Making CZ look professional

[Brian P Long]

As I see it, one main reasons for getting the Charter written and in place is the amount of attention it gets in many of our policy documents (most notably the Statement of Fundamental Policies). Publicly saying we're going to do something and then not getting around to it makes us look amateurish, I think, and strongly suggests that CZ can't keep it together enough to do some very basic planning and implementation.

One of the ways we might seem less amateurish, I think, is if we did a better job of designating which initiatives are still ongoing and which have quietly stopped. I'm thinking primarily here of Workgroup Weeks, but I think there may be some other initiatives which, by all you can tell from the policy pages, are still active and looking for new recruits (although no one's worked on them since 2006).

In the case of Workgroup Weeks, do I need any special permission to take the Workgroup Weeks notice off of the main page and to some kind of notice at the top of the main Workgroup Weeks page? In the latter case, I was thinking of putting this up:

Hello! If you've navigated to this page, you found a reference to Workgroup Weeks somewhere and were curious what this initiative is all about. Feel free to look around.

If you are curious whether the Workgroup Weeks initiative is ongoing, the short answer is no. For one, this initiative is fairly ambitious and large-scale for such a small community, and it was difficult to find people to do all of the things that needed to happen. Secondly, it was difficult to attract the kind of collaborators we need. Although some new Biology contributors showed up, they were not in the numbers we had hoped for. (More introspection can be found at the Biology Week homepage (http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/CZ:Biology_Workgroup/Workgroup_Week))

Does this mean Workgroup Weeks are gone forever? No. Once Citizendium is larger and more visible, we may return to the Workgroup Weeks initiative. Furthermore, if you would like to have a Workgroup Week for your favorite workgroup, and you are willing to do some of the work to make it happen, please be bold and do it!

That's what I got-- if anyone's got objections, let me know. If no one says anything, I'm putting this up and taking down the mention from the main page...

-Brian

[Paul Wormer]

I made my first edit here almost exactly 2 years ago, and I made quite a few edits since then. I have never heard of "Workgroup Week".  So , revive or kill! (On second thought, reviving is not a good idea, because most workgroups have between zero and two contributors).

[Hayford Peirce]

In my two years here I've seen mentions of Workgroup Week and stolidly ignored them. If even a couple of you think that it's useless and/or a distraction, do what thou wilt with it.

[Howard C. Berkowitz]

I made my first edit here almost exactly 2 years ago, and I made quite a few edits since then. I have never heard of "Workgroup Week".  So , revive or kill! (On second thought, reviving is not a good idea, because most workgroups have between zero and two contributors).

Could it be a typo for "Weak Workgroup"?

[Daniel Mietchen]

I took it off the Welcome page, and I think your notice sounds good.

[Hayford Peirce]

Just looked at the Welcome page.

What does *this* mean? "students are enrolled in formal higher education degree programs, and are assigned to author for their courses by their professors."  The second part of that is either a major typo or nonsense....

[Howard C. Berkowitz]

Just looked at the Welcome page.

What does *this* mean? "students are enrolled in formal higher education degree programs, and are assigned to author for their courses by their professors."  The second part of that is either a major typo or nonsense....

What's informal higher education? Education while under the influence, or just California standard?

[Brian P Long]

I took it off the Welcome page, and I think your notice sounds good.

I'll go ahead and put it up then.

Thanks,
Brian

[Brian P Long]

I just put the notice up. I put it in bold, but there may be a better-looking way to format the notice. If anyone has any better formatting ideas, feel free to put 'em into place.

-Brian

[Hayford Peirce]

I have removed  "and are assigned to author for their courses by their professors." until someone either rewrites it or tells me what it is supposed to mean so that *I* can rewrite it.

[Matt Innis]

I have removed  "and are assigned to author for their courses by their professors." until someone either rewrites it or tells me what it is supposed to mean so that *I* can rewrite it.

If I substitute "write" for "author" and "classes" for "courses", that at least makes sense.  I'm not sure if that is what was intended, though - "...and are assigned to write for their classes by their professors."

[Russell D. Jones]

Why not just revise the pages entirely.  If we don't do it (and I first ran across it a few days ago), then let's revise the pages and delete the reference.