CZ:Proposals/New: Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Larry Sanger
No edit summary
imported>Denis Cavanagh
Line 1: Line 1:
==History Naming conventions==
==History Naming conventions==


This has been discussed before but deserves a fuller debate. The central points of contention is whether general articles (e.g [[France, history]]) should be called [[History of France]] or even [[French history]]. The idea is that the keyword should be first in an article such as this, with people searching for [[France]] in a general search will see a list of articles, e.g:
 
{{proposal
|statement= General articles should stand as [[France, history]] as preferred to [[History of France]] or [[French History]].
|justification=
#The central points of contention is whether general articles (e.g [[France, history]]) should be called [[History of France]] or even [[French history]]. The idea is that the keyword should be first in an article such as this, with people searching for [[France]] in a general search will see a list of articles, e.g:


*[[France]]
*[[France]]
Line 8: Line 12:
*[[France, literature]]
*[[France, literature]]


etc. I don't really have an opinion on the issue despite the history workgroup handily being my most active one.[[User:Denis Cavanagh|Denis Cavanagh]] 11:29, 8 February 2008 (CST)
etc.
|prior= [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/CZ:History_Workgroup#Naming_convention:_need_a_decision]
|notes= This has been discussed before but deserves a fuller debate. I don't really have an opinion on the issue despite the history workgroup handily being my most active one.[[User:Denis Cavanagh|Denis Cavanagh]] 11:29, 8 February 2008 (CST)
}}
 
:I think most people would type in [[History of France]], so that should be the style.  Of course they could also go to [[France]] first, and there would be the required link.  [[User:Ro Thorpe|Ro Thorpe]] 14:24, 9 February 2008 (CST) - And so it is.  As for 'French history', I think most people would not choose it, a bit informal.  [[User:Ro Thorpe|Ro Thorpe]] 14:27, 9 February 2008 (CST)
:I think most people would type in [[History of France]], so that should be the style.  Of course they could also go to [[France]] first, and there would be the required link.  [[User:Ro Thorpe|Ro Thorpe]] 14:24, 9 February 2008 (CST) - And so it is.  As for 'French history', I think most people would not choose it, a bit informal.  [[User:Ro Thorpe|Ro Thorpe]] 14:27, 9 February 2008 (CST)


Revision as of 15:45, 9 February 2008

History Naming conventions

Summary: Please edit your proposal record and provide a summary.
Original proposer: Please specify original proposer (i.e., person who added the proposal to this page) Next step: Fill in next step
Driver: Driver needed (i.e., someone familiar with the proposals system who will move it through the system) To be done by: Fill in target date for next step
To the proposer: please read the proposals system policy page if you want to fill out a complete proposal, not just this summary. If you don't, please ask around for someone (a "driver") to take over your proposal!
Start complete proposal


I think most people would type in History of France, so that should be the style. Of course they could also go to France first, and there would be the required link. Ro Thorpe 14:24, 9 February 2008 (CST) - And so it is. As for 'French history', I think most people would not choose it, a bit informal. Ro Thorpe 14:27, 9 February 2008 (CST)

Improve general heading

The heading "Join! Help us create the world's most trusted encyclopedia and knowledge base. The general public and experts collaborate, using their real names. A new knowledge society." does not seem to be a good example of the kind of writing to be expected here. Is the last sentence a sentence? I propose, but do not know how to accomplish, the head be changed to something like:

"Join us, and help us create the world's most trusted encyclopedia and knowledge base. Where the general public and experts collaborate, using our real names, creating a new society of knowledge." Thomas Mandel 02:00, 9 February 2008 (CST)

How about either of these two phrases?

  • "Join us, both experts and the general public, using our real names, to help create the world's most trusted encyclopedia and a new society of knowledge."

or

"Join our new society of knowledge, consisting of experts and the general public, using our real names, and help create the world's most trusted encyclopedia and knowledge base that if free to world."

Perhaps something like:

  1. Like current, but with dash instead of period: "Join! Help us create the world's most trusted encyclopedia and knowledge base. The general public and experts collaborate, using their real names - a new knowledge society."
  2. Eliminate "that if [sic] free to world" from one of David's proposals: "Join our new society of knowledge, consisting of experts and the general public, using our real names, and help create the world's most trusted encyclopedia and knowledge base."

Warren Schudy 13:58, 9 February 2008 (CST)

Make "beta" tag a real tag

THe "beta" tag seems to be lost. By simply adding a chain linking the tag to the what looks like a key, can find it a home.

Thomas Mandel 02:03, 9 February 2008 (CST)

Uh, what's a "tag"? Is it a synonym for "category"? I don't understand your proposal. Warren Schudy 13:45, 9 February 2008 (CST)

He's talking about a prior graphic that was used for the logo. --Robert W King 13:50, 9 February 2008 (CST)
It's this Logo400grbeta small.png is what he's talking about, versus the logo that's in the upper left. --Robert W King 14:02, 9 February 2008 (CST)

User feedback

Summary: Please edit your proposal record and provide a summary.
Original proposer: Please specify original proposer (i.e., person who added the proposal to this page) Next step: Fill in next step
Driver: Driver needed (i.e., someone familiar with the proposals system who will move it through the system) To be done by: Fill in target date for next step
To the proposer: please read the proposals system policy page if you want to fill out a complete proposal, not just this summary. If you don't, please ask around for someone (a "driver") to take over your proposal!
Start complete proposal

Warren Schudy 13:34, 9 February 2008 (CST)

Response
By: --Denis Cavanagh 14:27, 9 February 2008 (CST)
I think its a good idea as long as its technically feasible.

We shouldn't have responses to proposals in the queue...it'll just get too messy. We need to discuss some basic questions about how this system should work before we start designing willy-nilly. Though the general outlines are looking quite good! --Larry Sanger 14:33, 9 February 2008 (CST)

Maybe the responses should go in their own subdirectory and each proposal should have a number. Like, proposal #0001, and the discussion should go in CZ:Proposals/0001 --Robert W King 14:36, 9 February 2008 (CST)

Maybe, maybe not. This might imply that the proposals are decided here in the proposals system. They won't be, not entirely; they're decided finally elsewhere. No proposal will receive a final decision via discussion that happens on these proposals pages. This is just a central project management page. The proposal might be decided by the Editorial Council, for example. --Larry Sanger 14:46, 9 February 2008 (CST)

Retrieved from "https://citizendium.org/wiki/index.php?title=CZ:Proposals/New&oldid=404956"