Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/Go for it!
Discussion
Comments from Quiddity
(I don't know if this is appropriate place/advice however, i wish to specify what I see as being at fault here. ie, this is my "comment".)
Go for it! has made numerous highly-useful contributions to the Wikipedia project, specifically (afaik), the organizing of previously scattered help pages, and the creation of various philosophy pages/portals/templates, and i don't wish to belittle these at all.
It is partly the wikiquette issue, as addressed by this RfC. But it is also Go for it!'s lack of education in the fields of web-design (webstandards), graphic design, User-Interface design, and Information Architecture, to back up the design issues that he is attempting to address in his wikipage overhauls. All the enthusiasm in the world, cannot make up for a beginner's level skill set in these complicated (and still evolving) fields. I would suggest he spend a lot of time exploring the various disciplines of visual/web design, before attempting to "lead" such endeavours.
I would also suggest spending a lot more time as an editor of articles, before attempting to overhaul more meta-pages; this would help give the required background knowledge and feel for community needs, and a better understanding of past disputes/resolutions, without having to have elaborate discussions (or polls) around each point. --Quiddity 22:07, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
- I don't know the protocol for this either. This is the first RFC that I've been involved with since joining Wikipedia. But maybe you can add it somewhere after the "Other users who endorse this summary" section (after HereToHelp's signature), and before the "Response" section. That's where I first put my added comments (perhaps should have kept them there). But, now that people are signing, maybe we should separate added comments from us and put them there. -Kmf164 (talk | contribs) 22:17, 7 April 2006 (UTC)