How Do We Track Wiki Pages that are draft or need fixes?

@peternlewis, thanks for setting up this forum section. I think it will be very useful.

I have some questions on wiki tracking:

  1. How do we identify all pages still in “draft” status?
  2. How do we identify pages that have the “FixMe” icon?
  3. How do we know when a draft page is approved?
  4. How do we track pages that need work, but don’t have the “FixMe” icon?


2 - You can just search for fixme on the forum and they will all show up.

1 - I suggest just tagging a page with something like:

FIXME [Draft - still working on fleshing this out]

(whatever message seems appropriately). But just include the FIXME key and the Draft work and that should be fine, right?

3 - There really isn't any approval process on the wiki. If you think it is fine, then remove the FIXME's. If you think it needs my particular reviewing, just let me know (email or here). As long as the wiki stays focussed on how to use Keyboard Maestro, then there isn't really anything I need to approve. Obviously I wouldn't expect anyone to edit the small bits of Stairways policy text on the web site (mostly confined to the About Keyboard Maestro page).

4 - I don't see any answer to that other than adding a FIXME icon when appropriate. I think if you see a page that you think simply doesn't have enough information, just as a FIXME icon to the bottom of the page, something like:

FIXME [this page needs to be expanded]

I assumed by "forum" you meant "wiki", and DUH!, it works.
Somehow the obvious escaped me.

So, as you say that solves tracking drafts.

Great suggestion. And finally, when the editor thinks he/she is finished, could put, at the bottom:
FIXME [Draft Submitted for review yyyy-mm-dd]

May I suggest that notice of all changes be posted in the Forum Wiki section for review by other editors?

It is well known in writing/editing circles that authors will often overlook the same glitch in their own work, even after they have read/reviewed their work many times. Since the author knows what he/she intended, the mind's eye tends to "autocorrect" these glitches in the author's mind. That's why it is recommended that before you send out anything of importance, you ask a trusted 3rd party to review it for you.

Personally, I'd much rather one of my fellow editors find my glitch before some user points it out months later. :wink:

Yes, I meant wiki.

If we had an unlimited amount of resources, then I’d go in for pair editing/peer review, etc. If you’d like the page to be reviewed, by all means ask. But it’s going to be a balance between editing time and reviews.

Since wiki editing is done on a volunteer basis, I figure it is perfectly fine if things are not clear or if typos are missed and then corrected only when users find them. Obviously it would be better that there is no mistakes and everything is perfectly clear, but its not necessary to review every change.