I use Cartograph to plan changes to an existing Wikipedia article. It gives my Live Page Editing clients a place to examine the wording I propose, the evidence behind it and the reason for making the change. The existing article is the starting point, and every proposed alteration needs to earn its place.
An editing request often sounds straightforward until I inspect the page. A date may describe a different event from the one the client has in mind. A disputed sentence may be supported by several sources. An apparently small addition may change the emphasis of an entire section. Cartograph lets me work through those questions with you at the level of the actual edit.
Give each change a reason
Where the full Cartograph proposal workspace is enabled for your project, I can prepare additions, removals, replacements and citation changes as specific proposals. Each can carry an explanation and supporting source material. You can see what I intend to change and assess it in the context of the article, rather than approve a vague promise to “improve the page”. The available review controls depend on your project’s workspace.
Consider a hypothetical article that calls an organisation a charity. You tell me it ceased to have charitable status several years ago. I need to examine the wording, identify the relevant period and inspect the source establishing the change. The appropriate proposal might distinguish its former status from its current structure. It might also require a new citation and a change elsewhere in the article.
That is the sort of connected editorial work I want visible. A replacement sentence should come with a reason you can understand and evidence I can defend.
Review the wording that is actually proposed
In that proposal workspace, you can contribute proposed wording, suggest an alternative and record agreement with a proposal. I retain responsibility for the editorial decision and for choosing the wording I am prepared to implement.
Cartograph keeps track of versions because agreement with yesterday’s sentence does not necessarily mean agreement with today’s revision. If the wording or supporting evidence changes, an earlier agreement or readiness decision may need to be revisited. This gives a discussion a definite subject: this version of this proposed change, supported by these sources.
I also need to identify conflicts between proposals. Two individually sensible edits can overlap or contradict each other when combined. A citation may need attention before the new wording is ready. Cartograph records those issues as part of preparing the work, rather than treating a client’s agreement as the final editorial check.
Keep the live article in view
Wikipedia can change while an editing project is under way. In a prepared Cartograph edit plan, the reader can switch between the edit plan and a saved view of the Wikipedia article, with its revision information. I check the current page before deciding whether a proposal still fits. Older projects may use a different review layout, but the underlying task remains the same: relate the proposed work to the article that exists.
Cartograph prepares a private proposal. I review the completed work, resolve the outstanding questions and make the commissioned edits on Wikipedia myself. Saving a proposal or agreeing with it in Studio does not change the public article.
Start with your editing project
Live Page Editing clients find Cartograph and its Discussion card at the top of their deck. Use Cartograph for the changes themselves and Discussion for broader questions about the plan. Library builder and Library keep the supporting material nearby. Together, these tools let me show you exactly what I am preparing and why.
