Difference between revisions of "Help:Be bold"

From Camera-wiki.org
Jump to: navigation, search
(Request for deletion)
(horrible change reverted)
Line 1: Line 1:
−
{{To be deleted|reason=Not a camera, a lens, a photographic technique or similar, and therefore very obviously in the wrong namespace, just for starters. Quite aside from matters of phrasing (and capitalization) that can be attributed to the writer's effort in a foreign language, the way this is put across is extraordinarily confusing, and, if taken seriously, wasteful. The reader is encouraged to blunder, to think of changes and reversions as a game, and so forth. There's not the slightest hint that the bold blunderers should check their facts, let alone cite their sources, which all adds to the impression that they may boldly write from what they read in a discussion forum, or vaguely remember having heard on a TV program or while sitting on a barstool, or whatever. By contrast, the [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia:Be bold|original page at Wikipedia]] is carefully written, distinguishing between articles on the one hand and categories, etc, on the other; no mention of any of that ''here,'' leading to my suspicion that the writer of ''this'' article hasn't even read and digested what he praises. Wikipedia (or its English version) also differs from Camera-wiki.org in various ways that seem to me to be pertinent here: the former is overseen by many more humans (not to mention bots) than the latter is, and new articles may not be created there by brand new accounts. &para; Now, perhaps I should just ''be bold'' and rewrite this personal essay accordingly, but I cannot be bothered to do so; moreover, I'm not convinced that the Wikipedia "philosophy" would work well here even if it were articulated carefully. Having been ''courteous'' and invited the writer to move it to his own userspace while he works on it, and having seen this idea dismissed and the "article" not improve in the slightest, my ''bold'' move is to request deletion. Material such as this, which both misrepresents what Wikipedia says and provides an inferior version of it, would do a disservice to both websites even if it were in the appropriate namespace ("Camera-wiki.org"). If people here want to cite Wikipedia's far superior original they can do as simply as <span style="color:#fff; background-color:#666; padding:0 2px"><nowiki>Wikipedia's "[[Wikipedia:Wikipedia:Be bold|Be bold]]"</nowiki></span> or similar. -- [[User:Hoarier|Hoarier]] 23:08, 4 May 2011 (PDT)}}
 
 
'''Be bold''' is an old [[Wikipedia]] rule-of-thumb to propel further development of a wiki. Thus if You feel uncomfortable with contents or appearance of a page and You develop an idea how to make text or page design better: Try it. Your change may be reverted, and then You can try to understand why Your change was unwanted. Did it go too far? Try it again with a more moderate change or write Your question or improvement idea into the talk page of the changed page.
 
'''Be bold''' is an old [[Wikipedia]] rule-of-thumb to propel further development of a wiki. Thus if You feel uncomfortable with contents or appearance of a page and You develop an idea how to make text or page design better: Try it. Your change may be reverted, and then You can try to understand why Your change was unwanted. Did it go too far? Try it again with a more moderate change or write Your question or improvement idea into the talk page of the changed page.
  

Revision as of 19:39, 5 May 2011

Be bold is an old Wikipedia rule-of-thumb to propel further development of a wiki. Thus if You feel uncomfortable with contents or appearance of a page and You develop an idea how to make text or page design better: Try it. Your change may be reverted, and then You can try to understand why Your change was unwanted. Did it go too far? Try it again with a more moderate change or write Your question or improvement idea into the talk page of the changed page.

The one who reverts a change should also think about wether or not the reason for the reversion is obvious, for example as obvious as the reversion of a spam address insertion or a moderate partial reversion to recover important contents details. Otherwise the one should also write the reason for the reversion into the talk page of the changed page.

If the change and reversion game goes into a second round, editor and reverter should use the user talk pages of each other to reach each other better with questions and arguments for and against the change or just to remind each other of further changes in the original page talk discussion. If the reverter is an experienced contributor or wiki admin he/she should be open-minded for new ideas, and each party should reduce the number of exchanged arguments to a minimum so that others can follow and enter discussion if necessary. It would be better to switch discussion early from arguments exchange to consent building if the suggested change proves to result from a realistic page-improving intention or can be developed from a totally free idea to a sound page inprovement.

Important hint for busy contributors: If You know that you made some valid major changes to a page, the last of these edits should not be marked as small change thru the checkbox "This is a minor edit" left below the editing window when You save the page. Thus the version can't go lost in database reorg actions of this wiki site's bureaucrat. It's very useful for the project if many small changes are marked as such minor edit in the page histories. But sometimes it's good to have a "major edit" in page history if a really improved article status is reached.

Important hint for bold contributors: Look into the page history before You make a big bold change. If there are only minor edits in the near past, make a small change first and save that as "major edit", i.e. as an edit that should not be marked as small change thru the checkbox "This is a minor edit" left below the editing window when You save the page.

see also

Retrieved from "http://camera-wiki.org/index.php?title=Help:Be_bold&oldid=104799"