Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 155 Stack Exchange communities.

What is meta?
Here's how it works:
  1. Any Stack Exchange user can ask a question
  2. The community provides support, votes on ideas, and reports bugs
  3. Your voice helps shape the way Stack Exchange operates

I would like to propose a new PostType to the tetralogy. PostType = Wiki.

What should be Wiki?

I think the ideal candidates for wiki style posts would be posts that are long and already are community wiki.

For example this query captures quite a few of them: http://odata.stackexchange.com/stackoverflow/q/66

What is different about Wiki posts?

  • Wiki posts are owned by the community.
  • You can gain reputation by improving Wiki posts.
  • Wiki posts do not fit the current Q&A model, the question is the title, the answer is the body.
  • Wiki posts only have commenting, there is no answering allowed.
  • Wiki posts have a special UI
  • Wiki posts have search priority (maybe)

OK, give some examples

List of freely available programming books is a wonderful post with lots of information, the trouble is, there is no incentive to keep it up to date. And the answers, well they are noisy and a repeat of what is at the top.

One more is Git for beginners. The big trouble is that you need a page reload every time you want to navigate to a section. And scroll-up foo.

Another C++ for a C# developer. It's really useful information that would cover probably a few hundred questions and really is a community effort.

The seminal Hidden Features of C#? would by amazing if it was just a single document with collapsible sections. After you work through 2 of them you just get tired of refreshing your web browser.

This one, The .NET SDK Programs - What does each tool do?, fits the wiki mold so tightly it's scary. It's a perfect candidate.

Other ideas around post type wiki

  • Wikis could be used for some static pages on the site like this one.
  • On meta we could use a wiki for the long requested change log
  • If we allow an abstract for wikis (8 lines of so) they could be associated with a tag and show up in the box when a tag is selected.

So:

  1. Do we need this kind of post?
  2. What are the mechanics involved in building this?
share|improve this question
    
I think you just wrapped every feature-request into this one post around the wiki thing :) – Earlz May 12 '10 at 23:16
    
Would give me more stuff to do. – Tyler Carter May 12 '10 at 23:32
1  
none of this stuff is what our sites are really about. As you said "Wiki posts do not fit the current Q&A model". I only see it happening at the [tag] level as we coalesce [tag] level FAQs and info. – Jeff Atwood May 13 '10 at 3:42
2  
also these are terrible questions you're using as examples. Yes they have a lot of content, but the presentation is just.. noise. This is not what our sites are about. – Jeff Atwood May 13 '10 at 3:43
    
Humm, This question should be a community wiki then.. – JamesM Jan 19 '11 at 4:20

I'll be the (so far) lone dissenter and upvote the idea. Putting my Meta Internet Dollars at massive risk here, just so you know!

Why do I like the idea? SuperUser. Wha-wha-wha?! Yes. I recently discovered that one of my questions on SU was closed as an exact duplicate by random. At first I thought, hey, they're not dupes! The tech involved is different!

Then I realized why it was closed -- SU would be overrun by the phenomenon of a million super-similar-but-different-only-in-a-single-technology questions if mods weren't diligent. (And thank you for your diligence, mods, particularly in the land of Ewoks.)

As this dawned on me, I was thankful that the question was closed, but felt a little empty: How could the community address scenarios like this, where a million similar-but-just-slightly-different questions could come up?

I think your idea, waffles, could handle that scenario. And thus, I support the idea. Either that, or one master community wiki post in the current framework with answers for specific technologies. But I think your idea, if the ability to include named anchors were included, would probably be more effective. (And would provide accurate dupe fodder for those questions.)

share|improve this answer
1  
They could address it by coalescing common FAQs to the tag page, as in my answer. Supporting random "true" wiki questions isn't going to happen. ever. – Jeff Atwood May 12 '10 at 23:47
    
@Jeff: I wouldn't expect any of the discussions on SOFU to become 'true' wiki questions or topics. One of the characteristics that define an idea like this, the way I see it, is more like an archive. There are many, many topics that have worn their welcome (not that I wouldn't want to re-read all the 'Skeet-isms') - CW items that have traveled their journey should be moved to a repository. I think it would be like cleaning up the classroom and building a reading room addition. Please forgive my poeticism... – IAbstract May 13 '10 at 2:37

This is a good idea, but I am not convinced that it is possible to combine wiki with reputation without becoming too complicated or open to abuse. I think that people will contribute without reputation incentives just to reduce the number of duplicate questions or because they want these resources for themselves.

share|improve this answer
    
+1 @ Casebash: I would be concerned about gaining rep as well. I think that some may be appropriate...but such a small amount that it is obviously not because of the rep that contributions are made. Should only be a token thanks. – IAbstract May 13 '10 at 1:52

I agree with @Aarobot. There is something here. Great idea waffles. I see a huge difference in this idea of a SOFU-wiki than the typical wiki-pedia.

  1. the wiki is produced by the SOFU community. Not only are the items brought up from questions that have been wiki-fied, but a huge source of information follows. A lot of it is very valuable information that I would guess is actually fairly untapped.
  2. the Wiki is moderated by 6K+ (or whatever) users ensuring that all information is maintained - adding new information and editing.
  3. a more dynamic, digital tome of vast amounts of diverse technical information and data.

Well, these are just a few ideas on why it is a good idea. This idea for a wiki just doesn't have the same feel as a wiki-pedia site would. I really think that it can be done in such a way that it isn't just another wiki.

This question is an example of a good discussion to wiki-fy.

share|improve this answer

In my opinion, this is closely related to the

Create a tag homepage/FAQ

proposal.

I don't see us doing this except as a [tag] page feature. The focus of the sites is not to be a host of epically large FAQ questions, but a host of related questions around a topic.

The natural place to coalesce the common elements of the topics is in the parent [tag] page which is the natural home for that "topic" anyway.

Wiki posts do not fit the current Q&A model, the question is the title, the answer is the body.

.. which is why they're a bad fit. We do Q&A. There can be some wiki-ness around the [tag] parent but that's about it.

share|improve this answer
    
I always thought "tag homepages" would be little things like a paragraph or two. not "large FAQs" – Earlz May 13 '10 at 0:01

Meh, too many implementation details and complications for very little gain in my opinion.

(post kept here for historical purposes. I withdraw this opinion though)

share|improve this answer
    
Try googling this google.com.au/… lots of traffic comes in here, it would be nice to have a better page to present that info – waffles May 12 '10 at 22:56

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .