Forum > Documentation (Maintaining -)

Wiki Article

<< < (3/9) > >>

I guess I agree with marcov, it is a page from 2007 with no useful information. trev's note allows us to ignore it, but it seems more like a dead link than a wiki stub.

I suppose a consistent policy should be adopted before deleting it though.


--- Quote from: marcov on October 29, 2021, 08:28:09 pm ---I agree that we should be consequent.. Delete those other low quality articles too
--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: VTwin on October 30, 2021, 12:57:13 am ---I suppose a consistent policy should be adopted before deleting it though.
--- End quote ---

I have created I would appreciate if we can paraphrase “other low quality articles” in general terms and describe other scenarios of pages hardly worth keeping. Later, unless there is already a consensus, we can hold a vote (forum topics support polls), but let’s first write the policy.

Very good move.

I think bad content is often worse than no content. Overall, I like what you say but maybe under the Contestable section, more information about the proscribed process ?  I believe almost all "to be deleted" pages will be contestable in one way of another so that model maybe needs more emphasis ?

An example might be the distribution dependent "installing Linux" pages, in practices we most of these pages are quite unnecessary, contain content that is not being maintained and detract and distract from the general page covering all distribution. But there is content in there that was once relevant, often they talk about a particular, obsolete, version of a distribution. Its not a good look, someone browses there and says "wow, they have not updated the Fedora page for years, this project is moribund".


Only Admins can delete Wiki content. There are nine. Three have not been active since 2016, 2017 and 2018. Apart from me, the rest appear to be developers of FPC+/Lazarus with contributions mainly confined to current development (releases, code merges, new features, breaking changes etc).

I was a lawyer (now retired) for which I hold multiple undergraduate and postgraduate law degrees. I have no programming qualifications. My programming experience in chronological order:

* CBM BASIC, 6502 machine code for a BBS (VIC-20)
* C for FidoNet BBS and utilities (PCs)
* DCL for a primitive editorial publishing system (VAX super-minicomputers)
* Bourne shell scripts and C  for an SGML editorial publishing system (Solaris.- Sparc)
* Delphi 1-7 for tax calculators (for CDs) and ISAPI DLLs (for Windows servers)
* Delphi 1-7 for ADSL router utilities, one ported to Lazarus + FPC in 2007 (PCs)
* XUL-extensions (I was a developer and reviewer for
* Bourne shell scripts and C for massively automated text transformations (Solaris.- Sparc + Intel)
* Since June 2019, Lazarus + Free Pascal mainly on macOS, and to a small extent FreeBSD

Anyway, the brief autobiography is to highlight that I am not a qualified judge of the existing Wiki material. I've written most of the Wiki macOS material and some FreeBSD material, but I'm not technically qualified to rate the quality of the other Wiki material for the purpose of deleting it.

Which brings me to the point, finally: Who's going to carry out the Wiki policy?

What I am missing is that a wiki page can be marked as Warning: content no longer valid but kept for historical reasons istead of deleted.
Meaning the entry still has some value e.g. algorithmic but the entry is not valid for the current compiler or lazarus version.

That can also apply to examples: suppose crypto example using ssl2,3 or tls1. Or MD5, that kind of entries.

And or a mark: This ientry has issues and needs adaptation, in case deletion would be too cruel


[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version