FTR, I'm not opposed to selectively opening the site (or more, certain
namespaces) to public editing. I am firmly in agreement with Brian and John
that the situation we're in does not permit a "free for all" as we have
obligations and responsibilities (including under the Act) as an
organisation wh
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 10:56 PM, John Vandenberg wrote:
> Another option is for non-members to be restricted to talk pages on
> the main wiki. This means they cant edit pages, but they can initiate
> and participate in discussions about them. Talk pages shouldn't
> contain anything official.
My
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 10:05 PM, private musings
wrote:
> The page basically just suggested that WMAU should allow registration,
> and therefore editing, by anyone so minded - part of my rationale is
> that we have a bit of a problem with engagement and participation -
> hence asking for folk cur
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 10:37:23AM +1100, Peter Halasz wrote:
> > A more basic question is why are non-members still non-members?
>
> I have not renewed my membership partly over this issue. (As I said
> previously: it shows WMAU is either moving at a glacial pace or is
> being run by people who s
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 10:37 AM, Peter Halasz wrote:
>> A more basic question is why are non-members still non-members?
>
> I have not renewed my membership partly over this issue. (As I said
> previously: it shows WMAU is either moving at a glacial pace or is
> being run by people who simply do
> A more basic question is why are non-members still non-members?
I have not renewed my membership partly over this issue. (As I said
previously: it shows WMAU is either moving at a glacial pace or is
being run by people who simply do not share my values.)
> My biggest concern is that open editin
Hi,
The part I'm not sure of is what parts of the Wiki people would wish to
change. There are sections which clearly can't be publicly editable, such as
the rules and minutes, but I'm assuming that there are other sections -
perhaps events? - which would be of interest to non-members for editing.
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 8:51 AM, Peter Halasz wrote:
>> Non members can explain here why they want to be able to edit our
>> wiki; we are listening.
>
> I'm not engaging in this debate again. It's been argued to death
> already. It's ridiculously obvious to me why it WMAU should be
> editable, and
> Non members can explain here why they want to be able to edit our
> wiki; we are listening.
I'm not engaging in this debate again. It's been argued to death
already. It's ridiculously obvious to me why it WMAU should be
editable, and the fact that it still isn't tells me that WMAU is
either movi
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 9:45 PM, Angela wrote:
> Would a separate wiki be a better idea? That way the committee
> wouldn't need to worry about the unofficial content being confused for
> anything they'd approved. And the community wouldn't need to worry
> about their pages being removed for being
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 10:45 PM, Angela wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 9:35 PM, private musings
> wrote:
>> I've written a proposal on the official wiki to allow registration,
>> and hence editing, by non-members.
> On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 10:20 PM, John Vandenberg wrote:
>>
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 9:35 PM, private musings
wrote:
> I've written a proposal on the official wiki to allow registration,
> and hence editing, by non-members.
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 10:20 PM, John Vandenberg wrote:
> that is not the process PM, and the process is not yet p
that is not the process PM, and the process is not yet public so
please stop discussing it here.
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 10:08 PM, private musings
wrote:
> ps. I think one of the key aspects to the proposals process that I
> bungled on is that an idea should have the support of at least 2
> membe
ps. I think one of the key aspects to the proposals process that I
bungled on is that an idea should have the support of at least 2
members before being formally raised on the wiki could I ask if
any member out there is minded to support the notion? Hope so!
cheers,
Peter,
PM.
On Tue, Nov 16
oops,
my apologies for not having followed the process I'll do my best
to read up on how to follow it properly, and then give it another go.
The page basically just suggested that WMAU should allow registration,
and therefore editing, by anyone so minded - part of my rationale is
that we have
Sorry folks. That page has been deleted.
Wikimedia Australia has been working on a process for proposals, and
this proposal did not follow the process.
The committee has talked a lot about allowing non-members to edit the
wiki, and I would love a good proposal, but the one that
privatemusings pu
Hi all,
I've written a proposal on the official wiki to allow registration,
and hence editing, by non-members. It's here;
http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/Proposal:Open_WMAU_Wiki_editing
I (obviously!) support such a move, and feel it would bring
considerable benefits to us as an organisation. T
17 matches
Mail list logo
