Difference between revisions of "User:WikiAdmin"
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
hello. tim here. | hello. tim here. | ||
| + | |||
| + | March 1, 2007<br> | ||
| + | > I just wonder why you're signing your annotation entries? I think it's appropriate to sign articles, but I think it could start getting pretty cluttered if users all start up signing their individual entries to the annotations or the alpha index, in order to take credit. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Thanks very much for the note. You're quite right, the signatures make a lot of clutter. I've been signing mostly entries where I'm arguing with someone. That may not be needful, since it's so easy to discover the authorship of entries/revisions through the history pages. To be honest, I have thought about halfway through this issue: I use History to see who is responsible for other information, but until your message it didn't occur to me that everybody else can use History too. . . . [Rapid rethinking of policy] I'll take your message as a suggestion and cut down on the signatures.<br> | ||
| + | Is it just me, or is ''AtD'' an order of magnitude denser than ''M&D'' in terms of encoding? The text keeps unfolding--with concrete information as an anchor (dates, etc.) forcing new ways of analyzing the narrative. It's very stimulating. | ||
Revision as of 08:14, 1 March 2007
hello. tim here.
March 1, 2007
> I just wonder why you're signing your annotation entries? I think it's appropriate to sign articles, but I think it could start getting pretty cluttered if users all start up signing their individual entries to the annotations or the alpha index, in order to take credit.
Thanks very much for the note. You're quite right, the signatures make a lot of clutter. I've been signing mostly entries where I'm arguing with someone. That may not be needful, since it's so easy to discover the authorship of entries/revisions through the history pages. To be honest, I have thought about halfway through this issue: I use History to see who is responsible for other information, but until your message it didn't occur to me that everybody else can use History too. . . . [Rapid rethinking of policy] I'll take your message as a suggestion and cut down on the signatures.
Is it just me, or is AtD an order of magnitude denser than M&D in terms of encoding? The text keeps unfolding--with concrete information as an anchor (dates, etc.) forcing new ways of analyzing the narrative. It's very stimulating.
