Large Scale Central

Site Changes #3 (10/4/2017)

I’ve had several people ask if we could bring back the Wiki that we had several years ago. I could bring the Wiki itself back, but the content (such as it was) is long gone. So I’m looking for feedback on this.

Would a Wiki have enough general interest that some of you would add items and keep things updated?

I guess I don;t remember it Bob but I would contribute whatever I can…mostly Zuni mountain logging RR and of course BBQ.

Will we be able to put pictures in? I have over 500 pics of standard gauge equipment that I took at various RR museums. I don’t know much about them but others on here will. They are in most cases from all four sides and the interior. I always though they would great for reference for scratch-building / super detailing if they were organized in a searchable manner.

  1. a wiki needs to be maintained - you’re looking for more work?

  2. isn’t the forum itself an archive of wisdom?

  3. who would you expect to write there? - people like Greg? he writes here, in other forums and on his own website already.

or people like cliff? those who spend their time actually building something?

or people like ######, who know, how others should do it?..

if i would stand in your shoes, i would spare me the additional burden.

Korm Kormsen said:

  1. a wiki needs to be maintained - you’re looking for more work?

  2. isn’t the forum itself an archive of wisdom?

  3. who would you expect to write there? - people like Greg? he writes here, in other forums and on his own website already.

or people like cliff? those who spend their time actually building something?

or people like ######, who know, how others should do it?..

if i would stand in your shoes, i would spare me the additional burden.

Bob, the Man from Paraguay speaketh truth here (I personally think anyway).

Me, I’m more than happy with the search feature…a dedicated space for information could degenerate into a platform of a few guys pontificating.

edit: actually, I don’t even want to see a wiki thing now that I think about it. Here’s what I mean by degeneration and pontification…nothing sets off acrimonious, petty, egotistical wars around here more quickly than when one “expert” decides another “expert” (read: know-it-all) is wrong about some obscure issue.

Korm Kormsen said:

  1. a wiki needs to be maintained - you’re looking for more work?

  2. isn’t the forum itself an archive of wisdom?

  3. who would you expect to write there? - people like Greg? he writes here, in other forums and on his own website already.

or people like cliff? those who spend their time actually building something?

or people like ######, who know, how others should do it?..

if i would stand in your shoes, i would spare me the additional burden.

Very wise input… I would agree not to make it more work… The site changes are great… (https://www.largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-cool.gif)(https://www.largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-laughing.gif)(https://www.largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-laughing.gif)

When you had the Wiki I only used it once. If I had a question I would either stir things up on the list or look in Articles.

I have to agree with Korm, on my site, for example I give factual information, I give MY opinions, and I accept comments. I’m in control.

On a Wiki site, you will need an “approving body” to filter the inputs, and also have to in a way verify the correctness of the information.

For some reason, often what should be factual exchanges of information giving which way is “better”, degrade into name calling, innuendos, slander, etc.

So your “approving body” will have to be more than one person, and who is going to monitor and manage that? Even Wikipedia is full of, well, to be honest… crap… many things there are not correct, and often what succeeds is persistence rather than accuracy…

It’s a noble and lofty goal, but a lot of overhead.

We have a great forum, where stuff can be discussed. You can search the forum with Google to find threads on great discussions. Reading the threads will give people information and varying viewpoints. That way they will know track power is better! (ha ha)… seriously, personally, I don’t have the extra bandwidth to contribute to another “authority”…

Greg

Bob,

I share the opinion of most of the current respondents. No, we don’t need one.

However, I would suggest an upgrade to the search feature. I always have better luck finding what I am looking for by using a Google site search, than the internal search feature.

And instead of a Wiki, how about a sticky section on site features, ie. How to post pictures (from both inside and external photo storage), if I am missing something on the search feature, how to work pointed searches for specific posters and content.

Suggestions are just that, and should you decide they are worth working on, whenever you can.

Bob C.

Hear hear Bob(s) (https://www.largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-wink.gif)

I would love to see just ONE thread on how to post pictures, etc, and delete all the redundant and old threads that only lead a newbie astray.

Might take a bit more policing, but how many times have people answered the same question (and not always with the right answer!!)…

Greg

I like the idea of an improved search engine, or maybe just a sticky that tells you how to use Google (or DuckDuckGo). One of the reasons I created an article of my build threads was to be able to find my stuff. It would be nice to be able to find build logs for others in a similar way.

OK, not doing this. On to the next bad idea.

Bob McCown said:

OK, not doing this. On to the next bad idea.

Wait…can’t we beat on this dead horse just a little longer??? (https://www.largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-foot-in-mouth.gif)

Still waiting for that new popcorn machine and pizza oven in the chat bar… and let me know if you need any more bad ideas…Rooster and I got a thousand of them…

Us West coast guys have trouble when you East coast guys get off at 9pm… we’re barely home after fighting traffic…

We need more East coast night owls. (https://www.largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-laughing.gif)

Greg

Greg, that can be difficult when us East Coast folks are already working while you Left Coast folks are still cutting 'Z’s…

Bob McCown said:

OK, not doing this. On to the next bad idea.

Bob, no, you’re instincts are bang on. Correct me if I’m wrong, but you’re suggesting something more formal and organized than the regular threads.

I agree with Korm, Greg, and the others, that a Wiki asks too much.

But, as Greg implied, is there a way to take a lengthy build or history or other focused thread, strip it of personal interaction / etc., and convert / preserve it into an “article” or “article thread” of some sort? And have a PDF version available? There’s probably tons of those kinds of threads to “mine,” and they could be organized into some clear and orderly folder structure for all to use. In a sense, you’d be acting as the publisher for all the thread authors.

===>Cliffy

Umm… the Articles forum? I would think you could ask Bob special dispensation there… I don’t know if there are tools to limit the posts in a thread to just the thread starter (would think that might be easy in the software)

Greg

I thought that was what the ‘Report’ button was for. If it gets used properly, it will do it’s job. Bob made that clear at the outset of this whole ‘bring back the forum’. Bob made it clear that if the same person was reported several times, even by the same person. he would look into it. No special anything required.

As for software to parse out only relevant posts to a build thread, it is a nice idea, but not practical in practice. I have a PDF file on my webspace that I concatenated from another forum, and got the OP’s permission to post on my site. I am sure if someone put the effort to do as I did, I am sure they would give permission to post on the ‘Articles’ sub-forum.

I am hoping BD’s next subject to tackle will be the site search. That will make finding those build threads we are all looking for easier to find.

Stan Cedarleaf said:

Korm Kormsen said:

  1. a wiki needs to be maintained - you’re looking for more work?

  2. isn’t the forum itself an archive of wisdom?

  3. who would you expect to write there? - people like Greg? he writes here, in other forums and on his own website already.

or people like cliff? those who spend their time actually building something?

or people like ######, who know, how others should do it?..

if i would stand in your shoes, i would spare me the additional burden.

Very wise input… I would agree not to make it more work… The site changes are great… (https://www.largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-cool.gif)(https://www.largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-laughing.gif)(https://www.largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-laughing.gif)

Amen

Don’t know about a “Wiki” seems like most of those are more full of crap than anything else but not my call.

I think a sight tutorial section is long overdue as mentioned above. For new comers and old hands alike to have a reference to posting pictures, using freight shed, which is better for a build log, general forums or the article section and several other similar questions. I have been a member here for several years and still don’t know the answer to most of the above questions, but then I am not very bright(https://www.largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-frown.gif)

Just something to consider

Rick