Wiki Product reviews

[meow2222]

Do we want diy product reviews on wiki? 'Review' category? Any complications?

NT

[Grunff]

I love product reviews, so yes please.

[Lobster]

Do you mean, as in someone writing "...the Matsuwashu circular saw is the biggest pile of wombat poo I've ever seen" and then he (or Grunff) gets sued by Matsuwashu, or something?

Dunno about that - but a review section would be very good I think. IMHO one really good thing about it would be having authors names attached to reviews, which would add a lot of weight.... how often has everyone come across a review of some gizmo or other on the internet, written by God knows who (maybe even a manufacturer's 'plant')... as far as I am concerned I would place a lot more reliance (or not!) in a review written by a uk.d-i-y regular whose judgement I have come to trust (or not!)

David

[meow2222]

That was something I felt needed to be brought up first, so all concerned and especially Grunff were clear and happy with it all first.

And talking of sections, I'd like to see, on the left I suppose. one link to each category, which takes the user to a category page displaying all the pages in that category, plus a link to 'contents' aka special pages, all. These links would probably see a lot more use than most of the links on the left now.

Sounds a good idea to me - although I guess its upto the writer whether they want to add their name or not. I'd trust Drivel reviewing hacksaws and cabers.

I'm also aware theres the possibility of a lot of reviews going up quickly, and wondered if it would be better to have one article for one supplier or one mfr, or one single product review per article?

NT

[Owain]

I think that provided you say "in my opinion ..." you can get away with it. IANAL OYOHBI, etc

There might end up being too many categories. However, the "all categories" and "all pages" links might be made more prominent.

If signing-in is enforced (generally), then contributions are trackable through the page history. IDs who only post one or two reviews and are not known on the group may be suspected of being plants.

I wouldn't trust Drivel to review a plantpot.

One page per article, with category:review, category:powertool, sub-category:circularsaw, category:matsuwashu tags

Owain

[John Rumm]

Me too!

Can't see any problem - especially if there is a disclaimer at the head end reminding people that the reviews are simply personal opinion.

[EricP]

Would they have any validity?

We would get the "Aldi" view, and the "Trade" view. The two viewpoints are not in the same category.

[meow2222]

Of course, and both can coexist quite happily on a wiki. If each writer does their own review section on the page, so that writers dont interfere with other peoples reviews, then the reader sees any and all different viewpoints.

And its well known there are differing requirements depending if youre occasional diyer, regular diyer/light trade, industrial user etc. I dont see any difficulty in that being recognised in reviews. Poundland is an example of that, where many items are good for average diy and in a few cases even light trade, but none is good for industrial use, and some not good enough for any use at all imho.

NT

[meow2222]

I think the Mclibel case has really laid the ground on this one.

20-30 categories covers pretty much everything in diy, and that would fit just fine. Its the one bundle of links would be most useful imho.

I dont know what you mean there, but I think I can maybe answer my own question. Wiki articles are what people choose to write, so I guess it'll end up as a mix in practice, some mfr/supplier reviews, and some specific product reviews, and some category reviews.

After all trying to force all contributions to meet one policy only is only going to be trouble. And in many cases not really appropriate anyway. An example or 2....

a review of all circular saws on one page would be most useful a review of all storage systems on one page a review of all poundland stuff on one page a review of bosch power tools on one page all these are quite different product groupings, but all are grouped the way a reader would most likely want to read them. So... let wiki freedom flow. Its not as if its about to cause a problem really.

NT

[EricP]

Ok. :)

I look foward to how it works out but suggest a max of 50 entries on any review. :)))

[Jason]

The way these media-wiki things tend to work, is that someone adds something, and people either jump in and help, or ignore it. Your answer would be there: try it and see what happens ;-)

-- JJ

[Owain]

Each review page gets tagged with mulitple catehories.

That's what multiple category tags would achieve - click on category:review and you would get all the reviews. Click on category:circular saws and you would get all articles on circular saws, including reviews, how-tos, humour, projects, etc.

Owain

[meow2222]

ahh, its finally sunk in. Yes that sounds good. I dont know how to do subcats, is it just [[subcategory:whatnots]] Only downside is it would mean multiple pages if reviewing a supplier. Maybe supplier reviews can stay as one page on their own then.

NT

[meow2222]

I cant imagine that being necesary

NT