Frabby
02/20/12 04:14 PM
87.164.194.59
|
I've tried to raise this point on Template talk:Update needed but nobody commented, so I'll try again here.
I *hate* the "Update Needed" template. Lots and lots. It isn't just pointless, I regard it as positively unhelpful, destructive and bordering on spam. Every time somebody posts this template I want to butt my head against something, or scream at someone.
In some cases, it is apparently used because someone *thinks* an upcoming product (or a product that's still under moratorium) may contain new, relevant information; in countless cases it simply isn't the case.
In other cases, whoever includes the tag is apparently too lazy to include the information in the article himself... and instead tells the community to do it! How is that a meaningful contribution to BTW?
|
Mbear
02/21/12 08:58 AM
75.42.211.31
|
Though I agree every Sarna page has an implied Update Needed tag at the top, I disagree with removing it. I find it useful to know what pages someone has actually seen and cared enough about to flag with an Update Needed tag. The tag helps me prioritize what updates I'll make during my available time.
|
Mbear
02/21/12 09:38 AM
75.42.211.31
|
Another possibility is that some contributors may not want to contribute to the page if they feel their language skills aren't great. Look at how much flak Neuling has taken for misspelled words. If my abilities with a non-native language were constantly criticized, I'd be hesitant to try adding anything beyond the basics.
|
Revanche
02/21/12 10:52 PM
96.19.133.164
|
I understand how you think the tag is worthless. You just see it being added and added and rarely removed.
However, I'm much more supportive of the tag, if for the reason that it might inspire a reader to throw his hat in the ring to meet a need he feels he can meet...when what the article needs is spelled right out in front of him. For me, it's all about bringing in the new editors.
But....I think we'll get a lot more open comments from other interested parties if we conduct this on the wiki itself. Pasting it in the chatterweb might bring in the breadth of opinions.Maybe it'll improve the usage of the tag?
|
Mbear
02/24/12 05:26 PM
75.42.211.31
|
As I sit here, trying to update pages with a single source listed in the Update Needed tag, I'm beginning to see Frabby's point. Updating four pages and expecting to see the Sources needing Updates page count drop and instead seeing it increase is really annoying. (Not saying we should get rid of it, but I wish people would do more than just add the update needed tag.)
|
Revanche
02/25/12 01:43 PM
96.19.133.164
|
I *really* urge either of you to engage the community on this. At the least, it'll highlight the perceived problem from those most likely adding excessive tags. At best, a policy on its use will develop.
|
Mbear
02/27/12 09:59 AM
75.42.211.31
|
Quote:
I *really* urge either of you to engage the community on this. At the least, it'll highlight the perceived problem from those most likely adding excessive tags. At best, a policy on its use will develop.
OK. How do I do that? (I've never done it before.)
|
Revanche
02/27/12 10:39 AM
138.162.8.58
|
What I'd do is three-fold:
- follow up to Frabby's post on the template's Discussion page, either as a response or your intent to start a dialogue regarding the problem
- Add the link to the front page's Chatterweb section (with a descriptive but short statement)
- seek out the heaviest users on their Talk pages and invite them to take part in the discussion
Rarely, if the issue is big enough, I post about it in one of the two News sections, to increase visability.
|
