On Thursday, September 11, 2014, John Mark Vandenberg <jayvdb(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 8:21 AM, Wil Sinclair
<wllm(a)wllm.com
<javascript:;>> wrote:
Tim, do you think that this list of all the
useful stuff that talk
pages can currently includes things that aren't being done because
they are too advanced for newbie editors or too inconvenient for
veterans?
Regardless, you make a strong argument for keeping a meta-document
that spans threads and/or should be more persistent. A lot of this
stuff seems indispensable to recording decisions and linking to stuff
that backs them up, avoiding constant rehashing of issues. My concern
is how such a documents could be tied to pertinent threads in the
discussion oriented software. Maybe we could create anchors in such a
document that could make it easier for the right sections to be
displayed alongside threads that reference them in the UI.
The concept of a meta document, which uses wikitext and is editable
using VE, would alleviate a lot of the concerns about Flow. It would
be relatively simple to change processes from using 'Talk:x' to using
'MetaDoc:x' (still a big migration task, but less problematic than
going through process re-engineering for every Wikipedia process in
250+ projects with their own language).
If that meta document also had a talk namespace (MetaDocTalk:x), which
uses wikitext, the old-timers (and bots) will still have a place to
hold discussions and post notes using wikitext if they wish to.
--
John Vandenberg
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org <javascript:;>
?subject=unsubscribe>