discuss: TLDP and WIkipedia
Subject:
Re: TLDP and Wikipedia
From:
Stein Gjoen ####@####.####
Date:
19 Aug 2005 09:52:46 -0000
Message-Id: <4305ABCF.3020804@mail.nyx.net>
jdd wrote:
> David Lawyer wrote:
>
>> I would support registration
>
> registration is a good thing and should be encouraged. It allows to know
> who writes and contact it
>
> and verifying users.
It has to be good enough to prevent banned users from re-registering
under a new user name and then continue the vandalism. In my brief
report I pointed out one such case.
> but verufying is a bad thing. we have already a discussion list for
> that. Wiki is for fast contact. When somebody have a problem (if not,
> why read a HOWTO), he can't always subscribe to a system, wait... doing
> so we loose many things a wiki could provide.
>
> wiki is a system per se, with pros and cons, it must not be used for
> what it's not done.
I am not sure how you imagine a wiki should be used at TLDP. My
conclusion from more than 6 months use is that it is quite
unsuitable for HOWTO editing. For commenting it might be of use.
If the purpose is just for fast contact, commenting or discussion
a plain web forum is sufficient.
>> On wikipedia, I started to read about some topics that I know about
>> and found too many errors. But there is no accountability. I tried
>> to correct one major error and even explained why in the discussion,
>> but my change was rejected.
>
> I have never had problem to edit wikipedia? never ask for permission
> though (nor did it very often), but remember: tldp wiki will only be a
> _very small_ subset of tlp, NOT the only way to read HOWTO's!!!
The process of editing is simple but that is also the trivial part.
When others revert your input due to being misinformed, vandals or
political correct the editing process is problematic. Wikipedia
suffers many edit wars, as this phenomenon has become known as.
Anyway we have to first agree on purpose and use before deciding on
implementation. Tools should fit TLDP, notthe other way round.
>> When I read a sentence that I think is wrong, I would like to be able
>> to find out by clicking who wrote it
>
> history is made for that (not always handy though)
True, you only get a pseudonym or IP number.
>> author should appreciate this "punishment" since errors that remain in
>
> I don't think authors like any kind of punisment and we should not allow
> this. On mediawiki, anybody (hence the authors also) can be warned if a
> choosen page is edited. and then if he wants go and see what was chaged.
Why not? Wikipedia has found some has to be permanently banned
and I have already pointed out a case where someone admitted to
creatig a new pseudonym. Continuously reverting gonzo editing
is a major risk for wasting time better spent on editing a more
traditional HOWTO.
> I really greatly appreciate that: my english is far from beeing as good
> as it should and my articles are frequently edited and I'm glad of this.
> Most edits are so small I don't worry about them before making a major
> edit.
Good English is not even sufficient when it comes to edit wars between
American English and British English spelling, a total waste of time.
Regards,
Stein Gjoen
