Re: wikipedia Leap Seconds collaboration
In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Neal McBurnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: : Rob Seaman wrote: : I hope we can all continue this discussion in a more positive manner. : : It is the nature of email lists to be good at stimulating discussion, : and bad at generating clear resolutions. Thus was the FAQ born. But : we have a more modern technology than FAQs, the wiki, which can more : effectively funnel passionate energy from groups of people with : diverging ideas into coherent descriptions of a variety of viewpoints, : suitable for enlightening the world. Imperfectly, to be sure, but : better than a mail list : : I think the thing we need to do is build on what clarity we can find : in the moment, and document it at wikipedia. If the folks discussing : the Jesus article can arrive at a relatively stable set of positions : (and last time I looked, they had done remarkably well, considering), : surely we can also. : : Note the relatively successful policy of presenting things from a : Neutral Pointof View (NPOV): : : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view : : So would folks be willing to collaborate at : : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leap_second : : and related pages? I've contributed to the unix time over leap seconds pages, and would be happy to help. I feel I can write a good argument for both sides, even though I have my preferences. Warner
Re: wikipedia Leap Seconds collaboration
Be careful. The goals of the folk on this mailing list and the goals of the wikipedia project are probably not aligned. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not In particular, note the section Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought. It is certainly possible for people on this list to help improve the wikipedia's coverage of articles related to time keeping, but the wikipedia article is not an appropriate place for a group attempting to hash out a consensus on a mailing list to record all of its thoughts. -Tim Shepard [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: wikipedia Leap Seconds collaboration
On Mon, Jan 23, 2006 at 11:20:45AM -0500, Tim Shepard wrote: Be careful. The goals of the folk on this mailing list and the goals of the wikipedia project are probably not aligned. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not In particular, note the section Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought. It is certainly possible for people on this list to help improve the wikipedia's coverage of articles related to time keeping, but the wikipedia article is not an appropriate place for a group attempting to hash out a consensus on a mailing list to record all of its thoughts. Thanks - very true. An important point is that folks should include references to other sources. But there are a ton of other sources, and when we're behaving well, we already reference them in these discussions. I think having more folks working on wikipedia will both help our discussion here, and encourage folks to generate web pages and other sources for new proposals. My wikipedia talk page contains a number of relevant policy references, some of which may be a bit dated: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Nealmcb And note that it is good practice to discuss major or controvertial proposed changes to, e.g. the leap seconds page, at the associated discussion page, e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Leap_second Cheers, Neal McBurnett http://bcn.boulder.co.us/~neal/ Signed and/or sealed mail encouraged. GPG/PGP Keyid: 2C9EBA60
