I really think Wargear could use a wiki.  It's an amazing site, but there is a lot awful lot going on.  We have the the FAQ and some sticky threads, but a lot of the details are just in the heads of users.  Luckily people are very helpful, and it's worked ok so far, but I feel like a wiki would be so much better.  I remember the wiki from ToS was somewhat useful, and I feel like the community here is so much better, we could put together a great wiki. 

A fully integrated into the website wiki would be awesome - it would be easy limiting it to wargear users, tracking changes against users, same look & feel, etc. 

But if that's not easy for Tom to turn on, I suggest we find a decent free wiki host and start on it ourselves.  Even if it is off-site, maybe Tom could forward from wiki.wargear.net to wherever it is hosted, and add a line on the toolbar to the wik or somewhere on the page.

+1

If there are no plans for board 'workshop' pages forthcoming, Wikis could also used as an ad hoc foundry/workshop/instruction manual for individual boards as well.  Obviously, before starting such a project using an ouside host, it would be good to know if Tom is considering the idea of converting board 'view' pages into semi-designer moderated workshops any time in the foreseeable future.

The ability to upload images into the wiki would be priceless.

+1

M57 - I was thinking of the board workshops when I suggested this.  I think a wiki would be a decent solution for now.

I'll start looking at free wiki hosting soon & maybe we can start discussing structure of the wiki.

A section for newbs.

Lots of areas for map designers.

 pages for individual maps (in development, & passed review)

Events (reward tournaments, mapmaking contests, etc?)

what else?

(drunkness level:  moderate)

Terminology page. =:0)

This might be a stupid question but what would be the difference between the wiki and the Help section?

AttilaTheHun wrote: This might be a stupid question but what would be the difference between the wiki and the Help section?

A wiki is typically editable by the same group of people who use the wiki - often the entire community- much like you can edit many things on wikipedia.  A wiki is collaborative by nature.  It is the much better choice when the information on it is constantly changing, and a more dynamic understanding can be gained from its contributors having multiple viewpoints.

A help section is generally created and maintained entirely by the people who run the site.  Because Help sections  are written by "professionals", or the person or people with the "inside" track on the how something works, they can very informative, consistent, and cohesive - they tend to be static - write it once and done type affairs.

As well, a help section reads/looks/is written the way the owner of it wants it to be.  This communicates all manner of things like professionalism, attention to detail, ability to organize, weather or not the community should have access to information and which information etc. etc. 

A wiki is the voice of the users, and are usually far more extensive. 

I'm also thinking that it would be a good place to track forum threads of note.  Lots of good stuff happens in the forum, and then essentially disappears.

Oh, oh, oh and a Dice rolls stats page!  

ratsy wrote:

Oh, oh, oh and a Dice rolls stats page!  

Ideas like these suggest that there is a whole set of unforeseen, but relevant pages that will arise out of the changing dynamics of the site.

As ratsy has suggested, the voice of the users will tend to be far more extensive (and current) than could that of a help section.  Properly maintained and moderated, it should easily relieve Tom of the responsibility of having to maintain an up-to-date help section. That may not be a big deal (I know he gets help from the likes of Yertle and perhaps others, but it's something.

Makes sense to me. Any votes as to which one? Integrated would be preferable...

I have used mediawiki before, and been fairly happy with it.  I installed it on my own website by hand without too much trouble.  It doesn't have all the bells & whistles of some, but  it is used by wikipedia and funded by the Wikimedia Foundation, so I assume it will be around for a while.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_wiki_software

Does integrated mean that you could insert things like a board explorer?

I don't think so.  I think integrated means that it will be hosted on the same hosting as wargear, and will use the authentication (i.e. usernames/passwords) that wargear uses.

You could still put a link to the board explorer in it.

Ozyman wrote:

I don't think so.  I think integrated means that it will be hosted on the same hosting as wargear, and will use the authentication (i.e. usernames/passwords) that wargear uses.

You could still put a link to the board explorer in it.

Yes, this - it would appear as if it was part of WarGear rather than a separate website.

It sounds like it wouldn't be as accessible as would be optimal. and I'm trying think of what it wouldn't achieve. 

For instance, if I'm on a game page, or just persing this site, could I find links that would take me to the relevant wiki?  ..maybe with an intervening sign-in pop-up?  ..and going the other way?  I suppose that could work.

I imagine it would get a tab like "Help", "Forum" and "Boards"

Yeah, what ratsy said.  Also, if there was enough well defined structure to the wiki, you could have more specialized relevant links  on a page. 

For example maybe on the page for a board, it would have a link to the wiki page for the board.  i.e.  Somewhere on:

http://www.wargear.net/boards/view/Antastic!

There might be a link to

http://wiki.wargear.net/index.php/Boards/Antastic!

or something like that.

I imagine that as the wiki structure fills out, it will be more obvious how/where these links should be created, and Tom can add them in as needed.

So - how is it "not" integrated?  What's the downside?