Last modified: 2014-04-29 15:22:42 UTC
I sometimes find inaccuracies in articles but am often not sure about the proper fact - I just know that the statement in question is not entirely correct. I do not want to 'revise' the sentence/s with possibly another inaccuracy but rather would like to put some sort of comment to the section, to let others see my concern and to eventually lead to a correct and/or clarified section. Let me explain my proposal further by outlining two oppositional modes of operation: In MediaWiki software anyone can edit the whole article or leave his thoughts in the 'discussion' page on every article, but there is no strong correlation to the part objected. The other side is, for example, the Documentation/Manual at php.net. Basically it is moderated but readers can leave their ideas at the end of every page. Over time, these comments may be included in the official documentation by the moderators. Something in between would be a comment-style system for every single section - like the edit link, maybe titled 'discussion' like the global per-page discussion link. Inside this per-section discussion page it could work like well-known board software pieces. There is the post of the thread starter as well as answers, displayed, for example, as a tree structure. When a conclusion is reached and a satisfying formulation was found, the whole thread can be dismissed or moved to some sort of archive. If a board-like implementation is not suitable right now, maybe a free-form style of editing, like in the current global per-page discussion link is expedient. However it looks like, there should be a number indicating the activity of this comments-sections next to the discussion link. I think this whole enhancement could attract the casual reader to look at the comments and maybe induce him/her to add their own thoughts. All in all it may promote participation.
I don't see how the logistics of this would work. What happens if the section's name is changed? What if it's split or merged? What interaction, if any, would this have with the main talk page? I can't see how this would work over time; the entire setup we have has sections as impermanent, with no real identity of their own, and any attempt to change that will cause serious difficulties. (Removing the word "comment" from summary to avoid confusion with <!-- SGML comments -->.)
Yes, this idea is based upon the need for some sort of ID for every section. I realize that this would be a very big change, as it affects the inner workings of the mediawiki engine. So it's probably a candidate for a development branch inclusion. As for your other questions: if the fundamentally section ID would be provided, many of your concerns are answered. If every item on your list of actions is the result of the discussion going on in the section's talk page, then the specific thread resulting in the change would be dismissed. As for all other non-resolved threads they would need to be moved, merged or put into the main talk page, if they do not apply for a specific section any more. The main talk page would not be any different than before, except the absence of the now outsourced per-section discussions.
Efforts are being focussed on Flow, a replacement for talk pages, rather than on talk pages themselves.
