Posted: Fri Jul 27, 2012 10:57 am Post subject: Outdated NeoWiki content
I keep bumping into NeoWiki pages that have outdated content. While much of the outdated content causes no harm, there is lots of content that mentions donations, community support, and other things that we have not done in years.
While I understand the content from earlier times when the "supported only by donations and volunteers" was our model, that model failed long ago and keeping that particular content there raises false expectations of what we do.
The problem is that neither Ed nor I have the time to go through and rewrite all of the outdated NeoWiki content that contradicts what is on our main website and I don't think our moderators have the time either.
So, I would like to propose that I put something like the following in a big highlighted banner at the top of the NeoWiki near the Google search field so it is clear that the much of the NeoWiki site may not be up-to-date:
Quote:
This site is maintained by a small number of volunteers so some pages in this Wiki site may contain old or incorrect information. For the most current information, please go to the main NeoOffice website.
Posted: Fri Jul 27, 2012 11:27 am Post subject: Re: Outdated NeoWiki content
pluby wrote:
So, I would like to propose that I put something like the following in a big highlighted banner at the top of each NeoWiki page so it is clear that the much of the NeoWiki site may not be up-to-date:
I'm not wild about that idea because it then implies that none of the info on the NeoWiki is reliable, but I don't have any better ideas that don't involve spending the time to find the problematic pages (I did take a look after the last time I saw Fran fixing things, but I see there are still more to be found.)
Hmm, if the concern is specifically/largely the outdated donations/free support parts, maybe if we tweaked the last sentence of the message text to say something like
Quote:
For the most current information about obtaining NeoOffice, supporting [or contributing to] the NeoOffice project, and getting help with NeoOffice, please go to the main NeoOffice website.
That would limit the scope of what we're saying is outdated in the wiki to the harmful outdated things, without also implying all of the tips and tutorials are outdated and have more current versions on the NeoOffice website. Does that sound OK?
Smokey _________________ "[...] whether the duck drinks hot chocolate or coffee is irrelevant." -- ovvldc and sardisson in the NeoWiki
Posted: Fri Jul 27, 2012 11:48 am Post subject: Re: Outdated NeoWiki content
sardisson wrote:
I'm not wild about that idea because it then implies that none of the info on the NeoWiki is reliable, but I don't have any better ideas that don't involve spending the time to find the problematic pages (I did take a look after the last time I saw Fran fixing things, but I see there are still more to be found.)
Hmm, if the concern is specifically/largely the outdated donations/free support parts, maybe if we tweaked the last sentence of the message text to say something like
Quote:
For the most current information about obtaining NeoOffice, supporting [or contributing to] the NeoOffice project, and getting help with NeoOffice, please go to the main NeoOffice website.
I think you may be underestimating how many NeoWiki articles are way out-of-date. In my brief click through the German articles, I could spot data that is way out-of-date as well as dead links without even reading the article.
From my standpoint, a large number of articles in the NeoWiki have been abandoned. AFAICT only you, I, and Fran are maintaining any articles and that is limited to mostly articles that change with each new NeoOffice version so your proposed wording feels like it is understating the current state of the NeoWiki.
I think you may be underestimating how many NeoWiki articles are way out-of-date. In my brief click through the German articles, I could spot data that is way out-of-date as well as dead links without even reading the article.
I thought we had already tagged most of the main articles (things linked from the main page of the German wiki) as being outdated, or pointed directly to English versions--and clicking back through, that does seem largely to be the case.
Given that the German version of the wiki was abandoned the longest ago (ca. NeoOffice 2.0), I think we should de-link it from the main page of the English version (and probably should have done that years ago ), and with only ~24 pages, it should be easy enough for me to slap the existing "outdated" template on the rest of the pages, regardless of the state of their content.
Also, given that the other language versions aren't currently maintained, either, I think it's reasonable to de-link their main pages from the main page of the English version. Dutch is also small enough to make it easy to slap the "outdated" template on every single page, regardless of its status, but French, Spanish, and Italian have lots of pages translated (mostly hints/tutorial pages, which are less likely to be out-of-date than pages dealing with more general issues), so slapping the "outdated" template on every page isn't as good a solution. But dropping them from the Main Page of the English version reduces their visibility significantly, regardless of what else we do.
pluby wrote:
From my standpoint, a large number of articles in the NeoWiki have been abandoned. AFAICT only you, I, and Fran are maintaining any articles and that is limited to mostly articles that change with each new NeoOffice version so your proposed wording feels like it is understating the current state of the NeoWiki.
I guess my view is different, that the bulk of the content of the NeoWiki is tips/hints articles that aren't specific to one version of NeoOffice or to a year/era of NeoOffice development, and those articles aren't "abandoned" or "outdated" just because no one's tweaked any wording in them recently (I frequently refer to several of Jacqueline's tutorials for doing things in Calc, and they still work just like they did 5+ years ago). And these pages don't have "current" equivalents on the main NeoOffice website, so it's potentially confusing to people to suggest that there are updated versions of their content on the main website…
All of that having been said, though, given that only you, Fran, and I are currently maintaining any articles, and none of us has the time to deal with the older content in a timely and comprehensive fashion right now, and no-one else has suggested anything better, either, I'm OK with using whatever wording you feel best to solve the problem right now (and if at some point in the future I've/we've had time to more completely attack the problem of outdated content in the wiki, we can revisit the wording then).
Smokey _________________ "[...] whether the duck drinks hot chocolate or coffee is irrelevant." -- ovvldc and sardisson in the NeoWiki
All of that having been said, though, given that only you, Fran, and I are currently maintaining any articles, and none of us has the time to deal with the older content in a timely and comprehensive fashion right now, and no-one else has suggested anything better, either, I'm OK with using whatever wording you feel best to solve the problem right now (and if at some point in the future I've/we've had time to more completely attack the problem of outdated content in the wiki, we can revisit the wording then).
I could also just copy and tweak the wording in the "fixme" template. I cannot find an article with that template, but IIRC the text was pretty well written and clear.
I don't think we need to emphasize which site is better or more current. My main concern is that Google search seems to favor the NeoWiki articles so I think that we just need to warn people that the content *may* be out-of-date so, if the NeoWiki content doesn't work or doesn't make sense, check the main website and/or search the Trinity forums.
I could also just copy and tweak the wording in the "fixme" template. I cannot find an article with that template, but IIRC the text was pretty well written and clear.
For the most part, we'd done a good job of fixing all of the English articles that had been tagged "fixme", at least ones for which the tag had been added for content reasons (rather than style reasons), so English "fixme" pages are somewhat harder to find
This is the template; it shows up like this in a real article (one of Jacqueline's translations that neither Lorinda nor I ever finished copyediting). That text is better, but is not exactly what we want, either (but see below).
pluby wrote:
I don't think we need to emphasize which site is better or more current. My main concern is that Google search seems to favor the NeoWiki articles so I think that we just need to warn people that the content *may* be out-of-date
Ah, OK. That's perfectly reasonable. I wasn't aware that Google was finding NeoWiki sources first; the last time I had done some test searches (quite a while ago now), Trinity was typically the top hit, but that's obviously changed.
pluby wrote:
so I think that we just need to warn people that the content *may* be out-of-date so, if the NeoWiki content doesn't work or doesn't make sense, check the main website and/or search the Trinity forums.
This language sounds better to me than the first suggestion (even though it's not structured like an intended warning yet) and, like you said earlier, sounds closer to the "fixme" template language.
So taking a stab at adapting that language:
Quote:
The NeoWiki site is maintained by a small number of volunteers, so some pages may contain old or incorrect information. If the information doesn't work or doesn't make sense, please visit to the main NeoOffice website or search the Trinity forums for the most current information.
How's that sound?
---
Also, if you or Fran (or anyone else) have a "list" of English NeoWiki articles (or come across any in the future) that are the most problematic or in need of a rewrite/major update, let me know and I'll bump them up on my list of things to tackle.
Smokey _________________ "[...] whether the duck drinks hot chocolate or coffee is irrelevant." -- ovvldc and sardisson in the NeoWiki
Posted: Sat Jul 28, 2012 10:57 pm Post subject: Re: Outdated NeoWiki content
sardisson wrote:
So taking a stab at adapting that language:
Quote:
The NeoWiki site is maintained by a small number of volunteers, so some pages may contain old or incorrect information. If the information doesn't work or doesn't make sense, please visit to the main NeoOffice website or search the Trinity forums for the most current information.
How's that sound?
That sounds good to me. When my list of open bugs is clear and I have some time, I will work on adding this to the NeoWiki "skins" code.
Joined: Jun 20, 2006 Posts: 2051 Location: Midwest, USA
Posted: Wed Aug 01, 2012 7:59 am Post subject:
I think Patrick's solution is the best one for the moment. I regret that I haven't spent time on the wiki in several years. When Jacqueline died, I found I no longer had the heart for it--a grief reaction it took me some time to recognize. By then the priorities for my free time had changed, and I never re-shifted them to include the wiki again. Now my work hours have expanded considerably, and I simply don't have the time I once did. So my apologies for "bailing" on you.
FYI. I got through my backlog of NeoOffice 3.3 Beta 2 bugs so I finally had some time to update the NeoWiki skins.
I tweaked the wording slightly to the following since the warning will be on every NeoWiki article:
Quote:
Warning: This web page is maintained by a small number of volunteers, so this page may contain old or incorrect information. If the information on this web page does not work or does not make sense, please visit the main NeoOffice website or the NeoOffice online support forums for the most current information.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You cannot download files in this forum
(I did take a look after the last time I saw Fran fixing things, but I see there are still more to be found.)
But dropping them from the Main Page of the English version reduces their visibility significantly, regardless of what else we do.
