Re: Debian is testing Discourse
On Wed 22 Apr 2020 at 17:44:00 -0500, David Wright wrote:
> On Tue 21 Apr 2020 at 20:07:55 (+0100), Brian wrote:
> > On Tue 21 Apr 2020 at 11:18:14 +0100, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 11:35:00PM -0500, David Wright wrote:
> > > > I don't know what the writer of those two sentences meant by
> > > > structure, but I specifically mentioned the Discussion page
> > > > (≡ Wikipedia's Talk page) which I think is an important
> > > > factor in improving content.
> > >
> > > At some point a long time ago, the Debian Wiki administrators (at the
> > > time) decided to direct meta-discussions towards the debian-www@ mailing
> > > list, instead of Discussion pages. I think this was a mistake, and it's
> > > something I've been wanting to push back on for some time, but it hasn't
> > > raised up my TODO list far enough.
> >
> > I do not have a TODO list, but pushing all wiki issues onto debian-www
> > probably wasn't the best of ideas. It seems to me that discourse would
> > be a good place to put them.
> >
> > At the same time, what is the point of discusssion? A user thinks a
> > technical point on the wiki is wrong; they know it is wrong; they change
> > it. Where's the problem?
>
> 1. Going from thinking to knowing. Even assuming they're well-informed,
> it may be worth checking with other people running different systems
> about what's wrong, and what the new text should say.
If I were to conduct some rewriting of
https://wiki.debian.org/xinit
the last thing I would ask for is opinions on altering the External
links section, the provision of other links and removal of ?. Should
I go on to explain the function of the xinit and startx commands and
expand on the text, I would not be likely to seek advice on the
purpose or content. Those who come afterwards can deal with it in
whatever way they see fit.
You could see this as arrogant - but Debian is a do-ocracy.
> 2. Pages often need more than just piecemeal corrections: they may
> need someone with a sense of ownership to restructure them, or even
> to coordinate a rewrite when they lose focus.
I like this idea of "sense of ownership".
--
Brian.
Reply to: