CZ:Proposals/Editorial Council: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Jitse Niesen (move "Should we allow article specific subpages?" here from New queue) |
imported>David E. Volk m (→Create workgroup style guides: Turned into a Resolution) |
||
| Line 95: | Line 95: | ||
|Name and date of original proposer = [[User:David E. Volk|David E. Volk]] 11:33, 29 February 2008 (CST) | |Name and date of original proposer = [[User:David E. Volk|David E. Volk]] 11:33, 29 February 2008 (CST) | ||
|Username of driver = [[User:David E. Volk]] | |Username of driver = [[User:David E. Volk]] | ||
|Next step = | |Next step = CZ:Editorial Council Resolution 0011, awaiting sponsors and a vote | ||
|Target date for next step = | |Target date for next step = July 1, 2008 | ||
|Notes = | |Notes = | ||
The idea is to have a workgroup-specific style guides to aid authors and editors for consistency | The idea is to have a workgroup-specific style guides to aid authors and editors for consistency | ||
Revision as of 13:39, 9 June 2008
These are proposals that will go (or are now) before the Editorial Council.
Should we allow article specific subpages?
| Summary: The proposal recommends that citizendium adds three new fields to the metadata template (tab1, tab2 and tab3) that can be used to specify a subpage that is not defined in the generic list of subpages. An example of this can be seen at Iron/Isotopes. The Isotopes subpage will only be used by a small fraction of clusters (typically elements). This information could live on the /Catlogs subpage but citizendium readers will find it far more intuitive if the tab actually says Isotopes rather than Catalogs. | |
| Complete proposal | |
Moving Forward on Obscenity
Summary: Our family-friendliness policy, as written, is unclear, and should be rewritten. Furthermore, we should move away from trying to self-censor, and work on setting CZ up so that schools, libraries and parents can filter content they find objectionable.
| ||||||
| Complete proposal | ||||||
Disambiguation mechanics
Summary: This proposal argues that all disambiguation pages should be at titles of the form "foo (disambiguation)", with a redirect at all basic names which are being disambiguated; this will allow us to easily find articles which have been linked (erroneously) to the wrong meaning of "{foo}".
| ||||||
| Complete proposal | ||||||
Create a page for all notable genes in the human genome
| Summary: We are interested in creating one page for all notable genes in the human genome. Each stub would be seeded using content which is harvested from publicly available sources. The resulting "Gene Wiki" would be a relatively unique resource compared to popular gene portals used by researchers and students. Given the expected number of created pages (5000-10000), an automated bot would be created/modified to perform the stub creation. | |
| Complete proposal | |
Self-Correction Policy
Summary: The Citizendium should adopt a policy that requires that we list all factual errors in previous versions of our articles--including unapproved articles--at the bottom of an article. This is the same standard that newspapers and other legitimate periodicals use. We are clearly obligated to adopt the same policy. Doing so will earn us good will from the public and increase our credibility considerably.
| ||||
| Complete proposal | ||||
Citing CZ article by authors
Summary: An author X, who wants to cite a Citizendium article he contributed to, should do so in a form like "Authors and X (2008) Life ..." (summary written by Proposals Manager)
| ||||
| Complete proposal | ||||
Medical Disclaimers
Summary: Add a disclaimer to drug and medical condition pages
| ||||
| Complete proposal | ||||
Pilot to allow Citizens to take credit for pages
Summary: By popular demand, we would, to a limited extent, allow Citizens to take authorship credit of articles. This would (for now) take the form of a template placed at the bottom of the page, which would, in small and unobtrusive print, list the contributors to an article in alphabetical order. Contributors would add themselves. To avoid issues about what counts as an "important" edit, a person could take co-authorship credit for adding at least two sentences, and five people who have to be on the list before any names were displayed. We would try this out in just four workgroups (the template would be removed from articles in any other workgroup).
| ||||
| Complete proposal | ||||
Create workgroup style guides
Summary: To promote coherent style and subsections within each workgroup, aid new users with examples of equations, drawings and other how-to items
| ||||||
| Complete proposal | ||||||
| Proposals System Navigation (advanced users only) | |
|
Proposal lists (some planned pages are still blank):
|