two wiki's

[Tom Davies]

Hi :)
Unofficial is the wrong word but would naturally follow in most people's
minds if they hear the other one is "official".  I think one is more from
the wider community and easier for strange random people to edit.  The
checks and safe-guards do help to make sure it's not as bad as it could be
and i tend to find it's usually pretty awesome
Regards from
Tom :)


On 19 November 2014 12:40, Gunnar Hjalmarsson <gunnarhj at ubuntu.com> wrote:

> On 2014-11-19 13:12, Mauricio Tavares wrote:
> > On Nov 19, 2014 7:03 AM, "Hannie Dumoleyn" <lafeber-dumoleyn2 at zonnet.nl
> > <mailto:lafeber-dumoleyn2 at zonnet.nl>> wrote:
> >>
> >> Is this question interesting enough to be answered by someone of the
> >> docs team?
> >> http://askubuntu.com/questions/550993/why-are-there-two-wikis
> >
> > I thought it was properly answered: one is the official doc and
> > the other isn't.
>
> Are you saying that wiki.ubuntu.com is official and help.ubuntu.com not?
> In that case I have to disagree. Really disagree.
>
> help.ubuntu.com, except for help.ubuntu.com/community, contains the
> official user documentation for the Ubuntu desktop and server, and is
> maintained by the docs team.
>
> wiki.ubuntu.com contains a lot of different things. For instance it
> contains personal info pages, which are anything but "official".
>
> --
> Gunnar Hjalmarsson
> https://launchpad.net/~gunnarhj
>
> --
> ubuntu-doc mailing list
> ubuntu-doc at lists.ubuntu.com
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-doc
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-doc/attachments/20141119/a9dd018d/attachment.html>