User talk:Ssw0213 - Revision history

Perspectoff at 19:18, 2 February 2010

2010-02-02T19:18:52Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:18, 2 February 2010
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~Hi, Dr. Watson.~~

	~~I have been reading Vistapedia and see that you have made a lot of contributions there.~~

	~~I run several large wikis and have been a contributor to Wikipedia for many years.~~

	~~May I make some suggestions about editing a wiki:~~

	* Don't add your signature within the wiki for every contribution you make. It is considered egotistical and adds nothing to the info. That's what the Talk pages are for.

	* Be concise. The tendency for many wiki contributors is to write entries exactly as they speak, in a folksy conversational tone. That is ok for private blogs, but not for wikis where readers need to sort through a morass of information quickly.

	* Don't leave blank links or create blank pages with the intent of having other users filling them in. If you don't have information to add, don't create the page or link. A sea of red (i.e. empty pages/links) makes for a very poor wiki.

	*Be responsible for your content. Don't expect other users to correct your mistakes. If they do, great. But don't start a page and expect others to figure out how to get out of the mess you've gotten into. That's what sandboxes (test pages) are for.

	*Always use in-line links. Never spell out links. It makes the page cluttered.

	*Be sure grammar and spelling is accurate. Don't use run-on sentences, incomplete phrases, or "texting" abbreviations. The audience will vary between newcomers and experts, and abbreviations are often idiosyncratic. Storage space in a wiki is cheap -- spell out your words.

	*Don't use "I" or "you," especially "you should." It is pedantic and preachy and is a sin that exists uniquely in American speech patterns. Be cognizant that your method works for you and is primarily a suggestion; someone else may have found a better method. Conversely, don't be self-deprecating ("this works for me"). Just put down the advice without qualifiers and let other contributors edit it as necessary. Wikis are not like the US Congress (where posturing trumps results and very little of substance gets done).

	*Don't use trite phrases ("an overview of complexities and 'gotchas'") or odd analogies ("However, in true military fashion, you will be dealing with "live ammunition", and you can blow your legs off in an instant"). That is fine for discussions over beer but has no place in a professional document.

	This advice is given to all new Wikipedia contributors and was given to me (in many tones) when I began to contribute there. VistA (WorldVistA and OpenVistA) are booming, right now, but documentation for them (including Vistapedia) is haphazard at best.

	~~Vistapedia can serve an important function for a somewhat desperate clientele, but only if it is well-written. I look forward to seeing your continued contributions there. Cheers.~~

Perspectoff at 22:19, 30 January 2010

2010-01-30T22:19:18Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:19, 30 January 2010
Line 20:		Line 20:

	*Don't use "I" or "you," especially "you should." It is pedantic and preachy and is a sin that exists uniquely in American speech patterns. Be cognizant that your method works for you and is primarily a suggestion; someone else may have found a better method. Conversely, don't be self-deprecating ("this works for me"). Just put down the advice without qualifiers and let other contributors edit it as necessary. Wikis are not like the US Congress (where posturing trumps results and very little of substance gets done).		*Don't use "I" or "you," especially "you should." It is pedantic and preachy and is a sin that exists uniquely in American speech patterns. Be cognizant that your method works for you and is primarily a suggestion; someone else may have found a better method. Conversely, don't be self-deprecating ("this works for me"). Just put down the advice without qualifiers and let other contributors edit it as necessary. Wikis are not like the US Congress (where posturing trumps results and very little of substance gets done).

			*Don't use trite phrases ("an overview of complexities and 'gotchas'") or odd analogies ("However, in true military fashion, you will be dealing with "live ammunition", and you can blow your legs off in an instant"). That is fine for discussions over beer but has no place in a professional document.

	This advice is given to all new Wikipedia contributors and was given to me (in many tones) when I began to contribute there. VistA (WorldVistA and OpenVistA) are booming, right now, but documentation for them (including Vistapedia) is haphazard at best.		This advice is given to all new Wikipedia contributors and was given to me (in many tones) when I began to contribute there. VistA (WorldVistA and OpenVistA) are booming, right now, but documentation for them (including Vistapedia) is haphazard at best.

	Vistapedia can serve an important function for a somewhat desperate clientele, but only if it is well-written. I look forward to seeing your continued contributions there. Cheers.		Vistapedia can serve an important function for a somewhat desperate clientele, but only if it is well-written. I look forward to seeing your continued contributions there. Cheers.

Perspectoff at 18:45, 30 January 2010

2010-01-30T18:45:13Z

New page

Hi, Dr. Watson.

I have been reading Vistapedia and see that you have made a lot of contributions there.

I run several large wikis and have been a contributor to Wikipedia for many years.

May I make some suggestions about editing a wiki:

* Don't add your signature within the wiki for every contribution you make. It is considered egotistical and adds nothing to the info. That's what the Talk pages are for.

* Be concise. The tendency for many wiki contributors is to write entries exactly as they speak, in a folksy conversational tone. That is ok for private blogs, but not for wikis where readers need to sort through a morass of information quickly.

* Don't leave blank links or create blank pages with the intent of having other users filling them in. If you don't have information to add, don't create the page or link. A sea of red (i.e. empty pages/links) makes for a very poor wiki.

*Be responsible for your content. Don't expect other users to correct your mistakes. If they do, great. But don't start a page and expect others to figure out how to get out of the mess you've gotten into. That's what sandboxes (test pages) are for.

*Always use in-line links. Never spell out links. It makes the page cluttered.

*Be sure grammar and spelling is accurate. Don't use run-on sentences, incomplete phrases, or "texting" abbreviations. The audience will vary between newcomers and experts, and abbreviations are often idiosyncratic. Storage space in a wiki is cheap -- spell out your words.

*Don't use "I" or "you," especially "you should." It is pedantic and preachy and is a sin that exists uniquely in American speech patterns. Be cognizant that your method works for you and is primarily a suggestion; someone else may have found a better method. Conversely, don't be self-deprecating ("this works for me"). Just put down the advice without qualifiers and let other contributors edit it as necessary. Wikis are not like the US Congress (where posturing trumps results and very little of substance gets done).

This advice is given to all new Wikipedia contributors and was given to me (in many tones) when I began to contribute there. VistA (WorldVistA and OpenVistA) are booming, right now, but documentation for them (including Vistapedia) is haphazard at best.

Vistapedia can serve an important function for a somewhat desperate clientele, but only if it is well-written. I look forward to seeing your continued contributions there. Cheers.