This is the Discussion Page of Talk Page. This page is in Thread Mode. Please sign your opinions. Title of page is correct.
I suggest to start using this concept here with Home Page. Like '<Real Name>Talk' and include this link rather on top of the users homepage. Sure there should be a reverse link on the Talk Page too! Because some people who are around here since quite some time, got very lengthy homepages. There is need for some structure. -- Manorainjan Holzapfel 10/2014
This wiki started long before Media Wiki 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 Home Page 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 Home Page 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:
Ward Cunningham You can always reference:
The pages you want to talk about as a list on your Home Page.
A blog you maintain with articles or entries talking about the topic of the pages of interest.
Home Pages tend to be much more freeform. -- Dave Voorhis
The Talk Page concept is not about form. It is about structure. It is not about what and how to write on a Home Page. 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 Home Page. The Talk Page concept is more of an invitation to speak up. It anybody offers a Talk Page, 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 Home Page. --Manorainjan Holzapfel
I'm not convinced that we need to proliferate bureaucracies. -- Dave Voorhis
I'm sorry if You experience a singular suggestion as a of a 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? --Manorainjan Holzapfel
Who said anything about " of a " 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 Re Factored term exaggeration^3. --Manorainjan Holzapfel
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 Wards Wiki I could clearly see that this really old wiki has hardly increased in bureaucracy at all. Like the consequent upholding of the Ip Editing Only 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 Super User Ward Cunningham 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 Talk Page concept relieves you from scrolling down 'endlessly' on Home Pages 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 Talk Page 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. --Manorainjan Holzapfel
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 Wiki Reader, 10 as a Wiki Author), someone new attains Wiki Rapture and becomes an eager Wiki Puppy, 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 Software Engineering (Design Patterns and Extreme Programming) along with inspiring the most significant recent movement in knowledge capture and dissemination (Wiki Pedia), we are careful to guard its unique character, as flawed as it may be. -- DV
Discussion works well under "xDiscussion" pages. -- Dave Voorhis
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 Discussion Page Discussion if one likes. The Talk Page concept does not touch the Discussion Page 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 Document Mode on Talk Page as a related concept, as similar but different. I initially called the Talk Page concept complementing the Discussion Page concept. that means, that I do not intent to suggest to expand the Discussion Page concept for the use of Home Page like Manorainjan HolzapfelDiscussion, unless the community thinks me to be a controversial person one should discuss about ;-) --Manorainjan Holzapfel
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 Wiki On Wiki stuff like this, anyway, and prefer to focus on content, discussion, and debate about Software Development and related matters. -- DV
No need to be afraid ;-) The distinction is very simple: Talk Page is to free Home Page from getting cluttered with input of possibly only temporary use or value like questions which got answered. And Discussion Page does just that for relate pages in Document Mode whereas Mixed Mode Pages 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. --Manorainjan Holzapfel
"Talk" addressed to a user has worked just fine for almost 20 years by writing it on a user's Home Page. Change should be driven by need, not by whim. Part of the Wabi Sabi beauty of Wards Wiki is its essential simplicity and informality. Let's not ruin it. -- Dave Voorhis
Thank You for playing the Advocatus Diaboli 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 Home Pages which grew over time. Therefore to add a Talk Page to a Home Page 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 Home Page. --Manorainjan Holzapfel
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 Software Engineering (Design Patterns and Extreme Programming) and inspired the most significant recent movement in knowledge capture and dissemination (Wiki Pedia). 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. -- Dave Voorhis
This wiki community has experienced a lot of trauma and those who are still here are careful and thoughtful. -- John Fletcher
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. -- Dave Voorhis
Any more comments?
Perhaps, let's take some time and consider what is here.
See original on c2.com 