Wiktionary talk:Entry layout/Change proposal draft of 20050505

Thanks for the link from WS:ELE. It does make this easier to find. --Connel MacKenzie 22:37, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

see also

We'll be wanting to put in somewhere the see also for the capitalisation

opinions

Here are a few thought which you are welcome to shoot down. There's probably a more appropriate place, but I'm putting it here because it applies at least to this article.

Like the rest of the site, the article seems to lack an audience, although the error isn't as egrigious as with other pages. In fact this is probably the most useful of any resource. But even this page could be tailored further.

Who's our audience? Admittedly not much more than a guess, I'd break people down into the following groups, starting with the base of the pyramid:

• Wikipedia users

These are people who use the resource as a dictionary. They judge the dictionary against others, whether printed, online, free, commercial, or in their fantasies. They're impatient and ill informed. They're the reason we're here.

This group needs to know how to use Wiktionary. For instance, entering search words in lower case is pretty standard. Sure, they may need the obvious, but that can be reserved for a failed search page. It's confusing to provide a long history of the change and how it impacts not them.

This group would want to know how to use the pronunciation key, especially as it pertains to English. In some cases they may need a more complete chart. However, they don't want to be led to long discussions about the differences between IPA and SAMPA and benefits thereof. They need to know how to get the characters to display correctly on their browsers. They make comments in the most accessible places, e.g. the talk page of individual entries. If they offer information about actual use and applicability to their needs, they shouldn't be scolded for putting it in the wrong place, stating it as a complaint, or being flat wrong. They're not going to find an answer to their question in the middle of someone's treatise or pretty much in any document more than one click away. They should know that the content can be edited, and when they try to do so they should be provided with the most basic resources: a statement about the license and copyrighted works, a guide for style ("This is a dictionary," etc.), a current guide for layout, and a secondary guide for more obscure questions about markup, etc.

• Typical contributor

These are English speakers, usually registered, who add the bulk of content to the English site. Mere users at one time, they have become involved with the project. They are more likely than occassional contributors to rely on resources such as the secondary guide above, and may need some clarification on rare or ambiguous issues. They are more likely to raise questions about the language and even provide feedback for others. They are more likely than occassional contributors to start a new page, but they don't need a lesson on parts of speech to determine that their word isn't a preposition. They're encouragable and want to know how to satisfactorily complete a page. It should be easy for them to learn about using the templates and categories provided for them. They shouldn't be led to guides on how to create useless new categories if they aren't aware of the policies, although the more technically oriented will stray into these areas. Most won't be interested in hammering out policy, but all will have specific issues on which they'll want to be heard.

• Translators

These are typical contributors placed in a different class because they have an extended set of goals, issues, and resources that most contributors don't need to muddle with. Of course, they are part of the same community, if other communities as well.

• Knowledgable users

The audience I'm trying to persuade.

• Vandals

The obvious. Luckily, this is the smallest group.

In short, it has taken too much reading to familiarize myself with the basics of this community and the mechanisms of this project, and I want to implement changes to streamline that process. Davilla 20:18, 28 July 2005 (UTC)