Wikipedia:Refactoring talk pages
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Refactoring is a form of editing whose goal is to improve readability while preserving meaning. It is a stronger term than copy editing and can include removing superfluous content, summarizing long passages, and any other means that alter the presentation of information. (See list below.) Like refactoring in computing, refactoring of talk pages must preserve the full intentions of the original authors.
Refactoring talk pages can be necessitated by an accumulation of unclear or irrelevant previous posts. Such an accumulation can make understanding an ongoing discussion difficult and may discourage potential contributors from involvement.
Both refactoring and archiving promote productive discussion by improving clarity and accessibility.
Contents |
[edit] Refactoring vs. Editing
Refactoring, unlike editing, saves the entire original intent and meaning of the author(s).
Content to remove
- Redundant - Separate discussions of similar or identical topics.
- Superfluous - Content that is entirely and unmistakably irrelevant.
Content to alter
- Outdated - A discussion that has reached an unalterable conclusion.
- Poor formatting - Misused or underused indentation.
[edit] How to refactor
[edit] Summarize
If a discussion has become lengthy in such a way that it obscures meaning and hinders further discussion, an editor is encouraged to summarize it in such a way as to preserve all significant detail. It is the editor's responsibility to ensure credit is given to those who posted the original commentary. Wherever possible an editor should retain the original usernames and timestamps of the parties involved in signed comments.
[edit] Prune
Following Wikipedia's talk page guidelines, an editor is encouraged to remove any content that is not appropriate. See Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines#Behavior that is unacceptable for what is content that is not appropriate on a talk page.
[edit] Introduce a frequently asked questions list
If the discussion would benefit, consider making an FAQ. One can convert existing question and answer sessions into a more polished document. See talk:Mother Teresa/FAQ for an example.
[edit] Add an overview
Ongoing discussions that are not yet ready to condense might benefit from a summary. This can be added to the top for people who need a quick overview but don't want to get involved with the heated discussions. It might also help those having the argument to stay on focus.
[edit] Concerns
These concerns should be considered when refactoring:
- Refactoring may cause confusion if improperly applied to an ongoing discussion; an editor should take great care to preserve all such discussion and all relevant details to its context.
- Editors should be conscious of the newcomer's perspective; one should not remove content that would benefit an editor who had not yet read the page.
Be aware that not every editor will agree with your refactoring or even of the refactoring concept in general. Provide links to the original, uncut version, so others can check your changes, and if necessary go back to the original to clarify what an author actually said. This combination of refactoring and archiving will often prevent complaints that information was lost. Make it explicit that you have refactored something so no one is misled into thinking this was the original talk page.
If you think people may object to their discussion being refactored, make your summary on a different page. Rather than reducing archives 7 to 10 of talk:New Imperialism, create a new page entitled [[talk:New Imperialism/Summary of archives 7 to 10]]. Link this to the top of the appropriate archives, and to the current talk page. This gives newcomers the chance to get a quick understanding without the risk of losing what has gone before. Having a linked archive can help satisfy both those who feel their words must remain intact and those who want a neat summary.
[edit] Tools
When refactoring, it is often very helpful to have an advanced text editor with extended find and replace functionalities. Also, if you're technically inclined, scripting languages are immensely helpful in situations involving complex-but-regular text manipulation. For example, sorting a number of sections into chronological order is a painful task to do by hand, but if you're handy with scripting languages, you can save a lot of time and effort. Good scripting languages for text processing include Perl, Python, and Unix shell scripting.
On the wiki side, it helps to tag the page(s) being refactored with Template:Reorganizing. Simply add {{reorganizing}} or {{refactoring}} to the top of the page(s). This will alert other editors to the fact that the pages are under construction, preventing edit conflicts.
See MediaZilla:1843, a request for an archiving feature in MediaWiki.
[edit] Terminology
Other wikis dispute the use of the term "refactoring", calling the nomenclature unhelpful and prefer to call this "editing". See Clublet:WeDontRefactorWeEdit. According to Wiki:WhatIsReworking, refactoring and reworking may not be the same thing. On Wikipedia, however, the term "refactoring" is often used to mean any changes to a talk page that improve the readability of it.
[edit] Significant Examples
Talk pages that have benefited from refactoring:
[edit] See also
- Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page
- Wikipedia:Remove personal attacks
- Refactoring wiki pages
- Constant refactoring is a good thing
- Refactor as you go
- Conclusion template
