Talk:Members

Use this page for talk about general formatting for all Member pages.

Why not make this a category page (like the one already started for members)? It would seem that any list of members would be in alphabetical order, so a category page would make most sense. Also to take into consideration--would it be alphabetical by first name or by last name? Unlike other pages where you can have the list page & a category page, this seems to make sense as only the category page.{Duff 18:32, 14 March 2007 (EDT)}

Well the page you're describing, I might call "List of Members." I envision this page talking about what a member is, types (classes) of membership, with links to other pages about Alumni Members, Honorary Members, etc. Article pages (like this one) should have content. Category pages are lists of Article pages (or other category pages) that are tagged with category tags. Make sense? FreshBoy 18:36, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

I understand how you were setting it up. My next question then is about the nature of the wiki. How much is going to be posted that really has nothing people can add to? For example, the page with the different type of memberships isn't something that will likely be changed (unless constitutional amendment), so what is the purpose of that being on the wiki? Maybe you have a different idea about input that could be added to that page, but the question applies to any page added--even if it won't change, will it be added? NOTE: I understand some pages are added for history sake so others can fill them in with information that isn't currently available.{Duff 18:41, 14 March 2007 (EDT)}

I want to see this become THE resource for PSP. I see this evolving into a sort of Wikipedia for all things Phi Sigma Pi. I think this could potentially be a resource for Bros who don't really understand some stuff... like the difference between a Charter Member and a Founding Member, since it's not overly clear in the National Constitution (which many people don't read anyway), and a lot of Chapters don't have any first-hand knowledge or experience with Founders/Charter Members anymore. I think if we're going to tag people as Founding Members/Charter Members, we should have a page somewhere defining what those are, for people who don't know. Same idea with anything we talk about... if we mention the National Council, we'd better have a page explaining what the National Council is, who's on it, what they do, how they got there, etc., so that people know. The ancillary pages like old National Councils, etc., are just an expansion of the main page. You're right, many of the pages i'm pushing right now won't change much... but that doesn't mean they won't be useful in the long run. Eventually, this could be a good place for new brothers, or maybe even Initiates to go to learn about Phi Sigma Pi. And it's easier to update than word documents, DVDs, or printed books. Just my mini-vision for the Wiki. FreshBoy 18:47, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

Alright. I understand where you're coming from, I just don't necessarily agree on all the points. Essentially it would turn into a companion version of the PSP nat'l website. My thoughts on the wiki were that it would be a place where brothers can contribute information, whether that be on best practices (resource guides) or on past/current history to keep it up-to-date.{Duff 18:55, 14 March 2007 (EDT)}

Overall I would approach it as a source of 'documentation'. There is information contained in here. Some will change or be added on to such as the practices in the Resource Guides, or even to a slower extent the Council pages after each election. Some won't change, or to phrase it differently are not prone to editing or adaption, like lists of past councils. I don't think we need to say content on here should only be of the nature that it is constantly changing or able to constantly change at one's discretion. As to the point of this being a parallel to the national site I see what you are saying. I don't think it is a problem to relocate information here, as we are experimenting right now with the council pages for instance. There are advantages to this content management that allows very linear progress that the main site does not. For example I can view Council's as a team, or then can view just all the individual office holders in succession, or even then just information on one particular office holder on a bio page, then I can find history on their chapter, etc. At the same time the wiki is not a suitable environment for much of the information currently contained on the home page of this national site. (Jonah 19:24, 14 March 2007 (EDT))

Ok. I'm not trying to stifle anyone's creative ideas, I was just trying to get a big picture (or scope) of what the wiki will be and how it could be used. I appreciate Jonah & Fresh posting their vision because it helps my understanding. {Duff 19:54, 14 March 2007 (EDT)}

Nah, not stifling one bit. I think it is important to discuss it, so we know at least the limitations of what this can do on one end and where this is going to go long term. (Jonah 20:37, 14 March 2007 (EDT))