[Foundation-l] Usability: Is our vocabulary SNAFU?

Milos Rancic millosh at gmail.com
Thu Dec 11 16:44:30 UTC 2008

On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 12:48 AM, Platonides <Platonides at gmail.com> wrote:
> It surprised me that the jargon didn't mention the really wikimedian
> terms: AGF, RFA, NPV, NOR, NLT, BLP, NPA, AFD, db...
> After IAR and BOLD, you're blocked for NPA and NLT on a BLP article
> where you didn't follow NPV, although the other part didn't AGF.
> OTOH, the article could have been deleted per G4 or G10. Maybe you
> should complain to ARBCOM, but wait, I better shut up per BEANS, DNFTT.
> I don't consider myself an outsider, still -as a contributor to
> different wikis- I don't know by heart what's an 'A3.1416 deletion' or
> the proper templates and pages to start a deletion procedure for an
> image with a disputable source.
> Acronyms may still be worked out, others are unrelated, unless you
> already know it. Worse, each wiki has its own [[WP:WP]] creating their
> dialect.
> Is it good, is it bad? Probably neither, but something to have really
> into account for usability.

It is good because it represents social development. And you are right
about usability. Maybe all talk pages should have special words
highlighted with "on mouse over" function which opens a small frame
which explains its meaning.

More information about the foundation-l mailing list