Looking again at the proposed approach of changing the article, it looks like one of the primary goals is to change the "wrong" headings to "right" headings. For example, if the "Incorrect edits" article currently lists:
- Misplaced roundabouts
- Overlapping segments
- Corrupted turn restrictions
- Unnecessary road splitting
- etc.
The friendlier approach would list
- Correctly-placed roundabouts
- Proper use of adjacent segments
- Correct turn restrictions
- Appropriate road splitting
- etc.
Although I agree this is a friendlier approach, I feel pretty strongly that it sacrifices the clarity necessary for an article whose readers have arrived with one question: "tell me what I did wrong and why the editing community responded like it did". The main point of this article is to answer that question. Headings that talk about doing things right are great and appropriate in other articles in the wiki, but this is the one place I believe it's better to talk about doing things wrong.
It is fantastic that this could be a useful article for editors who haven't yet been asked to read it! But they are not the primary target audience. So I would propose to retain the negative headings.
[EDIT: Oops, crossed posts! Thanks again for the suggestions and understanding!]
- Misplaced roundabouts
- Overlapping segments
- Corrupted turn restrictions
- Unnecessary road splitting
- etc.
The friendlier approach would list
- Correctly-placed roundabouts
- Proper use of adjacent segments
- Correct turn restrictions
- Appropriate road splitting
- etc.
Although I agree this is a friendlier approach, I feel pretty strongly that it sacrifices the clarity necessary for an article whose readers have arrived with one question: "tell me what I did wrong and why the editing community responded like it did". The main point of this article is to answer that question. Headings that talk about doing things right are great and appropriate in other articles in the wiki, but this is the one place I believe it's better to talk about doing things wrong.
It is fantastic that this could be a useful article for editors who haven't yet been asked to read it! But they are not the primary target audience. So I would propose to retain the negative headings.
[EDIT: Oops, crossed posts! Thanks again for the suggestions and understanding!]
Re: [New Page] Responding to incorrect edits