Help:FAQ - Revision history

Avelino Maestas at 17:23, February 27, 2009

2009-02-27T17:23:20Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:23, February 27, 2009
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	~~===Why are the background of some pages light yellow and others white?===~~	+	{{Helpbar}}
−		+
−	Encyclopedia article pages have white backgrounds, while dynamically generated 'special' pages, talk pages, user pages, and about-wikipedia pages have yellow backgrounds. This is intended as a visual cue that you're not in the encyclopedia per se.	+
−		+
	===How do I report that something isn't working properly?===		===How do I report that something isn't working properly?===

−	If you think it's a bug in the software (for example, if it happens in two different web browsers), you can send a bug report ~~to editor@prwatch.org~~.	+	If you think it's a bug in the software (for example, if it happens in two different web browsers), you can send a bug report via the [[Contact\|contact]] page.

−	===Is it possible for a vandal to delete all ~~SourceWatch~~ pages?===	+	===Is it possible for a vandal to delete all OpenCongress pages?===

−	Not really. You need to be an ~~[[SourceWatch:Administrators\|~~administrator]] to permanently and totally delete pages. Any other users could remove the text of a page, but any other user could restore the text from the history archive. If someone did an extensive attack, they could be blocked from further editing by the admins. Moreover, we are keeping backups of the server itself.	+	Not really. You need to be an administrator to permanently and totally delete pages. Any other users could remove the text of a page, but any other user could restore the text from the history archive. If someone did an extensive attack, they could be blocked from further editing by the admins. Moreover, we are keeping backups of the server itself.

	===Is allowing everyone to edit pages safe? What if someone contributes or writes something that might be defamatory?===		===Is allowing everyone to edit pages safe? What if someone contributes or writes something that might be defamatory?===

−	Contributors should refer to [[~~SourceWatch~~:~~Policy~~]] and [[~~SourceWatch~~:Ground rules]] for guidelines on what is acceptable content to add to ~~SourceWatch~~. If you see content that does not meet those standards, see [[Help:How to fix or report an error]] for solutions.	+	Contributors should refer to the [[Meta:Editorial policy\|editorial policy]] and [[Meta:Ground rules\|ground rules]] for guidelines on what is acceptable content to add to OpenCongress. If you see content that does not meet those standards, see [[Help:How to fix or report an error]] for solutions.

−	Under the [[Digital Millennium Copyright Act]], the person who posts content on the wiki, rather than the ~~Center for Media and Democracy~~, is generally liable for their additions. The Electronic Freedom Foundation has a good [http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-overview.php "Overview of Legal Liability Issues"] that may help guide your contributions.	+	Under the [[Digital Millennium Copyright Act]], the person who posts content on the wiki, rather than the Participatory Politics Foundation or Sunlight Foundation, is generally liable for their additions. The Electronic Freedom Foundation has a good [http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-overview.php "Overview of Legal Liability Issues"] that may help guide your contributions.

−	===What is the best way to link into ~~SourceWatch~~ from another site?===	+	===What is the best way to link into OpenCongress from another site?===

−	To link to the ~~front~~ page, the ~~prefered~~ URL is http://www.~~SourceWatch~~.org/	+	To link to the main page, the preferred URL is '''http://www.OpenCongress.org/'''. To link to the OpenCongress Wiki, use '''http://www.opencongress.org/wiki'''.

	===Is there a place where people ask for new entries?===		===Is there a place where people ask for new entries?===

−	On the [[~~SourceWatch~~:Requested articles]] page you can ask for a specific article to be created. The [[Special:Wantedpages\|Most Wanted page]] lists nonexistent articles that other articles have link to.	+	On the [[Meta:Requested articles\|requested articles]] page you can ask for a specific article to be created. The [[Special:Wantedpages\|Most Wanted page]] lists nonexistent articles that other articles have link to.

	===Is there any peer review process to validate the data that is displayed?===		===Is there any peer review process to validate the data that is displayed?===
Line 29:		Line 26:
	We are all peers here, and we all review each other's work.		We are all peers here, and we all review each other's work.

−	===~~How is SourceWatch backed up? Is it possible that an accident could destroy all this data~~?===	+	===What happened to Congresspedia?===
		+	In 2006, The Sunlight Foundation partnered with the [http://prwatch.org Center for Media and Democracy] (CMD) to launch Congresspedia, the original online encyclopedia about Congress. Congresspedia was hosted by CMD on [[Sourcewatch]], a wiki about PR firms, activist groups and government agencies (and their intersection with the media).
		+
		+	In March of 2009, the Sunlight Foundation decided to merge the Congresspedia project with another joint venture, the [http://www.participatorypolitics.org/ Participatory Politics Foundation's] [[OpenCongress]] project. The "Congresspedia" brand was dropped, and the corresponding Wiki articles became the OpenCongress Wiki.

−	~~We make periodic dumps into a database customized for SourceWatch backup.~~	+	=== Is it okay to copy an OpenCongress article into Wikipedia, or vice versa? ===
−	=== Is it okay to copy ~~a SourceWatch~~ article into Wikipedia, or vice versa? ===	+

−	We don't have any objections to this from the ~~SourceWatch~~ end. If copying articles from Wikipedia into ~~SourceWatch~~, please add a <nowiki>{{wikipedia}}</nowiki> template tag to the bottom of the ~~SourceWatch~~ version. This adds an attribution credit and a link back to the Wikipedia article.	+	We don't have any objections to this from the OpenCongress end. If copying articles from Wikipedia into OpenCongress, please add a <nowiki>{{wikipedia}}</nowiki> template tag to the bottom of the OpenCongress version. This adds an attribution credit and a link back to the Wikipedia article.

−	When copying articles from ~~SourceWatch~~ into Wikipedia, it is possible that Wikipedia editors may object, depending on the nature of the article that you want to add. Wikipedia's editorial policies are somewhat different than ~~SourceWatch~~ regarding what type of content is considered appropriate. First of all, Wikipedia has a "[[w:Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view\|neutral point of view]]" (NPOV) policy that says articles should be written from a neutral, and not partisan, point of view. (The [[~~SourceWatch~~:Policy\|~~SourceWatch~~ policy]] is somewhat different, seeking articles that are fair, accurate and referenced.) Wikipedia has a diverse community of editors and therefore they have numerous internal disputes about what is or is not "neutral," so it's quite possible that someone there may object to your article on that basis, while someone else may feel your article is perfectly fine.	+	When copying articles from OpenCongress into Wikipedia, it is possible that Wikipedia editors may object, depending on the nature of the article that you want to add. Wikipedia's editorial policies are somewhat different than OpenCongress regarding what type of content is considered appropriate. First of all, Wikipedia has a "[[w:Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view\|neutral point of view]]" (NPOV) policy that says articles should be written from a neutral, and not partisan, point of view. (The [[Meta:Policy\|OpenCongress policy]] is somewhat different, seeking articles that are fair, accurate and referenced.) Wikipedia has a diverse community of editors and therefore they have numerous internal disputes about what is or is not "neutral," so it's quite possible that someone there may object to your article on that basis, while someone else may feel your article is perfectly fine.

	Wikipedia also has a "[[w:Wikipedia:Notability\|notability]]" policy that says an article should be on a topic that has "received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." It has a policy on "[[w:Wikipedia:BLP\|biographies of living persons]]" that basically recommends caution to avoid adding content that might be hurtful or libelous. Finally, it has a "[[w:Wikipedia:Spam\|spam]]" policy that discourages people from adding external links to their own websites or other self-promotional material.		Wikipedia also has a "[[w:Wikipedia:Notability\|notability]]" policy that says an article should be on a topic that has "received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." It has a policy on "[[w:Wikipedia:BLP\|biographies of living persons]]" that basically recommends caution to avoid adding content that might be hurtful or libelous. Finally, it has a "[[w:Wikipedia:Spam\|spam]]" policy that discourages people from adding external links to their own websites or other self-promotional material.
Line 47:		Line 46:
	*[[w:Wikipedia:Spam\|Wikipedia:Spam]]		*[[w:Wikipedia:Spam\|Wikipedia:Spam]]

−	If you try adding ~~a SourceWatch~~ article to Wikipedia and someone objects, you can certainly argue your case for its inclusion on the article's Wikipedia talk page. Of course, we recommend being polite about the matter and accepting the decision of Wikipedians if a majority there feels that the material is inappropriate for their website.	+	If you try adding an OpenCongress article to Wikipedia and someone objects, you can certainly argue your case for its inclusion on the article's Wikipedia talk page. Of course, we recommend being polite about the matter and accepting the decision of Wikipedians if a majority there feels that the material is inappropriate for their website.

Avelino Maestas: bringing over FAQ from Sourcewatch, needs modification

2009-02-18T22:51:35Z

bringing over FAQ from Sourcewatch, needs modification

New page

===Why are the background of some pages light yellow and others white?===

Encyclopedia article pages have white backgrounds, while dynamically generated 'special' pages, talk pages, user pages, and about-wikipedia pages have yellow backgrounds. This is intended as a visual cue that you're not in the encyclopedia per se.

===How do I report that something isn't working properly?===

If you think it's a bug in the software (for example, if it happens in two different web browsers), you can send a bug report to editor@prwatch.org.

===Is it possible for a vandal to delete all SourceWatch pages?===

Not really. You need to be an [[SourceWatch:Administrators|administrator]] to permanently and totally delete pages. Any other users could remove the text of a page, but any other user could restore the text from the history archive. If someone did an extensive attack, they could be blocked from further editing by the admins. Moreover, we are keeping backups of the server itself.

===Is allowing everyone to edit pages safe? What if someone contributes or writes something that might be defamatory?===

Contributors should refer to [[SourceWatch:Policy]] and [[SourceWatch:Ground rules]] for guidelines on what is acceptable content to add to SourceWatch. If you see content that does not meet those standards, see [[Help:How to fix or report an error]] for solutions.

Under the [[Digital Millennium Copyright Act]], the person who posts content on the wiki, rather than the Center for Media and Democracy, is generally liable for their additions. The Electronic Freedom Foundation has a good [http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-overview.php "Overview of Legal Liability Issues"] that may help guide your contributions.

===What is the best way to link into SourceWatch from another site?===

To link to the front page, the prefered URL is http://www.SourceWatch.org/

===Is there a place where people ask for new entries?===

On the [[SourceWatch:Requested articles]] page you can ask for a specific article to be created. The [[Special:Wantedpages|Most Wanted page]] lists nonexistent articles that other articles have link to.

===Is there any peer review process to validate the data that is displayed?===

We are all peers here, and we all review each other's work.

===How is SourceWatch backed up? Is it possible that an accident could destroy all this data?===

We make periodic dumps into a database customized for SourceWatch backup.
=== Is it okay to copy a SourceWatch article into Wikipedia, or vice versa? ===

We don't have any objections to this from the SourceWatch end. If copying articles from Wikipedia into SourceWatch, please add a <nowiki>{{wikipedia}}</nowiki> template tag to the bottom of the SourceWatch version. This adds an attribution credit and a link back to the Wikipedia article.

When copying articles from SourceWatch into Wikipedia, it is possible that Wikipedia editors may object, depending on the nature of the article that you want to add. Wikipedia's editorial policies are somewhat different than SourceWatch regarding what type of content is considered appropriate. First of all, Wikipedia has a "[[w:Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view|neutral point of view]]" (NPOV) policy that says articles should be written from a neutral, and not partisan, point of view. (The [[SourceWatch:Policy|SourceWatch policy]] is somewhat different, seeking articles that are fair, accurate and referenced.) Wikipedia has a diverse community of editors and therefore they have numerous internal disputes about what is or is not "neutral," so it's quite possible that someone there may object to your article on that basis, while someone else may feel your article is perfectly fine.

Wikipedia also has a "[[w:Wikipedia:Notability|notability]]" policy that says an article should be on a topic that has "received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." It has a policy on "[[w:Wikipedia:BLP|biographies of living persons]]" that basically recommends caution to avoid adding content that might be hurtful or libelous. Finally, it has a "[[w:Wikipedia:Spam|spam]]" policy that discourages people from adding external links to their own websites or other self-promotional material.

Here are the links to Wikipedia's policy pages in each of these areas:

*[[w:Wikipedia:Neutral point of view|Wikipedia:Neutral point of view]]
*[[w:Wikipedia:Notability|Wikipedia:Notability]]
*[[w:Wikipedia:BLP|Wikipedia:BLP]]
*[[w:Wikipedia:Spam|Wikipedia:Spam]]

If you try adding a SourceWatch article to Wikipedia and someone objects, you can certainly argue your case for its inclusion on the article's Wikipedia talk page. Of course, we recommend being polite about the matter and accepting the decision of Wikipedians if a majority there feels that the material is inappropriate for their website.