Bitcoin Wiki Links

[ghost]

There are several references and links to the Bitcoin Wiki. The Wiki is inaccurate and outdated in several respects. I have tried several times to get whitelisted to update the Wiki with no success. The various methods of whitelisting do not work. Either the Bitcoin Wiki should be made functional again or the references and links to the Wiki should be removed from Bitcoin.org. I also don't see the page https://bitcoin.org/en/how-it-works on then Github repository so it is unclear how changes can be proposed.

[harding]

@millybitcoin I agree that the Bitcoin Wiki has a lot of incorrect or outdated information (as well as outright spam), but I think it also has even more correct and current-enough information---enough that its positives outweigh its negatives. I also recently created an account (August 18th) and had no problem with the CryptoPayment editor registration method. My vote is that we continue linking to it.

As for editing how-it-works, the page template is in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin.org/blob/master/_templates/how-it-works.html and the translation strings for English are in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin.org/blob/master/_translations/en.yml .

However, before you create a major pull request, I would highly recommend that you discuss what changes you plan to make with @saivann and other interested parties. You can use this issue, but if your goal is documentation, you may want to start a discussion on the Bitcoin documentation mailing list which several of us use for public brainstorming. Thanks!

[jgarzik]

+1 @harding

[saivann]

Agreed too with keeping the wiki, let's not throw the baby with the bathwater. It's usual for wikis to have some outdated pages or spam attempts, but the wiki is still very useful and full of information.

[ghost]

The problem with the Wiki is that you are posting conflicting information between Bitcoin.org and here and it appears several of the pages on the wiki have been abandoned and are outdated. As things are posted here the corresponding items should be removed from the Wiki and linked back to here.

As for the cryto payment system, I did not use it because of all the mismanagement of donated funds surrounding the operation of the various web sites in the past. I was finally whitelisted today after I posted this but the other stated methods of whitelisting do not work.

Thanks for the link to the page but that does not follow the pattern of other pages on the site for some reason.

[harding]

I agree that Wiki pages containing significant errors should either be fixed or removed, but I don't see any reason to remove quality pages from the Wiki just because Bitcoin.org describes the same thing.

When I'm researching something, I often find it useful to read separate descriptions of the same thing in case one description explains it better than the others. Assuming other people also find syntopical reading useful, removing quality content from the Wiki would seem to be a disservice.

In any case, removal of content from the Wiki sounds like something that should be discussed with the Wiki staff, not something directly relevant to the Bitcoin.org repository. Perhaps this issue should be closed?

[luke-jr]

@millybitcoin The wiki works fine for many others, including complete newbies. You have not made any attempt to contact staff (from what I can see) to try to resolve whatever vague problems you claim to be encountering. http://webchat.freenode.net/?channels=%23bitcoin-wiki

[ghost]

This was closed before the discussion was even completed so this process appears useless and is not as stated on the Bitcoin,org site.

@harding - the issues is outdated and incorrect information. I noticed this because I saw people posting references to the Wiki that contained inaccurate and outdated information.

@luke-jr - The wiki works fine in some cases. In other cases people are confused. Both Bitcoin.org and the Wiki claim to be community-developed resources. However, many of the people involved in the centralized control of these resources appear to be controlling both resources. As you are aware, many of those people have been involved with the promotion of activities meant to scam newbies who want to get involved in mining and those people are not credible. Further, the majority of the people stay anonymous so there is no way to know who is actually controlling things. Your comment has no merit.

[luke-jr]

@millybitcoin If the wiki contains outdated information, update it. If you can't figure out how to edit the wiki or are having some technical problem, get support. It's not hard.

[ghost]

@saivann - I see why you generate so many complaints about the way you handle this web site. 2 or 3 people commented and we were in the middle of discussion and you closed the issue. You abuse your position.

[saivann]

Communication with @millybitcoin has always proven difficult in the past and thus far nothing good has been achieved with regards to these conflicts, so I vote we continue working on more important things.

[ghost]

@luke-jr - If you would read the issue you would see I couldn't get access to update the wiki without sending Bitcoins to unknown entities who were most likely involved with promoting scams. I am trying to fix things but the issues get closed before they are fully discussed so the process is useless. Your comments are without merit.

[luke-jr]

@millybitcoin That sounds like paranoia and incompetence on your part, especially since all one needs to do to get access is ask. Your comments are without merit.

@saivann I tend to concur.

[ghost]

@saivann - May people are complaining that working with you is difficult and you have centralized control of the web site. I am trying to resolve conflicts with information that is being haphazardly posted in 2 different places and is causing confusion among new users. That is more important than your ego. Your intent is to push out anyone not in your inner circle and you have done it to many people who have tried to participate.

[luke-jr]

@millybitcoin I've not heard anyone with a serious complaint about @saivann. Your comments are without merit.

[ghost]

luke-jr - While you have some technical knowledge I will not consider any of your comments as having any merit due to your promotional activities.

[ghost]

The complaints about saivann are that he has complete control over the web site and he often won't allow others to participate. Some people don't want to say anything publically for fear of getting on the wrong side of people who control the resources. Others have made public complaints but most just gave up trying to participate which is why there are so few people commenting on these things.

[harding]

I think this issue is devolving into personal attacks, so I'm going to lock this issue for now. Anyone who has something useful to add can email me at dave@dtrt.org and I'll happily post it. Sorry for any inconvenience.