When I paid a visit to the PerlMonks page on Wikipedia the other day (the reason for the visit escapes me at the moment), I noticed it seemed a bit sparse. It mentioned what PerlMonks is and a little bit about how it works. But, it was missing some essentials, such as:

So, I updated it, and here are my specific additions:

Generally, the section of the site with the most traffic is Seekers of Perl Wisdom, where users of all experience levels ask Perl-related questions. Some questions are from beginners trying to understand the basics of the language, while others are from seasoned veterans looking for methods to improve upon algorithms or to optimize performance. Those who provide answers are also of varying experience levels.

Much of the site's content consists of specific code examples. Some of these examples are for Perl's core features, as documented on the official Perl documentation website (http://perldoc.perl.org). Other examples are for the Comprehensive Perl Archive Network (CPAN), which is a repository for Perl libraries (known as modules) that are not part of the core Perl distribution.

Notable members include the creator of the Perl language, the authors of several well-known Perl books and the authors of numerous CPAN modules. CPAN authors frequently promote and provide support for their modules at PerlMonks.

Regarding who we are, I know there are other monks who contribute to Perl in significant ways, such as developing the internals and working on Perl6. How would you describe yourselves?

If you get a chance, read through the whole (short) article, and think of some simple ways to improve it. Since I plan to re-word some of of what I added, I could incorporate others' changes. Or, I encourage you to make the changes yourself. It's already there; it might as well be an accurate reflection of who we are.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Update PerlMonks on Wikipedia
by Lady_Aleena (Priest) on Jul 22, 2010 at 17:06 UTC

    Thank you toolic for updating the article and letting us know about it, however, the discussion of any changes to the article should happen on the article's talk page on Wikipedia. With the discussion kept there, the Monks can't be accused of pushing an agenda of any kind. Remember the article needs to keep a neutral point of view (NPOV), use reliable third party sources, and not be an advert for PerlMonks. It also needs to be renamed, PerlMonks is one word not two, but that discussion can happen there as well.

    We don't want someone on Wikipedia to find an off-Wiki discussion on the article. That could lead to the article being put up for discussion (AFD) which could lead to its deletion. PerlMonks is an important player in the Perlverse and needs to be noted. However, as I said before, keep the notes there, not here. Okay? :)

    Have a nice day!
    Lady Aleena
[reply]
      It also needs to be renamed, PerlMonks is one word not two, but that discussion can happen there as well.
      Great! So my OP has already triggered a change, which was my main goal.
      That could lead to the article being put up for discussion (AFD) which could lead to its deletion.
      I was unaware of that.
[reply]
        It also needs to be renamed, PerlMonks is one word not two, but that discussion can happen there as well.
        Great! So my OP has already triggered a change, which was my main goal.

        I am glad that I could help you out there.

        That could lead to the article being put up for discussion (AFD) which could lead to its deletion.
        I was unaware of that.

        Some of the users of Wikipedia tend to be rules lawyers. Sure you could use the rule "Ignore all rules", however, that is one card that should be used sparingly. It is not a problem to just keep things compartmentalized. We do that all the time when we write code. I don't think that there is a specific rule that says that articles can not be discussed elsewhere, just be aware that some on Wikipedia might see it as advertising the site if we discuss it here or anywhere off-Wikipedia. (ACK! I probably look like a rules lawyer right now, since I know some of them well.) :)

        I was burned at RFA for my request to a single user to use IRC to discuss an article. Some were really upset by that and voted against my getting a mop.

        Have a nice day!
        Lady Aleena
[reply]
        FYI, since there's no controversy I went ahead and moved it. ~~~~ ;-)

        Elda Taluta; Sarks Sark; Ark Arks
[reply]
Re: Update PerlMonks on Wikipedia
by StommePoes (Scribe) on Jul 23, 2010 at 11:12 UTC
    Notable members include the creator of the Perl language, the authors of several well-known Perl books and the authors of numerous CPAN modules. CPAN authors frequently promote and provide support for their modules at PerlMonks.

    Wikipedia will likely ask for refs for those statements (easily done I think, links to home nodes).

    Thanks for posting this. I don't think I've ever looked up PM on wikipedia before.

[reply]

      ... NOT so "easily done... (with) links to home nodes" /me thinks.

      How would TimToady's home node serve as a citation for his role in Perl?

      And one could selectively ID some CPAN authors by their home nodes here, but other Monks' have home nodes which make no reference to their modules.

      Nonetheless, ++ for noting the liklihood that some Wikipedian will ask citations. Such requests do undermine the credibility of the posted info, unless it's on a topic on which the reader (well, this "reader" anyway) is already knowledgeable.

[reply]
[reply]
Re: Update PerlMonks on Wikipedia
by JavaFan (Canon) on Jul 27, 2010 at 15:41 UTC
    My attention was drawn to the "Perl" info box at the bottom, specifically the "people" row. Which mentions some book authors, but omits (except for Larry himself), all the pumpkings.
[reply]
Re: Update PerlMonks on Wikipedia
by OverlordQ (Hermit) on Jul 27, 2010 at 14:41 UTC
    In addition to the issues mentioned above other issues to keep in mind are Reliable sources (WP:RS), No Original Research (WP:NOR), and Notability (WP:NOTE).
[reply]

Back to Perl Monks Discussion