native wiki

dvsDave

Well-known member
The biggest blank spot in both VB and IPB is their lack of a native wiki product.

I want a wiki product with multiple namespaces and autolinking of terms from the the forums to the wiki entry. I also want to be able to see a list of terms in the wiki displayed like the memberlist on vb. (characters listed in a row across the top)

You provide that and an import from vbulletin and I'll move in a heartbeat.
 
Upvote 43
Krystofo: Lots of excellent ideas. We need a dedicated site to discuss this stuff !
A "dedicated site" is no problem. I have 100 secondary URLs and 3 VPS accounts. The problem is... I cannot afford to "dedicate" a Xenforo license. Although, I do have an owned VB-3 license which I am wondering what to do with. Hmmm... I can offer four options...

1) A minor Xenforo/XenCarta subforum within a Xenforo/XenCarta site. "Probably" I can also designate a portion of my XenCarta wiki for XenCarta documentation--if someone else is serious about moderating this section. However any future expansion to related themes "might" need to be limited, depending on the level of success of my other projects.

2) A major Xenforo/XenCarta subforum within a VB-3/VaultWiki site. If any person or persons want to collaborate on this, you are welcome to do so. In this case we would be almost equal partners for the entire website. Each of us will usually be able to start any subforums or wiki topics we desire--whether related or unrelated to Xenforo/XenCarta. We could also share the advertising banner space, subject to annual renegotiation. (P.S. I have no idea whether VaultWiki is likely to remain supported for VB-3. If not, we might want to choose a different wiki.)

3) Ten people donate $20 and we'll get a dedicated Xenforo/XenCarta site.

4) Start with no. 1 above and migrate to no. 3 if and when ten people donate $20.

If by chance anyone is interested, I suggest we start a conversation.

(By the way, all of my online operations are currently owned by me, but I would prefer them all to be a nonprofit co-op, with myself as manager on salary. If by chance anybody here is interested to help work out the process of forming a co-op, I would be eager to work together on this matter also. )
 
I tried IPBwiki and it just ruined my MediaWiki installation. Even if it worked, MediaWiki is confusing for my users, and it looks totally inconsistent with the site.
The creator of Mediawiki / Wikipedia:
Wikipedia is too complicated for many people to modify despite billing itself as "the free encyclopaedia that anyone can edit", its founder has said.

It aims to increase its users from 400m to 1bn by 2015. But growth requires a new interface, said Mr Wales.

He said a lot of people were "afraid" to contribute to the site by the sometimes complicated code - known as Wiki mark-up - needed to format entries.

"If you click edit and you see some Wiki syntax and some bizarre table structure - a lot of people are literally afraid.

Jimmy Wales says Wikipedia too complicated for many
It sure is Jimmy. :)
 
Wikipedia needs a forum like editor that is simple to use. WP has been heading in that direction for years, and their latest editor version makes that clear.

If you want to stimulate members to add wiki entries then you need some kind of reward. Reputation, likes, trophies, awards.

From Krystofos comments above he would currently benefit more from Vaultwiki than from XenCarta, as XC is new. Will XC expand in functionality to match or surpass Vaultwiki?
 
I just visited the NuWiki site out of curiosity. A private, own your own, on your own server license costs ------> $14,995.00 with a big comma in there! Either I'm looking at the wrong thing, or you guys and gals are WAY out of my league.

NuWiki How to buy

Jeff

PS. Their web site looks like it is based on MediaWiki.

This is NOT the NuWiki that was a native wiki for vB. NuWiki was hosted at NuHit.com, but the domain has lapsed apparently. I had NuWiki and it had a 1000 entry limit per forum that was really annoying. VaultWiki was awkward, but I've been working with the VaultWiki guys for years now and the upcoming version 4 of VaultWiki is going to be a complete rewrite of the current software. I would very much advise waiting for VaultWiki 4 to be released before biting the bullet on a wiki package as it's REALLY hard to migrate from one wiki to another. (Trust me, it stinks)
 
VaultWiki was awkward, but I've been working with the VaultWiki guys for years now and the upcoming version 4 of VaultWiki is going to be a complete rewrite of the current software.
I'd be pleasantly surprised to see vaultwiki improve substantially. I've tried helping them as well. It was designed with Mediawiki in mind. That is a very bad starting point. Apparently even the founder of Wikipedia says his UI is terrible.
 
I'd be pleasantly surprised to see vaultwiki improve substantially. I've tried helping them as well. It was designed with Mediawiki in mind. That is a very bad starting point. Apparently even the founder of Wikipedia says his UI is terrible.
The problem is that he is saddled with the clunky vB interface and is trying to mod it. However, with namespaces going away in favor of more mediawiki style landing page for topics, I think that alone will merit my patience as we wait for it to be released.
 
The problem is that he is saddled with the clunky vB interface and is trying to mod it. However, with namespaces going away in favor of more mediawiki style landing page for topics, I think that alone will merit my patience as we wait for it to be released.
Thank god... Namespaces were my biggest complaint about VaultWiki.
 
Ok, you can set a customuser group and make that the default registered users who can edit posts in a node.

What I'd really like to see is for them to be able to edit the pages as well. I have a long list of FAQ pages and don't want to change their URLs
 
Because the FAQ have good backlinks and the Pages can keep the same URL. If put in the forum they would have to change the URL and there are 100s of FAQ to redirect by hand. My .htaccess is already pretty long.
 
I will never use any third-party mods or applications. I have never had a single third-party mod with any forum software that didn't eventually stop working, contained serious bugs I discover after a month of usage, get abandoned, etc.

Hello everyone. I would just like to say that, the more I think about it, the more I think that Josh has a point. Addressing this point is, in my humble opinion, more important than any "feature" suggestions I have made previously. Also, the past two months, I have focused on installing and learning about Wordpress. This experience has taught me a few things. I would now like to make the following suggestions.

1. Developers should not be lone wolves. I would like to suggest that any developers of major add-ons should always work in groups of 3. I.e., I would like to be assured that there are 3 programmers supporting any major add-on, and that if any of them quits, he is likely to be replaced.

2. Xenforo should purposely make add-on development more profitable and more sustainable. I would like to suggest that Xenforo itself also have a system of encouragement to any major add-on. Such as (a) give certain add-ons "priority" status that officially encourages their use and also signing up for annual auto-repeating Paypal donations however small. (b) Activating some sort of policy whereby if Xenforo ever uses the ideas developed by an add-on, the add-on developers will receive priority consideration to work for Xenforo on this development or somehow receive significant compensation. I.e., I would like to see Xenforo remove the concern by third party developers that if their add-on is "too successful," Xenforo might make it obsolete by developing an official version. I believe that Xenforo could and should instead create a situation wherein developers "want" this to happen because it will likely be lucrative for them.

3. Work with Wordpress, not against it.I hope that Xenforo will never make the mistake of Vbulletin in attempting to develop and maintain a blogging extension. Instead, Xenforo should focus on the much cheaper and more effective path of optimizing an integration with Wordpress. The difference is analogous to the Soviet Union attempting to keep up with the United States in military technology in the 1980's, with government funding pitted against a booming consumer PC industry. Apple Computers similarly lost ground to the PC in the 1980's by refusing to cooperate in shared development.

4. Focus instead on a native wiki and a native networking extension. I do however think that Xenforo should develop or encourage the development of (a) a native wiki and (b) the ability to generate Facebook-style personal home pages for each member. Creating such extensions, instead of a blog, would be relatively inexpensive, relatively without competition, and extremely popular.

Meanwhile, I currently am planning to use MediaWiki with Wordpress integration. All evidence suggests that this works quite smoothly. This is currently used by Wordpress.org. Wordpress and Buddypress (which is just a Wordpress plug-in) have several wiki add-ons but which are always plagued with the support problems as implied by Josh.

The creator of Mediawiki / Wikipedia: It aims to increase its users from 400m to 1bn by 2015. But growth requires a new interface, said Mr Wales... He said a lot of people were "afraid" to contribute to the site by the sometimes complicated code - known as Wiki mark-up - needed to format entries... "If you click edit and you see some Wiki syntax and some bizarre table structure - a lot of people are literally afraid... Jimmy Wales says Wikipedia too complicated for many. It sure is Jimmy. :)

This is interesting news, which I was glad to learn, but can be interpreted in different ways. With Jimmy Wales keenly interested in improvement, it seems hopeful that MediaWiki will someday improve, presumably with either upgrade or migration capability. Meanwhile, I am quite certain of three things.

(a) MediaWiki is as certain as anything to remain supported long-term.
(b) Although it can be daunting to master MediaWiki, there is nothing at all to clicking "edit" and adding to the basic text.
(c) Jimmy Wales is something of a fanatic who wants everyone on the planet to become a MediaWiki contributor. His displeasure over the shortcomings of MediaWiki need to be seen in this light. Perhaps a lot of people can feel more welcome to edit simply by enabling a "text only" mode that does not display any Wiki mark-up.
 
It would be nice to be included with a on and off option. Myself would also benefit from this as we are a hosting community so we could do wiki on hosting related stuff. ;)
 
I have never been a fan of wikis'. I think they are very confusing to anyone who is not super familiar with them.
I completely agree.

And that is exactly the reason why...

I believe a solid integration with an existing wiki package would be better than expecting a native wiki product.

... you should not want to do this. Existing packages (like MediaWiki or whatever it is called) are too complicated. Exactly because of this a native XenForo solution is preferred.
 
Mediawiki is a very different animal than a forum. The average forum user is not tech savvy enough to use mediawiki. I have used mediawiki and only a small part of my users was able to cope with the codes. When I later switched to NuWiki, which uses vbulletins editor to post content, my wiki took off, because all my forum users could participate. And forum integration is a biggie.
Developing Wiki functions will become problematic sooner or later if you make it part of the forum. Its basically a different content type and like reviews, directories or other content types, would belong in a CMS.
IMHO forum also belongs in a CMS, but thats another matter completely.

And -as usual- again a very good post by Alfa1. One of my former Moderators was a real encyclopedic kind of guy and he was in love with Wikipedia (obviously) and kept requesting/begging me for implementing MediaWiki or that kind of functionality into our vB powered platform. My 'specialty' is the UI/UX side of things when it comes to (forum)software, so my eyes are focussed -and my decisions are often based- on that. So with this in mind, I tried (and tried and tried ;)) constantly to explain to him why things like MediaWiki are a bad decision to offer to our members. It is so obvious and logical: our non-savvy members (95% of them all) understand the great vB3.8 WYSIWYG editor. Does one really think bombarding them with yet another -much more complicated and completely different- User Interface is a good thing? No, it isn't.

So therefor I support this suggestion to become a stock XF functionality, so our users can construct/edit Wiki Pages through the excellent, easy and userfriendly XenForo UI.
 
Top Bottom