Get our free book on rainwater now - To Catch the Rain.
- This is a proposed Appropedia policy. You can , or discuss it on the talk page or at the Appropedia policy discussion page.
- For now, this should be considered an essay by one or more Appropedians, and not as a policy or guideline.
When Appropedia has a large, active community, and more stable content, we will look at applying a "stable versions" policy. This will be something like the Stable versions proposal at Wikipedia.
Each stable version is approved by a qualified moderator, academic and/or a specialist organization with experience in the field (like WaterAid or Oxfam, in watsan stuff). Ideally a theoretician and a practitioner, or someone with a very strong grounding in both, would approve each stable version.
Applied to what pages?
All high impact content pages operate under this policy, and we could consider doing it on certain other high-quality articles. It is strongly suggested that it is very limited, though - it's extra work, and the site may be penalized by search engines for duplicate content. (It won't matter so much if there's only 50 such pages.)
The German Wikipedia was working on this (see the |German version details). If it's a software solution, we can use it when it's available. But we can implement the policy at any time - flag a page as stable using a template notice, protect it, and link to the the editable version at, say, PAGENAME/open. If it's a category page, then the open page should not be in the category space, as this could lead to confusion.
It is essential that updates are performed frequently. The date of the last update will be shown, together with a link to the editable version.
There are several options:
- The "stable versions" have to be approved by the central team (who consult each other if there is the slightest doubt) and should be updated regularly.
- Separate teams are set up to oversee the stable versions of particular pages or groups of pages.
Another policy decision to make is whether the updates can be approved by:
- a member of the relevant team.
- consensus by the team.
By far the most efficient approach is for a single member to be allowed to do it. Anything even slightly doubtful can be taken to the team, and probably to the community as well, perhaps through the forum. (Being able to take it to a team of knowledgeable people is important, as taking it to the community is more uncertain in terms of if and when there will be a response; also the quality of the response.)
The approval team
The ideal team includes more than one person (who can share the load, and share their knowledge), and ideally should include:
- breadth and depth of knowledge in the topic areas,
- practical experience in the field
Stable versions are not meant to reduce the openness of editing at Appropedia. The editable document is always prominently linked.
As the stable version will have a "view source" tab rather than an edit tab, it's essential that it's very clear to users how they can contribute to the page.