Definition Wiki vs. A Specific Forum for Acronyms, Definitions, Etc.

Marc said:

A Wiki is definitely not a forum. One 'compaint' I have is that, for example, there's no index.

I'm tending towards a specific forum. That way you can see a listing of what's there, sort alphabetically and such. One response in this thread says a wiki is easier to search. I don't see that - Especially when the vBulletin 3.5 version is out (within a month I think - it's in beta test now) where full text search, boolean functions and such are enabled.

Click to expand...

Bleary-eyed and floating on numerous cups of coffee to stay awake after hours of perusing wiki last night, I tend to agree that a wiki for our specific purpose of a narrow "quality glossary of terms (including acronyms)" is overkill and the issues of vandals and spam would overly stress the resources of our Moderators.

I think the issue can be handled here with two "sticky" Forums:

1. One "closed but visible" Forum containing the Glossary.
2. An open Forum where suggestions for additions, corrections, deletions are made by Cove visitors.

In practice, administrators and moderators can update the closed Forum containing the Glossary at irregular intervals, based on input in the open Forum. If there is a dispute on a term, evidenced by debate within the open Forum, additions or changes can wait until consensus is agreed.

I don't see a need for "instant update ala wiki" for our Glossary.

Does this proposal sound reasonable?

I am SO looking forward to a Boolean search engine. (Do we have a "fingers crossed" smiley?)

I'm with Marc, a wiki seems like overkill. I'd never seen one before, so I went to the one that is posted in this thread, to see an example. Yikes, but that's a lot of info in one spot! It would take me a bit to get used to running through a wiki, but it looks pretty cool. I piddled around in the example and liked it. I just think it's overkill for what is being proposed here, besides the security concern.

Joe Cruse said:

I piddled around ...

Click to expand...

I hope you cleaned up after yourself!

Sorry - I'm short time - last day before a nice little vacation - I'm gettin' a little slap happy.

I voted "specific forum" - going along with Marc and Wes' 'In practice" . I just get too lost in the Wiki

Anyone else got that 80's song cycling through their head now? Jam on it, jam on it, I said jam, j-j-j-j-jam on it...

I'm sure that if I were "properly trained to the desired competency" I could learn how to use Wiki. but, at first glance, it just looked like a little more time was going to have to be invested than I had available right now. As others have mentioned, someone can probably use their knowledge to help some of us slower folk out.

Wes Bucey said:

Does this proposal sound reasonable?

Click to expand...

Yes. Wikis are fun, but I'm all for what works best.

The Index is interesting. I'll probably end up with a specific forum, but the wiki may come in handy for some things. I'm leaving it online for a while for testing, as I earlier stated, until 6 July.

I agree that it is really a fair amount more 'complicated' than the forums, but they are completely different animals. I think the wiki does take more time to understand how it all works which will limit a lot of people.

I voted for the specific form. I can just imagine that a wiki was set up and newbies would still open a separate thread to ask about a particular term. At least if we have a specific forum then we can link them to it. I imagine that if we linked the to a Wiki file we would also have to instruct them how to use it. I for one was totally lost during my brief stay.

Marc said:

The Index is interesting. I'll probably end up with a specific forum, but the wiki may come in handy for some things. I'm leaving it online for a while for testing, as I earlier stated, until 6 July.

I agree that it is really a fair amount more 'complicated' than the forums, but they are completely different animals. I think the wiki does take more time to understand how it all works which will limit a lot of people.

Click to expand...

Yep. We are NOT about "limiting people" - our primary target audience [for the glossary] is NOT experienced professionals, but bewildered "newbies" who may need help in understanding the jargon and "shorthand" (TS, ISO, etc.) we so casually use in our posts.

I notice even Steve Prevette got a little confused in the ASQ Forum that he moderates when a poster casually mentioned "TS" and "PPAP" because automotive stuff isn't in Steve's everyday experience. For that factor alone - just a quick reference guide when we come across an unusual term - the glossary is a great idea.