Alright, if this exists, please point me to it. If it doesn't, what do we need to get it going?
I found this, but wasn't impressed: http://guns.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page
It doesn't come close to having the depth of knowledge that these forums do.
I'm not talking about a dry wiki-type site that just lists known firearms and gives stats on them (like the one I found); I want to see a site that has the usefulness and breadth of these forums, but with the organization of Wikipedia. Basically a site where the articles are distilled versions of these threads.
Imagine if you wanted to learn about something like "reloading 9mm ammo"...currently you have two choices (or a combination of the two):
Eventually your hard work (research) and/or the hard work of others (people responding to your new thread) would commonly yield the following useful items:
I'm sure there are other things we usually find in the responses to a post, but those are some I could easily think of.
Now, imagine you could simply look up an article on a wiki site that encapsulates the gist of all of those threads on that one subject. The article could have subsections like:
All assertions would (just like Wikipedia) need to have citations/references. Some references could simply be a link to a thread on a site like this, especially if it has a poll. Just put the assertion in context.
Now, like Wikipedia, there would be some articles that would have to be protected with some safeguards and/or policed (like political topics are policed/safeguarded on Wikipedia). I'm thinking of an article that is on the topic of "9mm vs. .45 cal" or "Taurus Revolvers."
But wouldn't it be awesome to have somewhat definite articles on those subjects that pop up all the time? We could still debate them until we are blue in the face on here, but there could be a well-organized article that is maintained by all (and safeguarded by moderators). That article could present all of the (common) data and opinions in a balanced manner.
The forums would still be awesome for socializing, seeking specific info, etc. (And don't forget the humorous anecdotes.) But there would also now be a great resource (the wiki site) full of core knowledge.
If we did it (hint, hint owners of THR), I would imagine seeing this response often to a new thread: "Not this topic again, we really need to start an article on this topic in the wiki part of the site..." And then that member could go start an article on it.
What do you all think?
I found this, but wasn't impressed: http://guns.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page
It doesn't come close to having the depth of knowledge that these forums do.
I'm not talking about a dry wiki-type site that just lists known firearms and gives stats on them (like the one I found); I want to see a site that has the usefulness and breadth of these forums, but with the organization of Wikipedia. Basically a site where the articles are distilled versions of these threads.
Imagine if you wanted to learn about something like "reloading 9mm ammo"...currently you have two choices (or a combination of the two):
- Research site after site, thread after thread...If you are looking for a general understanding/starting point, this method can be useful.
- Begin a new thread and ask a question...This is very effective if you have searched in vain for a specific problem/solution.
Eventually your hard work (research) and/or the hard work of others (people responding to your new thread) would commonly yield the following useful items:
- Posts that give a general overview of the topic.
- Common issues and problems encountered by members and their solutions.
- Links to articles on blogs/professional reviews (well-organized content).
- Links to epic and/or very useful threads already existing on this question/issue (this is sometimes given rudely or nicely, for example [rudely]: "try searching next time, but for now, here is a link to a...").
- Humorous anecdotes
- A list of products, manufacturers, etc. that they can consider for their wants/needs.
- Opinions, opinions, opinions. These can range from ones that are more objective (thoughtful pros and cons) to vitriolic rants.
- Other subjects you might consider searching that are related.
I'm sure there are other things we usually find in the responses to a post, but those are some I could easily think of.
Now, imagine you could simply look up an article on a wiki site that encapsulates the gist of all of those threads on that one subject. The article could have subsections like:
- Overview
- Common Problems and Solutions
- Products and Manufacturers (we could include ratings based on polls, average product ratings on ecommerce sites, etc.)
- Pros and Cons (a balanced view of common opinions)
- Further Reading (links to articles, reviews, epic threads, and even a wikipedia article; pops in new window)
- See Also (related topics).
All assertions would (just like Wikipedia) need to have citations/references. Some references could simply be a link to a thread on a site like this, especially if it has a poll. Just put the assertion in context.
Now, like Wikipedia, there would be some articles that would have to be protected with some safeguards and/or policed (like political topics are policed/safeguarded on Wikipedia). I'm thinking of an article that is on the topic of "9mm vs. .45 cal" or "Taurus Revolvers."
But wouldn't it be awesome to have somewhat definite articles on those subjects that pop up all the time? We could still debate them until we are blue in the face on here, but there could be a well-organized article that is maintained by all (and safeguarded by moderators). That article could present all of the (common) data and opinions in a balanced manner.
The forums would still be awesome for socializing, seeking specific info, etc. (And don't forget the humorous anecdotes.) But there would also now be a great resource (the wiki site) full of core knowledge.
If we did it (hint, hint owners of THR), I would imagine seeing this response often to a new thread: "Not this topic again, we really need to start an article on this topic in the wiki part of the site..." And then that member could go start an article on it.
What do you all think?
