I think the SCP series pages are primarily navigational, there's not really much need to moderate them, just prune deadlinks and other maintenance stuff. If Nav does make changes to them, it'll most likely be to the links at the top of each series page.

However I agree with Estrella that Attribution Metadata should be solely Tech's purview. Similarly, Tag Search, being Crom-powered, should be Tech's purview, but I don't think having it technically be shared purview would present an issue.

The fact that is not officially defined anywhere is why I want to make it clear going forward who should be responsible for what.

SCP Series is odd, but I also don't know how to divvy it up, responsibility-wise.

Nowhere I can find anything about Wikiwalk having these abilities. Needless to say I am in full support of the dissolution of the team, but I would also like to know where Wikiwalk received this phantom purview that it's now trying to transfer to other subteams on its deathbed.

I hate to be a broken record, but it was Harmony again. With this proposal we are hoping to put the final nail in this and make sure from now on MAST can quickly and accurately tell at a glance who is in charge of what. No more guess work when it comes to purview.

Adding crosslinks to articles, adding footers to articles.

Nowhere I can find anything about Wikiwalk having these abilities. Needless to say I am in full support of the dissolution of the team, but I would also like to know where Wikiwalk received this phantom purview that it's now trying to transfer to other subteams on its deathbed.

The idea is that Collaborative Pages will handle all pages that requires a certain level of Editorial control - "all hubs that contain user-created contact beyond titles" - primarily that's just "does this meet the requirements for inclusion". This is only when the original author isn't around to do that, and the intention is to preserve the original format unless there's a specific decision to change that.

Navigation is basically everything else, I'm not sure if there's a more succinct way to explain that other than defining what the other teams do.

"Collaborative Pages" feels really vague if we're including hubs as a collaboration, and "Navigation handles the rest" is exactly the kind of vagueness that led to this issue in the first place.

What a team has control over should be able to be explained in a sentence without linking to an outside resource.

Vivarium

With the end of the Wikiwalk crosslinking initiative, we've decided to disband that team within MAST. However, there are a number of pages that have been absorbed into Wikiwalk's purview of aiding navigation around the site, and so the intention is to split these between the Collab log Pruning and Navigation Teams, rather than having them continue to exist in the limbo of being the responsibility of a defunct team. Note the "purview" does not imply the ability to make whatever changes a member of the team feels like - it's primarily about maintenance , updates and removal of low-quality additions, but these will be the teams to contact if anyone has proposals for changes, staff or non-staff alike. For major changes to these pages, they'd be expected to open this up to public discussion, and if necessary, staff voting.

Collab Log Pruning is already responsible for a number of pages that are not technically collab logs but remain similar in concept (e.g. open to new additions from anyone as long as certain requirements are followed). My intention as team captain is to rename the team to "Collaboration Pages", maintaining our existing purview over collab logs created by inactive authors, plus making us the people to contact for all hubs that contain user-created contact beyond titles - the canon hub, the GoI hub, that sort of thing. We already do this for the Personnel and Character Dossier and the Facilities page, the intention behind the name change is to avoid confusion and make it clear who to contact. If it's not within staff purview (e.g. the author was active within the last year and hasn't specifically given us editorial control over the page), we'll let people know that it's not actually our responsibility.

Navigation would be responsible for most of the other pages, including the SCP Series pages, although many of these would be shared with Tech, particularly pages in the Admin category.

Guides would have sole purview over the guide hub and required reading page, to keep things simple.

Since the purview of these various teams is a bit ambiguous at the moment, I put together a list of what would go where, which we can copy over to the team hubs on MAST. Note that not all of these are actually being transferred, rather than trying to work out exactly what currently falls within Wikiwalk's purview it was easier to just go through the list of hubs and work out what would most appropriately fit where going forward: http://mast-team.wikidot.com/wikiwalk-purview

Many of these pages specifically have shared purview - the idea is that teams outside of MAST may have useful insights, and so both should be consulted prior to making significant changes. Obviously if you feel like things should be the sole purview of a specific team, let us know.

Mainsite Mirror