Difference between revisions of "Anarchopedia:Itself"
From Anarchopedia
m |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | + | '''Anarchopedia, itself''' makes claims about [[en:Anarchopedia|Anarchopedia]], i.e. what it "is" or "is for": | |
| + | |||
| + | * An encyclopedia of [[en:anarchism|anarchism]] | ||
| + | * [[en:anarchist|Anarchists']] encyclopedia | ||
| + | * An experiment in anarchist [[en:large public wiki|large public wiki]] management [http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/2004-September/035299.html]. One of places on the Earth where anarchists can learn how to make anarchy. | ||
| + | * ''...'' | ||
| + | |||
| + | These claims about itself guide the project. If a claim is made in even one place off to the side, it is important, and should be added to the above. If the claim is wrong, change it in the article it came from, and THEN change it here. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Mention of '''Anarchopedia, itself''' in articles requires some standards to ensure: | ||
| + | |||
| + | *Text need not change when moved elsewhere in the GFDL text corpus. If we refer to this project in the third person, as Anarchopedia, then the text stands up better when moved elsewhere in the GFDL text corpus. This should be a standard everywhere '''Anarchopedia, itself''' is mentioned within. | ||
| + | |||
| + | *Statements about "Anarchopedia is...", or "Anarchopedia does..." can be more easily found, closely examined, and disputed (by [[Anarchopedia:en:Faction|Factions]] or otherwise). This is absolutely necessary to achieve deliberative democracy, [[en:reflexive design|reflexive design]] and some positive brand management - we would not want strange claims or assertions about its purpose or character to go unexamined, and we would want to support any desirable role or purpose. This is simpler if 'what links here' is a comprehensive list. Accordingly, any mention that affects identity or defines or limits a purpose should be to Anarchopedia:Itself not Anarchopedia, to distinguish from casual mentions that do not make any such claims (e.g. what "Anarchopedia says..." about something that is not itself). | ||
| + | |||
| + | *It provides a positive counterpoint to [[Anarchopedia:en:what Anarchopedia is not|what Anarchopedia is not]], which is the negation of [[Anarchopedia:en:itself|Anarchopedia:itself]]. But by definition can't define any progressive or positive mission! It's easier to keep "not" updated if "is and does" are up to date. | ||
| + | |||
| + | *It reminds people to update the [[Main Page]] occasionally and keep up to date with the most effective terminology to describe concepts under discussion. | ||
| + | |||
| + | [[Anarchopedia:en:what Anarchopedia is not|what Anarchopedia is not]] may actually be more important to understand for daily operating and governance decisions. | ||
Revision as of 23:59, 3 March 2006
Anarchopedia, itself makes claims about, i.e. what it "is" or "is for":
- An encyclopedia of
- encyclopedia
- An experiment in anarchist management [1]. One of places on the Earth where anarchists can learn how to make anarchy.
- ...
These claims about itself guide the project. If a claim is made in even one place off to the side, it is important, and should be added to the above. If the claim is wrong, change it in the article it came from, and THEN change it here.
Mention of Anarchopedia, itself in articles requires some standards to ensure:
- Text need not change when moved elsewhere in the GFDL text corpus. If we refer to this project in the third person, as Anarchopedia, then the text stands up better when moved elsewhere in the GFDL text corpus. This should be a standard everywhere Anarchopedia, itself is mentioned within.
- Statements about "Anarchopedia is...", or "Anarchopedia does..." can be more easily found, closely examined, and disputed (by Factions or otherwise). This is absolutely necessary to achieve deliberative democracy, and some positive brand management - we would not want strange claims or assertions about its purpose or character to go unexamined, and we would want to support any desirable role or purpose. This is simpler if 'what links here' is a comprehensive list. Accordingly, any mention that affects identity or defines or limits a purpose should be to Anarchopedia:Itself not Anarchopedia, to distinguish from casual mentions that do not make any such claims (e.g. what "Anarchopedia says..." about something that is not itself).
- It provides a positive counterpoint to what Anarchopedia is not, which is the negation of Anarchopedia:itself. But by definition can't define any progressive or positive mission! It's easier to keep "not" updated if "is and does" are up to date.
- It reminds people to update the Main Page occasionally and keep up to date with the most effective terminology to describe concepts under discussion.
what Anarchopedia is not may actually be more important to understand for daily operating and governance decisions.
