Talk:Consumer Protection Format (Unofficial): Difference between revisions

← Older edit Newer edit →

VisualWikitext

Add topic

@@ Line 9: / Line 9: @@
 :[[User:Tob|Tob]] ([[User talk:Tob|talk]]) 08:17, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
 ::This is great work but there are some issues that are entirely due to my misscommunication. I will add you to a thread on discord and add them here after I write them out there. [[User:Kostas|Kostas]] ([[User talk:Kostas|talk]]) 16:22, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
+::Hey @[[User:Tob|Tob]]
+::Regarding the new version of the example pages:
+::1. Individuals should not have an example template like this as it would counter some things laid out in the [[Living Persons Policy]] on the wiki. We are really hesitant to include most individual pages due to the issues laid out there anyway so an easier way to make them would likely result in a lot of deletions.
+::2. I missspoke or more accurately I did not have a clear view in my head of what the creation system would look like and how it would function when I called these templates. The layout as a normal page we were working with at the start is more in line with what we need. I really am sorry you did all the work to lay the templates out. I should have been a lot more careful with my word choice, "template" was an unfortunate choice.
+::For reference repair.wiki has a system here : https://repair.wiki/w/RepairWiki:Create that we would like to use as a basin on what to implement but we need one more extension before we start recreating all functionality. If you inspect source a few times you will see that in ends up invoking a page much like the one you initially had created. I made the template with the boxes to add to that more as a component of that initial page.
+::As far as new proposed content:
+::I see you omitted the transparency section from the original page. I have no objections to that as, as part of the next step I wanted your input in dissambiguating each of those subsections
+::We should also add indicators of when its time to break off to a product (productline/service etc) when writing an incident on a company page to avoid duplication. For example if Meta. Facebook and a facebook incident exist, Meta should link to the product facebook which in turn would have a summary of incidents and links to the incident pages regarding facebook. If in turn a company is not as large/does not have quite as many incidents as facebook (eg Bambu) it would have a summary and link to the incident in the company page itself.  Cutoff would be when the company page gets to a point where the table of contents is half the inital screen.
+::In the same vain we should add that Products/Companies should not contain incident summaries on to themselves.
+::Keep in mind this is my opinion, based on the [[Article Types]] and my understanding so far. We should see if @[[User:Keith|Keith]] agrees and what his thoughts are, as well as anyone elses.
+::[[User:Kostas|Kostas]] ([[User talk:Kostas|talk]]) 17:00, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
 Fantastic, looks good. Templates are a great idea. It might be a good idea to turn each page type into it's own template.