administrator, Bureaucrats, bureaucrats, checkuser, editor, emailconfirmed, move, Administrators
3,292
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→Naming Conventions
So far WikiChristian has been small enough not to deal with such issues, but if it grows to a household name, which I pray it does, these will be crucial issues. Best to "nip them in the bud." Your thoughts? --[[User:JBJ|JBJ]] 05:51, 9 Sep 2005 (EDT)
----
I agree with [[User:JBJ|JBJ]] that we need to define what wikichristian is and what it is not. I like the idea that all truth comes from God and should be represented here. However, to be focussed in our mission, we have to draw a line as to what we want to include and what not! While wikipedia's mission is a general encyclopedia, wikichristian is more focussed on everything related to Christians and Christianity and there will be some overlap. I think there is so much that could be done related to Christianity that we should be focussed on our mission at this point and do not spread ourselves too thin. I agree that our goals and mission might change as we grow and that is perfectly fine. We have no articles on many great people like "Billy Graham" and the like. We can also start wikichristian in other languages, as we grow!
Wikichristian has been and should be more than an encyclopedia. It is a wiki community, "Christian Index" and a wiki repository for all public domain christian works and an encyclopedia with a "Christian Perspective".
I think we should create a wikichristian vision page and let users express their opinions on the talk page and edit the vision page. Since you brought up the issue, I think you should take charge of this wikichristian vision page and start putting some thoughts together so that others can join in.
--[[User:Prab|Prab]] 06:12, 9 Sep 2005 (EDT)
== Naming Conventions ==
Has any thought been put into how to best name pages, besides with the lyrics pages? If so, can it be made public? Perhaps I just don't understand, but I'm not seeing comprehensive pattern or ruling. On account of being more than an encyclopedia, (see above entry) I don't think standard encyclopedia entries will be enough. I know Wikipedia uses Categories (but I don't have a good idea how). Is that an option for this? I've been using the format "General_Topic: Specific_Topic" when the Specific_Topic could likely be used in another context at a later point, but I'm not sure this is the best way. Again, the sooner this is resolved, the sooner we can correct past mistakes and the less work in total. --[[User:JBJ|JBJ]] 06:03, 9 Sep 2005 (EDT)
