wikipedia credit

[g6s]

I may be a minority, but it's really disappointing seeing people's name stamped all over the wiki site. I don't want to edit them all out, but I think the names taint the point of AdiscWiki and doesn't allow for fair peer critique. I would request that people stop adding their names so that I don't feel bad throwing in my two cents. I really hate adding a section entitled "Handfulofoat's view on the matter" because it ruins the credibility of the whole article when there are individualized names to each different idea.

 

[baconbit]

I may be a minority, but it's really disappointing seeing people's name stamped all over the wiki site. I don't want to edit them all out, but I think the names taint the point of AdiscWiki and doesn't allow for fair peer critique. I would request that people stop adding their names so that I don't feel bad throwing in my two cents. I really hate adding a section entitled "Handfulofoat's view on the matter" because it ruins the credibility of the whole article when there are individualized names to each different idea.

I understand what you mean people putting there names at the bottom showing the made it is a bad thing. But on a few parts you can't say anything like on m6y wiki topic about story writing the guides creators have to be credited or it is copyright.

 

[g6s]

the point of wiki article are to be a culmination of EVERYONE'S knowledge. so if you have to quote someone, then you owe the credit to someone, but if you're writing from your own personal knowledge, or from public domain... you dont need your name by it

 

[Mr Alex]

Would you prefer people just - signature? Or do you not want that either, thats what I do when other people have done that, I think I've only done it on one article.

We could just have a member opinion section, sign at bottom.

 

[g6s]

people's names appear in the history section. This is not a major wiki-site, so if people really want to add their names, it needs to be at the end... not the header of the section.

i just think having names detracts from articles, and makes other uses unwilling to edit or add their own material. it's also a bit tacky, in my opinion.

 

[EmeraldsAndLime]

I don't mind if the "personal views" are accumlated and sectioned off from the main body of the article. Like a more personal extension to the article. I don't feel they should be a part of the main text.

 

[Martin]

I am with Lukie on this one.

 

[BitterGrey]

I may be a minority, but it's really disappointing seeing people's name stamped all over the wiki site.

Having been active in Wikipedia for a few years now, I have to agree. Contributors need to feel a sense of ownership. Developing a great wiki takes a lot of work. It is their work, so in a way, it is their wiki. This sense of ownership will keep people contributing and making improvements.

However, articles must not have markings of ownership. Once a section becomes titled 'so-and-so's section' or 'section by so-and-so,' others are discouraged from improving it. This goes against the basic concept of a wiki.

(This applies only to the articles, by the way. People should share their thoughts under their name on the talk pages, and not edit the contributions of others there.)

 

[recovery]

I don't mind if the "personal views" are accumlated and sectioned off from the main body of the article. Like a more personal extension to the article. I don't feel they should be a part of the main text.

Yeah, This is the only time I have seen people sign the article over something that is either tied to their views or past experiences. But I am a little annoyed at it though. Although it is nice to hear personal views and get a better insight, I think that's not what the wiki should all be about, or at least the article. So I'm with lukie on that. Maybe just have a section at the bottom called "Personal views and Experiences of ADISC members" or something to that accord?

 

[Mr Alex]

I agree, signatures and credits, should be at the bottom.