Re: External links @ the wiki, aka pagechange wars

On May 24, 2007, at 08:50, Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:

> On Thu, May 24, 2007 at 08:05:30AM -0400, Joshua Slive
wrote:
>> External links are encouraged where they add
substantial value, but
>> you may not link to your own pages or otherwise
seek private benefits
>> from external links.
>
> I like the elegance of this rule, because if it's your
page and you
> words, well you can just add the content to the wiki
anyway. But at  
> the
> same time it may invite even more awkward and
inappropriate behaviour,
> e.g. paying someone else to add the links on your
behalf.
>
> I think this problem is always going to fall into the
"We know abuse
> when we see it" category, it requires a vague kind
of rule-making  
> which
> only humans can apply.
>
> I'm in favour of banning these links in this instance,
though not all
> external links.

The trouble in this particular case is that the contributor
in  
question writes articles that are misleading or completely
wrong, and  
appears to be unaware of the fact that he is being
misleading and  
wrong. I'm not sure if he's genuinely trying to be helpful,
or merely  
trying to inflate his google ranking by creating pages that
link back  
to his site. Either way, the content that he produces does
not add  
substantial value, nor do the pages to which he links, and
often his  
content actively promotes practices that are discouraged as
being  
less-than-best-practice.

Added to this is his refusal to accept correction, so that
when his  
articles are modified to reflect best practice and reality,
he gets  
offended and changes it back.

Behind the scenes there are angry and insulting email
messages being  
exchanged, which I'm occasionally copied on, in which he
defends his  
articles as being the best things ever written, and accusing
us of  
singling him out for abuse. It's all very juvenile and time
consuming.

However, one of the side effects of having this kind of
public Wiki  
is that we have to do this kind of policing and maintenance,
and some  
people are going to feel singled out.

--
If you miss this moment
You miss your life

Rich Bowen wrote:

> The trouble in this particular case is that the
contributor in
> question writes articles that are misleading or
completely wrong, and
> appears to be unaware of the fact that he is being
misleading and
> wrong.

Then if AskApache will not correct the error of its ways, I
suggest that you
link to its pages -- with documentation correcting all of
its false
statements, as a warning to anyone who should fall upon them
by accident.

After all, I might accidentally come across them by a Google
search, and you
owe it to your users to ensure that such well-known
falsehoods are corrected
so that we do not follow them.  That may not be a notoriety
that it wants,
but too bad.

> when his articles are modified to reflect best practice
and reality,
> he gets offended and changes it back.

Too bad.  If it tries that on the Wiki, ban it.

	--- Noel

Hello,  

I've never used this list so bear with me, I couldn't get
docs-help to send
me help.    Its nice to know Apache has so many helpful
people willing to
discuss this situation, but why do I get the feeling that
none of you have
actually read the page in question?  Here is the link that
is causing all
the commotion:
http://www.askapache.com/htaccess/ap
ache-status-code-headers-errordocument.h
tml I encourage you to read it and then you can understand
my position.

After you read the article, how could you possibly say that
it is spam?
That is perhaps the most relevant article I've ever seen
about Apache
ErrorDocuments and more specifically, HTTP Status Codes. 
Its the single,
only place on the entire Internet where each of Apache's 57
Status Codes are
listed.  Its the only place on the Net where you can find
the headers of
each Apache ErrorDocument.  Its the only article anywhere to
have every
single returned errordocument.  I know because I did the
work, I filled in
the blanks on the Common_HTTPStatusCodes, I wrote it, and I
published my
findings to support open-source and Apache, and for the
benefit of the
entire net community.
 
I actually did research on the external linking of sources
or references on
the Apache wiki, asf, many other apache wikis, and the link
to my article is
100% compliant with the policies, but besides that it is a
really fantastic
article with 100% relevancy. 
 
1. There is no copyright issue.
2. Its 100% relevant to the wiki article.
3. Its the ONLY place on the NET with that information. It
is the
authoritative link because its the original source.
4. Its a not-for-profit site.
5. The source that I used to fill in the many blanks on the
Status Code
table was my article, and since the article is incredibly
lengthy a link to
the original source is 100% warranted.  
6. AskApache.com is registered for another 7 years, so these
links are
stable.
7. Have you even read the article?
 
I once again find myself in a wiki battle of reverts, but I
just don't have
the patience or the time to be harassed every time I
contribute to the wiki.
Its supposed to be a place where new ideas and drafts can
flourish, shutting
people down who want to contribute is not cool.  Calling me
a spammer and
calling my policy-compliant link "spam" is
disingenuous and that rudeness
and immaturity is NOT following the guidelines and policies
of apache and
asf.  

I have probably spent over 30 hours trying to contribute to
the wiki, which
I understood to be the trial area for working out new
documentation.  A
"work-in-progress" where the point was shared
collaboration.  Unfortunately
pctony and megaspaz have refused to let me post anything on
the wiki.. It
seems that every tip and suggestion I contribute immediately
gets shot down
as either being plagiarised, misleading and incorrect, or
they just don't
give me an excuse.  I have literally spent hours writing a
new wiki article
in the ScratchPad area, and a few minutes after I posted it
was immediately
deleted. 

My stuff isn't discussed or improved upon or checked out,
its just
completely deleted.  My email address is on my username page
on the wiki,
and I have emailed both pctony and megaspaz several times to
try and get
them to understand we are on the same team and the wiki
isn't their personal
feifdom.  Look at my site, askapache.com.  Its almost
entirely dedicated to
Apache httpd tips, tricks, etc..  I challenge pctony and
megaspaz to stop
deleting all my posts and instead show me how its wrong. 
Anyone who knows
anything about Apache will immediately recognize my posts
for being
original, creative, and incredible resources for the whole
web to enjoy for
free.  My billing is currently $125/hr, I am NOT trying to
make any kind of
profit from askapache.com, and to suggest my articles are
spam is complete
ludicrous.  Anyone can shout slogans,  I put the code up on
the NET for
everyone to discuss and improve.   

We are all like-minded here when it comes to Apache, so I
hope we can rise
above the emotional aspects of this issue and instead focus
on making the
wiki a more productive and friendly place for everyone who
has ideas and is
willing to donate their time and effort.

-AskApache

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.7/816 - Release
Date: 5/23/2007
3:59 PM
 

> The trouble in this particular case is that the
contributor 
> in question writes articles that are misleading or
completely 
> wrong, and appears to be unaware of the fact that he is
being 
> misleading and wrong. I'm not sure if he's genuinely
trying 
> to be helpful, or merely trying to inflate his google
ranking 
> by creating pages that link back to his site. 

If I am misleading or wrong in any way shape or form than it
is absolutely
accidental.   Instead of repeatedly telling me how bad my
contributions are,
and deleting anything I try to contribute, why not just
point out WHERE I am
wrong, WHERE I am misleading, that way we can work together
and add valuable
content to the wiki.  Not to mention I can revise the
articles on my blog,
which means your feedback will be helping thousands of
newbie Apache users.



> Either way, the 
> content that he produces does not add substantial
value, nor 
> do the pages to which he links, and often his content 
> actively promotes practices that are discouraged as
being 
> less-than-best-practice.

I don't care if you are the top Apache Guru on the planet,
the fact is that
thousands of people DO think that my articles add
substantial value, and if
you really feel my stuff is that bad its your problem, not
the content.
Otherwise I would encourage you to make suggestions, point
out errors,
highlight alternatives, illustrate best-practices, instead
of just talking
about how bad my contributions are.


> Added to this is his refusal to accept correction, so
that 
> when his articles are modified to reflect best practice
and 
> reality, he gets offended and changes it back.

Say whatever you want, I'm not going to argue when the
evidence is online
for everyone to examine.  Go look at the wiki at my posting
history, you
will see how unfairly I have been treated. 

> Behind the scenes there are angry and insulting email 
> messages being exchanged, which I'm occasionally copied
on, 
> in which he defends his articles as being the best
things 
> ever written, and accusing us of singling him out for
abuse. 
> It's all very juvenile and time consuming.

I believe I've written 3 people a total of 5 emails in the
past 4 months.  I
saved everything so I don't have to argue or use sweeping
generalizations,
facts speak for themselves.   I just don't understand all
the unfriendliness
and pettiness from 2 individuals since day 1 (look at my
wiki history).  In
fact, one of the people actually went to my blog and left
this kindhearted
public comment.  "This is the most idiotic ‘tip’ I’ve
ever read on the web
since 1990....  I am curious as to how you manage to
generate technological
content, you must be copying and pasting from different
sources." Pleasant
no?

I feel like just because I posted some radical, new, and
alternative ideas
and solutions that might not have been discussed elsewhere
before, people
get a little competitive and want me to fall in line or
something.  I can
already here the response: "your stuff wasn't new or
radical, it didn't
solve anything, it was wrong, poorly written, and definately
misleading."
Why not respond like you are supposed to and actually SHOW
me what is wrong,
misleading, or poorly written?  Isn't that what the wiki is
for?  How can we
improve content when it just gets deleted right away?  I
don't have time to
try to make a couple people like me.. thats silly, I go to
the wiki to
contribute, share ideas, and learn about my favorite
software.

I am only interested in being able to help and contribute to
the wiki
without immediately being deleted, reverted, and publically
dissed both
personally and academically.  I understand how it could have
gotten to this
point, drama is always exciting, but the past is the past
and I am just
wanting to contribute.  I've been trying for several months
now, with month
long breaks in-between, but I feel like if the people with
grudges can't let
it go, then I will never be able to contribute.  Isn't there
a policy or a
guideline or someone with rank that can point the way to put
this behind us?

"Teamwork makes the Dream Work"

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.7/816 - Release
Date: 5/23/2007
3:59 PM
 

On Thu, 24 May 2007 15:15:56 -0500
"Webmaster" <webmasteraskapache.com> wrote:

> Hello,  
> 
> I've never used this list so bear with me, I couldn't
get docs-help
> to send me help.    Its nice to know Apache has so many
helpful
> people willing to discuss this situation, but why do I
get the
> feeling that none of you have actually read the page in
question?
> Here is the link that is causing all the commotion:
> http://www.askapache.com/htaccess/ap
ache-status-code-headers-errordocument.h
> tml I encourage you to read it and then you can
understand my
> position.

OK, I just looked.  And to be brutal ...

WTF????

The first error is to call them "Apache Status
Codes".
That's a nasty one to perpetrate on innocent newbies,
because
it obscures what they really are, and misleads the reader.

First sentence: "There are a total of 57 HTTP Status
Codes recognized
by the Apache Web Server."   Sorry, that's plain
nonsense -
though at least it describes them correctly.

The article then suggests using any or all of them with
Apache's
Redirect.  It does so without any attempt to explain the
meaning
of any of the status codes, so it cannot be said to add
anything
to Apache's default behaviour or the mod_alias
documentation.
Rather it confuses the issue for readers who don't have
sufficient
grasp of HTTP to see that it's gibberish.  The fact that
Apache enables
you to shoot yourself in the foot is not a good reason to do
so.

It then proceeds to list HTTP status codes, and gives an
errordocument
for each one.  Unfortunately a number of them are bogus
gibberish.

> After you read the article, how could you possibly say
that it is
> spam? That is perhaps the most relevant article I've
ever seen about
> Apache ErrorDocuments and more specifically, HTTP
Status Codes.

Spam is not the right word.  But it's far too ill-informed
and
misleading to give the implied endorsement of a link from
an
official or semi-official Apache site.

I'm sure you could make a useful contribution if you want
to.
But you're not ready to go solo.  So why not put your
contents
(rather than links to it) on the wiki, where some of the
regulars 
can help improve it for everyone?

-- 
Nick Kew

Application Development with Apache - the Apache Modules
Book
http://www.apachetutor.or
g/

ons 2007-05-30 klockan 21:39 +0100 skrev Nick Kew:

> It then proceeds to list HTTP status codes, and gives
an errordocument
> for each one.  Unfortunately a number of them are bogus
gibberish.

It's the gibberish Apache emits if you shoot yourself in the
foot using
Redirect. Garbage in, garbage out.

Regards
Henrik