InstallGentoo Wiki talk:General rules

Reverts

A section on reverts might be helpful. Something like:

==Reverts==

Try to avoid reverting someone's edits when possible. If a revert is necessary give a rationale for it on the article's talk page. Calmly explain your reasoning. Try to be factual, site reliable sources and come to a consensus or compromise in disputes. Ask for a third opinion and request for comments if necessary. As a last resort ask a wiki admin to resolve the dispute. Use the three-reverts in 24-hours rule with exemption for vandalism. Do not engage in edit wars.

--Ebay (talk) 01:38, 24 December 2015 (EST)

Make small edits section

This might be another helpful section to add. It is a summary of a section from this page which I found helpful because I'm a wiki newbie:

==Make small edits==

Edits should stand on their own feet, address one particular concern in the article and be small in scope (not necessarily size). Avoid mixing multiple types of changes in one edit when possible. For example: restyling existing content, fixing typos and adding a new section are all small edits on their own. If they are all done together then they comprise a big edit. Small edits are easy to revert without affecting unrelated changes. They are also easy to refer to on talk pages and see in difference tools. Give a reason for edits in the edit summary, even if it is just "typo". Use the talk page for longer explanations.

--Ebay (talk) 02:44, 24 December 2015 (EST)

Okay. Personally, I think this shouldn't be registered as official guideline, but rather a personal guide (or as per Wikipedia's regulation, Essays). I found an article which refutes WP:FEET (WP:PRUNE) and I found both of them reasonable, I'd think those problems are personal preferences in editing an article. —Morpheus (talk) 07:12, 24 December 2015 (EST)

Ok, I forgot it was an opinion piece, so it doesn't really belong here. Both methods have advantages and disadvantages. --Ebay (talk) 14:37, 24 December 2015 (EST)

Editor Wars

I've noticed that a lot of guides for editing config files list a favorite editor in the guide, telling people to run sudo vim /path/to/file.conf. I think it would be better to have it in the guide to editing to have this as the editor command, which is a symlink to whatever editor is installed, the default being GNU Nano. --The One, The Only... Chocolate Chip! (talk) 19:46, 12 January 2016 (EST)

Eh. I'm an emacs guy, but use vim for small config files. I don't know. I don't really oppose this, but take into account that a significant amount of people probably don't know how to change their env.d to change the default editor. Oh and the proper command would be $EDITOR. — Galactus (talk) 05:45, 13 January 2016 (EST)

I'll look into ArchWiki for that, since they have some guides with config files and I'll see if it fits here.  Morpheus talk 07:22, 13 January 2016 (EST)

They tend to use the words 'configure', 'modify', and so on. — Galactus (talk) 07:29, 13 January 2016 (EST)

On my debian machine, sudo editor is the proper command, and it is default aliased to GNU Nano. I don't think $EDITOR would be needed unless you are changing the bash alias of `$EDITOR' to something else. --The One, The Only... Chocolate Chip! (talk) 23:27, 13 January 2016 (EST)

Expansion of guides (Followup of Editor Wars)

I decided to expand the guides into its own categories (Help:Editing, Help:Style and many more), and reserve the this page for rules only). I decided to copy and edit the pages from ArchWiki because of their consistency and technology relevance. However because I won't be able to edit it alone, you guys are welcome to help edit the help page. Remember to use the talk page if unsure.  Morpheus talk 14:27, 15 January 2016 (EST)