Wiki of our own?

[Eman]

Hi Guys,

I've been thinking that a telephone wiki would be a good idea. Articles could go much further in-depth than wikipedia would allow. I have the ability to host one ad-free and would give administrator access to the appropriate people.

Thoughts? Opinions?

[GG]

I was just suggesting that a few days ago, and I also have hosting capabilities.

If we'all decide to do this, I would definitely like to be on the planning committee in terms of how it's organized and what the policies are for write-access and all that stuff.   

[Eman]

My apologies if I've tread on your ideas, must not have seen your post. I truly believe it could be a great resource for documenting things in an easy to read form. And it would certainly make a good starting place for anyone getting into the hobby.

[Kenny C]

I'm all for it.

I doubt if I'll have anything noteable to say but I like the idea

[AE_Collector]

Would this be a part of CRPF or completely seperate?

Terry

[paul-f]

One was started about 4 years ago, but didn't reach critical mass and is gone. (telwiki.com)

Is there an advantage to starting a separate wiki as opposed to correcting, enhancing and expanding on the telephone-related entries in Wikipedia - that already has a large following?

[HarrySmith]

I think a centralized location containing clear, concise and accurate info would be a fantastic thing. I also think it is a humonous undertaking given the amount of incorrect info, misconceptions and telephone know-it-alls that are out there. I rarely use Wikipedia since anyone moron can add anything he wants. If we are going to take on this project I would help any way I can.

[Eman]

What we could do (if Dennis agrees) is to create something like wiki.classicrotaryphones.com, running the same software Wikipedia runs (MediaWiki), but have it only editable by registered users. Then make it only editable by persons of this forum.

As for why? Wikipedia has some strict guidelines about what is "notable" and what isn't. So if we were to expand their articles (and create more), they may decide that "oh that page isn't important, we don't need it, *delete*".

I'm thinking of articles about Dan/Panther's 1949 500, its story, its restoration etc. Or for example, which PBX's are pulse compatible, how to wire them up, etc. Such things would never be allowed on Wikipedia, other than a short note about it.

[AE_Collector]

What would the benefit be of a wiki over having a new board right here on the forum where threads are created in a logical theme with very regimented informaton in them. Only authorised moderators or contributors could work on the threads that they are assigned to and they would be "read only" for everyone else.

Since I am into AE phones I can envision an AECo subsection to the board with a thread for each model of AE telephone and in each of those threads would be all of the information that can be found on the model including good pictures, marketing info, wiring diagrams/schematics, colors available, years manufactured etc.

Some models have all this info readily available now, it just needs to be put together. Other models have very limited and incomplete information available so what is known would be tin the thread for the model and others that have additional info would contact the moderator to have his info added to the thread. This would maintain the consistency of the threads.

Terry

[DavePEI]

What would the benefit be of a wiki over having a new board right here on the forum where threads are created in a logical theme with very regimented informaton in them. Only authorised moderators or contributors could work on the threads that they are assigned to and they would be "read only" for everyone else.

I have to say I agree with Terry - the idea of a Wiki is that everyone can contribute to it, and that can lead to inaccuracies. So, if one is going to castrate it by allowing only a moderator decide what gets added, it would make more sense to have something set up here, as it is a better way to present approved data.

Just my two cents worth for what it is worth...

Nothing wrong with trying to find new ways, though! Keep at it!

Dave

[paul-f]

What would the benefit be of a wiki over having a new board right here on the forum where threads are created in a logical theme with very regimented informaton in them?

Good question, Terry.

One thing that comes to mind is that the wiki software may be more oriented to present information on topics with structured links and cross references among topics. 

Folks that are conversant with both sets of software can compare and contrast the benefits of each and hopefully lead us to the best solution for our goals.

Interesting discussion.

[etler]

Hi, just thought I'd add my 2 cents..

I was the one who ran telwiki.com but it really didn't get a whole lot of traction so I let the domain lapse. I still have the mediawiki database if anyone wants it. I can start it up again if no one else wants to host it.

Wikipedia's not a good idea for this type of stuff because articles need to be "noteworthy" and there's a lot of people who think they know what they're talking about but really don't who will get into editing wars or decide the pages need to be deleted. For the very specific stuff that hobbyists are interested in I think it's best to have a separate wiki.

One thing that has eluded me in both telwiki.com and my personal wiki is a way to limit user registrations. Mediawiki lets you limit page editing to registered users, but there isn't by default any way to approve account creation. It's possible that there are add-ons that implement this but I never searched too hard for it. Just something to keep in mind because if the wiki gets at all popular there will be spam accounts created.

In regards to the wiki or forum question, one of the nice things about a wiki is that it can be organized hierarchically and pages can link in many ways, which is difficult to do in message forums. It's true that inaccuracies can arise since anyone can edit pages. However, there are mechanisms that can be put in place to avoid this. It does take a certain amount of vigilance on the part of the community though.

With mediawiki you can "watch" pages that are of interest to you. You can receive notifications either through the wiki or via e-mail when those pages are updated. If you are a subject matter expert you can correct any errors that might creep in. Each page also has a discussion page associated with it. So if there are conflicts they can be discussed outside of the main page itself until a resolution is found. In the worst case scenario of edit wars, individual pages can be locked so only administrators can make changes until things are resolved.

It is quite different from message forums, and forums have their uses. I will say though that the vast majority of technical professional settings I'm familiar with use wikis to store information of this type and I find it particularly useful for my own personal things.

[GG]

Eman, no apologies needed; that wasn't "treading on," it was a wild coincidence that we both brought this up within a day or two of each other.

Why wikis?

Anyone who doesn't think a wiki is useful and hasn't seen britishtelephones.com, needs to go there right quick and spend an hour or three looking around.  Every possible piece of information about every telephone GPO/BT has ever used, all organized in a manner that makes it easy to search for and find stuff, with photos and diagrams, and tons of obscure information.  It's all there. 

That isn't a wiki; it depends on the unceasing efforts of one person to run it, a task that would be impossible for the entire scope of the North American telephone industry.  The only way to make this work for North America is to make it possible for many people to post articles. 

How to limit access:

(I am not a website or wiki expert so this is speculation.)   Wiki software is open source, and there have to be other wikis that have dealt with this before, so there must be a way to modify the source code to obtain the following result:

The registration page would not be visible to the public.  To register, you email the administrator, and that email goes to a mailing list containing maybe five people who are recognized experts and long-time members of the community (if any of them are away on vacation or whatever, others can approve new users).  Any of them can approve you as a new registered user.  All of them have access to the hidden page that contains the new user registration setup.  Whichever of them wants to approve you, emails the rest of them so they don't create duplicates. 

Then the person who approves you emails you back, and you're in.

For example:

"Hi my name is Bob and I'm an expert on AE 40s.  I've been posting on the forum under the username Bob40.  I'd like to start posting on the wiki."

That email goes to "newusers@whatever-name-this-has.org", a list whose members are Alice, Bill, Carlos, Darryl, and Eleanor.  Bill is sick with the flu and Carlos is on vacation, but Eleanor checks her mail that evening and sees Bob's request.  Eleanor mails the list and says "Yo people, El here, I've got Bob40." 

Then Eleanor logs into the wiki as Admin, finds the Secret Registration Page, and fills out the reg form for Bob40.  Then she writes back to Bob to let him know his userID and starting password. 

Security issues:

In theory a devoted baddie could pose as a smartypants here in order to get access.  But what could they gain?  Nothing: since the system wouldn't have any information in it that enabled identity theft or financial theft. 

For example:   No "PII" (personal identifying information): your userID is not your legal name, your legal name is not required, nor is your birth date (legal name + birth date = identity theft), nor is a photo of your face (name + face = the ID theft modality of tomorrow, mark my words).    No financial information: since this whole thing is free, you don't have to send a credit card number to sign up (no card numbers = nothing to steal).

Passwords are not secure if sent via un-encrypted email, so a spam attack could originate that way.  Thus users have to have access to their user profile page, whereon they can edit the details including their passwords.

[Owain]

Anyone who doesn't think a wiki is useful and hasn't seen britishtelephones.com, needs to go there right quick and spend an hour or three looking around.  Every possible piece of information about every telephone GPO/BT has ever used, all organized in a manner that makes it easy to search for and find stuff, with photos and diagrams, and tons of obscure information.  It's all there. 

That isn't a wiki; it depends on the unceasing efforts of one person to run it, a task that would be impossible for the entire scope of the North American telephone industry.  The only way to make this work for North America is to make it possible for many people to post articles. 

Bob Freshwater's phone site op. cit. although a great achievement and a valuable resource, is predominantly a collection of Post Office Telephone technical instructions - similar to Bell System Practices - OCR'd and uploaded. Those already exist for BSPs I think, in other places.

A wiki suggests more original work.

I don't think forum software allows the advanced layout of mediawiki for technical diagrams, tabulations etc. It also doesn't allow for collaborative editing leading towards a finished (but perhaps still evolving) article format.

Effective use of mediawiki relies on organisation and discipline; some editors would probably have to be willing to put in a lot of effort tidying up mark-up and cross-linking articles.

But it would be nice to get as much information collated before all the 'old people' who know about such things shuffle off to the Great Equipment Store In The Sky.

[DavePEI]

Anyone who doesn't think a wiki is useful and hasn't seen britishtelephones.com, needs to go there right quick and spend an hour or three looking around.  Every possible piece of information about every telephone GPO/BT has ever used, all organized in a manner that makes it easy to search for and find stuff, with photos and diagrams, and tons of obscure information.  It's all there.  

I and no one else ever said a Wiki isn't useful. However, it one is going to ensure the accuracy a limited number of people (moderators) would have to make the actual posts. These would have to be approved people who know their stuff! A prospective poster emails one of them with the information, and he can filter it and make the post.

My point is, even an expert can make a mistake, so this extra filtering will help to ensure accuracy. Someone suggested this in an earlier thread. So, simply making people register, even though restricted isn't enough. They could be as knowledgeable as heck, and still make a mistake in their posting. It is like having a proofreader when writing a book.

So, as I mentioned, I have nothing against Wikis, so long as you have a means in place of maintaining their accuracy above and beyond the Wiki "User does it" philosophy.

Dave