Tarquin wrote:
The meta-tree (anyone think of a better name?) will
have the following
entry points:
- wikipedia:naming conventions
- wikipedia:WikiProjects
- wikipedia:MetaTree
I'm still baffled. Your original idea appeared to me as an attempt to replace naming conventions and WikiProjects and somehow combine the two (which I still totally oppose). But now it looks like you want to augment them. I've already taken a look at the meta and I'm even more confused. I really do not like the term "MeatTree". Whatever the goal of such a system, why can't it live over on the meta? We should be using meta more anyway -- possibly even moving the WikiProject stuff over there when meta gets its wikiware upgraded. Please don't port the Meta-Tree over - yet at least.
--mav
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs http://www.hotjobs.com
On 8/8/02 5:50 PM, "Daniel Mayer" maveric149@yahoo.com wrote:
I'm still baffled. Your original idea appeared to me as an attempt to replace naming conventions and WikiProjects and somehow combine the two (which I still totally oppose). But now it looks like you want to augment them. I've already taken a look at the meta and I'm even more confused. I really do not like the term "MeatTree". Whatever the goal of such a system,
Mmmm...meat tree.
Daniel Mayer wrote:
I'm still baffled. Your original idea appeared to me as an attempt to replace naming conventions and WikiProjects and somehow combine the two (which I still totally oppose).
The reasoning was fairly simple: Wikiprojects are organized in a hierarchy. Naming conventions are increasingly hierarchic too. When I create a page, I seek information about how to name it and how to present it. It's stupid having to career halfway across the Wikipedia to find those two pieces of information.
As to where the structure lives and what to call it -- minor points.
wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org