WikiGuide/PageDiscussion/Draft comments/suggestions

[Allan Day]

> Is this really something we can standardize into specific rules or 
> should we leave it up to the author's discretion/common sense?
Both! Contributors are always going to have to rely on their own 
judgement, and there's always going to be variation in practice, but 
that doesn't mean that we can't come up with some kind of guidance (I 
wouldn't call it rules). As a group of people engaged in a common task, 
it makes sense for us to try and collectively learn from our experiences.
> I guess it would really depends on how explanatory/descriptive and 
> obvious the actual article title is to the reader/user.  If the title 
> is descriptive enough, *or renamed in link context to be descriptive 
> enough*, it really shouldn't need the extra explanatory text.  A 
> general rule that I have always gone by is: "The less text users have 
> to read for a link, and the more obvious it is, the faster it will be 
> for them to find the information they are looking for."
Thinking about it some more, the present continuous phrasing found in 
the official docs seems to have a number of advantages. It is more 
'action' orientated - which I think would better fit with the way people 
generally use the wiki (ie. to find out how to do specific tasks). It's 
also more accessible. The difference between 'System Administration' and 
'Administering your system' is significant, for example. The former 
sounds like something that technically proficient people do, whereas the 
latter has a more enabling tone.

A