4,193
edits
Electowiki talk:The caucus: Difference between revisions
→Editing velocity: - new topic: can we ensure quality of prose, given the quantity of prose?
(→Editing velocity: - new topic: can we ensure quality of prose, given the quantity of prose?) |
|||
Line 285:
::: [[User:Psephomancy]], I think my suggestion on this point would be that most articles should go into the deepest sub-categories possible, but for a minority of them (the most prominent ones, such as FPTP), they should be allowed to go into multiple categories where users might like to see them. Something like Schulze is probably the most prominent Condorcet method, for example, so it's reasonable to put it in both (Category:Smith-efficient Condorcet methods) and (Category:Condorcet methods) to maximize the odds that people to whom the information is pertinent will see it. [[User:BetterVotingAdvocacy|BetterVotingAdvocacy]] ([[User talk:BetterVotingAdvocacy|talk]]) 06:47, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
== Editing velocity ==
Bill Gates reportedly said "''Measuring software productivity by lines of code is like measuring progress on an airplane by how much it weighs''". Code is frequently made more efficient and useful by removing lines of code, rather than adding them. I believe that bit of wisdom also applies to prose and articles on this wiki. Do we have the review capacity to deal with the current velocity of contribution to this site? I'm not sure. Having witnessed rapid expansion periods on Electowiki (where I was more tolerant of low quality prose) has left a difficult cleanup task. How can we ensure that all of us (myself included) can be proud of the quality of Electowiki when (at the end of the year) we look at what we've achieved in 2020? -- [[User:RobLa|RobLa]] ([[User talk:RobLa|talk]]) 23:29, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
| |||