# Proposal - Restructure the Community Team Handbooks > [!question] Lingering Questions > - The proposal is internally inconsistent about "two-section" vs. "three-section" grouping in different places — worth checking the final adopted structure once the working group settles it. > - Whether prior Sponsor/Speaker handbook drafting work already exists to build on is an open question in the source. > - Does the "handbook MCP" idea (flagged as beyond scope) already have a Meta Trac ticket, or is this a genuine gap? > [!tip] Article Ideas > - "Regrouping is not deduplicating" — the comment thread's sharpest idea (collapse near-duplicate event handbooks into one source-of-truth handbook with per-subject exceptions) as a general documentation-architecture lesson, not just a WordPress Community Team case. > - Draft and post a comment on the live proposal (before its 17 July close) backing single-source-of-truth restructuring plus the first-time-attendee handbook. > [!link] Cross Reference > - [[3. Resources/MOCs/Open Source Governance MOC]] — contributor-onboarding documentation as governance infrastructure > - [[3. Resources/MOCs/DevRel MOC]] — documentation-as-product framing, accessibility/SEO/AI structure as a shared win > [!quote] Vocabulary > - **Single source of truth (per event type)** — the proposed deduplication target: one event handbook noting per-subject exceptions, instead of separate near-duplicate handbooks per event type ## Bibliographic capsule A Community Team contributor posts a two-part proposal on the Make WordPress Community blog to restructure the team's handbooks: regrouping today's flat nine-handbook list into three audience-based sections (with new standalone Sponsor, Speaker, and Volunteer handbooks) and restructuring the most-used Community Team Handbook's chapters, seeking a working group of roughly three Event Supporters before a 17 July 2026 deadline. ## Author's thesis The handbooks landing page — one of the team's most-linked-to pages — fails new contributors specifically because it's a flat, undescribed list rather than a navigation problem of content quality, and fixing findability (audience-based grouping, short "are you in the right place?" descriptions) is the higher-leverage move than rewriting content. ## Key arguments (≤3) 1. **The core problem is navigation, not content quality.** A flat nine-item list with no grouping or per-item description (and a missing Education handbook) gives new contributors no mental model for mapping a task to the right handbook. 2. **The comment thread pushes past regrouping toward genuine deduplication.** The sharpest idea in the thread argues for one event handbook with per-subject exceptions rather than several near-duplicate per-event-type handbooks — regrouping alone would fossilize the duplication instead of removing it. 3. **A rewrite is a rare low-cost opportunity to fix structure for multiple audiences at once.** One commenter notes that getting page structure right during the rewrite serves accessibility, SEO, and AI retrieval simultaneously — a single pass with three payoffs. ## Claim atoms ### Flat handbook list blocks new-contributor navigation > [!quote] ID:rw_h1 > It is difficult to learn which handbook is relevant where, especially for new contributors to the community team. Where/why: opening problem statement of the proposal. Names the core pain — findability for newcomers, not content quality — the whole restructure hangs on this. ### Aim for a single source of truth per event type > [!quote] ID:rw_h2 > Ideally, we'd have a single source of truth for all of the types of events. Where/why: the sharpest structural idea in the comment thread. Argues past regrouping toward one event handbook with per-subject exceptions; should decide the audit phase's direction. ### Add a handbook for first-time event attendees > [!quote] ID:rw_h3 > It would be great if we could make a first-time-attendee section aimed at first-time attendees, to help them understand what they can expect from the event. Where/why: comment thread surfaces an audience the original proposal ignored. Doubles as deduplication — would replace "what to expect" copy scattered across individual WordCamp websites. ### Fix page structure for accessibility, SEO, and AI > [!quote] ID:rw_h4 > In the rewriting, it wouldn't hurt to take a few extra minutes to get the page structure right (for accessibility, SEO, and AI). Where/why: tooling/structure comment. A low-cost, high-leverage win during any rewrite — one structure pass serves screen readers, search ranking, and AI retrieval together. ## Permanent candidates - **[P1] Documentation restructure decides dedup at audit, not after** — supported by H2; checked existing Permanents, found none capturing this specific sequencing claim; promoted below. ## Processing checklist - [x] Confirmed this doc's `notes` field already contained a full deep-read (Refactor Appendix present) — ported directly - [x] Checked for an existing Permanent note before promoting P1 — found none, created - [x] Connect into the relevant MOC — [[3. Resources/MOCs/Open Source Governance MOC]] ## Links - [[3. Resources/MOCs/Open Source Governance MOC]] — contributor-onboarding documentation architecture - [[3. Resources/MOCs/DevRel MOC]] — documentation-as-product and multi-audience structure wins - [[3. Resources/Readwise/Articles/Proposal Restructure the Community Team Handbooks]] — source document