Bill Taylor at 23:26, 23 October 2007

2007-10-23T23:26:01Z

Phi: proliferation of pages seems silly

2007-10-23T22:49:44Z

proliferation of pages seems silly

New page

Are we really likely to have so many ongoing emergencies at once that making sections on the page is going to be insufficient? The argument I can see in favor of using specialized pages is so we can keep the history on a page by itself once this is all over, which says to me we want one per event. Does setting up Flood, etc pages make sense when we don't know what's going to be next? We'd want to make one for a cat-5 hurricane if one happened rather than using misc, and trying to get them all seems silly, and what if there's another fire and we don't want people confused by this data but at the same time don't want to take down a page that might, Ghu forbid, wind up containing memorial information. --[[User:Phi|phi]] 15:49, 23 October 2007 (PDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:26, 23 October 2007
Line 1:		Line 1:
	Are we really likely to have so many ongoing emergencies at once that making sections on the page is going to be insufficient? The argument I can see in favor of using specialized pages is so we can keep the history on a page by itself once this is all over, which says to me we want one per event. Does setting up Flood, etc pages make sense when we don't know what's going to be next? We'd want to make one for a cat-5 hurricane if one happened rather than using misc, and trying to get them all seems silly, and what if there's another fire and we don't want people confused by this data but at the same time don't want to take down a page that might, Ghu forbid, wind up containing memorial information. --[[User:Phi\|phi]] 15:49, 23 October 2007 (PDT)		Are we really likely to have so many ongoing emergencies at once that making sections on the page is going to be insufficient? The argument I can see in favor of using specialized pages is so we can keep the history on a page by itself once this is all over, which says to me we want one per event. Does setting up Flood, etc pages make sense when we don't know what's going to be next? We'd want to make one for a cat-5 hurricane if one happened rather than using misc, and trying to get them all seems silly, and what if there's another fire and we don't want people confused by this data but at the same time don't want to take down a page that might, Ghu forbid, wind up containing memorial information. --[[User:Phi\|phi]] 15:49, 23 October 2007 (PDT)
		+
		+	:True, I didn't mean to just run away with every kind of disaster I could think of. Here in California, Fire, Flood, and Earthquake are common enough that they just spring to mind. Then I realized that there are other situations like Hurricanes and Blizzards and Tornadoes and I suppose lots of other things. So Miscellaneous came into being.
		+
		+	:But you are right, I don't think any of these pages should be a lasting monument. Eventually I think the goal here would be to post a simple message for as long as necessary, then erase it when no longer needed. As emergencies come and go, the status lines would come and go as well. A blank page would tend to indicate no trouble of that kind going on at present. I am torn between having lots of pages and just one page with sections. It has to be easy, assuming limited bandwidth for the evacuee. --[[User:Bill Taylor\|Bill Taylor]] 16:26, 23 October 2007 (PDT)

Category talk:Community Health and Welfare - Revision history

Bill Taylor at 23:26, 23 October 2007

Phi: proliferation of pages seems silly