Help:Using Discussion Pages Effectively
From StcWiki
Contents |
[edit] Overview
A few points aimed at optimizing communication in the discussion pages so it's easier to follow along with things.
[edit] Respect Page Size Limits (in Kilobytes)
When any page in MediaWiki reaches 32Kb in size, MediaWiki will throw you a warning recommending you break content down into more pages to reduce the page load. You can ignore this warning and keep piling up content in a page, but you essentially play with MediaWiki's temper at that point and if data is lost, there's no getting it back without rolling the page back, but either way you lose the content that surpassed the 32Kb recommended limit.
We do not want to break the discussion pages into multiple pages, that's making it more complicated than necessary to follow dialog. Hence, when a discussion page hits its size limit (which you don't have to worry about until MediaWiki makes it clear with a warning message), then it's time to permanently delete discussions that have since died-out or reflect decision making that has since been acted upon. It's pointless to keep around both types of the aforementioned discussion (both with respect to page size and with page usability). Delete the dated content!
[edit] Keep Most Recent Topics at Top of Page
It will be much easier to follow dialog if new discussion topics are added to the top of the page. This naturally permits older, dying dialog to sink to the bottom and therefore not get in the way of active discussion.
This does not mean top-posting every one of your individual comments, but rather only the second-level heading that defines the topic under which your are participating in discussion with.
It should make it much easier to make sense of it the date the topic is created is added to the second-level header in parentheses, for example.
[edit] Use Your Signature
It's easy to get lazy and not use the signature, or to use it but not use it effectively as could be.
[edit] Signatures for quick identification of discussion participants
Signatures provide immediate identification of the person making a comment. Although it's possible to find out who made a comment regardless by using the special:Recentchanges page, it's still bad form to be acting anonymous, especially in a wiki you are a private member of. So, use your signatures. Signatures are created in two ways, either by typing four tildes in a row (~~~~), or by clicking the signature button at the top of the text editor.
[edit] Signatures for clearly distinguishing dialog between discussion participants
Often times when people do use their signature, they add it at the end of their comment. The problem with this mode is that people typically look at the beginning of comments to find where dialog alternates between people; if there's no visual cue, it's more difficult to follow discussion or find your place if you are in fact taking part in discussion. By adding the signature at the very beginning of the comment, you create a quick eye-grap to the author, as well as a clear, distinguishable break between the comments of different discussion participants.
[edit] Keep Different Questions/Concepts as Separate Paragraphs
If you have different points of discussion or questions you want to make, don't bunch then all in one big paragraph; it makes it more difficult for responders to reply coherently. Separate each question/concept out into it's own paragraph, and use your signature at the beginning of each one. By doing this you make it clear and easy for others to to respond to each idea separately. This is also beneficial as maybe only one point is responded to which would be easier to do. Contrarily a single paragraph with too many questions ends up losing replies to those questions.
[edit] Indent Your Replies Successively for Each Level of Reply
Think of the dialog on a given topic like a threaded discussion. In old bulletin board systems, it was typical to see the main topic having no indent at all. An immediate reply to the main topic would have a single indent, often achieved with a first-level list (like a bullet). A reply to a reply would have a second-level list bullet, and so forth. Because of the easy syntax for creating bulleted lists, it's easy to mimic this effective organization of dialog in a discussion page. Here's an example:
--Destry 13:53, 28 July 2007 (UTC) This is my initial question or point of concern.
- [User X sig]: Here is a person's reply to my original question.
- [User Y sig]: Here is another person's reply to my original question.
- [User X sig]: Here is the first replier (User X) responding to the reply of the second replier (User Y).
- --Destry 13:53, 28 July 2007 (UTC): Here is my reply to User X's reply to User Y.
- [User X sig]: Here is the first replier (User X) responding to the reply of the second replier (User Y).
- Destry 13:53, 28 July 2007 (UTC): Here is my response to the first two replies to my initial beef.
Normally it shouldn't get so complicated, but the point is it can be organized quite well with a little attention to following dialog in an organized way, using little more than wiki bullets.
