[PLUG] Sites aimed at fostering wiki CONTENT?

Richard Owlett rowlett at cloud85.net
Fri Jan 6 18:59:28 UTC 2017


On 1/6/2017 8:43 AM, wes wrote:
> 1. being wrong is ok. when you find information that doesn't work for you,
> but don't have something better to replace it with, you can place a note
> near it. something like (note: this doesn't work in montana during a full
> moon). hopefully others will see it and either add to it or correct it. but
> if they don't know to look, they are less likely to.

I hadn't thought of that approach. Although now that you mention 
it I've seen it done on a wiki that I've not visited recently. It 
has the advantage that only people looking for that information 
will see it.

>
> 2. I think if you stipulate that what you're doing is for a very specific
> application, perhaps even in the page title itself, it will be more likely
> to help others with similar goals, and less likely to be clobbered by the
> mainstream users.

That last phrase may be optimistic.

> In the worst case, your page gets deleted and you will
> have at least tried.

Total deletion would not be the concern. My concern would be 
those making piecemeal changes who don't pay attention to the 
overall context/intent. I'd have to do a careful proofreading 
anytime I went into edit after receiving coherent germane comments.

> Then, if this becomes the recurring pattern in
> practice, the next logical step may be to set up your own wiki.
>
> -wes
>
> On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 6:22 AM, Richard Owlett <rowlett at cloud85.net> wrote:
>
>> I have asked many questions (some odd;) and have received much
>> useful feedback.
>> Some have suggested creating or adding to wiki pages.
>> For two reasons I hesitate to create/edit a page on an
>> established wiki (e.g. wiki.debian.org):
>>
>> 1. The strong possibility I could have my facts wrong. There have
>> been cases where I could demonstrate current wiki content was
>> wrong and have been chided for not changing it myself - it being
>> a wiki after all. I did not know the correct information &/or
>> could not see replacing known bad with something with other
>> unknown errors.
>>
>> 2. As to creating new content, I have atypical perspectives.
>> During the development of content I would need feed back but a
>> traditional established wiki is open for modification by the
>> general public. Almost by definition they would edit to conform
>> to that divergent view.
>>
>> I do not have the resources nor expertise to create or administer
>> such a site.
>> Characteristics of such a site (roughly in order of importance):
>>    1. ONLY the author of a page has write access to the page content.
>>    2. there be some means for publicly readable comments on the
>> content.
>>    3. the content should probably be open indexing by search engines.
>>    4. if possible it should be flagged to not be archived by sites
>> such as
>>       http://archive.org as one of the goals is to limit the
>> perpetuation of
>>       erroneous "facts".
>>
>> Comments/suggestions?
>> TIA
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> PLUG mailing list
>> PLUG at lists.pdxlinux.org
>> http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
>>
> _______________________________________________
> PLUG mailing list
> PLUG at lists.pdxlinux.org
> http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
>




More information about the PLUG mailing list