Please see [[Wikipedia:Advertising discussions]], a proposal I've made to formalise guidelines on where and how the largest discussions should be advertised around Wikipedia to ensure sufficient input to major discussions. Improvements to the page and input on the talk page would be appreciated.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Advertising_discussions
Carcharoth
On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 11:36 AM, Carcharoth carcharothwp@googlemail.com wrote:
Please see [[Wikipedia:Advertising discussions]], a proposal I've made to formalise guidelines on where and how the largest discussions should be advertised around Wikipedia to ensure sufficient input to major discussions. Improvements to the page and input on the talk page would be appreciated.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Advertising_discussions
Hmm. I'm going through that list there, and it is actually rather difficult to decide what level of exposure to pitch a small proposal like this at. So far, I've done:
*Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) *Wikipedia:Village pump (policies) *Wikipedia talk:Canvassing *Wikipedia talk:Consensus *Wiki-en-l mailing list
The last one was a bit unnecessary really.
The Community bulletin board, CENT template, and Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Policies feel a bit like overkill. I suppose it is the difference between wanting some input and wanting some formal approval (that should really come later by some ill-defined "common practice" assessment - if this is common practice, it should be a guideline immediately, if not, more discussion is needed). Other options are even "higher" and less appropriate.
So I am going to stop there and see what input results.
Carcharoth
"Carcharoth" carcharothwp@googlemail.com wrote in message news:206791b10904110350q7cb5419q586ca9b2faf7a9f1@mail.gmail.com... (...)
*Wiki-en-l mailing list
The last one was a bit unnecessary really.
It's in the statement of principles. "well advertised"..."nature of wikipedia". I would add that the newsgroup interface to the mailing list is more advanced, because the last time I read anything about it, gmail does not thread properly, or people delete what they've read from their INBOX.
On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 3:50 AM, Carcharoth carcharothwp@googlemail.com wrote:
On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 11:36 AM, Carcharoth carcharothwp@googlemail.com wrote:
Please see [[Wikipedia:Advertising discussions]], a proposal I've made to formalise guidelines on where and how the largest discussions should be advertised around Wikipedia to ensure sufficient input to major discussions. Improvements to the page and input on the talk page would be appreciated.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Advertising_discussions
Hmm. I'm going through that list there, and it is actually rather difficult to decide what level of exposure to pitch a small proposal like this at. So far, I've done:
*Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) *Wikipedia:Village pump (policies) *Wikipedia talk:Canvassing *Wikipedia talk:Consensus *Wiki-en-l mailing list
I added it a while ago, but for discussions of wide interest, don't forget the Signpost tipline: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/Newsroom/Suggestio...
We are trying to cover community-wide discussions on a regular basis now. Remember that other event or project news and announcements are also welcome at the tipline, both from en:wp and from the other projects. It's most helpful if you can leave an item that is written up and ready to publish :)
-- Phoebe
Discussions affecting the whole community a.. Wikipedia:Centralized discussion for centralized discussion of policy, guideline, and infrastructure changes That is noise. This is the centralized discussion forum. It can handle more traffic. It's all threaded, attributed, dated, archived, and multi-cast. You can't even do that last one with a web page, unless everyone polls it, and most people do not know how to make a browser do that. The first avenue for sujjesting that something be deleted is the user who posted it. Discussion of policy and guidelines belongs primarily *and not exclusively* on the talk pages of the policy or guidelines, because you cannot lock both a talk page and a mainspace page, even if I hav seen administrators trying to do that.
Infrastructure? A few hundred newsgroups on are on this server dedicated to software. Assuming that any discussion forum is central, this is it. More people hav seen it. More people here are equipped to argue with it.