Wiki - Best / Stable

[Mart456]

I am looking to install a wiki,

The two that keep coming up are: Vaultwiki & Xencarta

does anyone have any feedback regarding either of the above...

From what I understand:
Vaultwiki - has a lot more features, but appears to be behind in providing updates / support / comments suggest it could be buggy
Xencarta - has less features but appears to be stable and updated.....

What would I be missing by using Xencarta over Vaultwiki?

For me it's more important to start documenting the wiki, than spending time on configuration and sorting out bugs...

Any input or feedback would be appreciated

 

[Digital Doctor]

Is vaultwiki 2.3 compatible ?

What would I be missing by using Xencarta over Vaultwiki?

You need to do some research.

@Robert9 was making one.

I see some ThemeHouse sites still using their MediaWiki bridge.

 

[Suzanne O]

Be careful anyone can edit wiki no matter what one you use.

 

[smallwheels]

You need to do some research.

Really? It seems he has done that, because what he states is pretty much the essence of what you find about the two when you search in this forum here.

Basically like what is stated here:

Add-on Post in thread 'Looking to add wiki'

Aug 5, 2024

XenCarta is a minimal wiki, and if you end up needing something complex it will not work well.

VaultWiki is a full-fledged 'native' wiki however it is prone to bugs; it does have some features that are impressive such as the templating and variables features. I've tried to use it several times, and it just ends up being too problematic to use.

I've attempted to use Resource Manager as a guided page generator for wiki-esque pages, and it's too limited to work well.

I've also used Showcase in the same manager as Resource Manager, and had much better results but there are still...

• Forsaken

• 

If you know more: Why don't you share it or give at least a hint to a useful source of information? If you don't know more: How can you give advice then?

@Robert9 was making one.

Indeed, but it seems that, after a furious start, there was no update for more than 1,5 years now:

R

Post in thread 'Wiki on forum'

May 21, 2023

Thank you; until August/September I cant do anything, sorry.

• Robert9

• 

I see some ThemeHouse sites still using their MediaWiki bridge.

Not sure if it is still available, not sure about the stability or futureproofness.

Post in thread 'Wiki on forum'

Mar 15, 2023

Any new advice in this regard? We are looking for a wiki eventually. Looking like VaultWiki is still the best bet/only supported?

Vault Wiki is supported, but every time I have used it there have been site/workflow breaking bugs that makes it unusable for a productive wiki.

@Mike C / @ThemeHouse had a MediaWiki bridge, but it is no longer available.

Jaxel has his lite wiki, but it is very very very limited.

I temporarily settled on Showcase (from @Bob) with a lot of heavy modification and planning, but my pages are more about presentational data and information...

• Forsaken

• 

As many others I sit in the same boat: A wiki would be really helpful for my forum but having to rely on fragile bridges with uncertain future is a problem. Possibly the new auth possibilities of 2.3 will be able to change this for the better.

However: The bigger problem is: In most cases seperate wikis I found tied to forums lacked acceptance. Only very few people wrote articles, only few people searched for information there. So a really good integration in the forum software would be important - including the forum search finding wiki articles.

When looking for native Wikis for Xenforo one ends up with the two mentioned by @Mart456 - which seem to be kind of okish but lacking in comparison to a real wiki (no wonder). Clearly no one says any of them would be the best invention since sliced bread. And so one ends up stuck pretty quickly as both are paid add ons and w/o buying one cannot really find out about their individual ups and downs.

 

[smallwheels]

Be careful anyone can edit wiki no matter what one you use.

That's the idea behind a wiki in the first place, isn't it? Apart from that it is obviously possible to use the rights systems of the wiki software, so "anyone" is clearly not necessarily true.

 

[Digital Doctor]

So a really good integration in the forum software would be important - including the forum search finding wiki articles.

XenCarta has that.

I like WikiThreads for most forums that want to collect useful information. It uses the first post as a multiuser document. Ideally you could pair an editable document to "pull together" all the wikithreads, especially if the documents are of sufficiently high quality to justify that.

Thread '[OzzModz] Wiki Threads'

Nov 21, 2021

Ozzy47 submitted a new resource:

[OzzModz Wiki Threads - Mark threads as Wiki type

Requirements
XF 2.2.0

Description
This add-on allows users to mark a thread as a "WikiPost" giving the ability to edit the original post in a thread to any user with the required permissions.

Features

• Mark threads as "WikiPost"
• Set group permissions for WikiPosts
• Allow any user (with required permissions) to edit thread
• Admins or thread authors able to mark threads as "WikiPost"

Attribution:
Originally coded by...

Read more...

• Ozzy47
• Replies: 11
• Forum: Add-on releases [2.x]

• 

The best example of XenCarta is of course 8wayrun.com

 

[smallwheels]

So a really good integration in the forum software would be important - including the forum search finding wiki articles.

XenCarta has that.

It would be a shame if not as it is native to XenForo. My annotation targeted more the use of an external wiki software like MediaWiki via a bridge. I would assume to potentially run into issues here.

WikiThreads

I had thought about that as well as about Xon*s collaborative threads add on. But probably I'll give XenCarta a go as a trial. It is hopefully closer to my needs.

 

[Digital Doctor]

Xon*s collaborative threads add on.

• Trigger author alerts (Thread Starter Alerts add-on)

Alerting other thread authors could increase wiki participation / moderation / ownership.

• Supports Aggregating forums add-on

This could be a game changer. If you could have a "wiki" forum as a subforum, but the content cycles through the parent forum, that can significantly improve visibility and participation.

• Support for mostly arbitrary permission sharing from the thread starter to collaborators.

Not sure what this means.

 

[Digital Doctor]

Any good wiki software ?



that could be bridged ?

I was excited in 2006 when Google bought JotSpot . Google said they'd provide "wikis for everyone". They didn't

https://web.archive.org/web/20111202005749/http://www.pcworld.com/article/127718/google_buys_jotspot_offers_free_wiki_pages.html

 

[smallwheels]

I've seen dokuwiki in combination with Xenforo, so this could be possible. I've used dokuwiki quite intensively for many years. It is very robust, in existence for very long, actively developed, has loads of plugins and is free as in free beer. Doesn't even need a database. And it works very, very well. Just the optics is a little oldfashioned - but one could change this with a bit of customization effort.
However: Even in professional environments a lot of people did not like to work with it in the last ~10 years as they got used to fancier wikis like confluence.

I've worked with confluence intensively for years and while it is modern and pretty decent it is also expensive (license fee per user) - it is for companies, enterprise software, not for a forum. You could no doubt connect it to Xenforo with custom development but then you have to spend loads of money. Makes no sense. Same goes for notion - a lot of people love it (and even use it for their purposes as a single user). It is nice to work with it, but it also targets companies and office use, not community use. Both live in the cloud. As a company for a forum, these two are basically ruled out.

I've played a tiny bit with wiki.js with the intention to use it as a wiki for my forum. It is modern, has a nice, shiny interface, it is free and open source and seemed to deliver a user experience and modern interface closer to confluence than dokuwiki. The base installation you end up with is then optically somewhat way less impressive than what one will assume based from their webpage. I hoped to get it to work with the auth options of XF2.3 but did not test it that far yet - from first look it seemed ok as a wiki but less impressive than I thought and possibly way more work than I assumed. Also technically more complex - I used docker for the installation (while with dokuwiki you just throw the files somewhere and off you go). As I am not ready for XF2.3 yet anyway I stopped digging deeper into it. Could be worth having a deeper look - seems somewhat promising.

Everyone knows Mediawiki - it is what Wikipedia runs on. So robust and stable, but also a bit oldfashionate looking, especially regarding the use of pictures in wiki-articles (judging from Wikipedia). I have used it, but that was many years ago. Was ok, but no highlight in terms of fun or usability.

 

[🔥Iggy🔥]

For me it's more important to start documenting the wiki, than spending time on configuration and sorting out bugs...

idk if either of those 2 really fit that criteria....you may be able to pick between one or the other tho....idk..

 

[Forsaken]

I am looking to install a wiki,

The two that keep coming up are: Vaultwiki & Xencarta

does anyone have any feedback regarding either of the above...

From what I understand:
Vaultwiki - has a lot more features, but appears to be behind in providing updates / support / comments suggest it could be buggy
Xencarta - has less features but appears to be stable and updated.....

What would I be missing by using Xencarta over Vaultwiki?

For me it's more important to start documenting the wiki, than spending time on configuration and sorting out bugs...

Any input or feedback would be appreciated

What is the purpose of your wiki specifically?

If it is like a game compendium, you can get by with Showcase/AMS/IMS; if it is documents, you can get by with AMS.

It is not a wiki, obviously, but it does provide you with more flexibility than offered by XenCarta (at least in my opinion), and better stability than VaultWiki.

The biggest issue I've had with almost every wiki system is that the template and variable systems offered are generally pretty bad... Something that VaultWiki does very well is that you can create pages and provide variables that are filled in by the user, which lessens the work they need to do, and keeps things consistent. Some of these exist for MediaWiki, but they are either not supported, not free, or are privately used by the big wiki providers (who rarely contribute back to MediaWiki in the form of add-ons).

If I had to choose between wikis, and I could dedicate the time to maintaining it, I would choose VaultWiki due to how flexible it is. my problem is that I need a very robust wiki system that can handle a lot of growth, and I do not believe most wikis can do so.

 

[Suzanne O]

That's the idea behind a wiki in the first place, isn't it? Apart from that it is obviously possible to use the rights systems of the wiki software, so "anyone" is clearly not necessarily true.

Go into to wikipedia and look up your favourite NFL player or team and see if it's the right info if it isn't your favourite team or player can sue for defamation.

 

[Mart456]

Thank for all the replies....

I need a big fan of a bridge 3rd party software i was wanting something fully integrated.. with search from forum etc... and something that would be kept uptodate through the next updates..

i guess i will have to play around with both and see which one meets my needs the best...

 

[smallwheels]

my problem is that I need a very robust wiki system that can handle a lot of growth, and I do not believe most wikis can do so.

Probably many wikis can handle that. The question ist what numbers and criteria we are talking about when you say "growth":

• many parallel readers
• many parallel editors
• many pages
• many parallel searches
• user-friendlyness for inexperienced users
• complex layouts, cross-linking, content types and structure
• sheer size of the wiki
• complex searches
• featureset for admins like rights management, history etc.

And then what exactly the number for "many" is. Probably many of the non-XF-native wikis would have no issues with whatsoever - but integration with XF is an issue.

Also, the XF-based wikis each seem to depend on a single developer. A bit of a risk as typically a lot of work goes into a wiki and a lot of the most valuable content is stored there. So you want to be sure that it will continue to work for years and years, the wiki is able to grow along with your needs (that you don't know today) and offer possibilities for it and that in case of serious trouble you have a migration path (like the possibility to export the wiki contents easily to html or other open formats). All these topics and risks are probably better dealed with with the generic wikis as they are full fledged and typically do have not one person but a team behind it.

So it is clear to me that with the XF based ones you are more limited in many ways and carry a bit more risk, but you gain better integration and possibly better user acceptance. The question is what is more important for you.

 

[smallwheels]

The two that keep coming up are: Vaultwiki & Xencarta

I've now bitten the bullet and bought XenCarta to give it a try. Did not want to wait any more, did not see new developments evolving in near future an had and have the hope that it will do it's job properly and be enough for my needs.

Huge advantage in comparison to Vaultwiki: It is way cheaper. XenCarta is 30$ (which seems to be a one-time-fee, updates included) whereas Vaultwiki is just 15$ but includes only a month of updates - after that updates and support are 80$ per year. Quite a difference.



Installation of XenCarta was easy, configuration so-so. The only documentation available is a video and this is rudimentary at best.

The biggest issue I've had with almost every wiki system is that the template and variable systems offered are generally pretty bad...

The total absence of any default templates in XenCarta along with a non-existent documentation how to create them is indeed a bummer.

The best example of XenCarta is of course 8wayrun.com

Which is a bit frightening to be honest. In the navigation there seems to be only one level of hierarchy unter the main index page (I would need ad least to - there is a pulldown for that in the backend but only the main index page can be choosen there), the breadcrumps are used in a very unusual way and the Wiki Index seems to be completely indepenend from the main navigation (plus I have absolutely no idea how to populate it on my test installation).






So while XenCarta will in theory probably be sufficient for my needs I do have a very hard time to make use of it due to absence of hints or documentation.

 

[Alpha1]

Huge advantage in comparison to Vaultwiki: It is way cheaper. XenCarta is 30$ (which seems to be a one-time-fee, updates included) whereas Vaultwiki is just 15$ but includes only a month of updates - after that updates and support are 80$ per year. Quite a difference.

This is incorrect. You only need a one time $15 payment to do an upgrade and over the years there has been about 1 major update a year. About two a year if you want the security patches as well. 99% of security patches are for very exotic things with no real world impact. I did skip updates some years, even though I have lifetime licences.

I don't think there is any advantage of XenCarta over Vaultwiki when it comes to licence costs.
Especially considering that Vaultwiki support is extensive and hands-on, whereas XenCarta support is non-existent.

XF2 [8WR] XenCarta 2 (Wiki) PRO - Reviews

xenforo.com

The issue with vaultwiki is that most of its features are not native to xenforo which means there are a lot of bugs in each release. Once these are reported @pegasus fixes those promptly.

VaultWiki - Reviews

xenforo.com

 

[philmckrackon]

Be careful anyone can edit wiki no matter what one you use.

Not, true. XenCarta editing is permission based and can be controlled by the system. This site that uses xenCarta requires three posts to establish editing privileges.

 

[philmckrackon]

I use a very simple version of xenCarta but it can be much more.
The templates & pages @8way are pretty complicated.
I can post more examples if requested.
Example:

 

[smallwheels]

In the navigation there seems to be only one level of hierarchy unter the main index page (I would need ad least to - there is a pulldown for that in the backend but only the main index page can be choosen there), the breadcrumps are used in a very unusual way and the Wiki Index seems to be completely indepenend from the main navigation (plus I have absolutely no idea how to populate it on my test installation).

After reading the whole 23 pages of the discussion thread for the resource 1 and 3 are solved. But some new potential hick ups let me scratch my head.

This is incorrect.

Well - that's what is written on the resource page. Will barely be incorrect...

You only need a one time $15 payment to do an upgrade and over the years there has been about 1 major update a year. About two a year if you want the security patches as well. 99% of security patches are for very exotic things with no real world impact. I did skip updates some years, even though I have lifetime licences.

This is one of the strange things with XF ad ons. With enterprise software you pay a license fee and - depending from the software - 20-50% of it per year for support and maintenance. In general I consider this to be a good model as you can calculate the cost upfront, the author of the software maintains an income and this way has the interest as well as possibility and obligation to deliver support and updates. The XF ad on market works somewhat different and prices vary wildly as does behaviour of the ad on developers while many customers seem to live on a shoestring financially (at least they pretend to). Which I can to a degree understand as the very limited feature set of XF creates the need for ad ons quicky (if you want more than the basics of the basics regarding features for your forum) and so it is easy to spend way more on ad ons than on XF itself.

The idea to only pay maintenance after there is an update available that one wants like is very comfy for customers and a bit of cherrypicking. So rather a small update fee than maintenance. Seems to be common in the XF community. But obviously if you want the support that you praised so high you will have to pay the maintenance fee I'd assume.

The issue with vaultwiki is that most of its features are not native to xenforo which means there are a lot of bugs in each release. Once these are reported @pegasus fixes those promptly.

And that's what kept me away from vaultwiki - there is kind of continuous development, but also a continuos stream of new bugs according to the reviews and discussions. I want a stable system, not one where I have to try to stabilize the thing continuously and end up with a new bug for every one that has been fixed. Can't judge from experience but these statements clearly drove me away. Plus I did not like the optics of the demo site too much.
However - I do like the 15$ initial price as it makes it easy to give it a try w/o investing (and in the worst case loosing) too much money.

Not, true. XenCarta editing is permission based and can be controlled by the system. This site that uses xenCarta requires three posts to establish editing privileges.

Well, possibly not worth even answering - the commenter likes to have a (typically very strong) opinion on many topics. Often enough - like in this case - she just chatters around w/o foundation and w/o delivering any useful value in terms of the thread topic but rather directing away from it.

I use a very simple version of xenCarta but it can be much more.
The templates & pages @8way are pretty complicated.
I can post more examples if requested.

Thank you very much! Thanks to the resource thread I finally understood how these templates are intended to be applied and - besides the hassle of creating some (and undesrtanding how this is done) - I believe this is way over what my forum members are willing or able to learn to use for creating wiki pages. So this is something I have to think about when deciding wether taking XenCarta live or not.