Brian Barnes
EF1
Since it’s founding on January 15th, 2001 Wikipedia.com has grown to become the world’s largest encyclopedia. And of course the world’s largest encyclopedia has a lot of content related to meteorology and severe weather, but I had an idea – a Wikipedia clone that is focused exclusively on meteorology and severe weather. It’s an idea that some people might find objectionable, but I think not.
I have three thoughts as to why this is a good idea –
I have secured the domain name “StormWiki.org,†and provided the seeding for the initial hosting and bandwidth. I have also taken the basic steps to install the MediaWiki software and provided it with a few additional features (not found on Wikipedia) for increased spam protection. As well as equipped it with a Google Maps plug-in that is easy to use and has some special syntax.
My initial thought is to basically just open the system up and let the control lay with the community that edits it, just as Wikipedia.org is operated. However, I am imposing one difference from the traditional wiki methodology and it’s something that everyone on StormTrack.org is already familiar with – you must use your REAL NAME as your user name.
Other than that – it’s open and free to anyone. You don’t even need to register to make edits to articles.
In its current state – there isn’t really any content in the StormWiki database – it’s an open book. I didn’t set the system up for me to write an encyclopedia – I set it up for the “meteorological community†to create a meteorology reference.
StormWiki’s users will decide on its structure, its features, its categories and its articles. This allows the project to evolve and develop on its own terms and with a methodology that is most practical.
That all being said – having a “StormWiki†may be something that nobody wants to mess with. And, if that is found to be the case then it will go away. However, if there are others that believe in the usefulness of the StormWiki, and if it does in fact become a useful resource to people, then it will never go away.
One more thing – if the StormWiki catches on, there will eventually be a group of moderators who do have some special privileges. Those privileges basically just include the ability to “lock†an article, or delete an article. This is part of the core software so that common pages (such as the main page) cannot be abused. I have not discussed this with anyone as of yet – so if you’re interested send me a message and let me know. Moderators will be more like a “stormwiki committee†and will also contribute to important future decisions about the project. For example – if this is project that people enjoy and it begins to grow, then the “committee†might discuss options for expanding the server resources, or relocating the wiki database to another hosting provider for greater bandwidth (but it's currently on a private server), etc… Other than those few privileges I want the system to be completely as open as possible, so that the system can be “self-governed†by its own community.
Does anyone have an objection to our trying this out?
Brian Barnes
[email protected]
I have three thoughts as to why this is a good idea –
- When people are looking for answers to their questions they may try to find their answer from an online forum community. It’s likely that the question has been asked many times and answered – but the nature of a forum is interactive communication and as such most people will not search for their answer before starting a new thread. Wikis however encourage the use of the search feature – allowing people to quickly get the information that they are looking for. Wikis also feature a discussion (or “talkâ€) page for any additional debate related to the topic.
- The “StormWiki†has the same architecture and fundamental design as Wikipedia (it uses the MediaWiki software) and thus it has the same potentials, but for a niche topic. Just as Wikipedia.com outgrew every printed encyclopedia, StormWiki can outgrow any printed collection of meteorological articles and become a single source of information for those interested in the specific discipline of meteorology – all indexed and easily searchable, and editable.
- Wikipedia has often brought along with it intense debate about various subjects, however the articles are written with neutrality. I personally believe that this is important for any scientific related study, or practice. I do not believe that a meteorological wiki is going to solve the climate change debate, nor should it, but it will without a doubt ignite vigorous open debate when creating such “hot topic†articles and during the continuance of the editing processes. However, the articles must be kept “open†and written from a neutral point of view.
I have secured the domain name “StormWiki.org,†and provided the seeding for the initial hosting and bandwidth. I have also taken the basic steps to install the MediaWiki software and provided it with a few additional features (not found on Wikipedia) for increased spam protection. As well as equipped it with a Google Maps plug-in that is easy to use and has some special syntax.
My initial thought is to basically just open the system up and let the control lay with the community that edits it, just as Wikipedia.org is operated. However, I am imposing one difference from the traditional wiki methodology and it’s something that everyone on StormTrack.org is already familiar with – you must use your REAL NAME as your user name.
Other than that – it’s open and free to anyone. You don’t even need to register to make edits to articles.
In its current state – there isn’t really any content in the StormWiki database – it’s an open book. I didn’t set the system up for me to write an encyclopedia – I set it up for the “meteorological community†to create a meteorology reference.
StormWiki’s users will decide on its structure, its features, its categories and its articles. This allows the project to evolve and develop on its own terms and with a methodology that is most practical.
That all being said – having a “StormWiki†may be something that nobody wants to mess with. And, if that is found to be the case then it will go away. However, if there are others that believe in the usefulness of the StormWiki, and if it does in fact become a useful resource to people, then it will never go away.
One more thing – if the StormWiki catches on, there will eventually be a group of moderators who do have some special privileges. Those privileges basically just include the ability to “lock†an article, or delete an article. This is part of the core software so that common pages (such as the main page) cannot be abused. I have not discussed this with anyone as of yet – so if you’re interested send me a message and let me know. Moderators will be more like a “stormwiki committee†and will also contribute to important future decisions about the project. For example – if this is project that people enjoy and it begins to grow, then the “committee†might discuss options for expanding the server resources, or relocating the wiki database to another hosting provider for greater bandwidth (but it's currently on a private server), etc… Other than those few privileges I want the system to be completely as open as possible, so that the system can be “self-governed†by its own community.
Does anyone have an objection to our trying this out?
Brian Barnes
[email protected]
