what goes here and what goes on HTYP

Jump to navigation Jump to search
Revision as of 8 March 2015 at 15:01.
The highlighted comment was created in this revision.

what goes here and what goes on HTYP

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.

    Woozle (talk)17:54, 2 March 2015

    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.

      Dredmorbius (talk)01:55, 3 March 2015

      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:

      HTYP Issuepedia
      • hands-on technical details
      • customer service issues
      • personal experiences (non-gov-related)
      • public policy
      • government/governance (at any level)
      • epistemology (mechanics of debate/rhetoric)
      • economics

      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.

        Woozle (talk)15:01, 8 March 2015