On Wed, Mar 07, 2007 at 11:03:46AM +0100, A.J.Mechelynck wrote: > John Beckett wrote: > >Brian McKee wrote: > >>One of the first things I was thinking about mirrors the above comments. > >>http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Talk:Learning_the_vi_editor/Vim/ > >>TipsSandbox/Tip_1:_the_super_star has a bunch of "thanks for the > >>great tip!" type comments with more useage info interspersed. I > >>think those 'great tip' comments go to a separate page, while the > >>'use # or % instead' kind of comments need to be edited into the > >>actual tip itself. > > > >But why keep the 'great tip' comments? > > > >The friendly atmosphere of the current Vim Tips web site is rather > >nice, but why put all the work of moving it to a wiki unless you > >make the tips more helpful? > > > >Unhelpful tips and unhelpful comments should be omitted. > >
I think this would imply a lot of manual labor and would render the porting scripts obsolete. And why is everyone so eager to delete the "great-tip!!! kthnxbye!!" comments?! They raise moral, encourage further contribution and counts as positive feedback (specially for first time tip-posters). Plus they're harmless. > >John > > > > > > Moving the tip body to a wiki page and the comments to its talk page can > (IIUC) be automated. /Then/ the tip author (or maintainer, etc.) can > archive the talk page, remove empty comments (of the "great tip" kind), > refactor useful comments into the tip body, etc. > I couldn't agree more. All comments should be placed in the talk page (it's just natural) and changes generated by the discussions should be added (and optionally thanked) on the front page. [--snip--]
