One wiki member has taken to adding the phrase "Originated By" to wiki pages that they have started, and insisting that the phrase appears at the beginning of the document. Attempts to move this to a "Contributors" section at the bottom of the page or to move it to a signing of the original content have been rebuffed.
I believe that this behaviour violates the concept of the Egoless Wiki and the collective authorship of the wiki. I hold neither of these two ideas as absolute. What I find most concerning is that the Originated By phrase places a degree of ownership over content contributed by Anonymous Donors, as it is unclear which pieces of content have been contributed by the originator unless all other content on the page is signed.
My current approach to this is to change the "Originated By blah" phrase to "Originated By blah (includes contributions from Anonymous Donors)" when I seem such a page that obviously has contributed content. I think this is a better approach, but I still feel uneasy about promoting the author of a page so prominently, especially once other significant contributions have been made.
I would appreciate other Wiki Citizens' thoughts on the matter. -- Daniel Sheppard
I strongly agree. It clearly is a strong claim of ownership, and the opposite of Egoless Wiki practices, and although I don't want to start yet another war, I don't see any reason why such a thing should remain unfactored. There's no support for it in any of the conventions; quite the opposite. -- Doug Merritt
It makes me uneasy too. What happens when a page Originated By someone is heavily refactored? Some pages here have been reworked so much that none of the original content remains. -- Jonathan Tang
Also strongly agree. I have started my share of pages on Wards Wiki, but over the time I've been here (less than three years) I've come to understand that this is not an
"author's forum" nor a "recognition platform" for aspiring pundits. Nor, indeed, any one participant's property.
I do add attribution to my stuff, but it's more to make it possible for the reader to evaluate my contributions in the context of other things I've said.
It took me a while to accept that after I started a topic or contributed to one that I didn't necessarily "own" it just because I touched it.
I consider that my contributions to Wards Wiki have value to the degree that people leave my scribblings unmolested or even agree with them. I can't impose that value.
Not everyone agrees with me, and I don't agree with everyone, but my identity is not at risk simply because we see things differently.
I believe there is value in knowing who contributed to a page, but I also believe that there can be a tyranny in forcing identification of a page with a person. -- Garry Hamilton
(The following discussion is between Daniel Sheppard and the user of the Originated By tag - Daniel's comments in italics)
Thanks for your comments regarding ownership of pages. I have changed the Heading to that of Originated By instead and will continue to do so on pages I originate. I do this because it is the style which has developed in the years of participation on this wiki. It also associates my name with the topic when Google crawls the site. Feel free to delete it from your local copy of the page, but until the model I am discussing is completed, I would like for the introduction to remain, please allow me this vanity.
I would encourage you to try and let go of your contributions a bit more - at least moving your name to the bottom (the content should take precedence), but if your really want to put your name at the top, I'm not going to stop you. I would also discourage timestamping, it tends to make people dismissive of your data after it has aged, rather than simply letting it stand on its merits.
It is traditional to credit the author or originator of a document at the top. I will follow that time-honored tradition, I am not ashamed of what I start. I will finish it in steps. As I discover and learn, I modify my own writings. The timestamping has been removed, at least for this wiki. I like to keep track of when I do stuff, but will reserve the timestamping to my local copy. As to standing on merit, I have authored dozens of pages which have withstood the test of time and scrutiny of many. I will author hundreds more. This year, next year, and the year after that. I am here to stay, Wards Wiki is a good place with much good content. Thanks again for your contributions.
It is not however, the tradition within Wards Wiki to credit the author at the beginning of the document. You seem to have been around here quite a while, so I guess you know this already. It's just that I feel somewhat uncomfortable making unsigned contributions to your pages for the fear that my thoughts might be thought of as your thoughts. May I ask why you feel that introducing the concept of the page originator in such prominent manner is important?
I sign it in such a prominent manner because I have Contributed a new topic to the wiki. It is not my intent to claim authorship or ownership of the page by so doing, just to stake the claim to its origination. As to comfort, You do not seem uncomfortable in making contributions, deleting contributions, moving contributions, and you shouldn't, after all this is the first wiki and the rules say you can do what you want. I only maintain that a person who Originates a page and has expended time and effort in doing so, should feel free to sign a page as originator. I further maintain that subsequent edits, modifications, comments, etc. should be made below this original text. This is just one person's opinion however.
Perhaps refactoring an "originated by" statement into a simple attribution (at the end of the text, name preceded by double-hyphen) will be a middle-ground that all parties can be happy with.
I would have no problem with that, it seems like a happy compromise. I wouldn't actually recommend it, since it doesn't follow Egoless Wiki, but hey, we all have egos, so... -- Doug Merritt
Wouldn't a "Pages I Originated" list on your Wiki Home Page confer the same advantages as signing those pages? People could find your role as originator through a Back Link search, and search engines would still associate your name with the page. It also confines ego to Wiki Home Pages.
In regards to the above statement, sometimes as a user I would like to locate a primary contributor, not necessarily the original one, so I can post some followup queries, or attempt to engage the person(s) in further discussions. This will of course work only if the person is still hanging around in the wiki, and have interest in the subject matter
I also think the Egoless Wiki concept need to be balanced, on occasion, with other concerns as well. An example being if a valued contributor is stopped from creating exceptional material on this wiki due to certain habits, I for one would bend the rule a little to achieve the greater good --David Liu
In practice many pages on this wiki start out with signatures and then those signatures are refactored away as time goes on and the page grows. Meaning that there's usually a window of time in which it's fairly obvious who originated a page, and easy to track them down for one-on-one conversation.
But there should be no need to worry about the Egoless Wiki turning off contributors. Certainly there will always be people who only want to contribute when they know they'll get some tiny monument to their intellect as a result. But there are many others who would rather just have a conversation. The proof is in the pudding: Many of the finest pages here are the older ones where it's impossible to tell who started them. -- francis
Would someone explain to me what constitute a New Topic here? Is it any new page, or entirely new subject area, or ....?
Forgive the sarcasm, I am saying the following in a quite light tone of voice: Yes. Far too much refactoring happens on Wiki. We most assuredly need another roadblock to it.
See original on c2.com 