Adding a Wiki to wiredpakistan


#1

Any suggestions to adding a wiki to the website? Here are the wiki engines I'd looked at so far:

Dokuwiki - Top of my list so far.

http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/MediaWiki]Mediawiki :: This powers Wikipedia, and using it for this site is like using a anti aircraft gun and an artillery barrage to kill a fly.

PMWiki -

I was thinking of adding it here: http://www.wiredpakistan.com/wiki/ - instead of the /wiki it could be /something else also.

There are tons of wiki engines out there, the problem is choosing b/w them!


#2

Now that will be a very interesting development. People (including myself) may add information that is 100% true but might not be in-favor of corporates and government of Pakistan (as it will expose hidden-truth to common man). As they say "truth is always bitter" :)

I might use MediaWiki. However, the decision is yours. I would say choose anyone and just give it a shot. If you like Dokuwiki then just install it and run as "beta" version for WP's wiki.

By the way, be warn for heavy vandalism by evil-doers, corporates, and government. You'll need to take early prevention measures to prevent vandalism, otherwise it may render into a mess of "failed test".

Good luck! :) My best wishes are with you. :)

Fe-Aman Allah


#3

I personally like mediawiki and you can always customize it to suit your needs.

PunBB still lacks polls? :/

Registration/forum integration, and approval before posting/editing might be required as abuse is anticipated.


#4

I don't know the ins and outs of the different wiki engines, but I must say that this is a good idea! As to the URL, I vote for the simple yet straightforward /wiki/.

EDIT: and yes, a strict editing policy would really help the authenticity. :)


#5

What is Wiki?


#6

[quote=", post:, topic:"]

What is Wiki?
[/quote]

Wikipedia is an example of a wiki. Read more.


#7

@KO

Although I agree that the more functionality the better, I remain hesitant to endorse the idea. Wiki's require a very, very strong and motivated community to truly be informative, and hence effective. I mean no offense, but the little time I have spent on this forum suggests that perhaps this particular community is not quite "there" yet.

I can almost guarantee the result will be that the same questions are asked, just as frequently, but instead of the response being an answer, or a reference to another post, it will be link to a branch within the wiki. Given that most of your users tend to be first-time users, or those researching a particular topic, these questions will be inevitable.

If you do go ahead with the Wiki concept, I strongly suggest that you do not make it publicly accessible, but rather accessible by a select group of individuals who frequent this site and are active community members. A obvious choice is your moderation team. I would also suggest that board members with a certain number of posts should be permitted to contribute (I am not sure how the mechanics would work, but I am sure you would be able to figure it out).

Just my 2 paisas on the matter. On a side note, thank you for setting up this forum. If you hadn't done it, I certainly would have, although I am not sure I would have put as much time and effort as you obviously have.


#8

[quote=", post:, topic:"]

Wikipedia is an example of a wiki. Read more.

[/quote]

Thanks


#9

[quote=", post:, topic:"]

@KO

Although I agree that the more functionality the better, I remain hesitant to endorse the idea. Wiki’s require a very, very strong and motivated community to truly be informative, and hence effective. I mean no offense, but the little time I have spent on this forum suggests that perhaps this particular community is not quite “there” yet.

I can almost guarantee the result will be that the same questions are asked, just as frequently, but instead of the response being an answer, or a reference to another post, it will be link to a branch within the wiki. Given that most of your users tend to be first-time users, or those researching a particular topic, these questions will be inevitable.

If you do go ahead with the Wiki concept, I strongly suggest that you do not make it publicly accessible, but rather accessible by a select group of individuals who frequent this site and are active community members. A obvious choice is your moderation team. I would also suggest that board members with a certain number of posts should be permitted to contribute (I am not sure how the mechanics would work, but I am sure you would be able to figure it out).

Just my 2 paisas on the matter. On a side note, thank you for setting up this forum. If you hadn’t done it, I certainly would have, although I am not sure I would have put as much time and effort as you obviously have.

[/quote]

Raza you don’t seem to understand the reasoning behind setting up a Wiki. The problem IS that people repeatedly ask the same questions, and an even bigger challenge is to sift through the information on this forum to answer those questions. Its inefficient to re-post and answer to a question/query over and over again, and you can’t even tell the person which post to look at since threads tend to get unmanageably long. The Wiki is supposed to act as a resource to address these issues and to succinctly compile all important information in one place.

The obvious problem is who will be allowed to edit the Wiki as there is the threat of vandalism. However, we should be able to come to an acceptable solution once the Wiki is setup and we sort out the teething issues.


#10

Sah,

You missed my point. if you read my post, what I am suggesting is that even if you set up the Wiki, the same questions are going to be asked over and over again. The only difference is that the Wiki will only serve to organize said answers in a place that can be referred to over and over again easily. The value of the Wiki for this community, specifically new comers, will not be "self-service" but rather a destination that you, me and others can point towards.

I wholeheartedly agree that the organization of information is required, but the idea that it would "solve" the problem of people "asking" the questions, is wrong. It will help in answering, it certainly will not solve or stop.

Edit: On a side note, it is refreshing to hear that people in, or related to this country, are talking about the concept of efficiency outside of CNG and Motorcycles =)

Btw, are you attending Waterloo, Laurier or UWO by any chance?


#11

@Raza: We don't want people to stop ASKING questions. We want to provide a better way to ANSWER them! 'Absolute' information such as tariffs, speed comparisons and the like can be compiled in one place for easy reference and when someone asks for them, you can just give the Wiki link instead of searching the whole forum and reading a million posts to answer the question.

And I'm in third yr electrical engineering in U of Waterloo.


#12

@sah: Great! I think we are walking the same lines. Good stuff.

Cheers


#13

I endorse the idea of a wiki. :P And yes don't let the scummy company reps abuse it!


#14

[quote=", post:, topic:"]

If you do go ahead with the Wiki concept, I strongly suggest that you do not make it publicly accessible, but rather accessible by a select group of individuals who frequent this site and are active community members. A obvious choice is your moderation team. I would also suggest that board members with a certain number of posts should be permitted to contribute (I am not sure how the mechanics would work, but I am sure you would be able to figure it out).
[/quote]

Maybe, I interpret it wrong but I’ll disagree with you here as I follow slogan “knowledge should be FREE and for everyone”. Wiki should be open for everyone. Let everyone (even without any kind of registration) to read and get benefit from the knowledge written in wiki.

However, there should be some check-and-balance to protect wiki from vandalism but too much restriction will discourage people from adding their articles which will lead to either slow growth or eventually death of wiki (as lack of knowledgeable/out-dated articles).

Moreover, I would suggest to give proper and prominent credits to people who wrote or update articles to encourage people to write more in wiki.

I would suggest to try the path of open democracy rather than dictatorship of democratic-looking ruler-ship, in which any person in-power can press Delete button to delete any article which he/she doesn’t like to his/her taste.

Encourage people to write even novices (path to success) rather than forcing few people to work as slaves (path to failure).

In my opinion, a start of article is important even if written in bad/improper English or without proper formatting because start of idea or sharing information is critical in the success of wiki (take Wikipedia’s success example).

For example, anyone with excellent article writing skills maybe useless without statistical information but he can correct/update an article that has statistical information but written improperly. Just my thought.

Fe-Aman Allah.


#15

Perhaps only allow members with 10 posts or more to edit? Of course, everyone, including guests would be able to read though.


#16

@wampyr:

Yes, sorry, my post was unclear, re-reading it I see I made an editing mistake there. By accessibility, I meant to say the ability to edit, add-to and subtract from the Wiki. If the Wiki is not accessible to John Doe, then it serves little purpose.


#17

@KO

I've browsed through some of the options you listed, and while researching some of them, I came across WikiMatrix which seems to be a pretty powerful tool when comparing the multitude of engines.

Any how, consider this a vote in favor of DokuWiki; it seems simple, well styled and ready to go out of the box. The others seem, as you stated, a little over powered and complex.

As far as the URL is concerned, from a new user perspective and usability stand point, I think wiredpakistan.com/faq/ makes a lot of sense.


#18

Another thing that I would like to add here is that we should keep this in mind to prevent from reinventing the wheel. For example, instead of writing an article on Telnet, either link to Wikipedia or simply skip writing it at all.

Focus should be on information that is new. Duplicates can easily bulk up newly born wiki but can easily lost its actual path.

Fe-Aman Allah.


#19

The idea of a wiki is to to reduplicate information, but to provide info usefull here.

For example, the Wiki page on Wateen Wimax could link to relevant forum posts, the Wikepedia page on Wimax, user reviews around the web (as well as on the wiki...), etc.

The url /faq doesn't make sense - the faq will be just a page with faq's on the site, while the wiki will hold a lot more info!


#20

@KO

I think the breadth of the Wiki and its contents will probably be determined over time. I do believe its helpful to thresh out the scope and utility of it prior to execution. I think you would do well to set it up, albeit as a experiment or beta functionality, and see how things turn out.

I think its great that you are soliciting and taking into account the community's opinion. Thank you again for the time and (no doubt) expense you undertake to provide these services to us.

Good luck!