Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

cunnan, an SCA wiki

Expand Messages
  • Tom Cerul
    How about we move stuff onto Cunnan http://cunnan.sca.org.au/wiki/Main_Page The open editing nature of Cunnan would allow anyone and everyone to maintain the
    Message 1 of 9 , Aug 11, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      How about we move stuff onto Cunnan http://cunnan.sca.org.au/wiki/Main_Page

      The open editing nature of Cunnan would allow anyone and everyone to
      maintain the knowledge pages or link lists.

      Tomislaus
    • yanagroznaia
      It isn t a bad idea (one I ve been mulling over myself), but we would still need some content moderators. --Yana ... http://cunnan.sca.org.au/wiki/Main_Page
      Message 2 of 9 , Aug 11, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        It isn't a bad idea (one I've been mulling over myself), but we would
        still need some content moderators.

        --Yana


        --- In sig@yahoogroups.com, Tom Cerul <tom.cerul@g...> wrote:
        > How about we move stuff onto Cunnan
        http://cunnan.sca.org.au/wiki/Main_Page
        >
        > The open editing nature of Cunnan would allow anyone and everyone to
        > maintain the knowledge pages or link lists.
        >
        > Tomislaus
      • Tom Cerul
        What task do you have in mind for these content moderators? Submissions go right in. Copy editing falls to whoever is reading it.
        Message 3 of 9 , Aug 11, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          What task do you have in mind for these content moderators?
          Submissions go right in. Copy editing falls to whoever is reading it.

          On 8/11/05, yanagroznaia <yanajenn@...> wrote:
          > It isn't a bad idea (one I've been mulling over myself), but we would
          > still need some content moderators.
          >
          > --Yana

          > --- In sig@yahoogroups.com, Tom Cerul <tom.cerul@g...> wrote:
          > > How about we move stuff onto Cunnan
          > http://cunnan.sca.org.au/wiki/Main_Page
          > >
          > > The open editing nature of Cunnan would allow anyone and everyone to
          > > maintain the knowledge pages or link lists.
          > >
          > > Tomislaus
        • Sfandra
          I ve never seen this site before, but right away, IMO a concern would be people editing in incorrect information, or blanket generalizations. YMMV. --Sfandra
          Message 4 of 9 , Aug 12, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            I've never seen this site before, but right away, IMO
            a concern would be people editing in incorrect
            information, or blanket generalizations. YMMV.

            --Sfandra (not going to Pennsic, but staying home for
            a week to pearl things... :D)



            > Subject: Re: Re: cunnan, an SCA wiki
            >
            > What task do you have in mind for these content
            > moderators?
            > Submissions go right in. Copy editing falls to
            > whoever is reading it.
            >
            > On 8/11/05, yanagroznaia <yanajenn@...> wrote:
            > > It isn't a bad idea (one I've been mulling over
            > myself), but we would
            > > still need some content moderators.
            > >
            > > --Yana
            >

            ******************
            Sfandra Dmitrieva iz Chernigova
            Barony of Carolingia
            Kingdom of the East
            ******************
            "Earth: The most dangerous place known to Man. Billions of humans have died there." --TarynEve, "Desert Isle" (ENTff)

            __________________________________________________
            Do You Yahoo!?
            Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
            http://mail.yahoo.com
          • Tom Cerul
            Look out, lots of links! Sfandra, Have you ever taken a look at the Wikipedia ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page )? It has grown to be a very large
            Message 5 of 9 , Aug 12, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              Look out, lots of links!

              Sfandra, Have you ever taken a look at the Wikipedia (
              http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page )? It has grown to be a very
              large encyclopedia over the years (I started in 2002).

              Please consider these pages too:
              http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Introduction
              http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Replies_to_common_objections
              (really long, skip it if you like )

              Wiki's hit a sweet-spot in human nature where good stuff stays and
              even the worst offenders are easily undone. People can contribute as
              much time as they want and articles continually improve.

              If you'd like to try editting, here's my 'talk page' on Cunnan
              http://cunnan.sca.org.au/wiki/User_talk:Tomislaus#SIG_experiment_box
              please stop by and say hi. After you save your changes, click the
              history button on top. This shows all the edits that have happened and
              is the spot that you'd go if you wanted to revert an article back to a
              previous version.

              Thanks for putting up with me and my upstart ideas. :)
              Tomislaus who will vanish from the modern world within the next 24 hours.

              On 8/12/05, Sfandra <seonaid13@...> wrote:
              > I've never seen this site before, but right away, IMO
              > a concern would be people editing in incorrect
              > information, or blanket generalizations. YMMV.
              > --Sfandra
              > > Subject: Re: Re: cunnan, an SCA wiki
              > > What task do you have in mind for these content
              > > moderators?
              > > Submissions go right in. Copy editing falls to
              > > whoever is reading it.
              > >
              > > On 8/11/05, yanagroznaia <yanajenn@...> wrote:
              > > > It isn't a bad idea (one I've been mulling over
              > > myself), but we would
              > > > still need some content moderators.
              > > >
              > > > --Yana
            • goldschp@tds.net
              I ll weigh in my thoughts on this. A wiki is a neat tool. I have no problem with having a SIG-related wiki, but I don t think it is a substitute for a
              Message 6 of 9 , Aug 12, 2005
              • 0 Attachment
                I'll weigh in my thoughts on this.

                A wiki is a neat tool. I have no problem with having a SIG-related wiki, but I don't think it is a substitute for a moderated and refereed web page. The Knowledge Pages replaced my original links page for SIG, which at the time was a carefully compiled list of one person's effort. Sharing the load made sense because I couldn't keep up with it. But the idea was that it would remain refereed.

                I think there is a place for both a wiki and the knowledge pages. Just as there is a place for SIG-L and SIG.

                -- Paul

                > Wiki's hit a sweet-spot in human nature where good stuff stays and
                > even the worst offenders are easily undone. People can contribute as
                > much time as they want and articles continually improve.
              • Tom Cerul
                I thank you heartily for your response. Could I use you guys as practice for my advocacy of this technology? At some point I m sure I ll find myself trying
                Message 7 of 9 , Aug 12, 2005
                • 0 Attachment
                  I thank you heartily for your response. Could I use you guys as
                  practice for my advocacy of this technology? At some point I'm sure
                  I'll find myself trying to support wiki's to management at work.
                  Assuming I just got a yes, I'll continue.

                  I guessing that a referee/moderator is acts as a gate keeper, only
                  allowing content that meets a specific criteria. This action prevents
                  people from publishing bad facts such as Viking helms having horns.
                  In a wiki, one can redirect bad facts and respond to them. For
                  example:

                  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vikings#Myths_about_Vikings

                  As bad (untrue) facts are responded to, the articles acquire a
                  myth-busting quality which can be more educating than if the myth had
                  been 'stopped at the gate'.

                  I'll do some work in Cunnan relating to the SIG Knowledge pages in the
                  coming weeks as a priliminary. If I'm lucky, I may manage something
                  before I hit the road today.

                  Tomislaus


                  On 8/12/05, goldschp@... <goldschp@...> wrote:
                  > I'll weigh in my thoughts on this.
                  >
                  > A wiki is a neat tool. I have no problem with having a SIG-related wiki, but I don't think it is a substitute for a moderated and refereed web page. The Knowledge Pages replaced my original links page for SIG, which at the time was a carefully compiled list of one person's effort. Sharing the load made sense because I couldn't keep up with it. But the idea was that it would remain refereed.
                  >
                  > I think there is a place for both a wiki and the knowledge pages. Just as there is a place for SIG-L and SIG.
                  >
                  > -- Paul
                  >
                  > > Wiki's hit a sweet-spot in human nature where good stuff stays and
                  > > even the worst offenders are easily undone. People can contribute as
                  > > much time as they want and articles continually improve.
                • Alastair Millar
                  I would avoid using this like the plague. Given the nature of my job (I am a Czech- English translator specialising in archaeological, heritage and related
                  Message 8 of 9 , Aug 13, 2005
                  • 0 Attachment
                    I would avoid using this like the plague.

                    Given the nature of my job (I am a Czech->English translator
                    specialising in archaeological, heritage and related topics), I
                    regularly, i.e. every day, have to use the internet to look up
                    terminology, vocabulary, historical contexts etc.

                    Whatever the THEORY, my actual EXPERIENCE with Wikipedia has been that
                    it is not up to standard. It contains much information which is
                    plagiarised from other sources on the web, and a great deal of material
                    that is simply incorrect - and which has not been corrected simply
                    because it falls within subject areas likely to be of interest to very
                    few readers. Moreover, presumably because there is no academic rigour, a
                    great deal of what might charitably be termed "Romantic" (with capital
                    R) material is on there that cannot really be supported...

                    As a result, I have stopped using Wikipedia altogether: it's just too
                    unreliable, uneven and unbalanced.

                    So... I would say that the Knowledge Pages should NOT be in an
                    open-access, anyone-can-post-whatever format. Not only is the quality of
                    available material an issue: so too is the danger of the relevant
                    knowledge page losing its structure, or of certain areas (clothing,
                    perhaps) coming to dominate entirely at the expense of less "popular"
                    topics.

                    Alastair
                    always ready with jugs of cold water! ;-)

                    --
                    No virus found in this outgoing message.
                    Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
                    Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.10.8/71 - Release Date: 12.8.2005
                  • Tom Cerul
                    Alastair, thank you for your response. Wikipedia has policies to handle plagerism (see
                    Message 9 of 9 , Aug 21, 2005
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Alastair, thank you for your response.

                      Wikipedia has policies to handle plagerism (see
                      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Spotting_possible_copyright_violations
                      ).

                      I wish I knew what specifically was incorrect so that I could go fix
                      it for the next reader. The edit process is so quick that I spend
                      most of my time finding sources and references for the

                      Regarding accademic rigour, from the article "Replies to common
                      objections" in the section on Trustworthiness:
                      "Note that the three leading competing online encyclopedias have
                      disclaimers and provide no warranty as to their accuracy - Britannica,
                      Encarta and Bartleby. Sometimes the staff of those encyclopedias
                      forget about the disclaimers.
                      [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A30326-2004Sep17.html%5d
                      "
                      --from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Replies_to_common_objections#Trustworthiness

                      In short, quality increases over time as people contribute.

                      Please accept my apologies, but I do not understand what you mean by
                      big R "Romantic" material.

                      Regarding the possible dilution of focus, I must point out that the
                      number of websites focusing on the naked human form has not at all
                      affected my ability to hunt for jobs on the web. Similiarly, I
                      propose that the profusion of clothing related pages would not obscure
                      the limited number of pages on cooking, dance or weaponry.

                      Overall, I am trying to find a place where the Slavic Interest Group
                      has space for its pages, a way to contribute small amounts of time and
                      a continuing ability to fight link rot so that large portions ot the
                      knowledge pages do not become inaccessible due to unfortunate
                      circumstances in the contributors life.

                      Respectfully,
                      Tomislaus


                      On 8/13/05, Alastair Millar <alastair@...> wrote:
                      > I would avoid using this like the plague.
                      > [...]
                      > Whatever the THEORY, my actual EXPERIENCE with Wikipedia has been that
                      > it is not up to standard. It contains much information which is
                      > plagiarised from other sources on the web, and a great deal of material
                      > that is simply incorrect - and which has not been corrected simply
                      > because it falls within subject areas likely to be of interest to very
                      > few readers. Moreover, presumably because there is no academic rigour, a
                      > great deal of what might charitably be termed "Romantic" (with capital
                      > R) material is on there that cannot really be supported...
                      >
                      > As a result, I have stopped using Wikipedia altogether: it's just too
                      > unreliable, uneven and unbalanced.
                      >
                      > So... I would say that the Knowledge Pages should NOT be in an
                      > open-access, anyone-can-post-whatever format. Not only is the quality of
                      > available material an issue: so too is the danger of the relevant
                      > knowledge page losing its structure, or of certain areas (clothing,
                      > perhaps) coming to dominate entirely at the expense of less "popular"
                      > topics.
                      >
                      > Alastair
                      > always ready with jugs of cold water! ;-)
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.