The last substantial edit of this page was made on 20 September 2004 by Angela, in my opinion. It is a historical interest how the official website was launched and I don't therefore strongly support my proposal but how about renewal this page and turn it to basic instruction how to edit/translate the Foundation website?
My proposal is to provide information on this page, including:
- What is informed and will be (Already mentioned, a bit outdated though)
- Where the editors are working (Drafting on meta and then update the website)
- Relevant links, platform for translators etc.
- What is expected for the foundation wiki editors (knowledgeable about the Foundation; subscribing foundation-l etc.)
Comcom (mainly Promotion subcommittee) is now responsible to maintain this website, but it is apparent Comcom people cannot do this mission only by themselves. Without helps from many people diver both in languages and in interests, we cannot keep the website helpful for giving information about the Foundation.
The importance of the official website and communications on that site seems not to be arguable for me, since I have met no one who claimed it isn't. On the other site, the website is not said to be well maintained in all parts. And I found some editors who are willing to help are clueless what they actually can do. See Request for an account on the Foundation wiki; then you will find many irrelevant requests. We need, so I think, a page to tell how the website is being maintained, what is expected for its editors. Shortly, I would like to make this page more helpful and informative for the Wikimedia website editors both actual and potential. A page we can say "you are willing to support the website? Then go Wikimedia website and begin what you can do!".
How do you think? --Aphaia 08:54, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
moved from Request for an account on the Foundation wiki. guillom was asking if sysop status would be helpful to use the Import feature between meta and the foundation wiki.
Hello, sorry for late reply. I would like you to remind 1) as meta sysop (not depending if you have an account there) you can import its pages needed to update here to meta and 2) even with import between websites, we still need to hack ... due to different naming convention on both sites (this problem is bigger at the case import from foundation to meta). Do you have ideas to resolve that?
Just after testing the new feature, I admit being a sysop is very helpful but it doesn't mean that now only sysop can upload materials there. I would like to have some people who will care for two site consistency using import, but granting a sysop flag may not be within my responsibility, so if you would like to be a sysop immidiately, I feel a need to leave your request unwillingly. --Aphaia 01:26, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
- 1) I know, I was more thinking about the other way :)
- 2) About the different naming conventions, I think you should:
- import the page on meta from the Foundation wiki (you can import only the last revision, you don't need the whole history on meta)
- rename it to follow meta conventions
- let people translate it
- rename it to follow Foundationwiki conventions
- import the page on the Foundationwiki from meta
- I know it's a little complicated, but if you want to use the Special:Import feature, it always is. What were your reasons for using the Import feature?
- If i remember correctly, the histories are fused when you import a page with the same name as an existing page. Thus you should have all editors in the history (those who have edited the page on the Foundation wiki, and those on meta). On the other hand, whatever you do, you will have plenty of red links for usernames in the history, since many people don't have an account on the foundation wiki (but I really don't think it's a problem). guillom 08:40, 24 October 2006 (UTC)