Changing a previously widely accepted standard should take much wider discussion than this has received, and over a longer period of time. It's very easy at Wikipedia for a few people to move in fast and get something changed; the test is whether it hold up under subsequent scrutiny. And even actual consent ahead of time may change quite rapidly once people truly see the implications on a large scale in the encyclopedia.
On Sat, Oct 18, 2008 at 8:58 AM, Andrew Gray shimgray@gmail.com wrote:
2008/10/17 Marc Riddell michaeldavid86@comcast.net:
Thanks for your thoughts, geni. Although I see value in linking the years, what, in the end, I am REALLY looking for is some consistency. I still do not understand fully much of the decision-making process that goes into matters such as deciding on a specific format policy. But what I do see throughout the encyclopedia is an arbitrariness in form and structure that greatly detracts from the professionalism of the Project. A reader is coming to the encyclopedia looking for information on a particular subject. That information should be presented in a consistent, reliable, familiar form. This form becomes the "signature" of the encyclopedia. As the Wikipedia Project matures, it is important that the decision-making processes regarding such basic issues as its very form and structure mature as well.
Surely the thing you're bringing up - people going around and delinking dates for standardisation - is pretty much guaranteed to bring greater consistency of form in the medium term? There's two and a half million articles, most of which will have some date linking, so it's going to take time to get them all; a transitional period is always necessary for big changes. Nonetheless, I'm sure that in a month or two we'll be a lot closer to our ideal of consistency of style, once the new system's shaken out.
The only real issue, from a consistency viewpoint, is that it decided to rescind a previous standard form. This is not a dealbreaker - yes, consistency over time is nice, but we should never be backed into a corner of continuing with a problematic "solution" simply because it seemed like a good idea five years ago, when the issues were much different.
--
- Andrew Gray
andrew.gray@dunelm.org.uk
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l