Why Not Wiki?

That site is quite flexible. I put a number of pages up when they were first getting started and found it fairly easy to work with.

Who is the anticipated audience? Is it to contain 'general' stamp info? Or be more specific? How will it differ from the thousands of existing sites in terms of content? Obviously sites like the APS web site (http://stamps.org/Home ) already contain a large amount of good info both the beginner and advanced hobbyist. Other sites, like the 1847usa site (http://www.stampsmarter.com/1847usa/index.htm) contain a large amount of country specific info. Then of course you have many quality forums such as this one which covers a large range of topics.

I support any effort to increase online presence for our hobby but think that you will need to define what it is you want to accomplish. You will also want to make sure that once defined, you stick to the scope that has been chosen. Ideally you will find a niche that has not already been well cover by a multiple of other online resources.

The worse thing that can happen is that this is not defined and the effort languishes in a mishmash that does not reflect our hobby well.
Don

I found the Wiki site to be a bit hard to understand at first. Once I did 'get it' I re-wrote a couple of the help pages - don't know if they are still as I left them. Anyway, I think it's a great site. I added loads of GB Machin sets, and since then a Machin project has sprung up. The more who participate, of course, the better it gets.

The Wiki site was set up and is run by one of the SCF members and a long-time friend of mine.
I have added a bit in the earlier days but always find my time for stamps limited in the last few years.
I will get back to it. There is a section for postmarks too. Great place to search and visit.

Londonbus1

To wit:

I feel like I could be of use there. I'm a professional proofreader. I'm not the best person to write about the stamps of the world, but I can make sure the grammar, punctuation, and spelling are pretty. :) At the very least, that abominable lowercase "t" at the beginning of the last sentence there would no longer exist. Ugh.

I made an account. I couldn't stand the grammatical mess that was that page. It's all better now. I'll click through the pages at my leisure and try to clean them up grammatically. There's an option to mark the changes made as minor, which mine are, but there are a lot of edits that can be made to make the pages more readable and professional-sounding and the formatting consistent. :)

Londonbus1, are you confused by what I posted?

This is supposed to be an image of a "sheet." It is an image of a single stamp. And the narrative says "stamp shows the aircraft but makes no reference to the pilot" despite Lindbergh's name appearing on the stamp.

I am sure the wiki founder(s) hoped for better input, but this is embarrassing. Obviously, they do not have a competent (or sufficient) team in place to check the entries. Without that, a wiki is not going to be taken seriously.

I'm guessing that the entry title was meant to indicate that the entry is for the "sheet version" of the stamp, as distinguished from the "booklet version" of the stamp. I was not under the impression that the entry was intended to show the full 50-stamp pane.

You are correct in noting that Lindbergh's name is indeed on the stamp. That is most definitely an error in the entry description.

Anyone is allowed to contribute to the wiki. This site doesn't have a "team" that checks entries...it relies on experts in the community who are willing to help with the site and improve entries, and not just complain about a few submarginal entries.

(Of course, I understand it is easier to complain and ridicule things we don't understand than it is to actually put forth effort to learn something new and help make this a valuable resource to stamp collectors and an additional reference for this discussion forum.)

51studebaker, the 1847usa site is very similar to a wiki (although it is controlled by a single entity. It is also very specific to USA. And I think you would agree that it is also very different from this discussion forum. And I think you would also agree that it provides a valued service to US stamp collectors.

Now try to imagine something similar to the 1847usa site, but tailored to world wide philately. Also imagine that instead of one person in control the world wide community of stamp collectors provides information on various issues as their individual expertise allows, and that information is validated preferably with references and by other "experts."

The biggest difference between a wiki and a discussion forum is that a wiki is a collaborative effort by like minded people and relies on the community to actually participate in contributing to the project and not just talk about it.

Let's all try to keep the discussion pertinent to the topic, rather than make presumptive retorts to a poster. Some comments may be better left to private messages.

Everybody is entitled to their observations regarding the wiki entries, right or wrong. To me, it is reflective of how others see the entries, and thus would be relevant to the topic of "Why Not Wiki?"

The difficulty in setting up yet another all-encompassing stamp reference site is that the number of collectors with sufficient knowledge in so many areas is not as much as we might think (or hope for). Of course we can get a lot of people involved, and hopefully the combined knowledge will create a great reference site.

However, the fact of the matter is that many who do have the comprehensive background to do the checking and also add information to make the site comprehensive and reliable, often either: already have their website/forum, are full-time dealers for whom it may not be in their best interest to provide information free all the time (e.g., those who publish their works, or are professional expertizers...), or are simply too busy to be involved in another project in which they will be spending a lot of time making corrections.

And of course, reliability of information is paramount, even in the absence of comprehensive information. A site is not useful if a non-trivial amount of the information is not reliable.

There are a lot of difficulties in getting people to agree on what the resource should look like. Then, getting people actually involved long-term is not that easy.

Quite frankly, I find it much easier to google for information. The world-wide web is even more comprehensive than wiki would ever be.

I'm not shooting down your idea/thoughts. Just stating some realities. I think this is a good thread topic. I find the topic similar in many respects to threads on creating public domain cataloging systems.

k

Back to the hand held paper version! :)