On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 7:39 AM, Svip <[email protected]> wrote: > On 22 January 2012 23:31, Yao Ziyuan <[email protected]> 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.
What about a Slashdot-like comment section moderated by users themselves? :-) > > _______________________________________________ > foundation-l mailing list > [email protected] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
