Hello, thanks for your work on making the wiki more usable and of higher quality. I agree with many of your proposals, but I have some ideas on the implementation to avoid needless administrative work for the wiki team. Am Donnerstag, 15. Oktober 2009 schrieb Rupert Horstkötter:
Sandbox Editing
I understand the need to have a QA process for wiki pages, but the way you propose (having a sandbox: namespace, then move pages to main namespace) looks like lots of paperwork to me. I especially expect problems when a page is copied to sandbox: to do a large edit and someone else edits some things on the page in the main namespace. In this case, you'll loose the changes when moving the sandbox: version back to main or you'll get grey hair while merging everything to one version. IMH the better solution would be to use the "FlaggedRefs" extension (http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:FlaggedRevs) that allows to have a public/checked version while working on a new version. The german Wikipedia uses this method, see http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Gesichtete_Versionen I don't know how well it works because I use wikipedia read-only - the description sounds like it should be easier to manage than the sandbox: namespace.
Namespace "new-wiki"
This is another thing where the FlaggedRevs would be useful - flag the existing pages as OK (or fix them if needed) instead of copying them to a separate namespace. Besides that, this part of your proposal sounds like you want to build a copy of the wiki and then move all pages to the main space at once. I'm afraid this will result in overwriting several edits that are done to the main page after copying it to new-wiki. Oh, and will there be a namespace "old-wiki" for existing pages that won't be part of the "new" wiki? *SCNR*
Minor/Major Editing
Did I ever mention FlaggedRevs? ;-) I have to admit that in this case it possibly isn't perfect - I don't know if it can do a separate handling for minor edits. (But from the QA point of view, checking even minor changes can avoid that errors are introduced. Or: Is replacing "cat" with "rm" a minor change? *g*) I'd like to bring up another issue: Meetings and meeting logs Don't get me wrong - it's fine to have all meeting pages and logs in the wiki. Unfortunately they sometimes clutter up the search results (even if I don't have an example right now ;-) Proposal: Create a "Meeting" namespace that is not searched with the default search settings, and store all meeting pages and meetings logs there. Advantages would be: - "normal" searches don't bring up meeting logs. That's good because most times the meeting logs are not useful for the user searching for something. (Note: User != developer / contributor) - it's possible to search specifically in meeting pages and logs. This would be useful for developers and contributors in some cases. Disadvantage: - lots of pages need to be moved around Gruß Christian Boltz -- [Grundrechte] Natürlich gibt's da auch das berühme Recht auf freie Entfaltung. Andererseits: setzt das nicht auch zwingend vorraus, daß man vorher auch gehörig zusammengefaltet wurde? ;-) [Gerard Jensen in suse-linux] -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-wiki+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-wiki+help@opensuse.org