Collaboration maybe needs more encouragement...

[David Hoffman]

I know y'all are involved in figuring out governance and authority. But maybe there needs to be a forum and some more work on promoting collaboration. For instance, here's a question and no forum to put it in!

Wouldn't it be great to put a "Requests for collaboration" list somewhere, maybe even on the Main Page? Then, I could ask for help that people outside my workgroup and new visitors would see. Maybe they'd see where they can pitch in.

Specifically, I want help with images (for Judaism articles). So maybe also an "Image requests" list placed somewhere?

You might think we'd have a page for the authors/editors/visitors to gather, get help, discuss needs and plans, etc. The Project Home might be this, but it's really boring and not interactive. I'm reluctant to mention our evil twin     but compare our Project Home to this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Community_Portal

Thanks. David

[Nancy Sculerati]

You can put a request on the Notice Board. http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/CZ:Notice_Board If you look through the notice board, you'll see requests for images and other things. It's what I do. 

[David Hoffman]

You can put a request on the Notice Board. http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/CZ:Notice_Board If you look through the notice board, you'll see requests for images and other things. It's what I do.

Nancy, I looked over there. The notice board is rather a jumble and probably low visibility for most of us, not to mention visitors. I still think a visible list of collaboration requests, requested articles, etc. could be beneficial.

PS Maybe we need data on the most visited pages on the site, visited by CZers and outsiders...

[Matt Innis]

I hear ya David!  Unfortunately peoplepower is the issue at this point.  We not only need great ideas, but the bodies to take on the challenge.  If you see a niche that needs filling, go ahead and start and maybe the enthusiasm will build as the need is filled.  The old cliche, build it and they will come (hopefully).

[Pat_Palmer]

I think there is an issue worth discussion here.

I've been working a lot in Computers Workgroup, where there are many authors and editors shown on the page, but in practice, there only seem to be a few people actively authoring things right now, and somewhat fewer editing.

I have found it very difficult to get any kind of discussion going on the process of organizing Computers articles.  I have tried a few things; I posted on the Computers Workgroup site (some people saw that).  I posted in forums (some others saw that).  I posted on various article Talk pages (others saw that).  I looked for a maillist for the workgroup, thinking if only I could blast a mail to everyone who cares, but I couldn't find it.

Finally, lacking any validation or guidance, I wrote a few articles and reorganized some others, only to have interested parties suddenly surface to say "I don't like this approach".  There's nothing wrong with that, except that I wish I could have found them BEFORE I did the work using an approach they now want to scrap and start over.

In short, it's not easy to discuss Workgroup policy in the Computers Workgroup right now, despite the very best efforts of all parties involved.  Others are trying too, but we don't have a centralized way of getting people involved.

I am concerned that the possible negative consequence of this is, that it might discourage participation down the line.  A lack of coordination can lead to discouragement and duplicated effort.

At this moment, I see the issue but not the answer.  An easy-to-find maillist that went to the currently active body of authors (in digest form--I'm willing to wait a day or two for response) might work.

I only know some question right now, and not the answer.

[Jitse Niesen]

I looked for a maillist for the workgroup, thinking if only I could blast a mail to everyone who cares, but I couldn't find it.

See [[CZ:Mailing lists]].

[Stephen Ewen]

I have found it very difficult to get any kind of discussion going on the process of organizing Computers articles. 

I'd like to add my voice here to editors: take the lead with those in your workgroups and lay out a strategy and goals. For example, here is one I as an author suggested for a whole series of articles:

    * Birth control
          o Contraception
                + Method type
                + Method type
                + Method type
                + Method type

    *
          o Sterilization
                + Male
                + Female
                + Reversals

    *
          o Family planning
                + Counseling
                + Programmatic/Policy
                      # U.N.
                      # Country
                      # Country
                      # Country

    *
          o Population control
                + Policy
                + Key figure
                + Key figure
                      # Eugenics

    *
          o Religious views
                + World religion
                      # Sub-group
                      # Sub-group
                + World religion
                + World religion
                + World religion

    *
          o History
                + Key figure
                + Key figure
                + Key organization
                + Key organization
                + Movement
                + Movement
                + Counter-movement


Each entry represents an article.  I think doing things this is way is superior than "as it comes". Some people really need to see the big picture, too.

[David Hoffman]

Quote from: Pat_Palmer on Today at 08:48:25 PM
I looked for a maillist for the workgroup, thinking if only I could blast a mail to everyone who cares, but I couldn't find it.

See [[CZ:Mailing lists]].

Hi. Maybe a senior person can fix this: the Mailing Lists link on the toolbar (left margin) goes to a different, older page than the CZ:Mailing lists, noted above.

Also, things like the Mailing List and new Feedback page are only mentioned and navigated from the Project Home.
So, perhaps these pages need more internal links, e.g. on workgroup pages.

More importantly, I think, is we need a more user friendly, well-designed, attractive portal for the CZ writing/editing community. Maybe somebody could turn the Project Home into a more effective and pleasing web page?
An idea. Thanks.

[Larry Sanger]

There's now a place where you can find various types of requests, and create links to new pages with new types of requests:

http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/CZ:Project_Home#Requests_to_the_community

[Robert Winmill]

Collaboration will happen.  I don't think that CZ is at the point of critical mass that will make large efforts on collaboration pay off.  This will happen, be patient.  Spread the word outside of the existing CZ comunity.

[David Hoffman]

Collaboration will happen.  I don't think that CZ is at the point of critical mass that will make large efforts on collaboration pay off.  This will happen, be patient.  Spread the word outside of the existing CZ comunity.

Sure, though it would help if we made a conscious effort to grease the wheels. Especially when our numbers are still low, we need to make an extra effort to work together. Otherwise, newcomers don't get as much sense of this as an interactive wiki. Plus, if we start building a collaborative culture now, it will help recruit and help improve article quality. In my opinion. ~~~~

PS Putting my words to the test, I've just gone through the new Feedback page (http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/CZ:Feedback_Requests) and made a few edits on four other people's articles. Is this a good idea? If everybody did a quick round of editing others' work, we'd all have a sense of being noticed and helped. Plus, we'd might learn from a few new suggestions and edits. Or is this a waste of time and I should stick to my own articles?

[Matt Innis]

PS Putting my words to the test, I've just gone through the new Feedback page (http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/CZ:Feedback_Requests) and made a few edits on four other people's articles. Is this a good idea? If everybody did a quick round of editing others' work, we'd all have a sense of being noticed and helped. Plus, we'd might learn from a few new suggestions and edits. Or is this a waste of time and I should stick to my own articles?

This was a very good idea.  I found Northwest Territory and did some copy edits there.  It felt good to help out someone who actually requested it.  Keep this process going, I think it is a step in the right direction.

[David Hoffman]

There's now a place where you can find various types of requests, and create links to new pages with new types of requests:
http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/CZ:Project_Home#Requests_to_the_community

Thanks Larry.  I've tried improving the Project Home page. Can somebody with mark-up experience please help out?

Also -- I assume that "Feedback" might mean either (1) evaluate the article' s quality, or (2) pitch in for the writing or editing, or images etc. So maybe we need to refine this a bit.  ~~~~