Wikisocion talk:Community

Copying from other sites

"So does anybody have any idea about legalities, copyrights, and all that junk? What can and can't we copy/paste/translate into this site? Is this stuff an issue here?"

No texts copied from English language sites other than Wikipedia, but machine translating articles from Russian is probably okay for now. (Admin 23:20, 3 June 2007 (CDT))

I am working on the Psychology Wiki and we are trying to encourage the free publication of psychology knowledge. I would like to recommend that you use one of the copyleft licences say GFDL so we can all share in the development of your field. The limited access to many journals, and particularly translations of important work from other countries is stifling the proper development of our science. I wish you well with your venture and hope to contribute from time to timeLifeartist 16:31, 10 June 2007 (CDT)

If I'm not mistaken, all of this wiki is part of the public domain (I think that is GFDL?). We'd be happy to have your contributions and are developing some pages on general psychological topics that are of relevance to socionics (or vice versa).

It would help to make it clearer as it has important implications for potential contributors. Generally publishing under GDFL obliges people who use the text to acknowledge the contributors, while making it freely available77.100.28.37 17:15, 10 June 2007 (CDT)

"...is stifling the proper development of our science" -- are you referring to psychology or socionics? Just wondering. (Admin 16:50, 10 June 2007 (CDT))

I would think both - as socionics has taken a long time to even get on the radar within western academic psychology, and I am sure the cross fertilization in the fields of individual differences, social psychology, physiological psychology etc would be beneficial to both parties77.100.28.37 17:15, 10 June 2007 (CDT)

I'll have to research the license issue and find out exactly what the licenses mean and how acknowledgement should be made. This wiki is new, so some things we have not learned yet.

We are definitely interested in cross fertilization. Some of modern personality psychology, such as the Big Five, is not that interesting to most of us, but physiological and especially neurological research in the area of individual differences is. Research in compatibility and social psychology and even purely theoretical fields such as memetics (since it deals with the concept of information transfer) are also of interest. Leading Russian and Ukrainian socionists are also eager to establish greater contact with academic communities. (Admin 17:44, 10 June 2007 (CDT))

I have added "Content is available under the GNU FDL." at the bottom of each page. Is this sufficient to cover copyright issues? --Admin 16:52, 21 July 2007 (BST)

Technical issues

There are some issues I'd like to raise:

1. Article named after people: they should be as they are on Wikipedia (a bot could probably do this).
2. Redirects - use them as much as possible. Many alternate names exist for socionics concepts, and it would allow us to change the wiki standard name instantly. Also, dichotomy poles ("intuitive" or "intuition") should all redirect to the appropriate page ("Sensing and intuition"). Again, a bot could do that.

Thehotelambush 18:46, 19 June 2007 (CDT)

Translations

Maybe when translations of articles and such from Russian to English are posted for our Wiki-library or whatever I think there should be some kind of tags put on them to rate the quality of the translation. At the very bottom being straight machine translation (sucks) and at the top being "finished" or fully translated and easy to comprehend, with a few degrees in between. That way we could maybe spread out the work of moving towards quality translations.

Good idea. We could use the tags "Translation-1" through 5 and then make these five sections subsections of a "Translations" section. Go for it. (Admin 11:12, 9 June 2007 (CDT))

I have created "translation-poor," "translation-readable," and "translation-good" categories. (Admin 12:03, 9 June 2007 (CDT))

Site structure

I see that this site is growing rapidly in terms of new categories of information, but the existing ones aren't getting filled in. The descriptions by function position for each IM element are promising, as are attempts to better translate Socioscope descriptions, but there's more interest now in creating new, equally incomplete categories. Also, what there is has little information on the source of the information, either in the article or in the discussion section. So, people may be naturally reticent to change or add to it, as it's difficult to respond intelligently to the validity of what's there without knowing if it comes from sources or is just someone's observation. --Jonathan 11:57, 22 June 2007 (CDT)

The descriptions of function position stem in large part from Rick's observations during the London meeting, so it's "someone's observation", but so would be any "sources" on that Expat 12:00, 22 June 2007 (CDT)

Well, that's okay for the "ongoing projects," because they aren't encyclopedic in nature. But the more encyclopedia-style articles do need more sources for sure. Machintruc has been busy building the structure, which is bare in a lot of places now, but he is going on a two-month vacation in a week, so we should be able to catch up and flesh everything out :-) (Admin 12:05, 22 June 2007 (CDT))

Issues to be resolved

• In which headings should all words begin with capital letters? Do multi-word category names need to be capitalized (e.g. "Organizations and Schools")?
• Terminology of "information aspects," "IM elements," and "functions." People have been using these and other varieties of the terms almost interchangeably, but this will inevitably cause confusion. Here is a discussion of the problemand a way to resolve it. The only potential problem is that people on the forums have gotten used to other names or simply use them all sloppily.
• So does anybody have any idea about legalities, copyrights, and all that junk? What can and can't we copy/paste/translate into this site? Is this stuff an issue here?
• Is there a way to create, or automatically create a "site map" so that it's possible to see and navigate to what's there? One can find things by memory or doing a search, but that's about it.
• Is there a translator that works with the Russian site? It seems that every translator is fooled by everything but the main page. It would be interesting to be able to compare notes.

Timezone

Why Central Time? I think we should change that to GMT/UTC. Thehotelambush 03:09, 7 July 2007 (CDT)

I agree. I'll try to figure out how to change that, or maybe someone can dig around for instructions to help. --Admin 03:25, 7 July 2007 (CDT)

Instructions here. It seems awfully complicated, though. Let me know if it works. Thehotelambush 00:22, 9 July 2007 (CDT)

Actually, that was very easy. Did it work? --Admin 14:07, 15 July 2007 (BST)

I see that it did work by the time listed on my post. --Admin 14:09, 15 July 2007 (BST)

Messages associated with pages or sections of pages

I would like to create a set of messages to stick them at the tops of some pages and sections as necessary, like in Wikipedia. I'm not sure how to do this, so help is welcome. Here is a possible list (others may be necessary, too):

1. This page is incomplete. Additional contributions are necessary.
2. The accuracy of this page/section has been challenged.
3. This page has been recognized for its good content.
4. This page has been suggested for expert review. --Admin 07:20, 15 July 2007 (CDT)

I have started to work on this on the Help page. --Admin 14:33, 15 July 2007 (BST)

vision

"The long-term vision of Wikisocion is to become a sort of mirror of the socion itself, where all kinds of information and people are brought together and given their proper expression."

awsome Rick... That's what I was originally hoping when you started this all. Glad to see we're on the same wavelength there :) Bionicgoat 21:22, 17 July 2007 (BST)

One of the ideas I've been thinking about is to have a section for each type where we would gather a bunch of stuff that is relevant to that type, but without much analysis (except for talk pages, maybe) to avoid distracting people. Sort of like a collage, with pictures, clips, self-exposés, testimonials, "life advice," etc. --Admin 21:30, 17 July 2007 (BST)

sort of like "this is us and what we're about" page for each type? I like that idea, especially if it's allowed to be built by the types themselves. That in itself would be interresting to see, like which types make highly organized structured pages opposed to the ones who go at it half-ass or random. We could see the page full of half-finished stuff before they got distracted that the ENFps would make :P . I think in the end too it maybe could work as a tool to help people figure out their types (where am I at home?). The same thing could be done for quadras too. Anyways it's probably best to work on the fundimentals and all that junk before getting sidetracked off into the cool stuff. I can't wait though, it sounds like it'll be fun :) Bionicgoat 21:43, 17 July 2007 (BST)

I agree, it'll be a fun project. Should we make a rule that only people who are sure they are that type can edit the page? Should we provide a list of suggestions for what sort of stuff to have on the page, or just let people begin and see how it evolves? (probably they'll be comparing their type's page with the others anyway, so that might be unnecessary). I really like the idea, but I am a little bit worried that people who have mistyped themselves will cause confusion. Maybe my fear is unfounded. I'm hoping there will be enough people of each type to "correct" misfits. Let's start on this once the type descriptions in their current form are basically finished. --Admin 16:22, 21 July 2007 (BST)

Well I do think that this idea will demand a more energetic stance as to people who mistyped themselves, which will get complicated also due to the blurred cases. Expat 16:38, 21 July 2007 (BST)

I don't think that only people who are a specific type are qualified to make contributions to it. People can also take into account observations about other people. Also, the Discussion pages are very useful forums for what should go in and what shouldn't. Naturally, people who are the type in question are a very important source. Sometimes, though, a certain different kind of bias can occur, where the person ascribes a number of positive attributes (or individual traits) that aren't type-related to his/her own type. --Jonathan 17:59, 21 July 2007 (BST)

That might be less of a bias, though, than how the intuiters here will tend to describe types like SLE and LSI, etc. --Admin 18:09, 21 July 2007 (BST)

One thing I do think would be helpful is for people to understand which pages or sections are supposed to focus more on "classical" Socionics, and which portions are more appropriate for mentioning speculative ideas, anecdotal connections, and other subjective insights, which are valuable but shouldn't be allowed to get confused with the "basic" stuff. --Jonathan 17:59, 21 July 2007 (BST)

I see what you mean, but ultimately what is "classical" socionics will be decided by consensus, and we can incorporate new insights as we go along.

One way of doing this project might be to have a category for each type (like Category:IEE users) and then use the category page. Thehotelambush 20:04, 21 July 2007 (BST)