PrivacyWiki talk:Namespaces

@Nbartram: Do you have any input in terms of how the namespaces should be structured. I have tried to delineate them in a way that enables us to write about a variety of content and make it clear which page should have which type of focus. Do you think this is something that's conceptually useful? 21x (talk) 17:12, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Proposal on new namespace

I will suggest structuring the namespaces into 3 parts: Mainspace, concept, and guides.

This is to make for the wiki to be more objective, which is important as wiki can be edited by everyone and if subjective, disputes may happen. Below are how the namespaces work:

The alternative and the recommended namespace are actually the same, so it can be merged into the mainspace, which is for analysis of the good and bad softwares from a privacy standpoint and will require citations for the claims, see my work like ProtonMail, documenting the good and bad qualities of the softwares from a privacy standpoint. As guides are expressing the steps towards privacy, it is the best namespace to give minor advises and suggestions, which I think the weight of advises should not amount to much, as it is quite subjective. An example will be Adblocking, which includes advises like “donate instead” and suggestions of softwares, but at the same time it tells how to block ads. This will be a great match to the Guide namespace. Finally, the concept namespace remain the same function.

I believe this categorization would be more clear. Matttest (talk) 09:01, 13 July 2022 (UTC)

@Matttest Yeah, I moatly agree. Mainspace should contain content looking at specific companies or technologies, and it should be clear, concise, practical. I don't know about demanding sourcing for everything, but certainly for factual claims of misbehaviour that could be seen as disparaging of a person or a company.

But the wiki maintains that privacy is a human right, and opinions pointed in that direction should be accepted and not be a problem. I don't think it's helpful to chase Wikipedia level of objectivity. This is ultimately a wiki that advocates for a specific worldview, which is that personal privacy should be respected.

It also should not shy away from political topics which are supporting privacy, such as supporting Edward Snowden or Electronic Frontier Foundation.

But, yeah, alternative vs recommended are sort of the same. I just wanted to make it a clear distinction vs privacy-minded solutions (recommended) and privacy hostile ones, for which we provide alternatives (alternatives). The hope is that we would build a list of, for example, good email providers, and then the list could be transcluded into the article for all the bad email providers, such as Hotmail, Gmail, and others. But I suppose, we can just do this via templates, so having a separate namespace is redundant.

And yeah, we can move the adblocking article to Guides namespace (with a redirect in mainspace). 21x (talk) 11:20, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

Hi, I have procedurally moving the Adblocking article to Guide:Blocking Ads as consensus of this discussion, leaving a redirect behind. My idea that the mainspace can be used for documentation of the good and bad qualities of softwares is inspired by Qualitipedia and its affiliated wikis. I think we can get the current existing articles to move back to the Guide: namespace if it mainly on the method or Concept: if it mainly focus on definition, examples are like VPN, which describes the protocols and diffs from TOR and other similar technologies. These articles will be useful for inspiration when creating new guides and concepts. Matttest (talk) 07:13, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

Mainspace is envisioned to be for practical advice. We can have multiple articles of the same names, such as VPN (practical advice about being private when using VPNs), Guide:VPN (setting up and choosing VPN), Concept:VPN (concepts of tunneling data over the internet).

I do not support making this a reception wiki for companies and whether they respect privacy. It should be educational and practical, primarily. Opinons need to be in service of the core educational goals. 21x (talk) 10:49, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

This idea is just making the categorisation more clear - as the scope of mainspace and guides are currently overlapping. Just take a look at Android, it includes advises but also steps to achieve it. These two cannot be separated in a good way, as if the article include only advises, it will be very short, so I think merging them into the Guide: namespace benefits. Note that this won’t make this wiki to be a reception wiki, as we the importance of the three namespaces will be the same - the Mainspace to analyse companies, the Guides to give advises and the steps to achieve it, and the Concept remains its function. Matttest (talk) 03:37, 17 July 2022 (UTC)