Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. 04-09-2009, 07:00 PM #1
    Bart
    Bart is offline
    Coticule researcher
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    1,872
    Thanked: 1212

    Default New WIKI article

    Gentlemen,

    I would like to submit for peer review, my latest addition to the Wiki:
    Hanging Hair Test, from trick to probing method - Straight Razor Place Wiki

    Please feel free to criticize the article in this thread or under the dedicated discussion tab in the article, or edit the article directly.

    Thank you,

    Bart.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  2. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to Bart For This Useful Post:

    JimmyHAD (04-09-2009), Leighton (04-09-2009), manah (04-12-2009), mlangstr (04-11-2009), onimaru55 (04-10-2009), pjrage (04-10-2009), Rajagra (04-09-2009), Terje K (04-10-2009), xman (04-10-2009)
  3. 04-09-2009, 07:11 PM #2
    JimmyHAD
    JimmyHAD is offline
    Senior Member blabbermouth JimmyHAD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    32,564
    Thanked: 11042

    Default

    An excellent treatise on the HHT and one that I hope to learn from in practice.
    Be careful how you treat people on your way up, you may meet them again on your way back down.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  4. 04-09-2009, 11:07 PM #3
    BeBerlin
    BeBerlin is offline
    Retired Developer
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Berlin
    Posts
    3,490
    Thanked: 1903

    Default

    Totally love it. Should it be merged with Sharpness tests explained - Straight Razor Place Wiki ?
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  5. 04-09-2009, 11:14 PM #4
    JimmyHAD
    JimmyHAD is offline
    Senior Member blabbermouth JimmyHAD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    32,564
    Thanked: 11042

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BeBerlin View Post
    Totally love it. Should it be merged with Sharpness tests explained - Straight Razor Place Wiki ?
    Personally I don't think so. After taking a look at tests explained I think maybe a link from one to another ? Bart's is long and detailed and seems to me to be enough on its own. Mixing it in with the other article might dilute it There is plenty of bandwidth to sustain both. Just IMHO.
    Be careful how you treat people on your way up, you may meet them again on your way back down.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  6. 04-10-2009, 04:24 PM #5
    xman
    xman is offline
    Super Shaver xman's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Lotus Land, eh
    Posts
    8,194
    Thanked: 622

    Default

    Seems to me that a link from each article to the other would be best.

    X
    Last edited by xman; 04-10-2009 at 04:54 PM. Reason: Grammar Police!
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  7. 04-10-2009, 05:53 PM #6
    BeBerlin
    BeBerlin is offline
    Retired Developer
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Berlin
    Posts
    3,490
    Thanked: 1903

    Default

    I've linked one to the other now. "Style" is, and probably will, be a problem. I was hoping we could use the Wikipedia:Manual of Style - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia eventually, but...
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  8. 04-11-2009, 05:23 PM #7
    Bart
    Bart is offline
    Coticule researcher
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    1,872
    Thanked: 1212

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BeBerlin View Post
    I've linked one to the other now. "Style" is, and probably will, be a problem. I was hoping we could use the Wikipedia:Manual of Style - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia eventually, but...
    Robin, I have scanned that article before. Too my taste, the list of formatting restrictions to meet is too long. If I would have to write wiki entries in fear of breaching those rules, I would become completely paralyzed, as I have zero change of succeeding to keep up with such a long list of formating conventions.

    I suspect that your main objections are about not following the rules for first- en second-person pronouns and the restrictions for using instructional and presumptuous language. However I believe there are two key sentences in the "manual of style" that are in total contradiction with the nature of my HHT-article:
    -"Wikipedia articles must not be based on one person's opinions or experiences".
    The truth of the matter is that my HHT-article is almost entirely and solely based on my personal opinions and experiences. Maybe that makes the article unsuitable for the SRP wiki. If so, please feel free to remove the article.
    -"Avoid such phrases as remember that and note that, which addresses readers directly in an unencyclopedic tone".
    I believe the SRP wiki contains a lot of instructional content, and is as such more a guide than a compendium of knowledge, such as Wikipedia. Avoiding typical instructional language by all means, would lead to even more longwindedness as you're already used to digesting in my everyday posts. No one would be served by that.

    But I concur that we should have some uniformity in the SRP wiki. Maybe somebody should create a simplified "manual of style" for our specific needs.

    That said, I have no problems with anyone rephrasing my wiki entries. Otherwise I wouldn't have put them there.

    Kind regards,
    Bart.
    Last edited by Bart; 04-11-2009 at 05:26 PM.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  9. 04-12-2009, 09:23 AM #8
    BeBerlin
    BeBerlin is offline
    Retired Developer
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Berlin
    Posts
    3,490
    Thanked: 1903

    Default

    Absolutely correct. The Wikipedia manual will not work for (most parts of) the Wiki. Which is not a problem at all.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to BeBerlin For This Useful Post:

    JimmyHAD (04-12-2009)
« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Forum Rules