Solar Cookers World Network

Organization of this wiki

1,861pages on
this wiki

Forum page

Forums: Index > Village pump > Organization of this wiki


User_talk:Wsiegmund has a good discussion of categories. Here is the last topic, copied from that page:

Is there a way to create a category for NGOs that would create a page automatically divided by country like this page? Tom Sponheim 20:39, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't think so. You could alphabetize by country using the country name as the pipe parameter (as above). The first letter of the country would appear as a subheading with the article underneath. But, that is all that can be done in a straightforward manner, to my knowledge. Walter Siegmund 21:04, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
After more thought... You can create continent categories and country subcategories and put articles in the latter. That would be more or less equivalent to Non-governmental organizations. On Wikipedia, both categories and list articles are common. Sometimes it is fairly obvious which approach is to be preferred. However, it seems to be the norm to tolerate a fair amount of overlap. This is especially true on Commons. Best wishes, Walter Siegmund 04:59, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
Let's have continent categories and perhaps a Continent template for lists, and then we'll standardize the existing list pages (NGOs, Manufacturers and Vendors). This should be a trivial exercise but somehow it isn't. Do we have separate entries for Asia, Oceana, and Australia/NZ, or lump them together? Do we use geographic divisions (North America, South America) or language divisions (Anglo America, Latin America)? The Solar Cooking International Association divides the world up into four regions: Africa, Asia, Ibero-America, and Europe/non-Latin America, and for some purposes this is great, but if you're ordering a cooker, you probably don't want it shipped across the ocean. We could have multiple location category hierarchies, but that feels a bit overdesigned. --Beth Ogilvie 17:10, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
I've started adding "Category:Manufacturers and vendors" to the appropriate pages, and while I'm there I'm adding "Category:<Countryname>". The next step is to add a link to the country page template (and change the existing country pages) to display all pages with the corresponding country name. (Oh, and find other pages that correspond to the country, and add them to the category - a small detail. :) --Beth Ogilvie 18:01, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
BTW, the deletion of the Who's who in the solar cooking movement list article was a surprise to me. On Wikipedia, it is unlikely a consensus for deletion would be reached. A significant faction would insist that the list article was better than categories and should be retained. As a result, both would continue on, in equal parts, chaos and harmony. Walter Siegmund 05:35, 15 January 2007 (UTC) :(moved from under User Pages by Beth)
Why would a list be better than categories in this case? For Manufacturers and Vendors I can see the advantage of a list page, since the list page includes a photo gallery, and is organized geographically. For that, clearly we should have both, with the category page providing an alphabetical presentation. But the Who's Who was just alphabetical, so it didn't add value, just work. Yes? Walter, your input is so valuable. Thank you - thank you - thank you! --Beth Ogilvie 17:31, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
List pages are more flexible in that formatting and annotation can easily be added and modified. Some like the centralization of a list page. Others decry the need to edit it when adding an article. Wikipedians have passionate discussions about matters that seem to most to not be worth the energy (Wikipedia:WP:Lamest_edit_wars_ever). It is a pleasure to feel useful. Thank you. Walter Siegmund 19:49, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
Walter, how would the discussion take place (on Wikipedia) on subjects such as whether to delete a page or not? Is there a forum devoted to topics like deleting or moving pages? And what happens when no one replies (as in my questions above about how to organize countries into continents)? I could assume it means no one else cares so I should just make an arbitrary decision and proceed. --Beth Ogilvie 19:03, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
For article deletion see Wikipedia:WP:AFD. Images are handled in a similar fashion. Notice of a proposed page move is best handled with a note on the article or image talk page. I haven't been notifying anyone yet of page moves, though. On page moves, it is considered responsible to fix the links to the new page title (see "What links here"). Discussion of policies and guidelines is probably best done here. On Wikipedia, which does not yet have forums, it is discussion occurs on the talk pages of articles in the "Wikipedia" namespace. See Wikipedia:Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_deletion.
I don't have strong opinions on organizing countries into continents. Lumping Asia, Oceana, and Australia/NZ doesn't sound quite right to me. I think I've seen Oceana and Australia/NZ lumped. You can always see how Wikipedia does it, if you think that would be helpful. Walter Siegmund 19:49, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Copyright tags

A number of files are missing copyright tags. While it is probably less likely here than on Wikipedia that copyrighted violations will occur or be pursued vigorously, I think it is a bad idea to allow it to grow to the point that it becomes intractable. But, perhaps we should discuss this a bit before I start tagging images with copyright violations. Walter Siegmund 05:41, 9 January 2007 (UTC) (Copied from User_talk:Tom_Sponheim)

I've been operating under the assumption that any image on the solar cooking archive is in the public domain, and I've been tagging them as such when I upload them. If this is not correct, I'll have to change a lot of files! --Beth Ogilvie 17:24, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
Walter, can you just add the public domain tags? Everything we are adding is from the Solar Cooking Archive which is all in the public domain. Let me know if you don't have time and I'll add them. Tom Sponheim 19:58, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
I'd be happy to add PD tags. I'm glad to hear that it isn't the problem that I thought it might be. Thank you Beth for moving the discussion here, a more appropriate place. --Walter Siegmund 00:45, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
I cleared out the [[missing copyright tags]] list. Please add it to your bookmarks list and check it occasionally. It can be found under Special pages/More... Walter Siegmund 04:18, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
I notified editors who have uploaded images with no copyright tag that I've added the PD tag to their image(s) (as above). I wonder if it is time to think about making a missing copyright notification template? What should should the wording be? Wikipedia:Template:Image_copyright_request might be a good starting point. We probably need something like Wikipedia:Template:No_license to place on the image page, as well. Walter Siegmund 05:18, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
I started to copy Commons:No license to Solar Cooking. Template:No license already exists. Please take a look at Commons:Template:Image source. It is a rather complete and friendly notification template. Walter Siegmund 05:47, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
I like Template:No license better than Commons:No license. I find the latter completely overwhelming, and if I'm overwhelmed, I think it will scare away many of the people we want to contribute to this wiki. With the KISS principle in mind, we could have a policy that only PD docs go on this wiki. Wikipedia:Template:Image_copyright_request looks fine (with appropriate tweaks). --Beth Ogilvie 16:42, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
Thanks very much for the feedback. I'll copy Wikipedia:Template:Image_copyright_request to Solar Cooking Wiki, if someone else doesn't beat me to it, so that you and Tom can make adjustments. I don't think it is a good idea to require only PD documents here, but it would be fine to encourage that. On Commons, I use GFDL and cc-by-2.5.[1] I added "no license" to Image:Bowl2.jpg yesterday, by the way. Walter Siegmund 19:22, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
Yes, let's just have a nicely worded no license message. And I think it would be best to just add the {{PD}} tag for people when they first start and send them an email and add a message to their talk page. I know those sort of messages sent me away from Wikipedia for a long time since it seemed that everything I did caused problems. Tom Sponheim 23:38, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
I added PD tags to User talk:Ashokraok's untagged images and left a message to that effect on his talk page.[2] Walter Siegmund 23:39, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

User pages

The Who's Who pages (e.g. Tom Sponheim) seem a bit redundant with User pages (User:Tom Sponheim). I suggest that as the guiding lights of Solar Cooking register on the Wiki, we remove the redundant Who's Who page and just link Who's Who to the User page. --Beth Ogilvie 17:41, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure this is a good idea. The Wikipedians that are the subject of articles also have user pages, e.g., Wikipedia:Jimbo Wales and Wikipedia:User:Jimbo Wales. As you can see from this example, the content and purposes are quite different. I suspect that may be true here as well. Walter Siegmund 00:50, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
I thought I'd revisit this issue prompted by finding babel tags (language userboxes) on Tom Sponheim (article page). They looked very out of place to me and I moved them to User:Tom Sponheim (user page). As a result, I understand the motivation for Beth's suggestion better. So, for now, I'll adopt a wiki point of view and agree that maybe we should adopt her suggestion and see what happens. If it becomes apparent that an article is warranted in addition to a user page, it can be added and recategorized, etc.
A counterargument is that someone who has become accustomed to communicating on a User talk page will attempt to do much the same on an article talk page, thinking the s/he is talking to the article subject, rather than the editors of that article. I can see confusion either way.
The vast majority of personalities on the site will be normal pages and not have user pages. I think mixing user pages and normal pages is not a good idea at this point. Anyone sophisticated enough to even know about user pages, will know how to find a person's user page to leave a message. Also, if we see messages appearing on normal pages, we can just educate the person about user pages.
As far as deleting those two pages goes, I believed that I had a concensus. I had asked you to add categories so that we could link to the category pages instead of the standard pages. In my mind that made these other two pages redundant. I've found it's aways good to nip things in the bud so that bad examples don't give people the wrong idea about how to do things.
Given all of this, it might make sense to have the Bable tags on the normal pages, since they would indicate to a person browing the site which languages the person in question speaks so they would be able to email them in the correct language.
I know not everything here is like on Wikipedia, but I hope you can be flexible or offer a good counter argument. Thanks! Tom Sponheim 18:08, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
I think your argument regarding mixing user and normal pages is a good one, especially with the perspective that the vast majority will be normal pages.
I'm pleased that you find categories useful. I don't object to the deletion of the two list articles. It is easily undone if you change your mind.
I'm sure that this is not the last time that I'll exhibit Wikipedia chauvinism. Some of my comments and actions will be helpful in that they will give you the benefit of someone coming from that background. I hope that Solar Cooking will attract a few editors and readers from Wikipedia. Some commonality will benefit them and Solar Cooking. I hope I don't exhibit inflexibility, however. Babel tags on article pages look funny to me, but if they work, I'll get used to it. One suggestion is to modify the appearance of babel boxes so that they look different than userboxes (babelboxes are a subset of userboxes). Another idea is to set up an infobox for articles about solar cooking people. Please see the box in the upper right of Wikipedia:Devils Tower National Monument. The idea of an infobox is to present important information in a standard format so that it is easy to find at a glance. Babel information could be embedded in the Who's Who infobox.
Adding babel boxes is a bit slow. I've complete English and will do German next. --Walter Siegmund 00:50, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
Walter, I'm glad you're giving us all this insight into Widipedia processes and techniques. We don't have to do everything the Wikipedia way, but if we diverge from it, it's good to do it from knowledge and not from ignorance. --Beth Ogilvie 19:03, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
I'm glad too, Walter, that you're bringing us this knowledge. It would be nice to have some sort of info box for individuals as long as it's obvious to people how to edit it. Tom Sponheim 20:03, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki