CentOS docs - Oct 2009 - time to refactor AdditionalResources/Repositories ?

I see this commit:

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 15:42:14
From: noreply at centos.org
To: noreply at centos.org
Subject: centos wiki] Update of  AdditionalResources/Repositories    by
     PhilSchaffner

The following page has been changed by PhilSchaffner:
http://wiki.centos.org/AdditionalResources/Repositories?action=diff&rev2=96&rev1=95

The comment on the change is:
Add JPackage

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   $ sudo rpm -Uvh mharris-el-repo-release-5-3.4.noarch.rpm
   }}}
   which contains files to substantially the same effect, and a bit more
description of his archive.
+
+  * '''JPackage Repository''' - (See
http://www.jpackage.org/index.php )
    ... snipped ...
+
   ----
    * '''Jason Litka - Utter Ramblings Repository''' -
(See http://www.jasonlitka.com/yum-repository/) Updated web stack and other
applications for EL4 and EL5 that will replace core packages.  Includes apr,
apr-util, freetds, httpd, libmcrypt, mhash, mod evasive, mod perl, mod python,
mod security, mysql, mysqlclient10, mysqlclient14, pcre, perl-BSD-Resource, php,
php-apc, php-eaccelerator, php-memcache, php-pear, php-xcache, subversion, tidy.
Suggest caution if using this repo due to replacement of core packages.


(back to herrold:)

... and had a couple of reactions -- the snipped part of it is 
a direct scrape and paste from the remote site, rather than 
locally produced editorial content.  It is 'attributed' by 
being inside quotes, but really, I think a re-write is more 
proper, as the extract uses the first person singular and when 
first reading it I was confused.

The other part about this page has been nagging at me, and 
that is I think we need a refactor here, as the centos side 
archive discussion up top gets lost in the clutter later on.

Also, at this point I would elide the old bad example at the 
very bottom.

Thoughts?

-- Russ herrold

Am 29.10.09 20:56, schrieb R P Herrold:
> ... and had a couple of reactions -- the snipped part of it is 
> a direct scrape and paste from the remote site, rather than 
> locally produced editorial content.  It is 'attributed' by 
> being inside quotes, but really, I think a re-write is more 
> proper, as the extract uses the first person singular and when 
> first reading it I was confused.
I guess all other "external" repos have at least some "personal
experience" blurb around it, so yes, I'd also expect that here.

Ralph