Northeast Wiki Reform

[Cincinnatus]

Anyone who wants to volunteer sign in here please.  I'm looking at a couple of you in particular.  You know who you are.


Volunteers thus far;

Myself
Scott
Nix
homely

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

x Senator Scott

[Cincinnatus]

It is irrelevant if you have access to edit the wiki or not (though it would help).  Anyone willing to lend a hand is welcome.

[Napoleon]

Wrong board

[Cincinnatus]

Wrong board

The NE Wiki commission thread existed in this board.  So shall the extension of that effort.

[Napoleon]

Wrong board

The NE Wiki commission thread existed in this board.  So shall the extension of that effort.

It would likely be more effective on the main board and since it isn't a regional government related task any longer I will probably ask to have it moved, don't you agree?

[Cincinnatus]

People!  Only three of us so far?  We can do better than this..  We will begin discussing official business Wednesday, regardless of our number.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

I think Napoleon should join.

[Cincinnatus]

While we're still waiting for others to join (hopefully) let's discuss how we want to organize the wiki.  I recommend eliminating the two current statute pages by putting all current law into on section called "Law" or "Statutes", ect. 

We can (but it would be a lot of extra work) create separate sections for Repealed laws, and Proposed laws.  However, I think the best avenue to take is having one page with all standing statute of the NE in one accessible section.

My other proposal is basically a section that would be entitled "How-to" or "FAQ", ect.  We could easily link pages that would explain such things as "When am I eligible to vote?", "When are Assembly elections?", "Where can I find the SOAP?" and so forth.

Gentleman, comments?  Ideas? 

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

I like these ideas.  Do you feel we should categorize the laws by the session they were passed in?

[Cincinnatus]

I like these ideas.  Do you feel we should categorize the laws by the session they were passed in?

That's a possibility, though we may run into problems down the road tracking down which Assembly it was.  Certainly something to bear in mind.

Probably the best way to organize the laws section would be to put them chronologically in the order they were signed, which is essentially the same thing.  At the bottom of the text of a law we can write Notes saying such things as (Section _ amended June 16th, 2012) or something. 

Alternatively, we could organize the laws by category, which would require us to come up with categories.

Our goal here should be to create the most user-friendly reference.  Keep in mind we will all be using this when we need to refer to Northeast law, so ensuring it's easily navigable is essential.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Okay.  Sounds like a frightening load of work ahead, but it looks like I won't be bored at all this summer.

Are we going to divide the work up?

[Cincinnatus]

Okay.  Sounds like a frightening load of work ahead, but it looks like I won't be bored at all this summer.

Are we going to divide the work up?

Within the week I hope we'll begin dividing some work up, yes.  I'm hoping to have a couple more people join this effort first, so for now we're just going to develop the groundwork for how we feel the wiki should look, how we're going to go about organizing it, ect.

A lot of the statute already exists on two pages in the wiki, the key is for us to figure out the ACTUAL status of the bill (Is their an amended text?  Was it repealed?  Was it in the SRC report?  ect).

Another part will consist of filling in the gaps from the time we stopped updating wiki statute, until now.  Obviously it will involve a lot of thread searching/scrolling, ect. 

And.. if we're ambitious enough..The Assembly page needs to be updated to reflect past Assembly make-up.  This, however, is completely unessential, and takes a back-seat to the major goal.

[Cincinnatus]

Some of those are fair ideas.  But if you look here you'll understand my point.  On the bottom tabs, I'd like a link to a "Laws"  where only standing law would be included.  This way we have a reference to relevant, on the books statute.  We can surely include tally, signed date, bill summary, title, ect.  However, I DONT want to mix repealed or proposed/failed law in with it. 

If you would like, we can definitely make a new section for Proposals, and Repealed laws.  I just think mixing standing law, with proposed/repealed laws makes the wiki harder to navigate.  Thoughts?

[Cincinnatus]

Anyone?  Anyone at all?  No limit on membership people.. We will move forward within the week.

[Cincinnatus]

Well.. within 8 days anyway.  It seems it's just the 4(?) of us?  There are some people I wish were involved with this process right now, even if they're out of the region, and despite the fact that we may not be on the best of terms [Jake, Napoleon  ].

Moving on.. Nix, Scott, how would you like to proceed from here?  Do we need any leadership, or can we all work within some sort, albeit flexible, time frame to get this done?  I have former wiki work that homely and I did previously, with the help of Napoleon.  The thread exists somewhere, I'll just have to dig it up..  Also, I have some old notepads with, well.. notes that I took during the process.

The original point;  How would you two like to proceed?

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

I think I'd like to start by adding Northeast legislation on the wiki.  Do you think we should start by adding to this page, or just start from scratch?

[Cincinnatus]

I think I'd like to start by adding Northeast legislation on the wiki.  Do you think we should start by adding to this page, or just start from scratch?

I think an entirely new page would be easier.  Call it "Statute"?  Or.. "Law"?

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Okay.  I am starting on this page.

[Cincinnatus]

Okay.  I am starting on this page.

Hold on friend.  We should brainstorm our plan of attack first..wouldn't want you to have to do double work

[Cincinnatus]

This is how homely and I approached this previously.  I suggest we do it in this format, especially since I've already made individual links to bills

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

This is how homely and I approached this previously.  I suggest we do it in this format, especially since I've already made individual links to bills

...Oh, crap.

[Cincinnatus]

Realistically, this is a nice template for how the wiki should look.  Do you agree Scott?

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Realistically, this is a nice template for how the wiki should look.  Do you agree Scott?

Sure.  I'll start making changes now.

[Cincinnatus]

Realistically, this is a nice template for how the wiki should look.  Do you agree Scott?

Sure.  I'll start making changes now.

I would leave out the Executive orders (we can create a seperate page for this, so do keep a note of them)..Also, I think it might be wise not to include amendments?  Instead we can just write a note under the law like so.