PDA

View Full Version : FIRSTWiki


phrontist
05-23-2004, 10:20 AM
Quoth the ModWiki Documentation...
A Wiki is a collaboratively-edited website which many people also view as an anarchistic publishing tool. The distinguishing feature of wikis is that they typically allow all users to edit any page...

A wiki is essentially a fantastic way for a group of people to organize very complex knowledge and collaborate on the formation of new ideas. I am a big fan of wiki, and it just occurred to me that a wiki would be ideally suited for FIRST.

Anyone interested?

(For those of you who still don't follow, check out these sites:

http://wikipedia.com - An Encyclopedia wrought through wiki
http://sensei.xmp.net - A wiki about Go, a really fantastic game)

KyleGilbert45
05-23-2004, 10:39 AM
Please use the Search Feature.......

FIRSTWiki (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=26658&highlight=wikipedia)

Joe3
05-23-2004, 11:09 AM
Actually, I think he was talking about making a "wiki" for all of the things FIRST related...that is, making a encyclopedia for all the things you could need to know when you're involved in FIRST. That other post you mentioned is talking about putting a FIRST entry in another “wiki”. Two similar, but still quite different things.

Maybe before assuming that the other person is incompetent and didn’t search, people should read others posts more closely before telling the other person to search… Just a thought.

phrontist
05-23-2004, 05:27 PM
Please use the Search Feature.......

FIRSTWiki (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=26658&highlight=wikipedia)

<evil-villian>
Muhahaha! The tables have turned Mr.Gilbert...

You laughed, but who is incompetent now!!!
</evil-villan>

:D

KyleGilbert45
05-23-2004, 08:06 PM
I would say you are incompetent for posting such a stupid child like reply. :confused:

Joshua May
05-23-2004, 08:16 PM
Back onto topic I think that this is a great idea, there is so much to know about FIRST, and certainly very few people have a FULL knowledge of FIRST. But by combining the knowledge of all FIRSTers, we could create something seriously comprehensive.

And I, too, am a big fan of WIKI's, specifically Wikipedia.

Max Lobovsky
05-23-2004, 08:19 PM
I would say you are incompetent for posting such a stupid child like reply. :confused:
ok, enough fighting kids, we are all just joking around.

seriously though, good idea. If anyone does start one, Use wikipedia's software (http://mediawiki.org/), i think its the most excellent one available.

Joshua May
05-23-2004, 08:21 PM
ok, enough fighting kids, we are all just joking around.

seriously though, good idea. If anyone does start one, Use wikipedia's software (http://mediawiki.org/), i think its the most excellent one available.

I'll look into that, although I don't have any real secured webspace. Really, though, I think this is a great idea.

SilverStar
05-23-2004, 08:53 PM
I was looking at the WikiPedia. Great idea...


But what would we use it for?

phrontist
05-23-2004, 08:54 PM
Hmmmm... Well, I like wikipedia's software, but lets not rule out others. I'd prefer one of the following:

ModWiki (http://www.usemod.com/) - I use this for my personal wiki, and really like it. I don't like the way it handles uploads though! It works for me, but for a large public one we might run into issues.

Twiki (http://twiki.org/) - Has a cult following... :yikes:

As max mentioned earlier, WikiPedia's software is nice, but I don't know much about it...

UPDATE:

After looking into Wikipedia's features list, I have mixed feelings. I'm not sure the complexity is warranted in this situation...

phrontist
05-23-2004, 09:01 PM
I was looking at the WikiPedia. Great idea...


But what would we use it for?

I'm envisioning something like ChiefDelphi's Whitepapers section meets a collaboration system, meets a comprehensive FIRST encyclopedia. Hey, this could even address recent talks of a code repository...

In short, we can use it for almost anything!
;)

SilverStar
05-23-2004, 09:03 PM
I think ChiefDelphi stands on its own. It seems enough for our current needs. ;)

phrontist
05-23-2004, 09:08 PM
I think ChiefDelphi stands on its own. It seems enough for our current needs. ;)

I don't mean to imply that we need to compete with CD!

CD is geared towards discussion, and aims to be more a communication's medium more then anything. This would be more for the exchange of technical musings, and also as a "encyclopedia". Think FIRST History, Newbie's Intro to FIRST, etc.

SilverStar
05-23-2004, 09:14 PM
Just one caution:

I know I'm getting ahead of myself, but if there is a FIRST Wiki, only registered users should be able to contribute. I was looking through the Wikipedia logs and there are so many bad users that randomly vandalize/delete pages. If the ChiefDelphi user database could somehow be incorporated into it, that would be great.

Madison
05-23-2004, 09:22 PM
<evil-villian>
Muhahaha! The tables have turned Mr.Gilbert...

You laughed, but who is incompetent now!!!
</evil-villan>

:D

You're still incompetent ;)

Search harder. (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=21150&highlight=wiki)

phrontist
05-23-2004, 09:24 PM
Just one caution:

I know I'm getting ahead of myself, but if there is a FIRST Wiki, only registered users should be able to contribute. I was looking through the Wikipedia logs and there are so many bad users that randomly vandalize/delete pages. If the ChiefDelphi user database could somehow be incorporated into it, that would be great.

The principle that anyone can edit is highly held in the wiki community...

Usually, any vandals are negated swiftly because people notice and revert thanks to wiki's versioning system. Wiki accounts are built in, but they really only exist for attribution. Besides, even if we could interface to CD's username system (which would be nigh-impossible) what would it accomplish? CD doesn't really have a bouncer at the door
;)

Pat Roche
05-23-2004, 09:40 PM
hmmmi think the feds had something similar in the scouting database...obviously for scouting. What about hosting a page where every team would have a single page to display all their information that anyone on the team has the ability to change. That way information about teams can get out even easier than having to search for a webpage. Each page would have basic information of a team like a brief history, some logistical data...etc.

-Just some thoughts

Pat

phrontist
05-23-2004, 09:57 PM
You're still incompetent ;)

Search harder. (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=21150&highlight=wiki)

Bah! I stand corrected!

Oh well, the oddly named "Friki" is but a dead link...

Time to make a New And Improved wiki!

Max Lobovsky
05-24-2004, 12:53 AM
Wether or not its the best choice, im gonna have a wikimedia setup on my webspace probably by the end of monday for FIRST purposes. I have been wanting to set one up and play around with it, so here is the perfect excuse to waste time. I'd be willing to run the official unofficial one, if people don't mind, but if thats the case, i, and hopefully other people, will have to really decide which software is the best.

mtrawls
05-24-2004, 10:35 AM
Just one caution:

I know I'm getting ahead of myself, but if there is a FIRST Wiki, only registered users should be able to contribute. I was looking through the Wikipedia logs and there are so many bad users that randomly vandalize/delete pages.

I disagree. Completely. The reason that such projects as Wikipedia have been succesful is the lack of required registration. The aim is to lower the threshold requried to give information, not raise it. Someone can delete the *text* on a page ... but another person can restore it from the archives. And if a certain IP address presents a continuing problem, it can be banned from editing for a while. See here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Our_Replies_to_Our_Critics) (though their servers seem to still be suffering from strain). The wiki concept succeeds because it is open ... close it, or at least make it less open and it will not flourish as easily.

SilverStar
05-24-2004, 06:16 PM
I disagree. Completely. The reason that such projects as Wikipedia have been succesful is the lack of required registration. The aim is to lower the threshold requried to give information, not raise it. Someone can delete the *text* on a page ... but another person can restore it from the archives. And if a certain IP address presents a continuing problem, it can be banned from editing for a while. See here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Our_Replies_to_Our_Critics) (though their servers seem to still be suffering from strain). The wiki concept succeeds because it is open ... close it, or at least make it less open and it will not flourish as easily.
We all registered from ChiefDelphi, didn't we? So if we can somehow use our accounts from ChiefDelphi... what's wrong?

Max Lobovsky
05-24-2004, 07:20 PM
We all registered from ChiefDelphi, didn't we? So if we can somehow use our accounts from ChiefDelphi... what's wrong?
The only thing using a CD registered user provides is an email address to go along with the account. This does about as much good as an IP address, which can be logged and banned by Wikis, because both can be spoofed. I think the reason for not requiring registering is allowing anonymity. Wikis want contributers to contribute as freely as possible, even if that means contributing anonymously to avoid any sort of negative feelings or whatever might result from their post.

Astronouth7303
05-24-2004, 07:28 PM
Just one caution:

I know I'm getting ahead of myself, but if there is a FIRST Wiki, only registered users should be able to contribute. I was looking through the Wikipedia logs and there are so many bad users that randomly vandalize/delete pages. If the ChiefDelphi user database could somehow be incorporated into it, that would be great.
Possibly. Stuff like team pages, rule stuff, etc. should definately be limited edit. But things like 'How to get an EDU to talk to a Palm I through USB' should probably be public. Mixed permissions?

phrontist
05-24-2004, 08:03 PM
Possibly. Stuff like team pages, rule stuff, etc. should definately be limited edit. But things like 'How to get an EDU to talk to a Palm I through USB' should probably be public. Mixed permissions?

Yeah, the MediaWiki engine allows for that, and it seems like common sense to me.

Max Lobovsky
05-24-2004, 09:47 PM
it lives: http://www.afiber.com/FIRSTwiki/index.php go to recent changes on the left side to see.... recent changes...


man im gonna have some fun playing around with this.

Max Lobovsky
05-24-2004, 10:33 PM
Hmmmm... Well, I like wikipedia's software, but lets not rule out others. I'd prefer one of the following:

ModWiki (http://www.usemod.com/) - I use this for my personal wiki, and really like it. I don't like the way it handles uploads though! It works for me, but for a large public one we might run into issues.

Twiki (http://twiki.org/) - Has a cult following... :yikes:

As max mentioned earlier, WikiPedia's software is nice, but I don't know much about it...

UPDATE:

After looking into Wikipedia's features list, I have mixed feelings. I'm not sure the complexity is warranted in this situation...TWiki has some very cool stuff like the draw plugin (which incidentally could probably be ported to mediawiki) And other goodies.

useModwiki just looks way to simple from the examples i have seen. There seem to be literally hundreds (http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?WikiEngines) but only a few come close to the having the features that i think are neccesary, or more importantly, a large enough community to stay in active development and stay current with features.

MORE UPDATE:

On second though, maybe restricting editin to logged in users might be a good thing. Not because of security or vandalism or anything, it would just be nice to at least have something more than IP address to credit a contribution to.