Talk page moved from Category_talk:Collaborative_pages[edit source]

The following are comments from the old page. This conversation precipitated the new name of this category. --Lonny 02:13, 22 May 2007 (PDT)

This is a new category - it's possible that we need to define it differently, or give it a different name.

Question: are stubs by definition collaborative pages? Sound fine to me. Similarly, are all collaborative pages also stubs? That is, are the two terms synonyms? That's also fine; one is perhaps a more "PC" term than the other. "Stub" also seems to be connected to the stub template.

Here are some possible alternative names:

• stubs
• early stage pages
• developing pages (overuse of the word developing, considering the focus of this wiki)
• proto pages
• "alpha" or "beta"
• budding pages
• Tadpoles (or other cutesy small animal name)

--Curtbeckmann 13:15, 6 October 2006 (PDT)

Definition Response[edit source]

By nature, most pages on Appropedia are Collaborative. The category Collaborative pages is meant to include those pages which are intended, not necessarily to educate the public, but to allow contributors to make something together, e.g. a flyer for an organization, a letter to a government official, coplanning an event, etc.

I think the defining difference is that they are pages not to produce online content per se, but to create something else together... like an event, publication, project, etc. If the project was making a humanely captured rat powered vehicle, the project would be in [[:Category:Collaborative pages] while it was being made (with content of timelines, communication, updates, links, research, etc.). When the project was done, it would no longer be in Category:Collaborative pages, and instead just remain in the Category:Projects, Category:Alternative transportation, Category:Humane pest control.

In addition:

1. These Collaborative pages should have some type of box describing the work in progress and differentiating it from other pages.
2. I really think the name Collaboration is better than Collaborative pages. Originally I think I was calling these Working. It is not too late to change the name of this category. Any more ideas, based upon this definition? --Lonny 13:43, 6 October 2006 (PDT)

Wow, I completely missed the intent here. I got my sense from the main article page itself, and cut/pasted the "this is a new category" sentence from that page to the Talk page.

I guess the box you mean is like the box generated by the {{wikipedia}} template? Seems like that would work well.

It seems to me that another word for this might be "Coordination pages", since it is about coordinating some other effort, if I understand right. I like this word because, as you point out, the "collaboration" label is a bit overloaded in a wiki context, where I think "coordination" is distinct enough to work. If this works as a label, then it would probably need to be "coordination pages" because "coordinations" seems awkward. I like definition #2 at Wiktionary.

Another option (or class of options), is somewhat narrow but highly descriptive. I'm thinking of terms like "event management", or "project management", or "program management". But I think I like "coordination pages" a little better.

Option #3: "Planning Pages". Has the advantage of being shorter than "coordination pages"...

After thrashing here for a second, I think we can explain whatever category title we choose. I am slightly biased away from the "collaboration" label because of the overloading, but ultimately I think it's a matter of attaching the right description, which I think you've done above. --Curtbeckmann 16:10, 6 October 2006 (PDT)