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
Parent
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
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.
It would be much better split into separate questions. - Users have to scroll, ctrl-f search, or wade through a lot …
1y ago
Hi and welcome to the site. :) I think the idea of a canonical like the one you linked is great. A lot of newbies hav …
1y ago
You are a thoughtful person, aren't you? /me bows in thanks I for one think it would be valuable, even if you were to …
1y ago
I would recommend to post it anew here as a self-answered Q&A and update it if needed. You can use the "works for me" re …
1y ago
Perhaps the best way to deal with your SO content is to note in a comment that the canonical answer is no longer maintai …
1y ago
Post
You are a thoughtful person, aren't you? /me bows in thanks
I for one think it would be valuable, even if you were to port it as is. In other words: it's valuable. Period.
- I like what Stephen said and concur: divide into multiple questions please, careful with the licenses.
- If you dislike that, push here for "Articles". There was an idea to have longer pieces of text, articles, which, I think, might be a better fit for the canonical in it's current form. I lean towards 1, as I think articles aren't yet done.
- I distrust SO-the-company. Therefore (and due to SEO) I'd say deletion works better. In light of lack of particular enthusiasm within Meta discussion, I'd say it should go through without much problems. Link to Codidact will probably be removed. Or worse, misconstrued and used as an argument against, in mod-strike negotiations. I hope that's NOT the case, but again, my trust in SO-the-company is low.
- Rules for deletion are nicely summarised here: https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5221/how-does-deleting-work-what-can-cause-a-post-to-be-deleted-and-what-does-that The relevant part is quoted below.
You can't delete your own question if it:
- has an answer which received at least one up vote (even if that answer has a net zero or negative score)
- has an accepted answer
- has multiple answers (even if there are no up votes)
- has an answer with an awarded bounty
- has at least one other question that is marked as a duplicate of your question
As an example, a question with this answer cannot be self-deleted: answer with the acceptance tick and upvote arrows lit up, and a net score of -3
You can't delete any of your own posts if you've already deleted five of your own posts on the same day (with exceptions).
Broader canonicals discussion
I'd like for them to appear organically, making yours an exception rather than the rule.
I'd like them to be linked to relevant tags. So, when I post a question, tag-wiki is checked and headers within are used as a suggestion box (with some slight matching). So I won't ask question if there's something there already.
I'd like for a question which was well-received throughout some time to earn the place among the canonical. So, if a question about Git does reach certain threshold over certain time, we add it (or it's semi-automatically added, with mods having the option to postpone or outright veto it).
2 comment threads