Author Topic: Wikipedia content  (Read 2544 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.


Wikipedia content
« on: July 12, 2010, 09:36:10 pm »
(copied from [[Talk:laser hair removal]])

* My personal opinion, but these articles copied from Wikipedia are way too long & scientific to be practical in helping the average person. It's great if you're doing a research project on it (which is what Wikipedia is for) but not if you want advice on practical matters. I suggest not using Wikipedia material unless it's directly relevant; at any rate, there's no point in having two Wikipedias, this wiki should be its own thing with its own info & perspectives on the topic (i.e. the TG viewpoint). The other issue is if you have an excess of detailed scientific info on a topic, there's no place really to appropriately squeeze in information from personal experience, etc. People want to know about laser hair removal, yes, but they also want to know what it's like, where to look, other people's experiences, etc. Personally, I don't care too much about the techy stuff as long as it's safe & works for me lol. Transnikki 09:04, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
* Just to elaborate a bit, I doubt people are logging in here to know the latest specs on lasers :-P. The average t-girl wants it to look good, and making sure you look good has nothing to do with knowing wavelengths and whatnot. It's finding a center, knowing how much it costs, and knowing what you need to do to keep the treatments most effective (haircolor, ethnicity, staying out of the sun, post-treatment lotion, etc.). I'm just worried here because my eyes glaze over when I see so much jargonese and that doesn't help me at all, I think these articles should be a lot more KISS ;-). Transnikki 09:09, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
* I'd strongly suggest merely putting a wikilink (e.g. [[wikipedia:laser hair removal]]) for the actual content instead of copying it over. That way people can actually write their own article here (again from the TG perspective) without dodging through non-TG Wikipedia overinformation to do their edits. Until the article gets written here, they can link over to Wikipedia to see what they can find there. Again, there's no need for two Wikipedias, but there is a need for a TG wiki, and you're swamping the TG aspect with the Wikipedia content. Transnikki 09:14, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

* If a copy of a Wikipedia article is needed directly on the TG wiki, I'd suggest perhaps actually having two articles with the same name, one being the TG wiki article written here (e.g. [[laser hair removal]]), and the other being prefixed as "Transwiki:" (e.g. [[Transwiki:laser hair removal]]) in accordance with the Transwiki protocol (see ).
* I could add that prefixing current articles copied from Wikipedia with "Transwiki:" would save the trouble of modifying or deleting current wikicontent.  Perhaps we could create a new {{}} thingy on the Transwiki pages that would tell people that a TG wiki version of the article needs to be written and that the Transwiki (Wikipedia) version is there for technical reference.
« Last Edit: December 12, 2015, 01:01:25 pm by Dena »

Offline HelenW

  • Chat Administrator, retired
  • Family
  • *****
  • *
  • Posts: 3,316
  • Reputation: +111/-0
  • Gender: Female
    • Southern Tier Trans Network
Re: Wikipedia content
« Reply #1 on: July 13, 2010, 03:11:48 pm »
I agree that certain details included in Wikipedia articles and copied to our wiki may not be necessary.  If those who import the articles do not take it upon themselves to edit these details out then other editors are free to do so.  If it seems too much has been removed, we can always restore the previous versions.

I do not want to see double articles in our wiki, however.  We provide source information when the article comes from the Wikipedia and that should be enough for our readers in case they wish to examine the original.

Thanks for your suggestions!

hugs & smiles
FKA: Emelye

Pronouns: she/her

My rarely updated blog:

Southwestern New York trans support: