Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Meta

Welcome to Software Development on Codidact!

Will you help us build our independent community of developers helping developers? We're small and trying to grow. We welcome questions about all aspects of software development, from design to code to QA and more. Got questions? Got answers? Got code you'd like someone to review? Please join us.

Comments on To transfer, or not to, that is the question: whether 'tis nobler to let it stay or to take arms against Stack Overflow's dominance of FAQ canonicals

Post

To transfer, or not to, that is the question: whether 'tis nobler to let it stay or to take arms against Stack Overflow's dominance of FAQ canonicals

+13
−0

Some of you may know me from Stack Overflow or the broader network. In light of recent actions by the company, I finally decided to move over to Codidact. I am a subject matter expert on Google Apps Script (among other fields) and would like to move my canonical on extremely common errors developers encounter in its entirety.

As of now, the canonical is slowly rotting away there due to the split in opinion on what to do with it, cycling between closure and reopen with little incentive for me to keep it up to date or rekindle the discussion (especially now).

The question I have regarding the move consists of a couple of tightly coupled issues I would like to know the community's stance on before making the decision so as I know how to act:

  • Does the community feel the transferred content will be of enough value to it to warrant one?
  • Would the canonical be good as is (with some updates) or would it be better to split it into several self-answered canonicals?
  • Would it make more sense to make it an article (unfortunately, I am not sure if articles are enabled for the community in the first place)?1

I am aware of the Strategy to migrate meaningful content from Stack Overflow discussion which seems to have a conclusion that original content is preferred (for obvious reasons), so I have to note that my intention is to delete2 the Q&A there and do an extensive overhaul should the canonical be accepted.

With the personal concerns outlined, I would like this Q&A to serve as a basis for a broader discussion on how the community prefers such content to be transferred over (if at all, but from the discussions I've seen, it seems to be generally welcomed).


1 This issue stems from the Asking and answering FAQ style questions discussion and Monica Cellio's answer specifically.

2 It's been suggested in an outside channel that in case of the move it might be more beneficial to keep the original with a note that the up-to-date content can be found here, so that's another issue I would like to get input from the community.

History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.
Why should this post be closed?

2 comment threads

Article (4 comments)
Transfer, but split in Q&A for each specific issue (2 comments)
Article
manassehkatz‭ wrote over 1 year ago

This is the type of thing that first best as an "Article". Or something of that sort - basically a separate category of posts that (a) doesn't have all the usual "Answer" activity because it is supposed to be "a thing" and not "a question to be answered" and (b) that is relatively few in number and therefore easy to navigate. The problem (here, eventually when we get thousands of posts, but definitely in SE) is that it is very hard to find a Canonical post because it is subject to keywords, search algorithms, etc. We have Articles in some other Codidact Communities and adding one to Software Development may make sense, provided it isn't just for a single Canonical Article about Google Apps.

Oleg Valter‭ wrote over 1 year ago

That's another idea I am entertaining — do you think it would be a good idea to try to get the best of both worlds and both split the reference into individual Q&A components and to add an article as a sort of entry point more focused on triage?

manassehkatz‭ wrote over 1 year ago

If (big "if", because it first requires agreement among the group using this system) we add "Articles" (title could be different, but that's the concept) then something like this could be one large Article or one overview and then additional Articles for particular components. But no reason to make it Q&A at that point. SE supported (and we do it here too, nothing inherently wrong with it) "self-answered questions" when you have a question and have already figured out the answer but want to let the world know about it. A self-answered question makes a lot of sense for very specific questions. But for more general topics I think an Article is inherently better .

FoggyFinder‭ wrote over 1 year ago

Sadly but community seems voted against Articles. I suppose we have to wait until Codidact gets more recognition and we could re-vote.