Wikipedia information team wrote:
Thank you for your mail. You should direct this kind of enquiry to the Technical Mediawiki mailing, list, where people will have the skills to debate and analyse your proposition. You can subscribe on the list at the following address. http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l.
Sincerely,
Delphine Ménard
Hi I want to suggest a wiki Meta worldwide Structure (WMWS) for articles. example, one keyword is available in english, german and french languae and more,
All have a different structrue for this keyword of = first level == second level === third level.
There should be a Board for articilkes to give them a WMWS.
So i suggest to regard only the first level =.
So if in WMWS fo this keyword a "=" headline is created, this headline is shown as well in all language-wikis and, in the board to edit WMWS, there are then all headline translated
E.g.
1. Introduction
French: entree german: Einfühung
Then the Headline of level 1 (=) cannot be edited in the language wiki, only in the meta wiki
This should follow tot the goal to have in every language a unique structure of the wiki.
Level 2-3 then can be different in each language.
somehow clear ?
Thanks http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_site_feedback#WIKI_META_WOLRDWIDE_S...
On 20/05/05, closedshop closedshop@gmx.de wrote:
So if in WMWS fo this keyword a "=" headline is created, this headline is shown as well in all language-wikis and, in the board to edit WMWS, there are then all headline translated
E.g.
- Introduction
French: entree german: Einfühung
Then the Headline of level 1 (=) cannot be edited in the language wiki, only in the meta wiki
If I understand you correctly, you are proposing that a standard set of headings be made mandatory for all articles. My instant reaction is that this is extremely un-wiki, but I'll go further and justify why it is a Bad Idea.
Firstly, not all articles are the same - some will not be long enough to require an "introduction", some subjects may naturally suggest a structure where nothing ends up in a catch-all "introduction", and so on. The beauty of the wiki is of course that everything is editable, and making certain parts of the structure ineditable would just lead to awkward articles which had been "force-fitted" into that structure.
For something like "Wiktionary", there is more scope for enforcing structure, because all the articles *will* fall into the same pattern (although having looked at the introduction to the Oxford English Dictionary recently I realise how many allowances a standard structure needs to have to deal thoroughly with an entire language).
Secondly, it's not clear how this would work for anything other than the "Introduction" example you give. "See also", "External links", and "References" sections seem like good candidates for standardisation, but because they come at the end, and each may or may not be there, how could the software tell them from non-standardised headers, which will always be specific to the article - unless conventions are changed radically to have all headings inside the content at a lower level than "Introduction", "See also", etc (under a "Content" heading or somesuch). And even then, how do you determine whether to say "External link" or "External links"; and when not all are present, which non-editable headings are shown?
On a final, more trivial, point, it should be noted that "= First-level headings =" are by convention never used, since this is the same level as the article title; the highest level used for normal headings is "== The next level down ==".
My apologies if I've misunderstood your original intention, and even if not, feel free to disagree with my reasoning.
Hi thanks for the reply, yes you understood me right, ok, for the structure, then we need 2 x = as first level 3 x = as second level 4 x = as third level, if the level with one = is not used.
So I speak of making a META Board, [not for all articles, for all languages of one klexword, (i think you meant this as well)] to set up a structure for the first level headline, which then should show up in all translation of this article. Teh metaboard should as well offer to write the first headline in all language translations. If a user is not fillint that box, the english headline is used.
So this would be the rquest, yes. Why is htis needed: There are other examples, which show the need: if you search for a certain illnes, then somtime you find the structure like this - Name of illnes - History - Diagnostics - Therapy - Pills - Natural substances - Litrature -Weblinks
and sometimes the structure is quite mixed up.
Ok this is a reason for order. Every one can come to the metaboard and cange the first level structure - in discussion worldwide ! and: there is another reason: - the users have filled in text now, but there is now a phase, where you detect social ideology and social blockings for changes in wiki. So the standard has to be set worldwide. So why not learning from the structure in another language. This is an initiative to rise up the quality of wikie worldwide, So, if there is a level auto-printed called "Weblinks" , users will fill this gap in every language. But if there is an article without an "literature", users will not look up amazon to find the most bought book or the topseller. Only if there is a gap made by a worldwide firstlevel structure, we have gaps to fill.
IMHO we need a worldwide structure discussion board for each keyword in wikipeda. The first level of the structure then should be "printed" into each language. even - or just this reason, if a gap is produced. The gaps will be filled by wikiusers.
Globalisation needs the same structure for e.g. "pregnancy" in china as well as in usa or europa.
Anyone can edit anything, ok, multilanguage-able users (not me ;-) ) are mostly invidted to the meta-boards. But isn´t it alwasy so, that people with a look over the boarder are those, who bring new definitions and additions to the keyword-view of the special-language-country?
So editing the language-keywords needs an elite to havea computer, editing the metaboard-keyword needs an elite of mutlilanguage user, but this all is given and only for the first level.
Everyone can write an introduction in any paragpaph. there is no introduction headline needed. But if one keyword in china has an introduction, the other language-keyword-articles shoudl do as well (after a consens on the metaboard).
So.... this is just organizing a benchmarking process or "to compare".
Even same contect articels ("illness descriptions") have in ONE language different structures, and IMHO this structure comparison is needed worldwide.
Ok, from my point everything is said, just think or diskuss it, i have not rechnical equipment to make this. So it is your decision and from here only a request, because I believe it makes sense.
thanks
Rowan Collins wrote:
On 20/05/05, closedshop closedshop@gmx.de wrote:
So if in WMWS fo this keyword a "=" headline is created, this headline is shown as well in all language-wikis and, in the board to edit WMWS, there are then all headline translated
E.g.
- Introduction
French: entree german: Einfühung
Then the Headline of level 1 (=) cannot be edited in the language wiki, only in the meta wiki
If I understand you correctly, you are proposing that a standard set of headings be made mandatory for all articles. My instant reaction is that this is extremely un-wiki, but I'll go further and justify why it is a Bad Idea.
Firstly, not all articles are the same - some will not be long enough to require an "introduction", some subjects may naturally suggest a structure where nothing ends up in a catch-all "introduction", and so on. The beauty of the wiki is of course that everything is editable, and making certain parts of the structure ineditable would just lead to awkward articles which had been "force-fitted" into that structure.
For something like "Wiktionary", there is more scope for enforcing structure, because all the articles *will* fall into the same pattern (although having looked at the introduction to the Oxford English Dictionary recently I realise how many allowances a standard structure needs to have to deal thoroughly with an entire language).
Secondly, it's not clear how this would work for anything other than the "Introduction" example you give. "See also", "External links", and "References" sections seem like good candidates for standardisation, but because they come at the end, and each may or may not be there, how could the software tell them from non-standardised headers, which will always be specific to the article - unless conventions are changed radically to have all headings inside the content at a lower level than "Introduction", "See also", etc (under a "Content" heading or somesuch). And even then, how do you determine whether to say "External link" or "External links"; and when not all are present, which non-editable headings are shown?
On a final, more trivial, point, it should be noted that "= First-level headings =" are by convention never used, since this is the same level as the article title; the highest level used for normal headings is "== The next level down ==".
My apologies if I've misunderstood your original intention, and even if not, feel free to disagree with my reasoning.
On 20/05/05, Rowan Collins rowan.collins@gmail.com wrote:
And even then, how do you determine whether to say "External link" or "External links"; and when not all are present, which non-editable headings are shown?
You always say "External links".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Neilc/External_links#Common_mistakes
On Saturday, May 21, 2005 12:57 PM, Tomer Chachamu the.r3m0t@gmail.com wrote:
On 20/05/05, Rowan Collins rowan.collins@gmail.com wrote:
And even then, how do you determine whether to say "External link" or "External links"; and when not all are present, which non-editable headings are shown?
You always say "External links".
No, you say "External link" when there's one, and "External links" when there are more. We shouldn't give the impression that we're innumerate.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Neilc/External_links#Common_mistakes
"Personally I don't like articles that have an "External link" section"
Well, gosh, that must be what we should all do. It's a personal comment on a user page and /everything/.
Yours,
Hi You missed me, if the threads drifts to a discussion about links or link.
another try: what about a rating under reach site or keyword, the user can click in a school note range of 1(exellent) -6 (bad) , if this article fits the needed quality of the user. So an average count of all votings could be displayed. Then we can see, which keyword in which language is best explained !!!
thanks for doing at least this technically. :-) Microsoft and many others have this user survey, if the article was good or bad.
Just for the statistics, just for the (democratic) quality evaluation.
No, you say "External link" when there's one, and "External links" when there are more. We shouldn't give the impression that we're innumerate.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Neilc/External_links#Common_mistakes
"Personally I don't like articles that have an "External link" section"
Hi Closedshop,
Wikis are not like internet a search engines. A search on Google or Yahoo! might give you thousands of pages with the same subject. Users of wikis are unlikely to be faced with a choice of different pages about the same subject so having a quality ranking won't really help. A score for relevancy (as a percentage) is already given in the search results which is more helpful than qualty.
With regards to translation of headings - isn't the heading the easiest thing to translate? Having standardised heads pre-translated across languages isn't really any help unless you translate the whole article. If I visit a page in Japanese (which I can't read) and the headings are translated in to English (which I can read) I still won't understand the important part of the content. There may be some exceptions to this (for example in technical wikis where all the data is basically the same and only the headings are different) - but it certainly won't help much in Wikipedia.
Sorry to be so negative - let me know if I've miss understood your ideas.
Paul (BTW: ranking 1 to -6 isn't a ranking that many people would recognise - the most widely used system is "5 stars". 1 to 5 stars - like hotels).
----- Original Message n on----- From: "closedshop" closedshop@gmx.de To: "Wikimedia developers" wikitech-l@wikimedia.org Sent: Saturday, May 21, 2005 6:31 PM Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] Re: [Ticket#: 122761] WIKI_META_WOLRDWIDE_STRUCTUREofarticles
Hi You missed me, if the threads drifts to a discussion about links or link.
another try: what about a rating under reach site or keyword, the user can click in a school note range of 1(exellent) -6 (bad) , if this article fits the needed quality of the user. So an average count of all votings could be displayed. Then we can see, which keyword in which language is best explained !!!
thanks for doing at least this technically. :-) Microsoft and many others have this user survey, if the article was good or bad.
Just for the statistics, just for the (democratic) quality evaluation.
No, you say "External link" when there's one, and "External links" when there are more. We shouldn't give the impression that we're innumerate.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Neilc/External_links#Common_mistakes
"Personally I don't like articles that have an "External link" section"
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
ok, requesting a structure and creating a gap with a headline would make people active and releflective and then cumulative - this was the intent. so maybe it is technically to much work. Creating a user judgement under each site is for me still a good thing. BTW, we need 1-6 to let users choose, 1-5 means there is a middle/indifferent position, that´s why methodical it is better to use 1-6 stars. ;-) anyway, was just a suggestion, democratik means to let ever yuser give feedback. the dicussion tab is often not the right method. a vote click is better, imho. Kind regards, for me closed.
Paul Youlten wrote:
Hi Closedshop,
Wikis are not like internet a search engines. A search on Google or Yahoo! might give you thousands of pages with the same subject. Users of wikis are unlikely to be faced with a choice of different pages about the same subject so having a quality ranking won't really help. A score for relevancy (as a percentage) is already given in the search results which is more helpful than qualty.
With regards to translation of headings - isn't the heading the easiest thing to translate? Having standardised heads pre-translated across languages isn't really any help unless you translate the whole article. If I visit a page in Japanese (which I can't read) and the headings are translated in to English (which I can read) I still won't understand the important part of the content. There may be some exceptions to this (for example in technical wikis where all the data is basically the same and only the headings are different) - but it certainly won't help much in Wikipedia.
Sorry to be so negative - let me know if I've miss understood your ideas.
Paul (BTW: ranking 1 to -6 isn't a ranking that many people would recognise
- the most widely used system is "5 stars". 1 to 5 stars - like hotels).
----- Original Message n on----- From: "closedshop" closedshop@gmx.de To: "Wikimedia developers" wikitech-l@wikimedia.org Sent: Saturday, May 21, 2005 6:31 PM Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] Re: [Ticket#: 122761] WIKI_META_WOLRDWIDE_STRUCTUREofarticles
Hi You missed me, if the threads drifts to a discussion about links or link.
another try: what about a rating under reach site or keyword, the user can click in a school note range of 1(exellent) -6 (bad) , if this article fits the needed quality of the user. So an average count of all votings could be displayed. Then we can see, which keyword in which language is best explained !!!
thanks for doing at least this technically. :-) Microsoft and many others have this user survey, if the article was good or bad.
Just for the statistics, just for the (democratic) quality evaluation.
No, you say "External link" when there's one, and "External links" when there are more. We shouldn't give the impression that we're innumerate.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Neilc/External_links#Common_mistakes
"Personally I don't like articles that have an "External link" section"
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org