Talk:Research Wiki - Revision history

Jukeboksi: This requires for the "unified" login scheme to be reworked to adjust to the new situation where there is no one-to-one connection with Research Wikis and Publish Wikis

2004-05-03T11:25:48Z

This requires for the "unified" login scheme to be reworked to adjust to the new situation where there is no one-to-one connection with Research Wikis and Publish Wikis

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:25, 3 May 2004
Line 6:		Line 6:

	There will be only one research wiki and lots of [[Publish Wiki]]s in many languages some more coherent with current research and some less.		There will be only one research wiki and lots of [[Publish Wiki]]s in many languages some more coherent with current research and some less.

			This requires for the "unified" login scheme to be reworked to adjust to the new situation where there is no one-to-one connection with [[Research Wiki]]s and [[Publish Wiki]]s

Jukeboksi: There will be only one research wiki and lots of Publish Wikis in many languages some more coherent with current research and some less.

2004-05-02T22:22:00Z

There will be only one research wiki and lots of Publish Wikis in many languages some more coherent with current research and some less.

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:22, 2 May 2004
Line 4:		Line 4:

	:How about [[Code Wiki]] or [[Develop Wiki]] (this one you're reading), [[Research Wiki]] (the one full of articles of various levels of merit), and [[Publish Wiki]] (the one that actually goes to print, and has the status of "published material" either ads or editorial? Maybe [[Signal Wiki]] is just a bit too abstract, especially if the [[Consumerium buying signal]] is going to be more commonly "published" as a book or database downloaded into some [[worn device]] or [[checkout counter]]?		:How about [[Code Wiki]] or [[Develop Wiki]] (this one you're reading), [[Research Wiki]] (the one full of articles of various levels of merit), and [[Publish Wiki]] (the one that actually goes to print, and has the status of "published material" either ads or editorial? Maybe [[Signal Wiki]] is just a bit too abstract, especially if the [[Consumerium buying signal]] is going to be more commonly "published" as a book or database downloaded into some [[worn device]] or [[checkout counter]]?

			There will be only one research wiki and lots of [[Publish Wiki]]s in many languages some more coherent with current research and some less.

142.177.106.10: Develop, Research, Publish?

2004-03-21T21:42:07Z

Develop, Research, Publish?

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:42, 21 March 2004
Line 2:		Line 2:

	:Um, though, aren't we trying to encourage stuff to be refined to the point where SOMEONE considers it "research"? [[Wikipedia]] articles are usually not good enough to be in an encyclopedia, but it's at least possible to say "that's not good enough to be here". One could ditch things from a [[Research Wiki]] for "not being researched", it's damn hard to ditch things that are just "noise". That name properly belongs to [[Development Wiki]] where everything is truly noise until it becomes code.		:Um, though, aren't we trying to encourage stuff to be refined to the point where SOMEONE considers it "research"? [[Wikipedia]] articles are usually not good enough to be in an encyclopedia, but it's at least possible to say "that's not good enough to be here". One could ditch things from a [[Research Wiki]] for "not being researched", it's damn hard to ditch things that are just "noise". That name properly belongs to [[Development Wiki]] where everything is truly noise until it becomes code.

			:How about [[Code Wiki]] or [[Develop Wiki]] (this one you're reading), [[Research Wiki]] (the one full of articles of various levels of merit), and [[Publish Wiki]] (the one that actually goes to print, and has the status of "published material" either ads or editorial? Maybe [[Signal Wiki]] is just a bit too abstract, especially if the [[Consumerium buying signal]] is going to be more commonly "published" as a book or database downloaded into some [[worn device]] or [[checkout counter]]?

142.177.106.10: no, don't do that - it's got to be "research" to SOMEONE's standards to get into Research Wiki; Also everything has "noise in it", so the name is not specific enough

2004-03-21T21:27:02Z

no, don't do that - it's got to be "research" to SOMEONE's standards to get into Research Wiki; Also everything has "noise in it", so the name is not specific enough

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:27, 21 March 2004
Line 1:		Line 1:
	I'm going for [[Noise Wiki]] since '''who is eligible for the status of researcher''' will likely be [[faction]]ally contested, thus this is a bad name for a wiki		I'm going for [[Noise Wiki]] since '''who is eligible for the status of researcher''' will likely be [[faction]]ally contested, thus this is a bad name for a wiki

			:Um, though, aren't we trying to encourage stuff to be refined to the point where SOMEONE considers it "research"? [[Wikipedia]] articles are usually not good enough to be in an encyclopedia, but it's at least possible to say "that's not good enough to be here". One could ditch things from a [[Research Wiki]] for "not being researched", it's damn hard to ditch things that are just "noise". That name properly belongs to [[Development Wiki]] where everything is truly noise until it becomes code.

Jukeboksi: ...thus this is not a good name for a wiki

2004-03-21T15:21:19Z

...thus this is not a good name for a wiki

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:21, 21 March 2004
Line 1:		Line 1:
	I'm going for [[Noise Wiki]] since '''who is eligible for the status of researcher''' will likely be [[faction]]ally contested		I'm going for [[Noise Wiki]] since '''who is eligible for the status of researcher''' will likely be [[faction]]ally contested, thus this is a bad name for a wiki

Jukeboksi at 15:20, 21 March 2004

2004-03-21T15:20:50Z

New page

I'm going for [[Noise Wiki]] since '''who is eligible for the status of researcher''' will likely be [[faction]]ally contested