[maemo-community] Wiki Action Group: first task

[From: Dave Neary]

Hi,

Thomas Waelti wrote:
> Just one thing first: some of the orphaned pages aren't really orphaned,
> but "just" got linked the wrong way, by using an external instead of an
> internal link. Remember this when cleaning up.

Good point! Do you have any hints on finding these?

> Clean up the intro of  http://wiki.maemo.org/Maemowiki_Action_Group
> somewhat. Can the docmaster do that?

Sure - anyone can do that. What's unclear to you?

> (PS: There is also
> http://wiki.maemo.org/User:Generalantilles/Sandbox/Wiki_Action_Group
> which comes up earlier in searches...)

Deleted.

> Related to that, in more general terms: How do we want to handle
> outdated information? This garden is really overflowing with weeds...
> may we be generous in deleting old stuff?

That all depends. Clear duplication of material (eg. sandbox material
which got moved elsewhere) should just be deleted. Doing anything else
will muddle up search results, as you pointed out. If it's a page with
10% useful information and 90% unuseful or outdated information, then we
should make some effort to weed rather than irradicate - I'd suggest
that the best way to handle situations like this for the moment is to
note pages in this category (a list in the MAG page, for example), and
try to work out what page hierarchy might be more appropriate. A little
forethought here might achieve a lot.

> Could we just use a category "Trash" to mark pages for deletion?

Yes, adding a Trash category for pages marked for deletion is a good
idea - go for it!

> And there is also a category "DELETEME"... ?!?

Let's just use the (better) choice of Trash & remove DELETEME - I didn't
know it existed, to be honest. And now it doesn't any more.

> Let's add OS-related categories such as OS2008/Maemo5/Mer. Otherwise we
> will end up with a large mishmash of stuff.

Does that approach scale? I've thought about this before - is there
really a need for "OS2008/USB networking" and "OS2009/USB networking"? I
can certainly understand subsections for pages which are specific to a
distribution but for general tutorials or hints & tips, I don't think
they're necessary. Of course, the problem is that the lines blur - stuff
that was hard under OS2007 got easier in OS2008 and needs new
instructions - but that's the general principle.

> Who can add new categories? What about the Categories tree with
> subcategories and parent categories? they should be very hand in
> structuring the wiki in a better way.

You add new categories by putting [[Category:New category]] at the end
of a post. Category pages are like any other page, except that they
contain a list of all articles tagged with that category at the end.


> The results of this discussion should go to either the "Maemo Wiki
> Principles" subsection the the action group OR
> http://wiki.maemo.org/Task:Documentation_rules (which one? I'd prefer
> the latter)

I'd prefer to start moving away from the "Task:" nomenclature - I don't
think it adds much, and it makes page names a bit more awkward.

How about "Editing guidelines" or "Documentation guidelines"?

> Which brings up another needed cleanup: Instead of being part of the
> category "Tasks", some pages only have the prefix "Task:". I suggest
> that all tasks be categorized as such and that we refrain from using the
> Task: prefix.

Oh good - we're in agreement on this :)

> BTW: if a task is completed, I suggest that the perons responsible of
> the task also cleans up the page to reflect the situation after the task
> is finished.

Sounds like a good policy.

> And on a lighter note: The use of the word "current" should be forbidden :-)

Unless it's a mis-spelling referring to a scone or a bun?

I get your point - and indeed, in documentation guidelines in general,
there are rules that you should never document anything which will
automatically be out of date the next time a release is made.

Cheers,
Dave.

-- 
maemo.org docsmaster
Email: dneary at maemo.org
Jabber: bolsh at jabber.org