Comment on Is it dumb to create a wiki in this day and age?
Kinglink@lemmy.world 1 year ago
politics-related data
Yes.
I’m annoyed with how low-effort, entirely un-researched content
And you think a wiki will solve that?
Comment on Is it dumb to create a wiki in this day and age?
Kinglink@lemmy.world 1 year ago
politics-related data
Yes.
I’m annoyed with how low-effort, entirely un-researched content
And you think a wiki will solve that?
blightbow@kbin.social 1 year ago
Yeah, I've seen what this does to fan wikis. There is a certain type of personality that thrives on having their version of reality be what is reflected in the wiki articles, and they will revert any and all attempts to excise their personal theories. If admins step in to break up the edit war, it's clearly "favoritism" and "admins should only exist in service to the users and have no say in content". Some of these wiki addicts go out of their way to become the wiki equivalent of Reddit's supermods in order to ensure that they have the upper hand in these content disputes.
"No original research" is one of the core pillars of your ability to push back against delusional nonsense. If you're determined to live without it, you need to have very strong content standard in its place to decide the difference between your wiki presenting objective fact and having to debate a bunch of completely unnecessary nonsense with people whose egos are unhealthily embedded in your wiki pages.
(Somewhat of a tangent, but if you're bored you can look into a brief history of AlexShepherd's crusade against circumcision in the Silent Hill fandom. He's not the only person I've seen thrive on wikis who don't adopt an original research policy, but definitely the most entertaining read.)