Wiki or Forum?

[hank]

BTW, should we post script questions here or on the wikibook? Personally I'd rather post my questions here.

If you put your questions in the wikibook, it would create a FAQ that could be useful to others in the future.

- Hank

[Malenfant]

If you put your questions in the wikibook, it would create a FAQ that could be useful to others in the future.

Well, we have a perfectly usable forum here, the format is IMO much better for asking questions and storing the answers for future reference. Plus I don't feel all that secure with wikis anyway.

If it's all the same to you I'd much rather continue to post here. At least it's more useful for people here rather than getting them to go elsewhere to look for answers.

[hank]

If you put your questions in the wikibook, it would create a FAQ that could be useful to others in the future.

Well, we have a perfectly usable forum here, the format is IMO much better for asking questions and storing the answers for future reference. Plus I don't feel all that secure with wikis anyway.

The forum is great for asking questions. It's not so great for finding answers to questions previously asked and answered. The forum's dialog style doesn't allow information to be edited for conciseness and clarity or organized for access. And I guess I'm not sure what you mean by "secure with wikis".

If it's all the same to you I'd much rather continue to post here. At least it's more useful for people here rather than getting them to go elsewhere to look for answers.

Many people don't even look for answers here. They just ask their questions, without any effort to see if they could find the answer on their own. Partly that's explainable by the difficulty of finding previous answers on the forum. The wikibook might help that.

- Hank

[Malenfant]

Well, I find this is a much better way to actually ask questions. On the Wiki I wouldn't have a clue who's answering me or even whether my question's been answered without having to wade through the text - here's it's laid out a lot better IMO.

I agree that a wiki is a good place to STORE information though. Couldn't we just as easily make a FAQ to put on the wiki out of answers to questions posted here?

[symaski62]

149597870.691

Code: Select all

KM_PER_LY = 9.46728E12
KM_PER_AU = 149597870.691
camera = celestia:getobserver()
planet = celestia:find("Mars") -- finds object named Mars
camera:center(planet,1)
celestia:select(planet)
cameraPosition = camera:getposition() -- gets position of observer
planetPosition = planet:getposition() -- gets position of Mars
distance = planetPosition:distanceto(cameraPosition) -- gets distance from  position of Mars to that of observer
distAU = distance/KM_PER_AU
celestia:flash("Current distance to Mars is "..distAU.. " AU")
wait(2)
info = planet:getinfo()
albedo = info.albedo
celestia:flash("Mars albedo is "..albedo)
wait(2)
radius = planet:radius()
planmag = -26.73 - (5 * (math.log10(((math.sqrt(albedo))*radius)/149597870.691)))
celestia:flash("Absolute magnitude of Mars is "..planmag)

http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/glossary/au.html

[hank]

Well, I find this is a much better way to actually ask questions. On the Wiki I wouldn't have a clue who's answering me or even whether my question's been answered without having to wade through the text - here's it's laid out a lot better IMO.

If you think the layout or content of the wikibook needs improvement, just do it! That's the whole idea of a wiki -- continuous improvement by a collaborative community.

I agree that a wiki is a good place to STORE information though. Couldn't we just as easily make a FAQ to put on the wiki out of answers to questions posted here?

Of course. But if you ask the question at the wiki, it will eliminate the step of transferring the question and answer to the wiki. Also, it encourages you to look to the wiki first for answers, which is eventually where they should be. The problem is that the wiki hasn't reached critical mass yet, so there aren't many people keeping it up to date. It's a chicken and egg problem.

- Hank

[Malenfant]

If you think the layout or content of the wikibook needs improvement, just do it! That's the whole idea of a wiki -- continuous improvement by a collaborative community.

It's more that on a forum like this, any new questions are easily seen. Right now, the discussion page on the wiki is a bit of a disorganised mess - I can't easily tell without having to wade through it all who's asking what or what the answers are or if the answers given are final or correct. I don't think any amount of reorganising will help that - I just don't really think that wikis were designed really to be places to ask questions - I get the impression that they're intended to be places to store the answers to questions.

Of course. But if you ask the question at the wiki, it will eliminate the step of transferring the question and answer to the wiki. Also, it encourages you to look to the wiki first for answers, which is eventually where they should be. The problem is that the wiki hasn't reached critical mass yet, so there aren't many people keeping it up to date. It's a chicken and egg problem.

I understand that, but then that begs the question of what this board is for? At least on a threaded board like this you can easily identify the unanswered questions and which threads have been answered.

I'm all for the wiki being an ultimate repository of knowledge, I just don't think the discussion page is anywhere near as friendly a way to post questions and answers than this board.

And also, I'm just starting with the scripting lark here, and I wouldn't have thought to go to the wikibook to ask questions - but a Scripting forum right here with the other Celestia boards seems a much more obvious place to start, and I think you're more likely to attract attention to interesting scripts if they're posted here too.

[symaski62]

Code: Select all

KM_PER_AU = 149597870.691
camera = celestia:getobserver()
planet = celestia:find("Mars") -- finds object named Mars
camera:center(planet,1)
celestia:select(planet)
cameraPosition = camera:getposition() -- gets position of observer
planetPosition = planet:getposition() -- gets position of Mars
distance = planetPosition:distanceto(cameraPosition) -- gets distance from  position of Mars to that of observer
distAU = distance/KM_PER_AU
celestia:flash("Current distance to Mars is "..distAU.. " AU")
wait(2)
info = planet:getinfo()
albedo = info.albedo
celestia:flash("Mars albedo is "..albedo)
wait(2)
radius = planet:radius()
planmag = -26.8 - (5 * (math.log10(((math.sqrt(albedo))*radius)/149597870.691)))
celestia:flash("Absolute magnitude of Mars is "..planmag)

-1.52 MAGNITUGE

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soleil

http://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/phys_props_planets.html

je travaille

[Malenfant]

Je vous remercient pour corriger les valeurs, Symaski. Mais regardez-vous ici: http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/fa ... nfact.html

La 'magnitude' [ampleur?] du soleil est -26.74 selon NASA, pas -26.8. Je suis plus enclin a croire le site de NASA que le wiki.

Mais je corrige les valeurs dans mon programme.

(j'espere que mon francais est comprehensible! )


Rough translation for the english speakers [I need to practise my french anyway ]:

Thanks for correcting the values, Symaski. But look here: http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/fa ... nfact.html

The magnitude of the sun is -26.74 according to NASA, not -26.8. I'm more inclined to believe the NASA page than the Wiki.

But I'll correct the values in my script

(I hope my french is understandable! )

[BrainDead]

I understand that, but then that begs the question of what this board is for? At least on a threaded board like this you can easily identify the unanswered questions and which threads have been answered.

I'm all for the wiki being an ultimate repository of knowledge, I just don't think the discussion page is anywhere near as friendly a way to post questions and answers than this board.

And also, I'm just starting with the scripting lark here, and I wouldn't have thought to go to the wikibook to ask questions - but a Scripting forum right here with the other Celestia boards seems a much more obvious place to start, and I think you're more likely to attract attention to interesting scripts if they're posted here too.

If I may, Hank... I'm afraid that I have to agree with Malenfant here... I have
real trouble trying to understand the formatting, headers, etc on the Wikibook,
but here I can very easily post code, ask questions and return to see
replies at any time. I also do NOT receive any indication that the Wiki
site has been updated even though I'm watching the entire topic and
the discussion page.
I think the Wikibook site would be a great way to store educational
material, but it's very difficult to ask questions there. Just my opinion.

[cpotting]

I'm all for the wiki being an ultimate repository of knowledge, I just don't think the discussion page is anywhere near as friendly a way to post questions and answers than this board.

I agree. May I suggest that the forum be used to ask the questions, perform all the back-and-forth "what if..." and "I don't get it - explain it again..." messages, and finally when an answer is obtained, the thread can be distilled down to the essentials and posted to the wiki.

I also like the FAQ idea, but you have be careful... The first letter in FAQ stands for Frequently. If you put all the questions in the FAQ then you end up with an unusable morass.

[hank]

It's more that on a forum like this, any new questions are easily seen. Right now, the discussion page on the wiki is a bit of a disorganised mess - I can't easily tell without having to wade through it all who's asking what or what the answers are or if the answers given are final or correct. I don't think any amount of reorganising will help that - I just don't really think that wikis were designed really to be places to ask questions - I get the impression that they're intended to be places to store the answers to questions.

I agree that the wiki page isn't very helpful as currently organized. It's too much like a forum discussion, but without the posts identified separately and listed sequentially. I think the page should be reorganized as a FAQ, with each question in a separate section, the question used as the section title, the sections organized by topic, and the answers edited for conciseness and accuracy. You're right that the wiki is the place to store answers. That's so users can find answers to their questions without having to ask, and can also find answers to questions they didn't know to ask.

I understand that, but then that begs the question of what this board is for? At least on a threaded board like this you can easily identify the unanswered questions and which threads have been answered.

I'm all for the wiki being an ultimate repository of knowledge, I just don't think the discussion page is anywhere near as friendly a way to post questions and answers than this board.

The forum gives questions and answers short-term visibility, but once the threads have been pushed off the front page they basically disappear. And often the threads wander off subject, so some questions and answers are not indicated in the thread title. And you typically have to read through a long discussion to get a complete and correct answer. But granted, even with a well-organized wiki, it's a lot easier to just pop off your question on the forum and let others devote their time to educating you than to invest even a minimal amount of your own time to trying to find the answer on the wiki.

And also, I'm just starting with the scripting lark here, and I wouldn't have thought to go to the wikibook to ask questions - but a Scripting forum right here with the other Celestia boards seems a much more obvious place to start, and I think you're more likely to attract attention to interesting scripts if they're posted here too.

I'm not sure I understand why you think the forum would be a better place to start than the wikibook, except for the fact that the wikibook isn't very well developed. But again, that's the chicken and egg problem. Ideally, the wikibook would have well-developed tutorials, FAQs, reference materials, etc. That would seem to me to make it the obvious starting point for learning.

- Hank

[hank]

I understand that, but then that begs the question of what this board is for? At least on a threaded board like this you can easily identify the unanswered questions and which threads have been answered.

I'm all for the wiki being an ultimate repository of knowledge, I just don't think the discussion page is anywhere near as friendly a way to post questions and answers than this board.

And also, I'm just starting with the scripting lark here, and I wouldn't have thought to go to the wikibook to ask questions - but a Scripting forum right here with the other Celestia boards seems a much more obvious place to start, and I think you're more likely to attract attention to interesting scripts if they're posted here too.

If I may, Hank... I'm afraid that I have to agree with Malenfant here... I have real trouble trying to understand the formatting, headers, etc on the Wikibook, but here I can very easily post code, ask questions and return to see replies at any time. I also do NOT receive any indication that the Wiki site has been updated even though I'm watching the entire topic and the discussion page. I think the Wikibook site would be a great way to store educational material, but it's very difficult to ask questions there. Just my opinion.

Is it possible this is at least partly because you're used to the forum, but the wiki is still somewhat unfamiliar? If you're logged-in to the wiki as a registered user, you can click the "my watchlist" link in the upper right of any page to see a list of the pages you're "watching" that have recently changed. You can then click on the "hist" link for one of the listed pages to see a list of the recent changes to the page. They're listed in order, with the date and the name of the user who made the change. Then you can click of the "last" link for a specific edit to see what the changes were. For example you would have seen this view of one of my edits. Would that have helped?

- Hank

[Malenfant]

I agree that the wiki page isn't very helpful as currently organized. It's too much like a forum discussion, but without the posts identified separately and listed sequentially. I think the page should be reorganized as a FAQ, with each question in a separate section, the question used as the section title, the sections organized by topic, and the answers edited for conciseness and accuracy.

Well if you want to do that then by all means go ahead. But I don't think anybody else is that inclined to jump in there and reorganise it.

If you don't mind me saying, you seem almost evangelistic about using the Wikibook. I don't think that's ultimately very helpful - so far you're the only person here on this thread who likes the idea of using it to ask questions on instead of the forum. The fact remains that Wikis were never intended nor were ever designed to be places to ask questions. They're supposed to be repositories of knowledge, like an encyclopedia. You seem to want to turn it into something it's not.

I think this forum serves perfectly well as a place to ask questions. It's alongside all the other boards here so people can pop in and go through the threads and ask casual questions. It's obvious who is answering and what the quality of the answers are. You can easily see when a thread has been updated or responded to here.

As far as I'm concerned, the Wiki discussion page offers no advantages for asking questions whatsoever over the forums, and actually has several disadvantages compared to it. Whereas the Wiki has several advantages in storing the answers to questions and being a place to find information easily than the forums. Therefore it seems much more logical to use the discussion boards to ask questions and the wiki to ultimately store useful answers to those questions.

But granted, even with a well-organized wiki, it's a lot easier to just pop off your question on the forum and let others devote their time to educating you than to invest even a minimal amount of your own time to trying to find the answer on the wiki.

Now you seem to be implying that people don't want to use the wiki because they're too lazy to find answers? I don't think that's a valid assumption at all - it's just that the wiki is simply nowhere near as convenient a place to ask questions.

The whole point of asking questions on a forum is to get others to tell you what they know. Once a knowledge base is accumulated, a wiki can be set up to store it. It's the difference between asking an expert and looking up an encyclopedia. Laziness has nothing to do with it - you just often get a more complete, tailored answer from an expert than you would from an encyclopedia.

I'm not sure I understand why you think the forum would be a better place to start than the wikibook, except for the fact that the wikibook isn't very well developed. But again, that's the chicken and egg problem. Ideally, the wikibook would have well-developed tutorials, FAQs, reference materials, etc. That would seem to me to make it the obvious starting point for learning.

As I said - wikis are like encyclopedias. Great if you want a collection of information from which to start learning, but fairly useless if you want to ask questions.

Frankly, I don't think you're going to get very far persuading people that the wiki is a better place to ask questions. If you want to convince people to do things with the wiki then I'd suggest waiting til more people are expert on the subject of scripting and then encouraging them to edit and add information to the wiki that could be used as a reference for others. But insisting that it's a better place to ask questions than a discussion forum seems a tad irrational to me.

[hank]

I agree that the wiki page isn't very helpful as currently organized. It's too much like a forum discussion, but without the posts identified separately and listed sequentially. I think the page should be reorganized as a FAQ, with each question in a separate section, the question used as the section title, the sections organized by topic, and the answers edited for conciseness and accuracy.

Well if you want to do that then by all means go ahead. But I don't think anybody else is that inclined to jump in there and reorganise it.

If you don't mind me saying, you seem almost evangelistic about using the Wikibook. I don't think that's ultimately very helpful - so far you're the only person here on this thread who likes the idea of using it to ask questions on instead of the forum. The fact remains that Wikis were never intended nor were ever designed to be places to ask questions. They're supposed to be repositories of knowledge, like an encyclopedia. You seem to want to turn it into something it's not.

You're right, that's the problem. No one seems interested in contributing to the wikibook. I think most people just want their questions answered as conveniently as possible. They're not interested in building a knowledge base as a community resource. It's quite possible they wouldn't make use of one if it did exist, when they can get answers with little effort at the forum, letting someone else do the work. There's nothing surprising about that, really. It's quite rational, just basic human nature. I think it's very possible that the whole wiki idea, of collaborative knowledge creation, is not workable. Part of why I'm promoting the wiki here is just my curiosity as to whether it would work. Or not.

I think this forum serves perfectly well as a place to ask questions. It's alongside all the other boards here so people can pop in and go through the threads and ask casual questions. It's obvious who is answering and what the quality of the answers are. You can easily see when a thread has been updated or responded to here.

As far as I'm concerned, the Wiki discussion page offers no advantages for asking questions whatsoever over the forums, and actually has several disadvantages compared to it. Whereas the Wiki has several advantages in storing the answers to questions and being a place to find information easily than the forums. Therefore it seems much more logical to use the discussion boards to ask questions and the wiki to ultimately store useful answers to those questions.

I don't really disagree with you. I'm not so much interested in having the questions asked at the wiki as having the answers put there. I think it would be great if whenever someone learned something new related to Celestia, they would put it in the wikibook (if it's not already there) so that others could have access to the knowledge (even without having to ask). I don't see any problem with questions being asked in the forum if the answers are given in the wikibook. But the forum is easier to use to provide one-off answers, too. Unless there's a conscious committment to build the wikibook, it won't happen.

But granted, even with a well-organized wiki, it's a lot easier to just pop off your question on the forum and let others devote their time to educating you than to invest even a minimal amount of your own time to trying to find the answer on the wiki.

Now you seem to be implying that people don't want to use the wiki because they're too lazy to find answers? I don't think that's a valid assumption at all - it's just that the wiki is simply nowhere near as convenient a place to ask questions.

The whole point of asking questions on a forum is to get others to tell you what they know. Once a knowledge base is accumulated, a wiki can be set up to store it. It's the difference between asking an expert and looking up an encyclopedia. Laziness has nothing to do with it - you just often get a more complete, tailored answer from an expert than you would from an encyclopedia.

I'm not sure I understand why you think the forum would be a better place to start than the wikibook, except for the fact that the wikibook isn't very well developed. But again, that's the chicken and egg problem. Ideally, the wikibook would have well-developed tutorials, FAQs, reference materials, etc. That would seem to me to make it the obvious starting point for learning.

As I said - wikis are like encyclopedias. Great if you want a collection of information from which to start learning, but fairly useless if you want to ask questions.

Frankly, I don't think you're going to get very far persuading people that the wiki is a better place to ask questions. If you want to convince people to do things with the wiki then I'd suggest waiting til more people are expert on the subject of scripting and then encouraging them to edit and add information to the wiki that could be used as a reference for others. But insisting that it's a better place to ask questions than a discussion forum seems a tad irrational to me.

I think your perception of the potential use of wikis is too narrow. They can provide tutorials and FAQs just as well as encyclopedic references. Usually it's a good idea when you're interested in learning something to first read what you can about it before asking questions. It's not an efficient use of experts' time to be responding to basic questions for which the answers could be found easily in the wiki. And what if an expert is not available at the moment? The wiki is always there.

Again, I'm not insisting that a wiki is a better place to ask questions, but that it could be a more useful place to find answers. But only if people will start contributing to it.

- Hank

[hank]

At the request of the person who started this thread (Malenfant) I attempted to split this thread into two parts. Unfortunately, contrary to the documentation, it split the thread *before* the selected post instead of after it. *grump*

Selden,

Unfortunately, you split the thread while I was in the middle of posting. You'll need to move my post above to the other thread. Is it now going to be your policy to splt a thread whenever an off-topic discussion develops? That would actually be a very good thing, but you're going to be busy.

- Hank

Actually I asked him to split it myself.

Yes, I understood that from what he said.

I figured The wiki/forum discussion was too important to have lost in a 'getinfo' thread :).

Right. That's one of the big problems with the forum. There are lots of threads that go on for many pages, covering diverse topics, often unrelated to the original subject. And only the moderator can straighten them out, which isn't really practical. That was my point.

- Hank

[Malenfant]

You're right, that's the problem. No one seems interested in contributing to the wikibook. I think most people just want their questions answered as conveniently as possible. They're not interested in building a knowledge base as a community resource. It's quite possible they wouldn't make use of one if it did exist, when they can get answers with little effort at the forum, letting someone else do the work. There's nothing surprising about that, really. It's quite rational, just basic human nature. I think it's very possible that the whole wiki idea, of collaborative knowledge creation, is not workable. Part of why I'm promoting the wiki here is just my curiosity as to whether it would work. Or not.

I think you're missing a major point here.

In order to create a knowledge base, you need two things - people who have that knowledge to start with, and a load of useful information to put on it. We have neither of those at the moment.

In the first case, so far there aren't enough people who are experts on scripting who would be willing to take the time to write down that knowledge in a way that would be useful to people. If you want to go ahead and try to impart what you know then by all means do so, but until more people become experts on the subject and are willing to make the same effort, you'll be fairly lonely.

In the second case, we need something to put there. I think it's rather like wine - you have to let information 'mature' for a bit so you know what is actually important enough to preserve and what isn't. Making an information base on the fly will just result in a disorganised, incoherent mess. It's already been pointed out that the key letter in FAQ is the F - the fact that questions that have been frequently asked end up on there so people can look up the answers without asking the same things over and over (theoretically. You still get a lot of newcomers who ask questions without realising a FAQ is there or even what it is).

I think answers will end up on the wiki eventually - hopefully myself and Bob at least are learning the ropes but we'll probably get to the stage where we can write our own little 'articles' about how to do something on the wiki. But right now it's too soon for that I think.

I don't see any problem with questions being asked in the forum if the answers are given in the wikibook.

Well I'd much rather see the answers given here on the forum too, and then transferred to the wikibook later on. Not as a part of a discussion page there, but as separate 'articles' in their own right.

I think your perception of the potential use of wikis is too narrow. They can provide tutorials and FAQs just as well as encyclopedic references.

Yes, but the point is that they're still reference material. They're a place to find answers and help without actually asking someone. If thinking of it as an encyclopaedia doesn't click then think of it as a textbook or a guide too. But the problem with wikis is that they were never intended to be a place where one could actually ask questions. The way they're set up just doesn't lend itself to that anywhere near as well as a forum.

Usually it's a good idea when you're interested in learning something to first read what you can about it before asking questions. It's not an efficient use of experts' time to be responding to basic questions for which the answers could be found easily in the wiki. And what if an expert is not available at the moment? The wiki is always there.

Well arguably the experts would be spending their time writing wiki articles instead of answering questions. Writing articles might be better in the long term, but if someone needs an answer to a question that isn't in the wiki then what are they supposed to do?

Again, I'm not insisting that a wiki is a better place to ask questions, but that it could be a more useful place to find answers. But only if people will start contributing to it.

Sure. But "answers" really means "information on how to do stuff". And right now it seems that there aren't enough people who know enough on the subject to transcribe what they know there.

And another thing is that a forum provides the expert with some degree of satisfaction too - you get feedback from the people who want your knowledge. On a wiki, you don't really get that.

[hank]

In order to create a knowledge base, you need two things - people who have that knowledge to start with, and a load of useful information to put on it. We have neither of those at the moment.

That just isn't true. There are a lot of people with useful knowledge on many aspects of Celestia who have not contributed what they know to the wikibook.

In the first case, so far there aren't enough people who are experts on scripting who would be willing to take the time to write down that knowledge in a way that would be useful to people.

You don't have to be an expert to contribute to the wiki. All you need is to have some knowledge to share that isn't already there. Given the present state of the wikibook, it doesn't take much.

If you want to go ahead and try to impart what you know then by all means do so, but until more people become experts on the subject and are willing to make the same effort, you'll be fairly lonely.

I guess I shouldn't be wasting my time.

In the second case, we need something to put there. I think it's rather like wine - you have to let information 'mature' for a bit so you know what is actually important enough to preserve and what isn't. Making an information base on the fly will just result in a disorganised, incoherent mess. It's already been pointed out that the key letter in FAQ is the F - the fact that questions that have been frequently asked end up on there so people can look up the answers without asking the same things over and over (theoretically. You still get a lot of newcomers who ask questions without realising a FAQ is there or even what it is).

There's no reason why a knowledge base built on the fly should be any more disorganized or incoherent than the forum threads, and potentially it could be much more organized and coherent, because unlike the forums it can be easily edited. But it will never reach that potential unless people are willing to contribute.

I think answers will end up on the wiki eventually - hopefully myself and Bob at least are learning the ropes but we'll probably get to the stage where we can write our own little 'articles' about how to do something on the wiki. But right now it's too soon for that I think.

I hope you're right. But I'm doubtful.

I don't see any problem with questions being asked in the forum if the answers are given in the wikibook.

Well I'd much rather see the answers given here on the forum too, and then transferred to the wikibook later on. Not as a part of a discussion page there, but as separate 'articles' in their own right.

I guess our disagreement is whether useful information should be put in the wikibook right away, or whether it should wait until some vague time "later on".

I think your perception of the potential use of wikis is too narrow. They can provide tutorials and FAQs just as well as encyclopedic references.

Yes, but the point is that they're still reference material. They're a place to find answers and help without actually asking someone. If thinking of it as an encyclopaedia doesn't click then think of it as a textbook or a guide too. But the problem with wikis is that they were never intended to be a place where one could actually ask questions. The way they're set up just doesn't lend itself to that anywhere near as well as a forum.

Your emphasis seems to be on "actually asking questions", rather than finding answers. It's true, if someone can't or won't make use of an on-line information resource, the wikibook will not be helpful to them.

Usually it's a good idea when you're interested in learning something to first read what you can about it before asking questions. It's not an efficient use of experts' time to be responding to basic questions for which the answers could be found easily in the wiki. And what if an expert is not available at the moment? The wiki is always there.

Well arguably the experts would be spending their time writing wiki articles instead of answering questions. Writing articles might be better in the long term, but if someone needs an answer to a question that isn't in the wiki then what are they supposed to do?

Yes, I think that contributing to the wiki generally could have more long-term benefit to the community than answering individual questions in the forum. But if something isn't in the wiki, a question in the forum is quite useful and proper, as it will helpfully call attention to the missing fact so that the wiki can be updated.

Again, I'm not insisting that a wiki is a better place to ask questions, but that it could be a more useful place to find answers. But only if people will start contributing to it.

Sure. But "answers" really means "information on how to do stuff". And right now it seems that there aren't enough people who know enough on the subject to transcribe what they know there.

Again, there are lots of people who could improve the wikibook right now, if they were willing to contribute.

And another thing is that a forum provides the expert with some degree of satisfaction too - you get feedback from the people who want your knowledge. On a wiki, you don't really get that.

Yes, that's one of the basic questions about the wiki paradigm: Is egoless knowledge creation sociologically feasible? Perhaps it is not.

- Hank

[Malenfant]

That just isn't true. There are a lot of people with useful knowledge on many aspects of Celestia who have not contributed what they know to the wikibook.

Well I was talking more about scripting than Celestia as a whole. But I really don't think this something where you can just hope people will show up and spontaneously write articles out of the blue in the wikibook. Writing manuals and tutorials is a lot of effort and takes a lot of time.

If you actually had an organised system of volunteers who were willing to take that time and make that effort then it'd probably work a lot better (heck, if people were paid to do that then it'd work a charm, but that's obviously out of the question here). But it will move very slowly indeed if you just expect people to drop in and write stuff out of the kindness of their hearts.

You don't have to be an expert to contribute to the wiki. All you need is to have some knowledge to share that isn't already there. Given the present state of the wikibook, it doesn't take much.

But - to be devil's advocate - why should I contribute there by addressing a point nobody has raised in the hope that it'll be useful to somebody in future when I can answer a specific question here and know my answer is useful to someone right now?

There's no reason why a knowledge base built on the fly should be any more disorganized or incoherent than the forum threads, and potentially it could be much more organized and coherent, because unlike the forums it can be easily edited. But it will never reach that potential unless people are willing to contribute.

Well look at the wiki discussion page right now - it's a total mess of test scripts and comments. Why spend effort organising that when you can look at a discussion board like the one here and instantly recognise who is posting what and when things are answered? And also, it's quite possible to search the forum for answers to questions before you ask them - there is a search function here after all.

The main CelX wiki page is fine, though it's clearly half-finished. I think a repository of scripts where you can browse each script on screen like that is kinda useful because that way you can actually look at the scripts and see some explanation nearby (unlike the script storehouse on the motherlode which is full of zipfiles that you have to download and extract and open and can't compare anywhere near as easily)

I guess our disagreement is whether useful information should be put in the wikibook right away, or whether it should wait until some vague time "later on".

It's also that a wiki would be a useful place for 'articles'. For example, I'm ultimately trying to come up with a script that will calculate the apparent magnitude of planets as seen from the observer viewpoint - IMO a rather useful function that is currently lacking in Celestia. Now, while I'm asking questions about it I can't really write anything about it in the wikibook. I could start I guess, but I'd ultimately be editing it all the time and I'd rather just write something up once I've got it all firm in my mind and have figure out the problems. That way I could go step by step through the program and be confident in explaining what I did and why I did it.

I'm not entirely sure what the point would be in writing an article on planetary magnitudes themselves though, since I could just as easily refer people to the webpage that I'm getting the equations from.

The only other alternative I guess it to just have a bullet point list of random tips but I don't see how that'd be much use.

Your emphasis seems to be on "actually asking questions", rather than finding answers. It's true, if someone can't or won't make use of an on-line information resource, the wikibook will not be helpful to them.

It's more that an encyclopedia without much knowledge in it isn't really much use. But I think you're expecting or hoping that such a resource can be assembled piece by piece by people who just drop in and contribute. I don't think that's really realistic. Most successful resources like that are made by dedicated teams of people working fulltime on collating and distilling information. I'd wager that most of the successful wikis are also written by organised groups of people who split up the article writing tasks between them, not by random people dropping in.

Yes, I think that contributing to the wiki generally could have more long-term benefit to the community than answering individual questions in the forum. But if something isn't in the wiki, a question in the forum is quite useful and proper, as it will helpfully call attention to the missing fact so that the wiki can be updated.

Well, as an example, what would you envisage being written in the wiki about my getinfo question? A short article a few paragraphs long explaining how to get specific information out of the getinfo command? Where would that fit in the wiki structure?

Again, there are lots of people who could improve the wikibook right now, if they were willing to contribute.

That would require them to take time off doing other things that are potentially more useful. I'm sure people like Fridger or Don would be great contributors to the wiki with what they know, but if they did that then they wouldn't have time to do any of the stuff they're actually GOOD at.

Yes, that's one of the basic questions about the wiki paradigm: Is egoless knowledge creation sociologically feasible? Perhaps it is not.

Frankly I don't think it is feasible from that perspective. Obviously it is feasible when writing an actual encyclopedia though, but in that case there is a strong support network and authors and editors etc are actually being paid for their time and knowledge.

[hank]

Malenfant,

At this point I'm afraid there isn't anything more that I can usefully say to you.

- Hank