[arch-general] Contributions to the wiki - Are user contributions a thing of the past?
Archdevs, When I see an wiki page that is unclear or could benefit from a small addition, for the past 7+ years I've tried to do my part, and I was happy to do so. But, consistently, for the past year or so, any user contributions to the wiki are systematically struct from the pages. The latest being a small addition to the multilib page to make clear that following repo addition and update you need to explicitly install the wanted multilib packages. Following the directions on the page as it exists gets you nowhere, but implies that it is all that needs to be done. Again, as has been the form over the past year or, the additions are erased and a vague reference mentioning the additional steps are covered in an ancillary page is given as the reason. As a P.E. and Attorney, I know documentation. I know when it's clear, and when it's not clear. If the point of the wiki is to provide clear information to users, then why are all improvements systematically struck? Yes, brevity is a good thing, but not at the expense of clarity... Does Arch still want user contribution to the wiki? If so, systematically deleting the contributions that users take the time to make, isn't going to promote further contribution. Why bother, more than likely it will just be erased.... -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.
On Wed, 23 Aug 2017 20:54:35 -0500
"David C. Rankin"
The latest being a small addition to the multilib page to make clear that following repo addition and update you need to explicitly install the wanted multilib packages. Following the directions on the page as it exists gets you nowhere, but implies that it is all that needs to be done.
First, if you enable the multilib repo because you need something and don't know that you would have to install that something, I would say you're on the wrong distro. This is common sense at in it's most basic. Second, the only thing that was removed was the useless examples, not the statement that you need to install something.
On 23/08/17 at 08:54pm, David C. Rankin wrote:
Archdevs,
When I see an wiki page that is unclear or could benefit from a small addition, for the past 7+ years I've tried to do my part, and I was happy to do so.
But, consistently, for the past year or so, any user contributions to the wiki are systematically struct from the pages.
The latest being a small addition to the multilib page to make clear that following repo addition and update you need to explicitly install the wanted multilib packages. Following the directions on the page as it exists gets you nowhere, but implies that it is all that needs to be done.
Again, as has been the form over the past year or, the additions are erased and a vague reference mentioning the additional steps are covered in an ancillary page is given as the reason.
Actually, the reason for rolling back the edits was much more clear: the information is contained in a tip. Your examples were not adding anything to the page other than character count.
As a P.E. and Attorney, I know documentation. I know when it's clear, and when it's not clear. If the point of the wiki is to provide clear information to users, then why are all improvements systematically struck?
Yes, brevity is a good thing, but not at the expense of clarity...
Lawyers are hardly known for either their brevity or their clarity.
Does Arch still want user contribution to the wiki? If so, systematically deleting the contributions that users take the time to make, isn't going to promote further contribution. Why bother, more than likely it will just be erased....
Contributions *are* welcome. That doesn't mean that they will automatically be accepted. Acknowledging that a wiki is a collaborative effort, and all that entails (often at the expense of individual egos), is also a helpful quality to bring to the project. /J -- http://jasonwryan.com/ GPG: 7817 E3FF 578E EEE1 9F64 D40C 445E 52EA B1BD 4E40
On 08/23/2017 09:54 PM, David C. Rankin wrote:
Does Arch still want user contribution to the wiki? If so, systematically deleting the contributions that users take the time to make, isn't going to promote further contribution. Why bother, more than likely it will just be erased....
Your contribution was not deleted, it was modified and built upon, in order to still say what you added but in fewer words. As jasonwryan said. I am startled that you would contribute to a Wiki and then when someone *rewords* your contribution you react by claiming that their right to contribute to the wiki is erasing your right to contribute to the Wiki. ... Lahwaacz did much the same with my recent contribution to the Official repositories page... but I acknowledge that he was right in doing so, and the part of my edits that was useful rather than frustrated ranting is still there. Likewise, the part of your contributions that is useful rather than redundant is still there, if less wordy. tl;dr Hey, a collaborative Wiki!!! -- Eli Schwartz
participants (4)
-
David C. Rankin
-
Doug Newgard
-
Eli Schwartz
-
Jason Ryan