On 8/31/07, John Reaves <johnreaveswp(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I don't like the idea of sticking editing specific
links in the anon
notice. The "10 things..." list is a handy page that readers might find
interesting/informative. We need to remember that most people that use
Wikipedia are readers, not editors, so we shouldn't necessarily impose links
about something they could care less about on them.
On 8/31/07, stevertigo <stvrtg(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello list,
> I like the fact that people (by one means or another) agreed on using
> the banner space for something other than the fund drive (there is
> already a permanent link in the interaction sidebox, no?). Then
> things is an interesting usage for that valuable bulletin space.
> But I don't think its the best usage. A better usage would be for
> mobjobs; fix-it tasks which would effectively serve double duty as
> reminders (or first time notices) of some basic process and policy,
> focusing on particular problems or aspects. These can be minor items
> that need lots of eyeballs to correct on a large scale. My favorite
> peeves are:
> * the misuse of external links in the body of articles,
> * improper hatnotes (WP:HAT - hey, my protologism is official terminology!
> * self refs in-body/outside-of-parenthesis. 'For more information,' etc.
One compromise would be to use some parser function trickery to make
the nature of the site notice text depend on the namespace of the page
being viewed. Then the ones that blatantly break the fifth wall or are
of dubious importance (or the ones Geni decides to raise hell about)
can at least be kept out of article space.