Knowledge

:Refactoring talk pages - Knowledge

Source đź“ť

475:
multiple points or become more complex, by contrast, may benefit from the creation of subsections to address different points, or in extreme cases by splitting off sections of text into entirely new sections. It may be necessary in these cases to reorganize large swatches of text, and if so care should be taken to ensure that no comments are taken out of context or lose connection with the original point they were addressing. It may be advisable to copy sections of text rather than move them (adding a comment that refers back to the original text), to duplicate the original author's signature across different points that have been moved to different sections, or to begin the new section with a parenthetical statement explaining the original context of the comment.
39: 509:, create a new page entitled ]. Link this to the top of the appropriate archives, and to the current talk page. This gives newcomers the chance to get a quick understanding without the risk of losing what has gone before. Having a linked archive can help satisfy both those who feel their words must remain intact and those who want a neat summary. 470:
In some cases, discussion should be broken down into new sections or subsections. This is useful when a section becomes overly long, or when conversation begins to diverge into a number of separate points. Resectioning may help both readers and participants understand the flow of the discussion and
181:
of talk page discussions, since archiving preserves a fuller record of discussion, does not lead to misrepresentation (accidental or disruptive) of other editors' opinions, and conserves material that may be useful in the future. The same principle has come to be applied to refactoring more broadly.
155:
Good refactoring practices are an important part of maintaining a productive talk page. Discussion pages that are confused, hostile, overly complex, poorly structured, or congested with cross-talk can discourage potential contributors, and create misunderstandings that undermine fruitful discussions.
517:
Simple refactoring can easily be done with standard Knowledge browser editing, but if you are faced with a particularly complex or tedious refactoring job, an advanced text editor or any of an assortment of scripting languages can be immensely helpful. Basically, any tool that has extended find and
163:
by editors who have contributed to the talk page. If there are recent heated discussions on the talk page, good faith may be lacking. If another editor objects to any refactoring that was performed, those changes should be reverted. Nevertheless, if the page is larger than the recommended size, then
185:
As a rule, editors should not edit each other's comments in ways that affect meaning – doing so creates misrepresentations, disrupts the flow of conversations, and makes debates and discussions impossible to follow – but cases exist in which an editor's comments need to be removed from the flow of
522:
capabilities, or programmatic text processing will become your best friend. Alphabetizing material, sorting sections into chronological order, changing multiple links, restructuring large tables – these tasks can be painful and time consuming to do by hand, but can be accomplished in a matter of
474:
For long discussions, participants often insert arbitrary breaks by adding a new subsection heading. In fact, such breaks are often given headings like 'Arbitrary break' or 'convenience break', with an index number to distinguish it from other arbitrary break headings. Discussions that cover
427:
is recommended for any points that are likely to be repeatedly raised and refactored. Existing material should be generalized appropriately and reformatted into a simple question/answer format so that later editors can have their concerns satisfied without raising the question again. Likewise,
501:
Be aware that not every editor will agree with your refactoring or even of the refactoring concept in general. Provide links to the original, uncut version, so others can check your changes, and if necessary go back to the original to clarify what an author actually said. This combination of
347:
or moved to a different page where it is more appropriate. If the refactoring is later reverted, the moved material should be deleted on the pages it was moved to, to prevent proliferation of the text. It is helpful to use the template
137:. Like copy editing, it always preserves the original editor's meaning and intent. Like archiving, it may hide material from immediate visibility. It should be used as a tool to separate unnecessary material from a discussion 100:
is a redrafting process in which talk page content is moved, removed, revised, restructured, hidden, or otherwise changed. It applies only in contexts where editors make signed statements (such as in the Talk and User talk
313:
Editing and deleting the text completely. Except for non-contentious fixes, this should only be done by the editor who wrote the material or by a sysop or bureaucrat with legitimate cause. Unless a sysop uses
176:
Earlier in Knowledge's history, and particularly before 2006, talk page content was summarized to conserve space – a non-preservative refactoring method. However, the community has come to prefer wholesale
502:
refactoring and archiving will often prevent complaints that information was lost. Make it explicit that you have refactored something so no one is misled into thinking this was the original talk page.
570: 523:
minutes programmatically. Most high-end 'Office'-type text editors have advanced text editing capabilities, and many light-weight but powerful text editing applications are available – see
295:, editors are encouraged to remove any content that is not appropriate. A link to the talk page history should be added if the removed text was part of discussions by other editors. See 494:
Refactoring may cause confusion if improperly applied to an ongoing discussion; an editor should take great care to preserve all such discussion and all relevant details to its context.
576: 438:
template can be used to provide a floating summary box next to a refactored discussion, or a comment may be added at the bottom (or sometimes the top) of a section.
186:
conversation because the comments themselves disrupt the flow of conversation. Loosely, the following types of refactoring are legitimate, with the listed caveats:
505:
If you think people may object to their discussion being refactored, make your summary on a different page. Rather than reducing archives 7 to 10 of
497:
Editors should be conscious of the newcomer's perspective; one should not remove content that would benefit an editor who had not yet read the page.
47: 300: 554:
to the top of the page(s). This will alert other editors to the fact that the pages are under construction, and should help minimize
589: 165: 134: 599: 465: 17: 604: 594: 55: 152:, where code is restructured (to improve its quality) in a way that does not change the operation of the program. 662: 612: 292: 192:– anything where you are sure that the other editor will thank you for the effort, rather than getting angry. 657: 228:
Reattaching signatures that have been split from the text, or adding "missing signature" templates such as
416:. Material collapsed in this fashion does not show up in page searches unless it is in an expanded state. 532: 319: 160: 322:, or a page has been deleted entirely, the deleted text will still appear in old revisions of the page. 652: 455: 555: 406: 296: 420:
The tool or technique used should be chosen according to the particular needs of the material.
212:
Fixing technical matters of wikitext formatting, tables, templates, broken links, and the like
637: 627: 276: 200: 84: 536: 524: 506: 396: 269:– should only be done with the original author's consent, or with good cause under policy. 102: 632: 8: 337:. This text is still marginally readable on the page, and will show up in page searches. 315: 59: 428:
lengthy ongoing discussions might benefit from template refactoring with a summary. The
519: 447: 432: 232: 207: 77: 69: 178: 54:
It explains concepts or processes used by the Knowledge community. It is not one of
344: 145: 571:
Exterior to what? Ausdehnungslehre means "extension theory", not "exterior theory"
561: 441: 171: 547: 413: 366: 219: 546:
For long refactoring jobs, it may help to tag the page(s) being refactored with
168:
of the talk page, or sections within it, without refactoring can still be done.
215:
Improving headings with typos or which are not descriptive of the content (use
125:
Relocating material to different sections or pages where it is more appropriate
245:
says not to correct other users' spelling or grammar without their permission.
646: 527:. Many scripting languages for text processing also exist; common ones are 242: 28: 262:
Moving or copying a comment to begin a new discussion in a different section
386: 376: 306:
There are several tools and techniques available for refactoring material:
130: 362:
A number of tools and templates hide or block text from further editing –
540: 351: 113: 579:(conservative refactoring by inserting subheadings and paragraph titles) 286: 566:
Talk pages or talk page sections that have benefited from refactoring:
256:
Adding new sections that split an editor's comment into separate points
241:
Other minor fixes without changing someone's words. Keep in mind that
119:
Removing off-topic, uncivil, unclear, or otherwise distracting material
621: 512: 149: 282:
Relocation of text to different pages where it is more appropriate
225:
below the new heading so as to not break any links to the old one)
141:, without waiting for formal archiving of the entire discussion. 577:
Is there a convention about the order of multivector components?
279:
redundant, outdated, or otherwise superfluous material from view
159:
Refactoring should only be done when there is an assumption of
259:
Moving a comment to a more appropriate place in the discussion
528: 27:
For the policy on refactoring other editors' comments, see
583: 485: 424: 573:(conservative refactoring by inserting paragraph titles) 299:
for guidance on creating a link to the page history and
252:– should be done with care to avoid changing meanings. 490:
These concerns should be considered when refactoring:
301:
WP:Talk page guidelines#Behavior that is unacceptable
303:for guidance on inappropriate talk page content. 644: 359:Hidden divs, collapsible tables, and templates 273:Removing, striking or hiding personal attacks 238:to comments that users have forgotten to sign 196:Adding missing topic headings and attribution 108:Refactoring has a number of uses, including: 471:help them find relevant parts of the text. 479: 466:Knowledge:Talk page guidelines § section 122:Restructuring of discussions for clarity 144:The term "refactoring" is adapted from 14: 645: 590:Knowledge:How to archive a talk page 58:, and may reflect varying levels of 33: 600:Knowledge:Pruning article revisions 129:Refactoring is more assertive than 24: 56:Knowledge's policies or guidelines 25: 674: 605:Knowledge:Not so arbitrary breaks 595:Knowledge:Remove personal attacks 328:Using the HTML strikeout tags – 37: 638:Reworking category at MeatBall 13: 1: 633:Refactoring category at Wiki 331:text to be struck</s: --> 133:, but less substantive than 7: 10: 679: 463: 445: 412:. These work by creating 67: 26: 356:to mark moved material. 190:Non-contentious cleanup 114:clarity and readability 628:Refactoring wiki pages 291:Following Knowledge's 663:Knowledge maintenance 613:Inappropriate comment 658:Knowledge discussion 562:Significant examples 537:Unix shell scripting 525:list of text editors 507:Talk:New Imperialism 414:collapsible elements 340:Moving text off-page 293:talk page guidelines 172:Refactoring overview 46:This help page is a 423:The creation of an 520:regular expression 518:replace features, 456:WP:Arbitrary break 18:Knowledge:REFACTOR 335:text to be struck 95: 94: 16:(Redirected from 670: 653:Knowledge how-to 617: 611: 553: 458: 437: 431: 411: 405: 401: 395: 391: 385: 381: 375: 371: 365: 355: 343:Material can be 332: 237: 231: 224: 218: 146:code refactoring 87: 80: 41: 40: 34: 21: 678: 677: 673: 672: 671: 669: 668: 667: 643: 642: 624: 615: 609: 586: 564: 551: 548:Template:In use 515: 488: 468: 462: 461: 454: 450: 444: 435: 429: 409: 403: 399: 393: 389: 383: 379: 373: 369: 363: 349: 329: 289: 287:How to refactor 235: 229: 222: 216: 174: 91: 90: 83: 76: 72: 64: 63: 38: 32: 23: 22: 15: 12: 11: 5: 676: 666: 665: 660: 655: 641: 640: 635: 630: 623: 622:External links 620: 619: 618: 607: 602: 597: 592: 585: 582: 581: 580: 574: 563: 560: 556:edit conflicts 514: 513:Advanced tools 511: 499: 498: 495: 487: 484: 460: 459: 451: 446: 443: 440: 418: 417: 407:discussion top 360: 357: 341: 338: 326: 323: 311: 288: 285: 284: 283: 280: 274: 264: 263: 260: 257: 247: 246: 239: 226: 213: 210: 204: 197: 173: 170: 127: 126: 123: 120: 117: 112:Improving the 93: 92: 89: 88: 81: 73: 68: 65: 53: 52: 44: 42: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 675: 664: 661: 659: 656: 654: 651: 650: 648: 639: 636: 634: 631: 629: 626: 625: 614: 608: 606: 603: 601: 598: 596: 593: 591: 588: 587: 578: 575: 572: 569: 568: 567: 559: 557: 550:. Simply add 549: 544: 542: 538: 534: 530: 526: 521: 510: 508: 503: 496: 493: 492: 491: 483: 481: 476: 472: 467: 457: 453: 452: 449: 439: 434: 426: 421: 415: 408: 398: 388: 378: 368: 361: 358: 353: 346: 342: 339: 336: 327: 324: 321: 317: 312: 309: 308: 307: 304: 302: 298: 294: 281: 278: 275: 272: 271: 270: 268: 261: 258: 255: 254: 253: 251: 250:Restructuring 244: 240: 234: 227: 221: 214: 211: 209: 205: 202: 198: 195: 194: 193: 191: 187: 183: 180: 169: 167: 162: 157: 153: 151: 147: 142: 140: 136: 132: 124: 121: 118: 115: 111: 110: 109: 106: 104: 99: 86: 82: 79: 75: 74: 71: 66: 61: 57: 51: 49: 43: 36: 35: 30: 19: 565: 545: 516: 504: 500: 489: 477: 473: 469: 442:Resectioning 422: 419: 334: 305: 290: 267:Pruning text 266: 265: 249: 248: 189: 188: 184: 175: 158: 154: 143: 138: 131:copy editing 128: 107: 97: 96: 48:how-to guide 45: 541:AppleScript 464:Main page: 397:archive top 325:Strike-outs 201:indentation 199:Correcting 98:Refactoring 85:WP:REFACTOR 647:Categories 552:{{in use}} 330:<s: --> 208:dead links 161:good faith 139:on the fly 103:namespaces 433:quote box 333:produces 316:Oversight 233:Unsigned2 166:archiving 150:computing 135:archiving 116:of a page 70:Shortcuts 60:consensus 584:See also 486:Concerns 480:examples 448:Shortcut 345:userfied 310:Deletion 179:archival 482:below. 297:WP:Diff 206:Fixing 539:, and 533:Python 367:hidden 320:RevDel 277:Hiding 243:WP:TPO 220:anchor 203:levels 78:WP:RTP 29:WP:TPO 529:Perl 478:See 425:FAQ 387:hat 377:cot 148:in 105:). 649:: 616:}} 610:{{ 558:. 543:. 535:, 531:, 436:}} 430:{{ 410:}} 404:{{ 402:, 400:}} 394:{{ 392:, 390:}} 384:{{ 382:, 380:}} 374:{{ 372:, 370:}} 364:{{ 354:}} 352:rf 350:{{ 318:, 236:}} 230:{{ 223:}} 217:{{ 62:. 50:. 31:. 20:)

Index

Knowledge:REFACTOR
WP:TPO
how-to guide
Knowledge's policies or guidelines
consensus
Shortcuts
WP:RTP
WP:REFACTOR
namespaces
clarity and readability
copy editing
archiving
code refactoring
computing
good faith
archiving
archival
indentation
dead links
anchor
Unsigned2
WP:TPO
Hiding
talk page guidelines
WP:Diff
WP:Talk page guidelines#Behavior that is unacceptable
Oversight
RevDel
userfied
rf

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

↑