Forum:WIGO RW

< Index | Site-related discussion

I was jumping on the mainpage revamp bandwagon and added a WIGO box that contained not 4, but 6 entries. The additional two were "WIGO:BAR" essentially a link to the SB (it was originally going to be "RW recommends", a series of non-specific links and funnies that didn't fit as a blog or news item, I still want this, but one step at a time) the second is "WIGO:RW". This is something I think we could do with. Some people head off and go away for a week, others sometimes miss important events, or would like to know when there's a flurry of activity around an article. Hence WIGO:RW. This is something that RWW is sort of supposed to, but more often than not fails to be. So, we start a new WIGO, entirely for cateloging things at RW. This is our "hot topics" as it were. If someone is starting a new article that needs a lot of help, add it. If the SB has propped up a new discussion that's interesting, add it. If RW has been mentioned somewhere, add it. And so on. This helps keep a record of what is happening in the group and how it's expanding and changing. If done right, it could be a valuable resource for people who want to involve themselves. ^moral 11:03, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

The whole reason we set up the forum section was to highlight on-going issues/conversations etc that were taking place in the SB and on RW in general for people that were absent for awhile, was it not?. Won't it make the forums superfluous? Aceⁱ⁹ 11:07, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

That wasn't the only reason. -- Nx / talk 11:12, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Except that the forum hasn't realy been used for that so much, and doesn't have the immediacy of a WIGO. But I see your point. ^moral 11:14, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

There's a WIGO RW at RationalWikiWiki. Like most things at RWW, it's sporadically updated & largely ignored. I guess the purposes of an onsite one would be a little different (highlighting things rather than mocking them), but then we already have various (mostly disused) ways of highlighting things (community chalkboard, intercom, etc.) Wěǎšěǐǒǐď^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 13:01, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

The issue I have with the RWW is, as you say, that it's sporadic and mocking. If people updated it like a proper meta-site, it would be a bit better. An on-site equiverlent would probably attract enough attention to keep it afloat. The other methods are probably disused because they're different. The intercom isn't needed now the SB is in place for general chat, although it works for site-wide messages and although this is reasonably rare, it works well for that purpose. The chalkboard is also nice, but it's limited in size and its prominence is restricted and usually goes ignored, it's nice for flagging up memos but sometimes items seem too mundane or too big for it and it gets ignored as a method for communication. A WIGO would be a more familiar and a deeper system to work with. The downside is that it's yet another WIGO, but as a focus point for site maintenence and expansion, I think it's the better and more flexible option. ^moral 13:15, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

A WIGO could be interesting. Much of the interesting stuff here happens in talk pages, so the traditional wiki approach of using categories to highlight articles doesn't work, and the forums would quickly be overrun if we tried to make them operate in the way that a WIGO would. Recent changes was my way of keeping track of things, but realistically it's becoming tricky unless I sit all day watching it, and my boss would not approve. RWW to me is primarily about comedy. --ConcernedResident ^{hybrid engine, for the ladies} 22:47, 18 May 2010 (UTC)