Main > Wiki Discussion

Should the wiki be re-lifed?

(1/2) > >>

Gray_Area:
Meaning, perhaps a new sub-forum of wiki-like entries would be better. People, especially noobs, might more likely see it. Also, threads could be locked so that they are free of chatter and clatter. Wiki Discussion could be kept around, where people would actually talk about the things posted in wiki threads; wiki thread discussion threads would be verboten in the wiki sub-forum. Maintenance would be less necessary, as if a thread is no longer relevant, it can be ignored, or someone can write up something new. Lastly, it would be part of the main site so that any admin actions required would be within grasp.

Oh, and maybe this should be [re]posted in MAIN, to give everyone a more obvious cue for say.

Thoughts?

PL1:
A pseudo-wiki will make more work that must be performed by fewer people since only OPs and mods can edit instead of all contributors.

A real wiki is the better way to spread the burden and will also prevent someone "going PBJ" and wiping out an entry if they're the OP, assuming change rollback is enabled.

Perhaps we could ask certain people to volunteer as "lead contributors" and have them review their portions every so often for organization, currency, and completeness.

Sections that need work could be posted with a request for assistance in the Main forum for maximum crowd-source input.

Once that feedback is received, it can be incorporated into the wiki.


Scott

Gray_Area:
Yeah, libraries only work when you have staff attendance and people to check the books out.

PL1:
There are at least four of us patiently waiting for the "library" doors to open so we can organize and update the stacks.

I suspect that once the info is more current and user-friendly, traffic will pick up a bit.


Scott

Gray_Area:
I doubt it.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page