The idea is this. Interview pages take the form '''J''''''oeSoapInterviewsFredNoggins''' or more simply '''W''''''ikiInterviewsFredNoggins'''. The first can morph across to the latter, by agreement mainly of F''''''redNoggins, but the reverse is not normally true.

In either of the above cases, and unlike most newspaper or magazine interviews, F''''''redNoggins has final editorial control over the page. The interviewer(s) are there to suggest questions but are not expected to complain

	* if a question is not answered
	* if a question is deleted
	* if a question is "improved" by F''''''redNoggins before being answered

Any attempt on the part of the interviewer to edit F''''''redNoggins' answers to indicate what they ''should'' have said is considered particularly bad form, unless F''''''redNoggins decides otherwise.

----
'''WikiInterviews - dormant or extinct''' 

''The following interviews have been reported on wiki but did not exploit WikiNature in the interview process. (Why do they all involve KentBeck?)''

	* CurzonInterview -- about patterns
	* VlissidesOnBeck -- about xp
	* InterviewWithKent -- about xp
	* RichardDrakeInterviewsWardCunningham -- never completed

-----
-----
'''''Discussion'''''

Reading RichardDrakeInterviewsWardCunningham, I think I'd like to see a line before each question (more or less) ''-- like was done on InterviewWithKent.''
Then it would be easier to see the transition from topic to topic.
''(Of course, it would make more of a difference if more than one question was answered!  ;-)''
This style might also encourage refactoring or linking to other Wiki pages for discussion.

I'm also thinking of a convention for "J''''''oeSoapInterviewsFredNoggins''Discussion''" pages, for 3rd party comments.
-- JeffGrigg

----
CategoryInterview