Search the Kids Internet
Encyclopedia > Wikipedia talk:Integrate changes
Article Content
Wikipedia talk:Integrate changes
Supporters of this rule include: Larry Sanger, Linus Tolke,
Pinkunicorn (strongly), Koyaanis Qatsi, and sjc,
Janet Davis, drj, Mike Dill (hard isn't it?),
Damian Yerrick (who personally doesn't think it's that hard),
GWO, tbc, AxelBoldt,
24, Enchanter I agree strongly! If the text you want to add flows logically it's so much easier to read the article, Karen Johnson, Rotem Dan (This is a significant characteristic of brilliant prose)
There's nothing "harmfully restrictive" about it: if you are a good writer and you understand the subject, you will easily be able to figure out where in the article your comment fits. But this much is true: if you feel motivated to add a paragraph but you don't feel motivated to put it anywhere in particular, sure, go ahead and tack it onto the bottom. Just realize that you're creating work for other people, who will (or won't) use your contribution in updating the article properly later on. If you feel at all motivated, please do update the article properly, i.e., integrate your contribution with the existing entry. --LMS
It is harmfully restrictive, in that if the rule were consistently followed it would restrict how people comment in a way that is harmful to the growth of Wikipedia. It would prevent people from adding information that cannot be integrated into the material already written, without adding a substantial amount of new material. In cases when people do not wish to add a substantial amount of new matieral, they would leave nothing. Adding new information to the bottom of the page is preferable to adding nothing.
Well, I agree 100% with the latter paragraph. But this is consistent with what I said. I've edited the rule so you ought to be able to agree with it now, Tim. --LMS
See also Tim's Refactoring as the essential Wikipedia process.
Opponents include:
You can and should add disjunct comments to an article. Over time, these comments will accumulate, and eventually there will be enough so that you or some other Wikinaut can junct them into beautiful prose.
However, comments relevent to the existing beautiful prose should be integrated into the flow of the article rather than tacked on. The rule, as presently formulated, is correct for such cases, but is harmfully restrictive with regards to comments not relevent to the prose as it currently exists.
There's nothing "harmfully restrictive" about it: if you are a good writer and you understand the subject, you will easily be able to figure out where in the article your comment fits. But this much is true: if you feel motivated to add a paragraph but you don't feel motivated to put it anywhere in particular, sure, go ahead and tack it onto the bottom. Just realize that you're creating work for other people, who will (or won't) use your contribution in updating the article properly later on. If you feel at all motivated, please do update the article properly, i.e., integrate your contribution with the existing entry. --LMS
It is harmfully restrictive, in that if the rule were consistently followed it would restrict how people comment in a way that is harmful to the growth of Wikipedia. It would prevent people from adding information that cannot be integrated into the material already written, without adding a substantial amount of new material. In cases when people do not wish to add a substantial amount of new matieral, they would leave nothing. Adding new information to the bottom of the page is preferable to adding nothing.
Well, I agree 100% with the latter paragraph. But this is consistent with what I said. I've edited the rule so you ought to be able to agree with it now, Tim. --LMS
See also Tim's Refactoring as the essential Wikipedia process.
All Wikipedia text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License
|
Search Encyclopedia
|
Featured Article
|