[wp-docs] New page policy discussion
mpt at myrealbox.com
Wed Mar 2 21:45:02 GMT 2005
On 2 Mar, 2005, at 1:42 AM, Carthik Sharma wrote:
> On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 23:24:44 -0700, Craig Hartel
> <craig at nuclearmoose.com> wrote:
>> Is this a dumb "policy"? I'm pretty much the one that suggested it
>> and set up the reminder template that sits in most peoples' TALK
> I expected to address this question in this document here:
> (please read the thread).
I expected to address the question by following up my last message on
the topic ("Re: [wp-docs] New Codex Page for Forum Go-ers",
2005-01-07). It seems the archive of pre-February posts to the list has
been lost, but the salient point of my message was this:
> On 7 Jan, 2005, at 12:55 PM, Craig Hartel wrote:
>> I was suggesting that there be a note on that new page that all new
>> pages should be created in the USER: namespace. In fact, I went onto
>> the TALK page and did just that.
> Cool. Given the huge amount of documentation we have, and the
> incredible difficulty of editing Wiki pages after they're created,
> putting each newly-created page through an approval process is
> *exactly* what we need. ;-)
I planned to wait a month after the guideline change, so I could
compare the number of pages created in the main namespace in the month
beforehand with the number created in the month afterward. That way, I
would have hard evidence for or against my hypothesis that the
guideline change would maim the main namespace.
Unfortunately for that experiment (though, I think, fortunately for
Codex), the wp-docs mailing list died shortly thereafter. So people had
no choice but to ignore the guideline.
> I proposed something, as outlined in that thread, and then it was that
> many people involved in documentation did not respond to it, or
> provide suggestions for improvement.
> I understand that you had a discussion with some individual, but if
> that individual has a real interest in how documentation develops,
> then it might be good for him to provide feedback when asked, or start
> a new discussion regarding it.
I believe I'm "that individual", and I'm sorry, I didn't receive that
thread at all (and so in the absence of a sufficiently flexible mail
client, I can't reply to it either).
Anyway, if you wish to revive a review process for new Codex pages, I
suggest first reading about what happened to Nupedia.
More information about the wp-docs