View source for Thread:Talk:Google+/what goes here and what goes on HTYP/reply (4)
- [View source↑]
|Thread title||Replies||Last modified|
|what goes here and what goes on HTYP||4||16:01, 16 March 2015|
Stuff that's mostly technical should probably go on HTYP; if it has the potential to become an "issue", then it can go here too -- but should probably have a subpage.
I sort of draw a fuzzy line somewhere between "customer support" issues (which are more HTYP-ish) and "Issuepedia-ish" issues; this is another thing where we need to collect grey area examples and try to come up with a consistent policy... but, for example, I put up an HTYP page about Verizon's email blocking policy; if this tied into public policy somehow, I'd be inclined to move it to Issuepedia or else put the technical details on HTYP and the social-impact details on Issuepedia.
Yes, I have often wished that I could have a single wiki, and just tag pages according to which site(s) they should appear on. Or something along those lines. It gets complicated quickly when I try to figure out details of how that would work, though.
Truncating this page to the "About" section and external references, and pointing to HTYP should probably work.
I'm going to need clarifying on the distinction between Issuepedia and HTYP.
At this point, I'm not really sure how to characterize it, beyond what I said above; I'm open to suggestions.
Maybe I should start with attributes that clearly place an article in one place or the other, no ambiguity:
I need to add a column for CWRE as well, since there's a lot of overlap there with Issuepedia.
I'm also open to rationales for modifying these delineations. I'm even open to discussing the idea that it's silly to have three separate wikis when there's so much overlap -- though there are details to resolve if they are going to be merged.
Well, yes, there is that whole "that's sort of a silly thing to do" aspect about it, and the question's occurred to me.
Poking around Wikipedia further (as I've been doing): there are numerous projects and categories within it, and one possibility is to emphasize content within one or more of those, and to escalate the primary projects on the homepage. It's a tagging solution to a classification problem, and handily avoids the question of "should this go here or here" that any fixed hierarchy imposes (absent links, references, etc.).
If you're using HTYP for specific business issues (and it's customer-facing), that could be a valid argument for keeping it split off. Otherwise, I'm not sure I see the need for a distinction.
CWRE as a project within Issuepedia seems like a slam-dunk to me.
I'm not versed on how Mediawiki projects are set up / supported within a given instance.
You do not have permission to edit this page, for the following reason:
The action you have requested is limited to users in the group: Users.
You can view and copy the source of this page.Woozle (talk)
Templates used on this page:
Return to Thread:Talk:Google+/what goes here and what goes on HTYP/reply (4).