WikiEducator talk:Style guide/Proposed guidelines
- [View source↑]
- [History↑]
Contents
| Thread title | Replies | Last modified |
|---|---|---|
| Additional content for 'design' | 1 | 02:57, 30 September 2009 |
| History section in proposal pages | 0 | 09:01, 27 August 2009 |
| Made a Mess | 0 | 21:36, 24 August 2009 |
| Added Navigation templates to the list with slight modification | 1 | 14:09, 23 July 2009 |
| Added Boilerplates to list with slight modifications | 1 | 03:35, 22 July 2009 |
| Added | 5 | 16:06, 20 July 2009 |
Hi - I'm very new to the world of wikis and wikieducator so I hope my comments will be helpful and not too obvious to those of you who have developed this fantastic project to this stage. I note that you want to produce guidelines that are different from wikipedia. What stands this wiki apart is that it is elearning and (unless I have missed it) I don't see the guidelines directly addressing that so far. I would see it as part of the purpose of a style guide to alert content-writers to the need to think about their learners, scaffold a learning pathway and design content for different learning styles etc. These points could either be part of the 'design' category - or even part of an introduction that gives some snappy design principles upfront, so that all style reflects these principles. --Jane Brotchie 11:59, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
Jane,
This is a really good suggestion. It may be useful to WE's authors to have such suggestions available for the creation of new resources. If you're inspired toward this sort of thing, you may want to think about instigating a project geared toward designing them. It doesn't sound like what would apply to the style guidelines. These cover things like proper capitalisation, citing sources, and content formatting. Think Associated Press, Chicago Manual of Style, or American Psychology Association.
Definitely stick around and watch how the style guidelines develop. I would bet you could come up with some great ideas, and I look forward to seeing them. I'm very excited about the potential of this project!
I'd like to discuss adding a "summary of history" section into the proposal pages. This would be especially useful in bringing together all the involved information, like discussion group posts, as well as providing a brief summary of how a proposal has evolved without having to read through the whole page or study the diffs.
Below are two examples of what the section would look like, using Capitals in titles as an example. The first is an example of what a SoH section would look like around the time of the suggestion's inception, and the second is what a SoH would look like after the guideline had been in existence for some time.
Notice that links to google discussions and the diffs from histories of pages that had relevant content at one point in time.
Summary of History[edit]
13 July 2009 - Subject is first brought up for public discussion.
15 July 2009 - Discussion is brought to separate page.
14 August 2009 - Proposal opens for approvals.
29 August 2009 - Earliest possible date for ratification.
Summary of History[edit]
13 July 2009 - Subject is first brought up for public discussion.
13 July 2009 - Proposal announces to discussion group
15 July 2009 - Discussion is brought to separate page.
14 August 2009 - Proposal opened for approvals.
5 September 2009 - Proposal officially ratified
3 January 2010 - Amendment suggested by User:Jesse Groppi
3 January 2010 - Amendment announced to discussion group
2 February 2010 - Amendment opened for approval
17 February 2010 - Amendment ratified
16 July 2012 - Amendment suggested by User:Jesse Groppi
16 July 2012 - Amendment announced to discussion group
14 September 2012 - Amendment dismissed by User:Jesse Groppi
Jesse, I tried to add spelling as a proposed guideline and made a mess.
Hi Jesse,
Copied over the content from Navigation with slight modification and added to the list. Again, please let me know if I did not capture the intent.
I just did a little bit of cleanup, and added in some reasoning for the guidelines. Good job!
Hi Jesse,
I added Boilerplates to the list with some tweaks. Let me know if I did not preserve your original intent.
Rob, It looks great. I reworded the first link because the title of that page doesn't necessary describe what the page is about, but what the page is used for. I also think the content concepts on that site would only serve to confuse folks, and since it's not relevant, I think it's more helpful to keep it a non-issue.
I also added another example to try making the topic even more clearer to contributors. --Jesse Groppi 14:35, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi Jesse,
I added "Use of plurals" using the inputbox and added the link. I was going to suggest that we use {{SUBPAGENAME}} instead of {{PAGENAME}} in for the inputbox template so all of the guidelines don't end up under the S for style. However, it does not appear to work in the Wikieducator name space. In addition I noticed that the back links that automatically appear on other subpages just below the title don't show up and {{ShortTitle}} does not work in the Wikieducator namespace. This strange since I seem to remember them working in the User namespace. Anyway, using the mytitle template seems like a great choice since it works!
Rob,
I looked up some info on the magic words at MediaWiki. It turns out that SUBPAGENAME isn't working because the WikiEducator namespace does not have subpages enabled. This is not a surprise as the only namespace that enabled them by default is the main namespace. So, the question is, now, do we enable it? In order to do this, one has to go into the files to add a line of code. It can't be done from the client side.
I posted a message in the tech discussion asking if there are any reasons not to have the subpages enabled in the Wikieducator namespace and if not, could they enable it. I don't think it should be a problem since it seems to be enabled in the User and Workgroup namespaces.
Rob,
Workgroup isn't actually a namespace. The "Workgroup:" bit is actually part if the title, which is why the talk page is actually at "Talk:Workgroup". This is a situation I've worked with before, and we called it a "pseudo" namespace. I'm not sure why WE has done things, but in regards to subpages, they work because the pages are actually in the main namespace, which does have them enabled.
Interesting. I did not notice that. Maybe it makes it easier for somethings. Subpages are now enabled for the Wikieducator namespace.
Get down with your bad self.
