AnnaSalamon comments on What isn't the wiki for? - Less Wrong

8 Post author: ciphergoth 07 April 2009 10:36AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (25)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: AnnaSalamon 08 April 2009 02:32:45AM *  0 points [-]

I don't mind using short titles; your point about easy searching and linking makes sense I think.

I don't want the thing I was envisioning to be called a "study guide", though. Because I want the individual "study guide"-like pages to serve not only as a guide for newcomers but also as a summary of what we've produced so far as a community, and where the gaps in our analysis are. Your other suggestions don't really unite the purposes either. We could just do e.g. "Heuristics and biases, conversational style", but that doesn't indicate purpose the way "study guide" does and I don't much like the way it sounds. Maybe it would help if I understood what purpose or use-case you have in mind for the NPOV style articles, as a contrast class.

Comment author: badger 08 April 2009 02:51:29AM 0 points [-]

Yeah, I understand that. Is there a term you think would be fitting? "guide" is the best term I can think of. It also wouldn't have to be just two types of articles. We could have "topic", "topic study guide", and "topic open questions" or something similar. I think "open questions" still sounds a little awkward, but that's just quibbling if we can't think of anything better.