Guide for Contributors
Contents
Basic instructions
You can contribute by inserting relevant facts and referencing their sources (citation style to be inserted, section on citations to be edited).
We welcome your professional judgment or expert analysis, especially if you are able to provide evidence or justification.
Do note that this is not a platform for service complaints. Your personal experiences and anecdotes (and those of your stakeholders and interviewees) are welcome as long as you put them within squiggly brackets {...}.
Square brackets [...] are also used to flag knowledge or information gaps.
Starting a new page
If there is a social cause or client group that is not here yet, you may start a new page. If you want to start a page for a client segment, e.g. 'Adults with Autism', you can link your page within the main 'Disability' Page. This allows for greater collaboration as well as relevance.
To get started, click on this link to cut and paste our suggested template.
Detailed guides
For detailed guidelines, please see Needs Assessment Guide. This is still a work in progress and will be refined over time.
Consult the User's Guidefor information on using the wiki software.
Editorial Guidelines
Ensuring Verifiability
- Data found on the site is not meant to be an authoritative source, but a collective source of knowledge. Nonetheless, the information needs to be verified, and as much as possible, current.
- Each webpage will have a “Last modified date”, which users should use as a reflection of how recent the information is.
Broad Guidelines
- Information put into the Social Collaborative Wiki site should be specific and purpose-driven. The template drawn up aims to provide an element of objectivity for users.
- All edits are reflected in the “Related changes” option on the top left of each page. Users can contest each edit, if they so choose to do so, with the “Talk” link at each edit. (need to re-verify with Joe)
Content
- Editors and users should focus on the quality of information provided, that they are accurate and from a credible and verifiable source:
- Citing the piece of work itself (article, book, newspaper e.g., The Straits Times, Today, Channel NewsAsia)
- The creator of the work (The writer, Journalist)
- The publisher of the work (E.g. NUS press, Ministry of Social and Family Development, etc.)
- Anecdotes, or links to anecdotes, can remain on the page, but needs to be flagged. E.g. A complaint on waiting times for specific services will be flagged by editors (or the larger community) as an {anecdote}
- Anecdotes, however, will not be part of the final report that would be produced.
Developing new flagging titles/tags
- It is plausible that new flagging titles may be needed with a larger user base,. These can include:
- References to incidents that occurred on social media (Twitter, Facebook)
- Other media sources (Mothership, The Online Citizen)
- Tags can be decided at a later point of time by the core Knowledge Team, together with the ICT team.
- Information without citations will also be flagged. If nobody were to produce a citation in a certain amount of time (to be decided), it will be removed by editors. If any member of the community wants to contest that decision, it can be done on the “View History” Tag, and under the “Talk” link at the specific edit. (to verify with Joe on where the Talk function is)
Language
- Language should be as neutral as possible; editors need to flag anecdotes and edit it to reflect a neutral and objective language.
- Vulgarities, slurs and hate speech are strictly prohibited. We seek to create and maintain a safe and inclusive space for everyone (insert details about moderation).
“Edit Warring”
- Occurs when editors who disagree about the content of a page and repeatedly override contributions made.
- 3 Revert Rule (3RR) is an editorial policy used by Wikipedia uses:
- An editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page – whether involving the same or different material – within a 24-hour period. Exemptions should include “self-reverting”, reverting obvious vandalism, etc. See here for more.
- Editors should amicably resolve their disagreements in the Talk section. Sanctions, like a ban, could be placed on people who violate the 3RR.
- A third-party opinion could be sought in the event of an ‘edit war’. This should ideally come from someone outside of the community who has a neutral point of view.
Formatting Guide
The Wikipedia formatting guideis available for contributors to do source editing, though most inputs can be done with Wikipedia's new (default) visual editor mode.
Tutorial (click edit to see how to create)
Add table
| Heading | Heading |
| Bread | Pie |
| Butter | Ice cream |
Upload picture
Go to Insert -> Media
(advanced) Insert picture with hyperlink
Add Accordion
click "Edit" to see how to create the accordion as shown below!
Add your content here!!
Edit Navigation Menu
go to: MediaWiki:Tweeki-navbar-left
Name without the "*" refers to the navigation header. Subsequent name with the "*" will be under that header. e.g "Configuration, *Options, *Message" will create a dropdown menu with "Configuration" as the header and the others as the dropdown content.
The name which you user refers to the url/link of the site. e.g "*Children" will direct the user to go to "/Children" page. (*CASE SENSITIVE)
Access the page to know more.
Reference
References
Guidelines if you want to run a wikithon
Lessons from previous wikithons
1. When pages are densely populated (e.g., Youth-at-risk, Disability), it can appear intimidating. After uploading a lot of information to a page, editorial/summarising work has to be done so that content remains accessible (e.g., have clear headings and sub-headings). Use images and tables to break dense blocks of text.
2. Tables of Contents should be parsimonious/easy to understand, e.g. Mental Health? J Do not clutter it with too many headings, and have as few categories as possible.
3. Encourage people to form groups to work on content so it is not so isolating. People might feel less intimidated when working together with others. Consider at least asking people to work in pairs so the whole process is less intimidating. Encourage teams to present their content at wikithons to get feedback, if time permits.
4. Have an intro briefing + demonstration. Don’t push people into the deep end.
5. Admin/Logistics:
· In addition to an invitation email, send reminders as the date of the wikithon approaches.
· On snacks & refreshments: poll participants on specific options?
6. Other suggestions:
· Scope specific questions for participants to look into.
· Incentives – have contests for the best teams?
· Some integration into current sector work would be ideal – e.g., to help with research that VWOs are looking for, have the ability to interview practitioners, etc.
· “Catch social work students right after their internship when they are passionate and see a lot of system gaps.”