Wiki / FAQ thoughts

We have not had a discussion on this for a few years, so thought it worth getting some opinion...

The wiki continues to grow slowly... (137 registered users, of which 4 do most of the regular editing / writing), It has 530 main articles, with 2700 odd pages of stuff.

Its been looked at by getting on for 8 million viewers since it was created. Many pages get 10s of thousands of views and the top few have had over 100K views now.

The FAQ is getting less attention. The most popular pages (plumbing generally - combis and the mid position valve being favourite get about

150 to 180 views per month. Power tools and a few electrical articles get less than 50/month. All the rest does not even register in the stats.

There is some duplication between the sites, and the FAQ is showing its age in some cases.

My temptation is to start pruning some of the older FAQ content where it is bettered by wiki material, and start to migrate some of the better stuff to the wiki. That then leaves the question as what should be the role of the FAQ?

It could:

  • stay as it is
  • include comment / discussion sections
  • move to a blog format with more regular updates of peoples DIY stories
  • go slightly commercial - carry some ads or affiliate links and use the revenue generated to do stuff like buy prises for competitions or whatever else
  • Act as a gateway to the newsgroup
  • Vanish altogether

Thoughts?

Reply to
John Rumm
Loading thread data ...

Ideally I think it would be good to gradually migrate FAQ material into the wiki. The sticking point is copyright though, so we can't just move it ove r. It may just be easier to give the FAQ articles links to relevant wiki ar ticles, labelled as more up to date and more comprehensive. That way maybe ultimately the FAQ shrinks as better wiki articles replace its content - bu t I doubt it'll ever all go.

I'm not fond of the prize idea, sounds like a recipe for petty resentments.

The other options I'm far from convinced they'd gain much or be worth the w ork.

Re discussion & blogs, we have uk.d-i-y for that. I don't see a gain in div erting some material to a relatively low traffic area

Re gateway to the group, the wiki already addresses how to reach uk.d-i-y. An additional gateway might be nice, but is it needed, does someone want to make a decent job of it, and would ongoing access cost anything?

Re vanishing, the FAQ does contain material not in the wiki, some of it goo d IIRC.

NT

Reply to
meow2222

Sound plan.

The pages ought to keep the same names, so that any persistent outside links continue to work (or use response 301, but you still have to maintain the names in a .htaccess file or whatever). But apart from that, I reckon it should all gradually migrate to the wiki (rewritten as necessary). Using 301 would, over time, reduce the confusion in search results.

Reply to
Jon Fairbairn

Personally? - in an ideal world I'd have all the FAQ content of value migrated over to the wiki, and leave the current FAQ link just displaying the contents of the link:

formatting link
("What is it, and how do I read it or post to it?")

Then there would also be a clear link/pointer to the wiki.

What's the specific copyright issue that we're worried about? Firstly, this presumably refers to material written to people who can't be traced and asked if they object. Other material has been lifted directly from the newsgroup, with a disclaimer; so presumably that's OK to be moved? So presumably the remainder is stuff which has been authored specifically for the FAQ by people who can't be traced - is that about right?

For material in the latter category, how much of an issue would it be just to go ahead and move it, along with attribitions/disclaimers/copyright lines etc? In terms of people providing diy advice, doesn't the wiki perform the same function as the FAQ in that regard, as long as it's not-for-profit etc? Just not convinced there definitely a copyright issue really.

Reply to
Lobster

I don't see any problem with copyright as such since all we would be changing in effect is the hosting technology. Its already accepted by the contributors that their work was going to be part of a FAQ, and subject to the whims of an editor/maintainer...

Indeed.

Reply to
John Rumm

So, is the FAQ going, then?!

Doesn't look like there's a huge depth of feeling on the matter here...

-- David

Reply to
Lobster

Depth of feeling not always reflected by posting!

I strongly support the idea of having one base only - the Wiki. But I have assumed that those actually involved will inevitably com to that conclusion themselves and there is no point in my posting. However, you have made me question that...

Had I got any copyright involvement, I would be more than happy for the move across - it is very much in the original spirit.

Reply to
polygonum

Not going, but I have started duplicating some pages in the wiki with a view to retiring them in the FAQ. Only really because some are getting quite dated and it would make sense to integrate them with the more up to date stuff in the wiki. Its also easier for more editors to get to work on the wiki (that's a hint in case I was too subtle ;-)))

What happens to the FAQ itself is open to question. It could just be a link or narrative guide to the wiki articles.

Reply to
John Rumm

I'm late coming to this; I don't get on here so often these days, but as a previous FAQ maintainer....

Agreed, there is defo some obsolete stuff in there now.

Contentious. Some say discussion should be only on here. OTOH a web interface controlled by diy folk as opposed to google/diybanter would give access to the next generation of diyers, many of whom will never reach us via nntp. I'm in favour of this but its a big job for the maintainer (i.e. John R).

Yes, should allow ads, if nothing else to contribute to the huge effort John/internode is putting in, both in hours, free hosting and paying for the domain. Carefully selected ads could even be helpful to people? Any income - if any! - could possibly be used to pay for google-ads to get further up google search results. Might be able to get manufacturers to link back to wiki articles that show their kind of tools/products in use (but only in a generic way, no ad 'placements' in the wiki).

If you mean as a replacement for what googlegroups *tries* to do, then a big yes.

Should at very least remain as links to the wiki.

Reply to
Phil Addison

I have started moving some of the articles to the wiki. That means they are duplicates at the moment, but will begin to trip the FAQ versions in time.

controlled

its a big job

On the downside, any NNTP to Web gateway is going to be an "off the shelf" affair - and hence may well suffer many of the same failings as the others out there. On the bright side, at least it would not just be a platform for selling ads.

That would potentially lower the workload a little, in that multiple users could have accounts. It might also suit folks who want to write stuff, but are wary of the editable nature of wiki posts.

John/internode is

selected ads

to pay for

manufacturers to

There are two areas where some commercial use might be advantageous that I can see. One would be in recommendations of things like books and DIY manuals. Its actually easier to manage an update an Amazon storefront than it is a static list of publications. You then also automatically get pictures of covers and links to reviews etc.

The other would be dealing with the occasional cross promotional deal that comes my way. e.g. manufacturers and tools suppliers interested in offering prises etc (in exchange for exposure and links etc)

Well - I suppose its not that different fom diybanters etc. Not sure that we really want the archiving headache of a full google style operation.

Yup - or the domain could simply redirect there...

Reply to
John Rumm

Good-o

interface controlled

generation of

its a big job

Except approved ones.

Its a shame that original authors aren't/can't be credited in the wiki, as well as any major (or even any) updaters. Credits not only give, err, credit but allow one another way of assessing the credence of the material. Maybe that is available in the log pages but I haven't explored there. Perhaps it's possible to reference an 'attributations' page from article pages.

John/internode is

selected ads

used to pay for

manufacturers to

(but only in a

I think the group should allow you to do these kind of things if it has some benefit to the group, and that includes acquiring some funding for the group. I know you are happy doing it 'for free' but one day you may want to hand it over to someone who needs a bit of cash input to pay for the domain name and to support hosting. All of course with the usual vocal input from the group :)

Noooo, not archiving just a web to uk.d-i-y gateway showing whatever is current on some nntp server.

... perhaps with a bunch of keywords to raise the google hits.

Reply to
Phil Addison

Well they can - either by virtue of them being recorded as the creator of an article, or in some cases where it has been someone else wikifying an exiting article we have left the attribution at the top of the text.

another way

pages but I

page from

Yup, click the "history" link on any wiki article and it will not only show you who did every edit, but also allow you to revisit any previous version or see a list of all the changes between any two versions.

John/internode is

selected ads

used to pay for

manufacturers to

(but only in a

needs a bit of

with the usual

In the grand scheme of things I don't expect its going to make any significant money (I have some book links on my web conversion page that perhaps generate £10 to £15 a year!). So it could probably pay for its own domain registration, but not its hosting.

The www site hosting is just on a cheap shared hosting package, and so it not too difficult. The wiki database size is now too large to go on most shared packages, and so would need at least a virtual server setup. As we currently need to maintain a dedicated server for other purposes (at getting for for £2K/year!) it gets a free ride on that for now.

Yup, that is probably doable.

Yup, or maybe an index page of some form...

Reply to
John Rumm

one another way

log pages but I

'attributations' page from

Sounds good. Would be good to mention this on "About this wiki".

benefit to

you are happy

needs a bit of

with the usual

Not saying you should do it, just that you "should be allowed to" if you desire at some point.

current on some

Yes but could also have diy-ish keywords that don't actually appear in any of the text, like... errr... umm... ahh yes diybanter .

Reply to
Phil Addison

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.