On 4 December 2011 16:58, Charles Matthews
On 4 December 2011 03:56, Tony Sidaway
Now whatever the merits of his case, this chap does have a point about
the unfriendliness of the environment.
Well covered in The Signpost, in fact.
Thanks, I hadn't seen that. That's very good coverage.
But I came away thinking that there
is a misconception behind the "complaint". Put it this way: who is the
customer? That turns out to be a rhetorical question: the customer is the
reader. If the customer was the writer, or the person who feels he/she
should have a Wikipedia page about them, the tone of the complaint would be
The wiki model of content production makes no distinction between
reader and editor.
It isn't so much that we've
gone out of our way to be unfriendly, but the tool we use to
interact--the wiki, in other words--isn't really very fit for the
Considering that Wikipedia is the "killer app" for wikis, the comment
a bit off-beam. What we have done is to stress-test the wiki concept by
making a wiki at least two orders of magnitude larger than would have been
been thought reasonable in the year 2000.
I think you're missing my point that the processes we're running on
the wiki--not the content--are what the tool is unsuitable for.