Florence Devouard wrote:
The primary role of the welcome is, I think,
informing the newcomers of
the community expectations.
When I look at the current template, I think it is rather good, but I
find interesting that the most important expectations we are mentionning
on the talk page of the newcomers are about "naming conventions" or
"manual of style".
Other expectations, such as code of conduct or consensus building, are
only mentionned on a second page, where the newcomer will have to go.
Note that I like the five pillars page very much. It is bright, concise,
to the point.
Hmm, that's a good point. IMO we should emphasize to newcomers that the
things they really need to know up front in order to contribute are: 1)
write neutral content; and 2) cite reliable sources so that what you
write can be verified by someone else. It's useful to link to some pages
explaining what those things mean (WP:NPOV, WP:RS, and WP:V). It's
probably also useful to give a few general background links, like the
five-principles ones. Most of the rest can be safely be left for later
IMO---if a newcomer is writing neutral, well referenced articles, it's
not a big problem if they name their article [[Prince Foo of Bar]]
instead of [[Foo, Prince of Bar]]---that's easy to fix.
One thing that *is* something of a bottleneck IMO is the technical
business of citing sources. A newbie looking for guidance on how to do
that goes to WP:CITE, which quickly degenerates into a morass of
multiple systems, template help pages, and who knows what else. Maybe we
should have something prominently posted along the lines of: "If you
find this confusing, feel free to cite your sources however you want!
Someone will fix up the formatting later as long as you provide a
complete citation to the sources you used."
-Mark
That's an excellent idea. I've just brought it up at WT:CITE