On 22 January 2012 23:31, Yao Ziyuan <yaoziy...@gmail.com> wrote: > The wiki way to talk may be favored by the Wikipedia community, but is > really weird to the general public.
The name 'talk page' is also a terrible name and very ambiguous as to what it is. A far more appropriate candidate for such a page's name would be 'collaboration page', 'work page', 'improvement page' and so on. I understand why many people believe it to be a page to talk about the article at hand rather than how to improve it. A comment section under the article (or a trollpage like on Wikinews) seems unlikely to benefit anything. Most of the comments will be unimportant, useless or altogether pointless. And those few comments THAT DO provide some insight or interest in the subject could either be better used incorporated into the article *or* will get buried among the thousands of other comments. You think [[Cats]] isn't likely to get a lot of stupid cat comments? And while changes to articles are worthy of maintenance for most people to volunteer to do, I sincerely doubt you will find many who would manage a comment system on Wikipedia. And it *will* require management to be useful. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l