Category talk:OpenEdit: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
Hoof Hearted (talk | contribs) m (Text replacement - "RealNamesNetwork" to "Real names network") |
||
| (6 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{TOC right}} | |||
==Home read only== | |||
What about when the '''front page is read only''' and the rest is open? [[User:TedErnst|TedErnst]] 02:03, 19 Jan 2006 (EST) | |||
:It is OpenEdit then. Don't you think? [[User:MarkDilley|MarkDilley]] | |||
::Yep I'd say [[:Category:OpenEdit]], in fact I ''have'' now said so in the definition of that category! (can change if people disagree though) -- [[User:Harry Wood|Harry Wood]] 12:27, 19 Jan 2006 (EST) | |||
==Benefits of Open Editability== | |||
I'm a firm believer in Open Editability. Wikis are uniquely capabile of supporting [[edit]]s from random un-logged-in internet users, because of their reversible change features which allow soft security to work. This is a huge bonus, allowing people to swing by and contribute something without going to the hassle of chosing a [[username]] and password. People setting up a new wiki are missing out, if they decide to set it up as [[:Category:LoginToEdit|LoginToEdit]]. A registration process immediately quashes the kind of casual contributions which can lead to addictive wiki energy and community participation. | |||
Anyway I'm probably preaching to the converted here, but should we add some notes to this effect on the category page there? I think we should at least link to somewhere pointing out the advantages of open editability. But where to link to? There's probably some good information on [[MeatballWiki]], if we can find it. I know they have some discussions of [http://www.usemod.com/cgi-bin/mb.pl?SoftSecurity SoftSecurity] and [http://www.usemod.com/cgi-bin/mb.pl?ReversibleChange ReversibleChange] -- [[User:Harry Wood|Harry Wood]] 06:26, 20 Apr 2006 (EDT) | |||
:Harry, I am 100% with you on this. I would like to start something like 'OpenEditNetwork' but haven't figured out how it would be differnt than '''OpenEdit'''. I am also struggling how to express the style of 'RealNames'. I have started a 'Real names network' to help identify those wiki who have that style. Please put notes on '''OpenEdit''' stuff. Best, [[MarkDilley]] | |||
::OpenEdit is fine, if you're either low-profile enough that you don't get hit with a lot of [[vandal]]ism, or you can find effective ways of fending off vandals. The {{Mw|Manual:Combating vandalism#Lock down (lazy solution)|lazy solution}} is to just lock it down. [[User:Leucosticte|Leucosticte]] ([[User talk:Leucosticte|talk]]) 13:32, 8 March 2014 (UTC) | |||
==Wiky== | |||
You may want to add [http://goessner.net/articles/wiky/ Wiky] to the list on your frontpage. -- Stefan | |||
:Created an article for it instead - [[Wiky]], rdgs, [[User:Hoof Hearted|Sean, aka <small>Hoof Hearted</small>]] • <sub>[[:Category:Active administrators of this wiki|Admin]]</sub> • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 02:52, 18 October 2012 (PDT) | |||
==What if it's OpenEdit, but only for one namespace== | |||
What if it's OpenEdit, but only for one namespace? E.g., [[ChildWiki]] only lets non-sysops edit the Draft: namespace. [[User:Leucosticte|Leucosticte]] ([[User talk:Leucosticte|talk]]) 13:30, 8 March 2014 (UTC) | |||
I | |||
I | |||
I | |||
I | |||
I | |||
I | |||
Latest revision as of 12:59, 5 January 2023
Home read only[edit]
What about when the front page is read only and the rest is open? TedErnst 02:03, 19 Jan 2006 (EST)
- It is OpenEdit then. Don't you think? MarkDilley
- Yep I'd say Category:OpenEdit, in fact I have now said so in the definition of that category! (can change if people disagree though) -- Harry Wood 12:27, 19 Jan 2006 (EST)
Benefits of Open Editability[edit]
I'm a firm believer in Open Editability. Wikis are uniquely capabile of supporting edits from random un-logged-in internet users, because of their reversible change features which allow soft security to work. This is a huge bonus, allowing people to swing by and contribute something without going to the hassle of chosing a username and password. People setting up a new wiki are missing out, if they decide to set it up as LoginToEdit. A registration process immediately quashes the kind of casual contributions which can lead to addictive wiki energy and community participation.
Anyway I'm probably preaching to the converted here, but should we add some notes to this effect on the category page there? I think we should at least link to somewhere pointing out the advantages of open editability. But where to link to? There's probably some good information on MeatballWiki, if we can find it. I know they have some discussions of SoftSecurity and ReversibleChange -- Harry Wood 06:26, 20 Apr 2006 (EDT)
- Harry, I am 100% with you on this. I would like to start something like 'OpenEditNetwork' but haven't figured out how it would be differnt than OpenEdit. I am also struggling how to express the style of 'RealNames'. I have started a 'Real names network' to help identify those wiki who have that style. Please put notes on OpenEdit stuff. Best, MarkDilley
- OpenEdit is fine, if you're either low-profile enough that you don't get hit with a lot of vandalism, or you can find effective ways of fending off vandals. The lazy solution is to just lock it down. Leucosticte (talk) 13:32, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
Wiky[edit]
You may want to add Wiky to the list on your frontpage. -- Stefan
- Created an article for it instead - Wiky, rdgs, Sean, aka Hoof Hearted • Admin • talk2HH 02:52, 18 October 2012 (PDT)
What if it's OpenEdit, but only for one namespace[edit]
What if it's OpenEdit, but only for one namespace? E.g., ChildWiki only lets non-sysops edit the Draft: namespace. Leucosticte (talk) 13:30, 8 March 2014 (UTC)