Tolkien Gateway talk:Collaborations: Difference between revisions
From Tolkien Gateway
m (Tweaked) |
No edit summary |
||
| (3 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
::::There isn't really a system; usually in the past an admin just picks out one from the list, or a couple of editors agree that a particular article really needs working on (as happened with [[Tuor]]). I am sort of reluctant to implement some form of voting system at the moment due to the poor turnout in FA and FQ, but I'm sure that Ederchil or I will change the Collaboration based on editor suggestion, so if you have an article you think should be up next, let me know! :-) --{{User:Mith/sig}} 17:46, 30 March 2011 (UTC) | ::::There isn't really a system; usually in the past an admin just picks out one from the list, or a couple of editors agree that a particular article really needs working on (as happened with [[Tuor]]). I am sort of reluctant to implement some form of voting system at the moment due to the poor turnout in FA and FQ, but I'm sure that Ederchil or I will change the Collaboration based on editor suggestion, so if you have an article you think should be up next, let me know! :-) --{{User:Mith/sig}} 17:46, 30 March 2011 (UTC) | ||
:::::Though I agree that chapters need work, I don't think they're very good for collaboration. It's one big hunk of text that can't be easily split into sections. -- {{User:Ederchil/sig}} 18:48, 30 March 2011 (UTC) | |||
::::::Hmm, I know, but the article which probably should most be collaborated on (Bilbo) I think would just get ignored as editors be daunted by the task. --{{User:Mith/sig}} 18:57, 30 March 2011 (UTC) | |||
:::::::We could try to organise a collaboration on Bilbo and assigned people to different sections? --{{User:KingAragorn/sig}} 19:15, 30 March 2011 (UTC) | |||
:::::If you consider to use voting, there is no need to create a 'mechanism'. Wookieepedia used to have collaboration proposals which worked like this: create a sub-section with the proposed article, and then anyone can sign in that sub-section (with a <nowiki>#~~~</nowiki>). I am aware that voting could have little sense here, where the active editors are much fewer than in Wookieepedia. [[User:Sage|Sage]] 19:40, 30 March 2011 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 19:40, 30 March 2011
So when we 'select' the next collaboration? Sage 02:16, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
- I've changed it to the next chapter of The Hobbit. I think if we work through them all it'll be quite a triumph. --Mith (Talk/Contribs/Edits) 14:00, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
- How does it work? Do we vote? Who chooses the next among the proposals, and every when? Sage 17:29, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
- There isn't really a system; usually in the past an admin just picks out one from the list, or a couple of editors agree that a particular article really needs working on (as happened with Tuor). I am sort of reluctant to implement some form of voting system at the moment due to the poor turnout in FA and FQ, but I'm sure that Ederchil or I will change the Collaboration based on editor suggestion, so if you have an article you think should be up next, let me know! :-) --Mith (Talk/Contribs/Edits) 17:46, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
- We could try to organise a collaboration on Bilbo and assigned people to different sections? -- KingAragorn talk contribs edits email 19:15, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
- If you consider to use voting, there is no need to create a 'mechanism'. Wookieepedia used to have collaboration proposals which worked like this: create a sub-section with the proposed article, and then anyone can sign in that sub-section (with a #~~~). I am aware that voting could have little sense here, where the active editors are much fewer than in Wookieepedia. Sage 19:40, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
