Difference between revisions of "Talk:Code of conduct"

From ArchWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Undiscussed changes: re)
(List of proposed amendments: re)
Line 48: Line 48:
  
 
-- [[User:Kewl|Kewl]] ([[User talk:Kewl|talk]]) 09:46, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
 
-- [[User:Kewl|Kewl]] ([[User talk:Kewl|talk]]) 09:46, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
 +
 +
:Thank you for doing this review. If these are the changes you've made, they should be applied again now - please check that. -- [[User:Lahwaacz|Lahwaacz]] ([[User talk:Lahwaacz|talk]]) 10:00, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Revision as of 10:00, 11 November 2018

Maybe make the section "correct" more clear

I'd like to see a clearer title for that section and add a little more on how users should effectively ask for help and report issues. ie they need to state the whole problem and what they have already tried as well as logs and error messages. how to report and ask smart questions are both great links.

Maybe "don't ask to ask" could also be added, as in, "can someone help me? My Arch install is broken!" type of messages.Meskarune (talk) 01:15, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

I don't think the ask smart questions is such a great link to give people. It's good for understanding our culture but it's not good for smooth relations with people asking questions. However, I do think how to report should be added; it's concise and to the point without risking antagonizing the person with a question. MacGyver (talk) 14:00, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
Yeah, maybe https://askubuntu.com/help/how-to-ask would be a better link to use. It is shorter, nicer and clearer than ESR's doc. Meskarune (talk) 03:26, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
I'm not sure I agree re. ESR. It is an exemplary exposition of the critical thinking required to effectively engage with a technical audience. I have no issues with people finding it difficult; this isn't a distro like Ubuntu where popularity is a consideration. Our focus is on contribution, so a degree of proficiency, or the desire to attain proficiency, is a prerequisite. Reading Smart Questions is a pretty good gauge of that willingness. Jasonwryan (talk) 06:58, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Change category

To Category:Arch community. --Larivact (talk) 18:22, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

[1] -- Alad (talk) 22:27, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Common sense

I don't understand the first point, what would you think of "If you choose to use the Archlinux distribution, you are welcome and you are encouraged to adhere to Arch Linux principles." ? -- Kewl (talk) 19:26, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

My preference is for "embrace" - which has a positive connotation, as opposed to "adhere" which is slightly less so. Jasonwryan (talk) 23:30, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Undiscussed changes

I was appalled that once again, maintainers made unwarranted changes to cosysop pages they have no place in editing. Neither User:Kewl or User:Svito are staff (in particular, neither forum or IRC mods), yet made the following changes in meaning:

  • advice on computer product recommendations to advice on computer products in general. Anything classifies as a general computer product, including Arch itself. Hence the added recommendations.
  • actively discouraged was changed to strongly discouraged. "strongly" is vague, actively implies administrative action, which is indeed the action taken on spam.

The page has been reverted to [2]. In line with User_talk:Larivact#DeveloperWiki, I've revoked the cosysop right for both maintainers during the period of 2 weeks from now on. Should any of you pull this kind of stuff again, it won't be pretty. -- Alad (talk) 22:03, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Thanks? My changes were only inserting spaces that do not change how page is rendered at all and using available wikilinks inside sections instead of using section headers. I even started my own draft page so if I would plan to any actual string changes I would make it to draft not real thing. -- Svito (talk) 22:17, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
Sorry, with the sudden 15 changes to the article I didn't inspect the authors closely enough. Reverted your cosysop removal. -- Alad (talk) 22:21, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
Since you have only 2 objections, I will revert again and fix those two separately. -- Lahwaacz (talk) 09:51, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
I unintentionally changed the meaning and understand the demotion, this will not happen again. Apologies to User:Svito for involving you, unintentionally as well, into this. -- Kewl (talk) 23:02, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

List of proposed amendments

I am submitting below some minor points I have noticed going through the page for review by User:Alad or other staff:

  • Change 50Kb into 50 kB: the internationally recommended unit symbol for the kilobyte is kB https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kilobyte#cite_note-IEC80000-1
  • If the staff in any of the fora feel that into considers that: staff is a collective noun and singular is generally used in US English. It involves the judgement of the staff rather than the feeling. Using plural can be appropriate in some circumstances (one can find debates around this topic in forums).
  • This type of content is much better suited to a blog or other personal web space and are considered into is
  • True freedom in this community is to cultivate benevolence toward others and harmonize our attitude with the Arch Way by bringing only benefit to our peers into true freedom in this community is to cultivate benevolence toward others and to harmonize our attitude with the Arch Way by bringing only benefits to our peers

-- Kewl (talk) 09:46, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for doing this review. If these are the changes you've made, they should be applied again now - please check that. -- Lahwaacz (talk) 10:00, 11 November 2018 (UTC)