# Wikifinity - The New FAQ



## Dragoneer (Sep 19, 2006)

Fur Affinity will be deploying a Wiki-based FAQ in the near future. The FAQ, which will be known as "Wikifinity", will be closed for public editing (to prevent trolling). We will be offering invites to users from the community to take up positions for content writers and editors to help keep documentation up-to-date so all users will be able to find answers quickly and accurately!

The invites will be sent to those who have proven their dedication to helping make Fur Affinity become a better, stronger community and to those who have expressed interest in helping with the site. Yes, we know who you are and we love you! All of you. Yes, yes, even you in the back. We see you waving your arms there!

In the up-coming version of FA, currently known as "Ferrox", we will use links towards the FAQ throughout the site, providing help and answers that will be, quite literally, "one click away". We feel that this will ultimately help make FA a much more user friendly site by allowing people to get instant help on the subjects they want without having to dig for answers.

All in the name of awesome.

_*GO TEAM VENTURE!*_


----------



## SevenFisher (Sep 19, 2006)

Hmm. I really like sound of it  - it'd help people greatly.  I can be bit lost in using FA setup, so I think it's help for any people who need a quick 'n' simple answer to slove their problems.

And awwh, nice to hear you love me. =3...*yeah yeah I know its not that case*

Can't wait to see when this is up, I know I'd give it a look. ^^


----------



## kukul (Sep 19, 2006)

wow... *drools* wikifi.... *stares at the infinity*..... knowledge.....

Now, really, that's a hell of a great idea =D !!!!


----------



## robomilk (Sep 19, 2006)

Aye. I do a fair bit on WikiFur. I started the article for Scooter and myself. As well as various minor edits.


----------



## Ultraviolet (Sep 19, 2006)

Sounds like a reasonable way to do things.  I'm looking forward to it!


----------



## Alchera (Sep 20, 2006)

Sounds reasonable, but is Wiki going to give you the same type of trouble they gave WikiFur when it first started? (Or is this in joint with Wikifur itself?) 

Wikipedia--I'm just going to say...the mainstream has a lot of issues, based on personal experience.

P.S. YES TEAM VENTURE!


----------



## Dragoneer (Sep 20, 2006)

Alchera said:
			
		

> Sounds reasonable, but is Wiki going to give you the same type of trouble they gave WikiFur when it first started? (Or is this in joint with Wikifur itself?)



Why would they? Mediawiki is a freely available application. What we do with it doesn't involve them. Lost of companies and various sites use the Wiki. Hell, it's even an instant-load plugin on Dreamhost and other sites.


----------



## Alchera (Sep 20, 2006)

Dragoneer said:
			
		

> Alchera said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




 Oh, trust me...I've had problems with Wiki before over rediculous little things, and it isn't about Mediawiki either. I'm keeping my mouth shut on it because I'm not going to start a controversy. However, I'm not saying that you shouldn't do it. I'm just saying be careful. They may not do it anymore, but it is best to keep an eye open.


----------



## GreenReaper (Sep 24, 2006)

Alchera said:
			
		

> Sounds reasonable, but is Wiki going to give you the same type of trouble they gave WikiFur when it first started? (Or is this in joint with Wikifur itself?)


Speaking from experience, most of the hassle we got was from Something Awful, and all they succeeded in doing was making WikiFur wildly more popular than it was previously.

Wikifinity will be a closed system with defined contributors. I was at Wikimania 2006 where there was a session on organization use of wikis, and one of the points raised there was that removing anonymous users and free registration gets rid of a huge class of problems. Obviously for WikiFur (where we need those contributions) that model doesn't work out so well, but it should work out just fine for Wikifinity.


----------



## Alchera (Sep 24, 2006)

GreenReaper said:
			
		

> Alchera said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I didn't hear that part of it. However, I still have my grudges with Wikipedia itself. By the way, it is nice to see you here. Though, I am curious on what SomethingAwful tried to do.


----------



## SevenFisher (Sep 24, 2006)

Alchera said:
			
		

> GreenReaper said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Me too, I was on that forums just to check Zidane's headbutting spoof pictures..although I've got the guess that there's alot of anti-furs there, trying to ruin the plan or something?


----------



## GreenReaper (Sep 24, 2006)

Alchera said:
			
		

> I didn't hear that part of it. However, I still have my grudges with Wikipedia itself. By the way, it is nice to see you here. Though, I am curious on what SomethingAwful tried to do.


Wikipedia doesn't really have anything to do with it other than providing the database software. I guess there's a kind of "wiki culture" that comes with it, but that tends to be different for each site depending on the circumstances. Wikipedia is a unique case, as it's an encyclopedia edited by the world, so it has to deal with everything and everybody. I'm amazed they manage to get it to work at all. 

Three weeks into WikiFur's foundation (about 120 articles, just after I'd started to promote it on LiveJournal), Something Awful posted it as their Awful Link of the Day, after a previous day as a forum thread. We got a huge influx of "visitors" - and some of them decided to do more than point and laugh. Overall, though, I think the net benefit was positive, as many of the visitors were actually interested in the site (SA houses more furries than they like to admit) and it helped galvanize the first members of the admin team who would go on to defend WikiFur against all kinds of vandals. Without their link it might have taken us far more than a month to reach 1,000 articles.


----------



## blackdragoon (Sep 24, 2006)

this is all very interesting stuff you guys put together here, i like it. i also like your avatar GreenReaper i think it's spiffy. >^@^<


----------



## GreenReaper (Sep 24, 2006)

blackdragoon said:
			
		

> this is all very interesting stuff you guys put together here, i like it. i also like your avatar GreenReaper i think it's spiffy. >^@^<


Hehe, thanks! We do try and write articles to be interesting as well as useful.

The picture was done by Vantid - the full version is actually my conbadge. We spent a while going over different versions, which I think helped a lot. Herbie also did a neat sketch which is guaranteed to make your teeth fall out . . . in a good way!


----------



## Alchera (Sep 25, 2006)

GreenReaper said:
			
		

> Alchera said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Very interesting-- Anyways, back on topic for me.

I did do editing and article clean up for wikipedia for a short time just to help the effort. I don't know if that would prove useful to anyone here. Writing and proofreading things are part of what I do.


----------



## Zippo (Oct 12, 2006)

Sounds wonderful, there always have been ether a gap, hidden truth or lack of knoloage in the subject, its awesome to finally clear the air. :3

-Z


----------



## imnohbody (Oct 12, 2006)

Sounds cool, Dragoneer.

_*Especially*_ since it's not going to be publicly editable. That kind of thing is why Wikipedia (and many wikis out there in general) is considered a "toy encyclopedia", not suitable for Serious Researchâ„¢*.



[size=xx-small]* Which, of course, is part of the Serious Businessâ„¢ that is the internet.[/size]


----------



## Dragoneer (Oct 12, 2006)

imnohbody said:
			
		

> Sounds cool, Dragoneer.
> 
> _*Especially*_ since it's not going to be publicly editable. That kind of thing is why Wikipedia (and many wikis out there in general) is considered a "toy encyclopedia", not suitable for Serious Researchâ„¢*.
> 
> ...


Wikis are a good idea, but simply subject to too much personal interpretation and trolling.


----------



## Alchera (Oct 13, 2006)

imnohbody said:
			
		

> Sounds cool, Dragoneer.
> 
> _*Especially*_ since it's not going to be publicly editable. That kind of thing is why Wikipedia (and many wikis out there in general) is considered a "toy encyclopedia", not suitable for Serious Researchâ„¢*.
> 
> ...



I agree that Wikipedia is a "toy enclyclopedia." I know Wikifinity will at least be run correctly. However, when someone tells me a fact, and I question it, and they show me wikipedia all I say is "Show me a credible source" because I've found numerous occassions where the information on Wikipedia was dead wrong. On some cases, even if you have proof they are wrong, they won't quit changing it back to the wrong info.


----------



## nrr (Oct 14, 2006)

Alchera said:
			
		

> [...] I've found numerous occassions where the information on Wikipedia was dead wrong. On some cases, even if you have proof they are wrong, they won't quit changing it back to the wrong info.


This is why your university library is a good resource to use.  Or, if you have an account with them, the ACM Digital Library.

I went into the library once at my uni, and I've never been back since.

In either case, the use of a wiki here for documentation on FA is actually a rather productive use of the concept.  It'll allow FA's management (and, hopefully, documentation writers in the future) to maintain a user guide and FAQ and whatnot with minimal fuss, with the added bonus of being able to cross-reference other pieces of the same documentation with that same minimal fuss.

Wikipedia and other similar information outlets serving a similar purpose are kinda subjective, and you need to have your research skills honed enough to wade through what is cruft to get to what is gold.  Looking specifically for articles that cite very credible sources (i.e., refereed papers) is a good start.


----------



## Dragoneer (Oct 14, 2006)

nrr said:
			
		

> In either case, the use of a wiki here for documentation on FA is actually a rather productive use of the concept.Â Â It'll allow FA's management (and, hopefully, documentation writers in the future) to maintain a user guide and FAQ and whatnot with minimal fuss, with the added bonus of being able to cross-reference other pieces of the same documentation with that same minimal fuss.


And one of the big benefits is that if we find a new solution/fix for a problem, we can reference that on the wiki instantly. I tried to do a rather decent FAQ the first time around, but re-organizing and formatting a huge document like that is NOT fun, especially when it comes time to "tweak the layout".

I plan to open up invites for editors based on how helpful people are on the forums. People wanna help out, they proove themselves on the fourms, love is in the air.

Heh.

I'm just waiting for the site to be setup right now. Like the forums, it's not going to be hosted on FA's primary server, but on another one of Gushi's systems.


----------

