created.		<pre>and be sensitive about editing other people's work</pre>
	*<pre>Check the history of a page before making any changes</pre>		nothing is lost and operating on the basis that most people will be making changes in good faith, let them carry on!
	*This is a good point - it should avoid repeated misconceptions		<pre>If you are about to make some more significant changes (e.g. entirely rewrite an important page, or change the category structure), send a mail (to Central) saying so. That way you can flush out people who might also be intending to do that, also find people who might want to review the changes</pre> <pre>Mail folk in the 'history' to ask if they want to review your changes</pre>
	*<pre>and be sensitive about editing other people's work</pre>		For both of these points, perhaps a better thing would to encourage people to watch the pages they are interested in so the wiki will tell them when there are changes and they can view/disagree/amend
	**nothing is lost and operating on the basis that most people will be making changes in good faith, let them carry on!
	*<pre>If you are about to make some more significant changes (e.g. entirely rewrite an important page, or change the category structure), send a mail (to Central) saying so. That way you can flush out people who might also be intending to do that, also find people who might want to review the changes</pre>
	*<pre>Mail folk in the 'history' to ask if they want to review your changes</pre>
	*For both of these points, perhaps a better thing would to encourage people to watch the pages they are interested in so the wiki will tell them when there are changes and they can view/disagree/amend

	People watching the more important pages can enquire why the changes were made and revert to the previous version if need be but we should operate on the basis most people try to make changes in good faith and should not be too afraid to make changes.		People watching the more important pages can enquire why the changes were made and revert to the previous version if need be but we should operate on the basis most people try to make changes in good faith and should not be too afraid to make changes.

NeilGood: Formatting

2010-09-02T20:53:15Z

Formatting

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:53, 2 September 2010
Line 1:		Line 1:
	From the eMail discussion, we seem to disagree on a good few of the points below:		From the eMail discussion, we seem to disagree on a good few of the points below:

	*<pre>''Don't leave blank pages without a declaration that you are intending to come back at some point to do it - and do so! (Each page has a discussion page which is intended for discussion about the content of that page: changes suggested, work in progress, etc)~~''</pre>~~		*<pre>Don't leave blank pages without a declaration that you are intending to come back at some point to do it - and do so!
			</pre>

			(Each page has a discussion page which is intended for discussion about the content of that page: changes suggested, work in progress, etc)

	**Conventional wiki wisdom positively encourages leaving blank stubs to pages that need to be created.		**Conventional wiki wisdom positively encourages leaving blank stubs to pages that need to be created.
	*<pre>''Check the history of a page before making any changes''</pre>		*<pre>Check the history of a page before making any changes</pre>
	*This is a good point - it should avoid repeated misconceptions		*This is a good point - it should avoid repeated misconceptions
	*<pre>''and be sensitive about editing other people's work''</pre>		*<pre>and be sensitive about editing other people's work</pre>
	**nothing is lost and operating on the basis that most people will be making changes in good faith, let them carry on!		**nothing is lost and operating on the basis that most people will be making changes in good faith, let them carry on!
	*<pre>If you are about to make some more significant changes (e.g. entirely rewrite an important page, or change the category structure), send a mail (to Central) saying so. That way you can flush out people who might also be intending to do that, also find people who might want to review the changes</pre>		*<pre>If you are about to make some more significant changes (e.g. entirely rewrite an important page, or change the category structure), send a mail (to Central) saying so. That way you can flush out people who might also be intending to do that, also find people who might want to review the changes</pre>

NeilGood: Challenging a few points

2010-09-02T20:52:02Z

Challenging a few points

New page

From the eMail discussion, we seem to disagree on a good few of the points below:

*<pre>''Don't leave blank pages without a declaration that you are intending to come back at some point to do it - and do so! (Each page has a discussion page which is intended for discussion about the content of that page: changes suggested, work in progress, etc)''</pre>
**Conventional wiki wisdom positively encourages leaving blank stubs to pages that need to be created.
*<pre>''Check the history of a page before making any changes''</pre>
*This is a good point - it should avoid repeated misconceptions
*<pre>''and be sensitive about editing other people's work''</pre>
**nothing is lost and operating on the basis that most people will be making changes in good faith, let them carry on!
*<pre>If you are about to make some more significant changes (e.g. entirely rewrite an important page, or change the category structure), send a mail (to Central) saying so. That way you can flush out people who might also be intending to do that, also find people who might want to review the changes</pre>
*<pre>Mail folk in the 'history' to ask if they want to review your changes</pre>
*For both of these points, perhaps a better thing would to encourage people to watch the pages they are interested in so the wiki will tell them when there are changes and they can view/disagree/amend

People watching the more important pages can enquire why the changes were made and revert to the previous version if need be but we should operate on the basis most people try to make changes in good faith and should not be too afraid to make changes.

<br>

--[[User:NeilGood|NeilGood]] 20:52, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

<br>