PesachZ wrote:It didn't matter if the request was formal or informal, it matters if the intent was for some specific edits, or to manage and maintain the area.

That's a clear perspective, that an informal AM award conveys the same support and confidence of the community as a formal AM award. To carry it further, an editor receiving an AM area informally would be just as welcome to mention it in forum signatures and the like as if it had been granted formally. Essentially, that there is no difference between the formal and informal processes for obtaining areas.

I continue to have mixed feelings about this. I'm probably taking it all too seriously. Still, I think we should leave the question open for awhile to get more opinions.

Perhaps we need to relax the term "Area Managed" then.

Perhaps it should simply be "Usual Editable Area". That could indeed be a more useful measure for those reading the State pages trying to get information on whom to contact. I would be in complete favor of that, and I mean that.

I don't want to be technocratic. I just want the meaning to be clear.

I am confused, and I know at least two other editors are confused. So yes, I really do think people are confused. One editor tells me he believes it means the area awarded in response to a formal request. Another believes it means his usual editable area. Those are not the same thing.

Personally I dislike guidance that means different things to different people, but I will drop the matter. For myself I will treat it as "Usual Editable Area" and that is what I will advise other editors if the matter comes up.

(EDIT: Or rather, "everything up to and including the entirety of one's Usual Editable Area".)

The problem is that "Area Managed" means different things to different people. If we don't want that misunderstanding to continue, we need either to agree on what "Area Managed" means, or to change the term to something whose meaning we can agree on.

One perspective holds that "Area Managed" simply alerts wiki readers to the region that AM could potentially perform unlocks etc. -- not necessarily the region that AM knows well or is unusually motivated to support.

Another holds that "Area Managed" will be interpreted by wiki readers as a statement of merit. In many if not most editors' minds, a larger AM area implies greater experience. AMs receive little reward for management work; giving credit to the AM for their granted area supports AM morale.

I would urge that we change the term. Both readings of "Area Managed" can be justified, but they can't coexist.

Some alternative choices:

Area Granted or Area Assigned: The AM received the stated area after being vetted for that area by senior editors.

• Pros: AMs granted larger areas receive recognition. The area description matches that found in the WME AM layer. Full editable area can be in the comment column if desired.
• Cons: May require enforcement if AMs misunderstand the term and continue to enter their full editable area. Realistically speaking, enforcement is unlikely, so the morale problem this term is intended to solve may return.

Usual Editable Area: the AM typically has editing access to the stated area. The AM is free to state less than his/her full editable area.

• Pros: Crystal clear and unlikely to require enforcement.
• Cons: One less way to give credit to experienced AMs. The area description may not match the AM layer, but at least the term "Usual Editable Area" does not suggest that it should.

bummerdude69 wrote:How about Usual Editing Area instead?

Like "Area Managed", it may mean different things to different people.

Some editors may think "usual editing area" means where they spend around 75% of their editing time. They'd put down what might be a relatively small area, maybe much smaller than their editable area.

Others might think it could include places they simply look at in WME at least once a month, and could put down a vast area.

I would prefer "Area Granted" or "Area Assigned", but would be OK, reluctantly, with "Usual Editable Area". Principally I just want the term to be something most editors interpret the same way and not easily subject to inflation. We've seen now that the term "Area Managed" doesn't do that job.

Looks great, only concern I have is that the Road Types (USA) article doesn't actually articulate a clear default standard for dirt roads -- rather it says application varies and one should check one's state resources. So readers may experience a certain circularity.

That is not the fault of the template of course. I wonder if it would be more productive to attempt to craft and find consensus on default USA language or just to write something for California.

(EDIT: sigh, Tapatalk showed me a stale cache of this thread so I responded to the "dirt roads" post from many days ago. Sorry, didn't mean to derail the conversation! But the comment still stands I believe.)

Kent is busy this weekend with personal matters, so his time will be limited. If he doesn't get to you guys today or tomorrow, rest assured, he'll answer on Monday.

sketch wrote:Anyway, La. test page for now: https://wiki.waze.com/wiki/Louisiana/Test

Sketch,
for your AM section, wouldn't your CM's "Area Managed" be USA or Countrywide instead of Statewide?

SkiDooGuy wrote:Starting with the questions.

When I go to create a "Unique Portion" for MI it doesn't seem to be editing to the correct page.

I created the new page under: https://wiki.waze.com/wiki/Michigan/test

However when I edit the Unique Portion this is my URL:
https://wiki.waze.com/wiki/index.php?title=Michigan/Resources/Main&action=edit&preview=yes&summary=*/Resources/Main*/

Whereas when you edit Texas unique section this is your URL:
https://wiki.waze.com/wiki/index.php?title=Texas/Test/Resources/Main&action=edit&preview=yes&summary=*/Resources/Main*/

It appears to have the "/test/resources" for Texas, but doesn't do the same for Michigan.

What did I miss?

Question, did the page Michagan/Resources already exits?

From what I have experienced, yes it does. I think the page links are case sensitive, so a lowercase and uppercase would result into two different pages.