OLPC talk:Featured content: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m (OLPC talk:Brilliant pages moved to OLPC talk:Featured content: deep link) |
m (replace the broken list of idea links with the parent Category:OLPC ideas) |
||
Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
; [[OLPC:good projects|good projects]]: anyone can add a project from [[projects]], [[contributors]], [[activities]] or [[collections]] as being 'good' - they should tag its talk page with {{goodproject}} and add it to the appropriate category/section on that page |
; [[OLPC:good projects|good projects]]: anyone can add a project from [[projects]], [[contributors]], [[activities]] or [[collections]] as being 'good' - they should tag its talk page with {{goodproject}} and add it to the appropriate category/section on that page |
||
; [[OLPC:good sites|good sites]]: actually a set of subpages by category containing individual urls considered 'good'... some will be large enough or important enough to have their own page for the project/org responsible for the site. |
; [[OLPC:good sites|good sites]]: actually a set of subpages by category containing individual urls considered 'good'... some will be large enough or important enough to have their own page for the project/org responsible for the site. |
||
; [[OLPC:good ideas|good ideas]]: anyone can add an idea from |
; [[OLPC:good ideas|good ideas]]: anyone can add an idea from the various kinds of [[:Category:OLPC ideas|ideas]] as being 'good' - they should tag its section with {{goodidea}} and add a section deeplink to the appropriate subpage of [[OLPC:good ideas]] by category. |
||
Thoughts and comments appreciated. |
Thoughts and comments appreciated. |
Latest revision as of 13:52, 22 February 2009
OLPC:Featured content (including OLPC:Brilliant pages) needs a set of processes for various types of content. Pages that feed it, including OLPC:Peer review and specific sister pages OLPC:project review and OLPC:website review, could use guidelines for various types of pages and content — what makes for a brilliant piece of writing or documentation, how to assess quality in an activity or collection.
I would like to propose starting with a very simple process, for identifying "good pages", "good projects" (including "good bundles"), "good sites", and "good ideas".
- good pages
- anyone can add a page on this wiki as being 'good' - they should tag its talk page with Template:Goodpage and add it to the appropriate category/section on that page
- good projects
- anyone can add a project from projects, contributors, activities or collections as being 'good' - they should tag its talk page with Template:Goodproject and add it to the appropriate category/section on that page
- good sites
- actually a set of subpages by category containing individual urls considered 'good'... some will be large enough or important enough to have their own page for the project/org responsible for the site.
- good ideas
- anyone can add an idea from the various kinds of ideas as being 'good' - they should tag its section with Template:Goodidea and add a section deeplink to the appropriate subpage of OLPC:good ideas by category.
Thoughts and comments appreciated.
This article is a stub. You can help the OLPC project by expanding it.