Talk Page Discussion

This is the DiscussionPage of TalkPage. This page is in ThreadMode. Please sign your opinions. Title of page is correct.

I suggest to start using this concept here with HomePage. Like '<RealName>Talk' and include this link rather on top of the users homepage. Sure there should be a reverse link on the TalkPage too! Because some people who are around here since quite some time, got very lengthy homepages. There is need for some structure. -- ManorainjanHolzapfel 10/2014

This wiki started long before MediaWiki and has not the same convention. There are many pages here and in fact a relatively small number of active people. The convention has grown up that the HomePage is the personal space of an individual, although other people may use it for discussion. While it is O.K. to make suggestions about the way a page could be improved, it is a bit different to comment on a HomePage as it may reflect some past history or a way of working which the author wishes to have the way it is. It is personal space here. Clicking on its heading will reveal the pages where it is linked (the same is true for any other page as well). An example:

WardCunningham

You can always reference:

The pages you want to talk about as a list on your HomePage.
A blog you maintain with articles or entries talking about the topic of the pages of interest.

-- JohnFletcher

HomePages tend to be much more freeform. -- DaveVoorhis

The TalkPage concept is not about form. It is about structure. It is not about what and how to write on a HomePage. Part of its definiton is: "It is the one page on wiki where the content and maintenance of the page is mainly the responsibility of its namesake." Therefore, out of respect, other users might hesitate to "disturb" some ones HomePage. The TalkPage concept is more of an invitation to speak up. It anybody offers a TalkPage, there can not be any doubt about it. There You are encouraged to talk to someone without messing up his possibly very distinct way of maintaining his HomePage. --ManorainjanHolzapfel

I'm not convinced that we need to proliferate bureaucracies. -- DaveVoorhis

I'm sorry if You experience a singular suggestion as a <strong> <increase> of a <multitude> of 'bureaucracy'. To factor this out it comes to bureaucracy to the power of about 3. But it is a single suggestion. and as a suggestion there can not be a valid connection with bureaucracy. I, as an IP-editor, do not have any power at all to implement the least of bureaucracy. So, what drives You to exaggerate^3? --ManorainjanHolzapfel

Who said anything about "<strong> <increase> of a <multitude>" of bureaucracy? I don't think it's a lot of bureaucracy, but every tiny bit added can add up to a lot. Obviously, we can ignore this instance of bureaucracy, but I'd hope that the prevailing attitude here isn't to keep suggesting bureaucracies. I think that would be a shame. -- DV

I, being from Germany, looked up to proliferate and got 'sich stark vermehren'. You did not literally write 'strong increase'. You wrote a Latin word that denotes strong increase, that could be translated as a development with exponential function x^2. Then bureaucracies is the multitude of bureaucracy. So I came to bureaucracy^3. Now, the suggestion to use a new concept is not am act of bureaucracy at all. The whole wiki is about concepts or patterns and about to suggest those. Therefore I call bureaucracy an exaggeration. This results in the ReFactored term exaggeration^3. --ManorainjanHolzapfel

Whilst sich stark vermehren appears to be a strict translation, I doubt it carries quite the same implication. "Proliferate" means "increase rapidly" or "multiply". The suggestion to use a new concept may not be an act of bureaucracy, but its implementation might well be a manifestation of bureaucracy. I don't like bureaucracy. To put it simply, I don't like having to remember to do extra or special "stuff" unless the benefit significantly exceeds the extra mental and physical effort needed to do it. -- DV

From my rather short experience here on WardsWiki I could clearly see that this really old wiki has hardly increased in bureaucracy at all. Like the consequent upholding of the IpEditingOnly and no possibility to upload anything else than text on a page, no write protection to nearly all pages and the like, it is very clear, that SuperUser WardCunningham is in no way inclined to increase bureaucracy on his Wiki. And he is the only one who has the power to do so. Now a word for the lazybones like me and you: The TalkPage concept relieves you from scrolling down 'endlessly' on HomePages of "old" Wiki folks who keep their whole collection of decades of experience there. One simply clicks the talk page link on top of the home page and add Your comment on that without scrolling (to much). I for example keep my talk page short by deleting answered questions. Also You do not have to remember any stuff. You can implement TalkPage right now for Your home page whilst this discussion is fresh on Your mind. Or You just leave it as is, because no bureaucracy - no duress, as it is the habit on this wiki. And, whenever You encounter a home page that is complemented by a talk page, there would be a link to click to it. No need to remember anything. This concept is ideal for the weak and forgetful mind. It does not put any stress on it. --ManorainjanHolzapfel
Fair enough. I tend to be a bit leery of early suggestions from new arrivals, because pretty much every year that I've been here (15+ years as a WikiReader, 10 as a WikiAuthor), someone new attains WikiRapture and becomes an eager WikiPuppy, immediately identifying all that is wrong with what we do and first suggesting, and then trying to push, significant changes. Suggestions are fine -- we might even take you up on some of them. Trying to change things en masse is not so fine, at least not until you've hung around for a while to get a feel for -- and hopefully appreciate -- how things work. I'm not saying you've come remotely close to forcing change -- because you haven't, and your input is very much appreciated for both its practicality and the spirit in which it is intended -- but I mention it in case you had major changes in mind. This is not just an old wiki, it's the first wiki and therefore the oldest wiki, and it is deep with tradition. Furthermore, as curators of both the content and the process that spawned two of the most significant recent movements in SoftwareEngineering (DesignPatterns and ExtremeProgramming) along with inspiring the most significant recent movement in knowledge capture and dissemination (WikiPedia), we are careful to guard its unique character, as flawed as it may be. -- DV

Discussion works well under "xDiscussion" pages. -- DaveVoorhis

How well Discussion works under "xDiscussion" pages I'm not to say and not to write about in this very page. Such question would have to be explored under DiscussionPageDiscussion? if one likes. The TalkPage concept does not touch the DiscussionPage concept. It is in no way to alter or even indirectly influence that concept. Certainly I had to mention it in the explanation in the DocumentMode on TalkPage as a related concept, as similar but different. I initially called the TalkPage concept complementing the DiscussionPage concept. that means, that I do not intent to suggest to expand the DiscussionPage concept for the use of HomePage like ManorainjanHolzapfelDiscussion, unless the community thinks me to be a controversial person one should discuss about ;-) --ManorainjanHolzapfel

I'm afraid I don't see much distinction between the "Talk" and "Discussion" concepts, but if it's something important to you, that's fine. I don't have that much objection. I generally ignore the WikiOnWiki stuff like this, anyway, and prefer to focus on content, discussion, and debate about SoftwareDevelopment and related matters. -- DV

No need to be afraid ;-) The distinction is very simple: TalkPage is to free HomePage from getting cluttered with input of possibly only temporary use or value like questions which got answered. And DiscussionPage does just that for relate pages in DocumentMode whereas MixedModePages try to sort this on a single page. Now, is it important to me? Important enough to try to introduce it and follow it up. --ManorainjanHolzapfel

"Talk" addressed to a user has worked just fine for almost 20 years by writing it on a user's HomePage. Change should be driven by need, not by whim. Part of the WabiSabi beauty of WardsWiki is its essential simplicity and informality. Let's not ruin it. -- DaveVoorhis

Thank You for playing the AdvocatusDiaboli with such a verve. That gave me amply chance to demonstrate or even see the advantages and not-disadvantages of this concept. Just on more word about the 'need': That which is not needed in the beginning can very well be needed much later, simply because of an increase in time, number of members or, as in this case, length of HomePages which grew over time. Therefore to add a TalkPage to a HomePage may seem to be overdrived in case of very new or short ones, but rather helpful in case of very long one or with those people wo really dislike someone "messing up" their HomePage. --ManorainjanHolzapfel

I'm not playing Devil's Advocate. I am cautious about change. Again, as I wrote above, we are the curators of both the content and the process that spawned two of the most significant recent movements in SoftwareEngineering (DesignPatterns and ExtremeProgramming) and inspired the most significant recent movement in knowledge capture and dissemination (WikiPedia). Thus, we are careful to protect its unique character, as flawed as it may be. Change should be allowed to evolve organically, or it must be considered carefully. -- DaveVoorhis

This wiki community has experienced a lot of trauma and those who are still here are careful and thoughtful. -- JohnFletcher

In the past, we've had individuals hound and badger participants until they left; we've had participants rampantly delete content and insert rubbish and abuse faster than it could be effectively repaired; we've had participants insist on "fixing" how we interact; we've had participants make picayune changes so frequently that it obstructs normal interaction; we've had participants who try to use wiki as a personal soapbox and delete all challenges or queries. And so on. These things don't cause trauma (or, at least, not much) to the individual participants as this is all just text on a screen -- contributors simply go away if they get too annoyed. It certainly doesn't harm the underlying software. However, it does cause a form of trauma when contributors leave and/or change their behaviour from open and enthusiastic to cautious and defensive, and thus negatively impact the emergent process that creates and maintains the living document that is Wiki. -- DaveVoorhis

Any more comments?

Perhaps, let's take some time and consider what is here.

CategoryDiscussion