Summarising policies and guidelines

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
5 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Summarising policies and guidelines

Steve Bennett-4
Hello all,
  I have an informal project to produce a summary of every policy and
guideline "in a nutshell" at [[Wikipedia:List of policies and
guidelines]].  I envisage that it would probably be useful to put that
nutshell summary on the policy pages in question, but that can wait
until such summaries are agreed upon.

The goal is basically to have a page that can explain *every policy and
guideline* to a user in a minute or two. Currently we have no real
limits on how many policies and guidelines there are, and nothing
stopping contradictory P/Gs being created. Consequently, people can pick
and choose which P/Gs they follow, and we end up having silly pages like
[[WP:ENC]] being created (I notice someone put the {policy} template
back on it, despite no consensus or active discussion...).  Some sort of
formal recognition that "yes, we have a community abide by the following
37 rules that we have created" would be good. If anti-anarchistic ;)

Anyway, if anyone feels like summarising a policy or guideline in one
line or so, or contributing any ideas on layout or project goals or
whatever, please do. There is discussion on an earlier version of the
project at [[template talk:Guideline one liner]].

Steve

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Summarising policies and guidelines

geni
On 1/9/06, Steve Bennett <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hello all,
>   I have an informal project to produce a summary of every policy and
> guideline "in a nutshell" at [[Wikipedia:List of policies and
> guidelines]].  I envisage that it would probably be useful to put that
> nutshell summary on the policy pages in question, but that can wait
> until such summaries are agreed upon.
>
> The goal is basically to have a page that can explain *every policy and
> guideline* to a user in a minute or two. Currently we have no real
> limits on how many policies and guidelines there are, and nothing
> stopping contradictory P/Gs being created. Consequently, people can pick
> and choose which P/Gs they follow, and we end up having silly pages like
> [[WP:ENC]] being created (I notice someone put the {policy} template
> back on it, despite no consensus or active discussion...).  Some sort of
> formal recognition that "yes, we have a community abide by the following
> 37 rules that we have created" would be good. If anti-anarchistic ;)
>
> Anyway, if anyone feels like summarising a policy or guideline in one
> line or so, or contributing any ideas on layout or project goals or
> whatever, please do. There is discussion on an earlier version of the
> project at [[template talk:Guideline one liner]].
>
> Steve

Have fun with the MOS. Generaly only refured to when when people are
trying to use it in order to win a debate.

--
geni
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: Summarising policies and guidelines

Steve Bennett-4

> Have fun with the MOS. Generaly only refured to when when
> people are trying to use it in order to win a debate.

Yeah, pages which contain hundreds of distinct suggestions with no
single underlying motivation present a problem. Perhaps we can produce a
short mock-up of a "perfect" page with "perfect" style?

Steve

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Summarising policies and guidelines

John Lee-5
Steve Bennett wrote:

>>Have fun with the MOS. Generaly only refured to when when
>>people are trying to use it in order to win a debate.
>>    
>>
>
>Yeah, pages which contain hundreds of distinct suggestions with no
>single underlying motivation present a problem. Perhaps we can produce a
>short mock-up of a "perfect" page with "perfect" style?
>
>Steve
>  
>
But what constitutes "perfect" or even "ideal, given existing
limitations"? Many things on Wikipedia have no consensus, as a visit to
FAC can tell you. Should the "perfect" article use only free images, or
be satisfied with fair use where free images are impractical? Should the
"perfect" article use footnotes? What about Harvard referencing? Or
inline external links? And speaking of references, do we follow
[[Wikipedia:Cite sources/example style]] or [[Wikipedia:Template
messages/Sources of articles/Generic citations]]? (Yes, the styles
differ in some cases.) Should captions be compliant with
[[Wikipedia:Captions]] or with the style currently used on most articles?

In case my point isn't clear, we can't produce a mock-up of a "perfect"
page with "perfect" style. It just isn't possible when we haven't even
decided what is "perfect".

John Lee
([[User:Johnleemk]])
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Summarising policies and guidelines

Steve Bennett-4
We can mock up a page that is "perfectly" in accordance with the
manual of style. That's all I was hoping for.

Steve

On 1/10/06, John Lee <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Steve Bennett wrote:
>
> >>Have fun with the MOS. Generaly only refured to when when
> >>people are trying to use it in order to win a debate.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Yeah, pages which contain hundreds of distinct suggestions with no
> >single underlying motivation present a problem. Perhaps we can produce a
> >short mock-up of a "perfect" page with "perfect" style?
> >
> >Steve
> >
> >
> But what constitutes "perfect" or even "ideal, given existing
> limitations"? Many things on Wikipedia have no consensus, as a visit to
> FAC can tell you. Should the "perfect" article use only free images, or
> be satisfied with fair use where free images are impractical? Should the
> "perfect" article use footnotes? What about Harvard referencing? Or
> inline external links? And speaking of references, do we follow
> [[Wikipedia:Cite sources/example style]] or [[Wikipedia:Template
> messages/Sources of articles/Generic citations]]? (Yes, the styles
> differ in some cases.) Should captions be compliant with
> [[Wikipedia:Captions]] or with the style currently used on most articles?
>
> In case my point isn't clear, we can't produce a mock-up of a "perfect"
> page with "perfect" style. It just isn't possible when we haven't even
> decided what is "perfect".
>
> John Lee
> ([[User:Johnleemk]])
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l