I feel that community wiki questions and answers feel soul-less compared to their authored counterparts.

Have a look at this Community Wiki question posted by Jeff. The majority of these posts are by one or maybe two people. It would be nice to see who was involved in those edits.

So, I propose, instead of showing no gravitars, show multiple. Show the most recent 2-4 people that have edited the post (Or, to stay consistent, the people with the highest percentage of content). For example:

Multiple gravitar pic

This will give Wiki posts more life without destroying the idea that wiki posts are edited by the community.

  • Slightly related: meta.stackexchange.com/questions/47394/…
    – jjnguy
    Sep 21 '10 at 1:08
  • So, what if you don't have a picture or aren't iconic enough for people to know? And what happens when you have more than 4-5 people edit a question? Shouldn't all be recognized?
    – TheLQ
    Sep 21 '10 at 1:14
  • The current data storage method for the CW display is denormalized, so to keep up with that the system will probably require storing those gravatars which it otherwise does not worry about. The alternative to denormalized values is obvious enough, but a full change of mechanics. Not meant to discourage this (I'm neutral on the topic), but this is just summat of a fair warning that there could be some opposition on the technical level. At least, as far as I can see it.
    – Grace Note StaffMod
    Sep 24 '10 at 19:51
  • @Grace, nothing that a little VC money can't overcome!!
    – jjnguy
    Sep 24 '10 at 19:52

I like this.

Since CW posts currently do show a name (the person with the highest % of content in the post), the new "signature" could list the top 3 or 4 people by content %.

This may be overboard, but since the name and percentage would get lost in this, underneath the images, it could show the name and percentage when hovering over the respective image, and default back to the highest % user when the mouse pointer is moved out of the area. Here's a quick mockup:

alt text

  • I like the percent content idea instead of most recent.
    – jjnguy
    Sep 20 '10 at 21:55
  • @jjn: Now that I look at the CW format, it looks like they dropped showing the content % and put the number of revisions instead. I think the number of revisions could go in the middle with the last edited date.
    – Jon Seigel
    Sep 20 '10 at 21:59
  • They still have the percentage show in some cases: meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5280/embrace-the-non-googlers
    – jjnguy
    Sep 20 '10 at 22:04
  • @jjn: Nice find. I suspect it has something to do with the age of the posts (possibly the percentage wasn't implemented at one time and those are the ones that don't show).
    – Jon Seigel
    Sep 20 '10 at 22:11
  • I really like the mouseover effect idea.
    – jjnguy
    Sep 21 '10 at 1:07
  • 4
    Jon Skeet gets 15% on posts he hasn't even viewed yet.
    – user27414
    Sep 21 '10 at 1:45

You must log in to answer this question.

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