Wikis can be dreadful to use!
People have a preconceived idea about how web pages should look and how they are supposed to function. Writing on a wiki takes practice and sometimes it takes patience as well. Writing on a wiki is like working on a huge group project, where everyone who uses the site should theoretically contribute to the site. It can also seem daunting, with a never ending cycle of pages and text. The only problem is that the number of people in your group are unknown, their base of knowledge is unknown, and they might not understand the ValueInRearrangingTheFurniture either.Problem with Technicality and Usability
- Format
- Confusion is an inevitable side effect of working as part of a hive mind. Pages get sloppy and misguided and cleaning is too often necessary. Luckily, another inevitable side effect is collective refactoring and reorganization. It works both ways.
- Smaller wikis rely on steadfast users to continually update ever-changing information.
- With more people editing the wiki, it's more likely that repetitive pages will pop up, such as the case of WikiForNewbies and WikiNoobs. It isn't unusual for more than one person to see the need for a page, create said page, and then find out that they weren't the only one. Redundant pages can only be deleted by an admin, so the easiest way for the general users to correct such a problem would be to take the topic in multiple directions. WikiForNewbies and WikiNoobs may seem identical based on the title, but one acts more as a guide for new users, and the other is about what makes someone a "noob." Same general topic (wikis and new users), but two very different pages.
Problem with WikiCulture
- Ownership
- It can be difficult for new wiki users (or even a WikiPro) to let go of the idea that what they write on a wiki is their own and the subsequent attitude that whoever changes it is rude/has an attitude/has a grudge against the OP/etc. It's easy to get angry or offended when someone changes content that you feel you've worked hard to perfect. The question may re-occur as to "who actually owns the wiki?" The social aspect of a wiki requires a major shift in attitude from one of complete ownership to one of collaboration. Nothing belongs to any one person, it all belongs to the WikiCommunity.
- Opinion/Biases
- The concept of collaboration on a wiki is a difficult concept for the WikiNoobs to grasp at first. A WikiContributor would have taken the time to come up with an idea to write about and dedicated their precious time to the process, only to watch another author come along and change it. Suddenly the couch is now where the dining room table sat, an obvious error in furniture placement most of us would agree, or perhaps that author corrected that very mistake and now the dining room table is where it should be. Writers can be very territorial creatures and many of us WikiNoobs may at first take offence when another author pees on our turf. But when we take hold of the idea of what a wiki really is versus what a blog is - it gets a little better.
Problem with Users and Collaboration
- Banning troublesome people is easy. Unfortunately, so is making a new account only to be banned again. Trolls and other vile internet cretin are everywhere, and they're unstoppable. We must coexist and keep an eye out for ban-worthy accounts—that's all there is to do.
- The whole concept of working on a wiki with other users is that anyone is able to come in and edit a page. In theory there is a spread of knowledge from a wide array of people to shed light on a particular subject. So, when you have to be registered to add information into a page when you are an outside source can sort of be frustrating. Just imagine seeing information a page that you know for a fact is wrong and you can't do a thing. The reason for doing this is so that they can monitor the accuracy of the pages and content, but it goes against the who concept of a wiki.
- Unjustified changes to text
Problems with Content
- Users often find themselves unsure of whether to write formally or informally on a wiki. This is a misguided concern. Style, if rules are imposed, will be brought about in the editing process by the hive mind behind the scenes. Content and ideas are what wiki users are most concerned about.
- Many people view wikis as not being a reliable source because anyone can come in and change the content, but this is not how wikis want people to look at the information. Claire trailed off thinking on this...
- Updating pages, I actual had to insert a little blurb about updating pages because as I went to save the few changes I've made on this page it makes sure that you see the little alert at the top of the page stating: This page was modified by someone else while you were editing it. It also suggests that you should copy your changes and then re-edit the page. Which also can be a reason that there are formatting issues with writing wikis, though the alert is helpful it would not publish my page.
- Blank pages are the devil. You see a cool WikiWord on any given page (like WikiPro or WhatTheHellWiki) and when you go to click on it, it wants YOU to create the page. It sends a little bout of fear through me. I don't know what should go on that page, that's why I clicked on it! But after that initial shock, it's fairly easy to create content for a blank page you are interested in. Plus, think of it as community service! Now the next person who wants to know what WhatTheHellWiki is all about you will have filled in the blanks for him. How considerate.
NOTE THIS IS A WORKING PAGE
