Community Meeting Agenda 9 June 2009

From FamilySearch Wiki
Revision as of 10:04, 22 April 2010 by Cottrells (talk | contribs) (Text replace - 'Category:Wiki community' to '{{PAGENAME}}')

Jump to: navigation, search

Be bold! Post your agenda items!

Feel free to post on the agenda any items you wish to cover during the meeting. If your item requires details or feedback, post some details on the discussion page and link to the discussion from the agenda.


Administrative items

  1. Assignment of time keeper and note taker
  2. Introduction of new members: 10 seconds for name and desired takeaways.
  3. Review of Minutes
  4. Today's agenda preview


Information items

Discussion items

I have listened to a number of these meetings.  They seem to be focused on the more technical part of the wiki.  As a contributor I see no reason to be a part of this meeting.  I focus on content rather than the functioning issues that arise on the wiki.  I think there needs to be a separate meeting on the content structure.  Take this page for example,  England Category.  This page has all the pages people have created that are connected to England.  It sure looks disorganized to me.  Someone named a page County Durham, now it is indexed under  'C'  Someone else started all the pages with England so even though it is England Category all the topics are listed in the 'E'  Take a look at the Utah Category.  Most of the topics are under 'U" This tells me that you have 100 different people thinking 100 different ways and there is no one there telling them any different.  In a year from now what is this going to look like?  It seems to me that this is something that needs to be in discusion.

There also needs to be some differentiation between LDS-specific forms and general versions of forms, particularly pedigree charts and group record sheets, so that non-LDS people can get the forms that do not have LDS-specific information such as LDS temple ordinance fields or checkboxes.  Are these already in there? How do we differentiate the two when placing links to them in the Wiki, so the two versions are easily found by those that need them?  (more on discussion page)  JamesAnderson 19:02, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

When does an article cease to be a stub?  Does a contributor remove that line after adding some details?  If so, how much detail is required before something is no longer "stubby"? Eirebrain 19:32, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

There should be a tab above or in nav bar asking for more contributions. dsammy 20:04, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Carryover from Last Week

New Items