Tweet
Let's start with some definitions:
a wiki is a site that allows its visitors to create and edit its pages using some simple syntax.
Wiki, or the Wiki is the site that pioneered this technology and the whole idea of collaborative creation. c2.com/cgi/wiki
Wikipedia is a wiki that contains encyclopaedic information.
People who call Wikipedia Wiki and people who call wikis Wikipedias piss me off.
Wikipedia is a good site, but it is a bad wiki. But what's bad is that it is so popular that many people think this is the way a wiki is supposed to work.
Wikipedia enforces a dichotomy of content and its discussion. A real wiki blends them, constantly refactoring discussion into content, only separating them when the discussion is too long or heated.
Wikipedia has rules that were supposed to be flexible and a whole host of bureaucrats who enforce them as Draconian laws. The main point of wikis is having a classless society, where the main rule is that you can edit any page. Well this and don't be a turd.
Wikipedia tries to maintain NPOV and encourages you to delete statements that deviate from it. A wiki is about having multiple PsOV, you are not supposed to delete stuff unless it's spam; if you disagree, provide your own opinion. Maybe someone else will unwind your discussion into coherent summaries of both views.
No, I'm not saying that Wikipedia should work like a real wiki. Its goals are different, and its encyclopedic articles wouldn't be able to exist otherwise. I'm saying that its a good side, but it's not an exemplary wiki. You shouldn't turn your own wiki into another CMS where the readers can fix your typos without having to write you a letter. A wiki is quick and fluid, not rigid and formalized. Don't look up to Wikipedia.
a wiki is a site that allows its visitors to create and edit its pages using some simple syntax.
Wiki, or the Wiki is the site that pioneered this technology and the whole idea of collaborative creation. c2.com/cgi/wiki
Wikipedia is a wiki that contains encyclopaedic information.
People who call Wikipedia Wiki and people who call wikis Wikipedias piss me off.
Wikipedia is a good site, but it is a bad wiki. But what's bad is that it is so popular that many people think this is the way a wiki is supposed to work.
Wikipedia enforces a dichotomy of content and its discussion. A real wiki blends them, constantly refactoring discussion into content, only separating them when the discussion is too long or heated.
Wikipedia has rules that were supposed to be flexible and a whole host of bureaucrats who enforce them as Draconian laws. The main point of wikis is having a classless society, where the main rule is that you can edit any page. Well this and don't be a turd.
Wikipedia tries to maintain NPOV and encourages you to delete statements that deviate from it. A wiki is about having multiple PsOV, you are not supposed to delete stuff unless it's spam; if you disagree, provide your own opinion. Maybe someone else will unwind your discussion into coherent summaries of both views.
No, I'm not saying that Wikipedia should work like a real wiki. Its goals are different, and its encyclopedic articles wouldn't be able to exist otherwise. I'm saying that its a good side, but it's not an exemplary wiki. You shouldn't turn your own wiki into another CMS where the readers can fix your typos without having to write you a letter. A wiki is quick and fluid, not rigid and formalized. Don't look up to Wikipedia.
Comment