So to whom is this going to be helpful and how? That sounds like being implemented to me, but apparently that isnt going to happen.
On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 7:57 PM, Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com> wrote: > Venerability policy? That's a new one. Verifiability policy. (Spellcheck is > not always a wiki-lawyer's best friend.) > > Pine > > > On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 12:55 PM, Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Speaking generally, guidance can be helpful even if it's not a policy. > > English Wikipedia has similar ways of organizing information and how-to > > guides. Some guidance documents are categorized as essays, some as > > guidelines, and some as policies. It's worth noting that enforcement is, > > somewhat counter-intuitively, not tied directly to the "authority level" > of > > a document. For example, the venerability policy is frequently violated > but > > generally people are rarely blocked for violating it, while the > exceptions > > to norms that are tolerated under "Ignore All Rules" have become thin as > > Wikipedia's complexity has grown and practices have become more detailed > > and standardized. (I believe that Aaron Halfaker has done some research > on > > that last point.) > > > > Pine > > > > Pine > > > > > > On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 1:24 AM, Rogol Domedonfors < > domedonf...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > >> If there's not going to be anything to implement, how do you see this as > >> having an effect on anything? What will be done differently or better? > >> Why should anyone be doing any work on it? How will we know whether or > >> not > >> it has been a success, and whther or not the time effort and effort was > >> well-spent? > >> > >> "Rogol" > >> > >> On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 10:35 PM, Keegan Peterzell < > >> kpeterz...@wikimedia.org > >> > wrote: > >> > >> > On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 3:13 PM, Rogol Domedonfors < > >> domedonf...@gmail.com> > >> > wrote: > >> > > >> > > Is the *Technical Collaboration Guidance* > >> > > https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Technical_Collaboration_Guidance > still > >> > > actively under development? > >> > > >> > > >> > Yes, there are internal stakeholder discussions still underway. > >> > > >> > > >> > > There seems to have been no discussion of any > >> > > substance since January. Is there an intention to bring the > >> discussion > >> > to > >> > > a close > >> > > >> > > >> > Eventually the plan is to remove the draft tag, yes. > >> > > >> > > >> > > and to implement the guidance? > >> > > >> > > >> > As guidance, there is nothing to "implement" as you say. As has been > >> > discussed on the talk page, these are not rules to be placed into > >> effect. > >> > This is a guidance manual from the TC team. The guidance is available > >> for > >> > teams to check if they'd like a written resource for the type of work > >> that > >> > Community Liaisons generally do. > >> > > >> > Further questions are welcome on the talk page, where discussions can > >> be > >> > properly captured on-wiki. > >> > > >> > -- > >> > Keegan Peterzell > >> > Technical Collaboration Specialist > >> > Wikimedia Foundation > >> > _______________________________________________ > >> > Wikitech-l mailing list > >> > Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org > >> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l > >> > > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Wikitech-l mailing list > >> Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org > >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l > >> > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikitech-l mailing list > Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l > _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
