Back from a long time of doing other stuff, I thought I'd suggest the creation of an online lexicon to bunkers.
We see all the time bunker drawings and photos being posted in threads here. While this is great in every way, the end result is total disorder.
To counter disorder, I would like to suggest a Wiki dedicated to bunkers of the Third Reich. Apart from Regelbauten, it'd have descriptions tables, photos and schematics of parts used in bunkers (steel plates, doors etc), bunker weapons of all sorts (MG's, mortars, artillery and others designed for use in bunkers or which saw use in bunkers), equipment (ventilation, sleeping arrangements, stoves etc) and anything else that is needed.
While there are several ambitious attempts to create such collections and archives, none of them are complete or even intended to be made complete. Another major drawback of these sites is that you have to be a webmaster to add, or correct, information.
This is where a Wiki comes in handy. A Wiki is based on the principle of sharing knowledge and letting everyone read, add and edit the contents of a large knowledge bank. There are several examples of operational Wikis. To mention a few thriving ones, there's http://www.wikipedia.org and http://wiki.beyondunreal.com/wiki/, the later of which I've been using since the start.
The first thing people will think about when reading "everyone" and "edit" in the same sentance is abuse. This is in fact solved in the simplest way - As anyone can sabotage, anyone can restore a page to the earlier edit. These edits are saved for a set period of time, usually a month or so, and anything in these edits can be restored or read until the time limit's expired. You can highlight the changes and compare edits with just a click or two.
While most kids abusing a Wiki gives up once they see everything they are changing is restored as soon as anyone sees it, there are those who are persistant. This is, also, easily countered by having administrators. Admins are the only ones capable of permanently removing a page, and also have the rights to ban a user. If you want to make sure only people interested in bunkers can add, you can integrate an account system as on this forum for anyone wishing to add, still letting anyone read the Wiki.
Users can ask questions and comment on parts of the text on the actual page and once an answer has been recieved, the answer will be integrated into the text by anyone passing by.
Users have their own Personal Page, where they can put links to their own homepage, telling why they aren't around much or having private discussions with people. There's of course a limit to what the PP will be allowed to contain, but those rules are obvious and used on any most sites.
As you can see, the few drawbacks to a Wiki on Third Reich Bunkers wouldn't have any real drawbacks as long as at least 20 people are adding to it. I think the activity here indicates the interest is high enough.
So, what say you? At the moment, I don't know enough to set a Wiki up, but the base for it is free and can be found at http://www.usemod.com/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?UseModWiki, and I'm sure someone here knows Perl. If not, I'll set one up once I've gone through with my programming education.
Note that the entire Equipment section of these forums could be made into a Wiki for a more organized source of information and could answer most common questions which are frequently asked here.
For the curious, I think this FAQ covers a lot: http://wiki.beyondunreal.com/wiki/Wiki_FAQ
Suggesting the creation of a "Bunker Wiki"
-
LegalAssassin
- Member
- Posts: 353
- Joined: 25 Oct 2003, 18:24
- Location: Kalmar, Sweden
Hello!
Interesting topic, but I have a few comments.
Until now, very few people ask questions regarding bunkers. Since this is my field of interest, I decided to start some stickies here, where those who have the interest can post their photos. This is not an ideal way to do it, but I`m afraid it`s the only way to do it on this forum.
The upcoming bunkerpages which is the result of the "regelbau collection" will hopefully be nice and structured
Info from several members are collected in the same thread, and later some volunteer(s) will make an article of it.
I fear that it could turn into major disorder if everyone were able to edit those articles....
Wiki is a good tool, but I don`t think it`s 100% for this kind of collection.
Several good sources are not 100% similar, so how should we know what to keep or not?
Again, if I add something, and you find a differnet source??
I surely have no time to start up such an project, but I`ll be happy to give it a try if it gets started....
In the end, Marcus is the one to answer this question
EE
Interesting topic, but I have a few comments.
While this is great in every way, the end result is total disorder.
Until now, very few people ask questions regarding bunkers. Since this is my field of interest, I decided to start some stickies here, where those who have the interest can post their photos. This is not an ideal way to do it, but I`m afraid it`s the only way to do it on this forum.
The upcoming bunkerpages which is the result of the "regelbau collection" will hopefully be nice and structured
Then comes the problem with copyright... We can not use other than our own drawings and photos. Steelplates, copulars and interior will also be a part of the new pages. As for weapons, most types were used, but only a handfull was designed for use in bunkers. The M19 is allready there, and more will follow in the future.descriptions tables, photos and schematics of parts used in bunkers (steel plates, doors etc), bunker weapons of all sorts (MG's, mortars, artillery and others designed for use in bunkers or which saw use in bunkers)
Much of the info in the AH Factbook comes from threads in this forum.Another major drawback of these sites is that you have to be a webmaster to add, or correct, information.
Info from several members are collected in the same thread, and later some volunteer(s) will make an article of it.
I fear that it could turn into major disorder if everyone were able to edit those articles....
Wiki is a good tool, but I don`t think it`s 100% for this kind of collection.
Several good sources are not 100% similar, so how should we know what to keep or not?
everything they are changing is restored as soon as anyone sees it
Again, if I add something, and you find a differnet source??
I say its a good and interesting idea, but I also see some new problems arriving which we haven`t got with the way things are done today.....So, what say you?
I surely have no time to start up such an project, but I`ll be happy to give it a try if it gets started....
In the end, Marcus is the one to answer this question
EE
Hello all
As Erik says, its a interesting idea !!!
A possibility could maybe, and i say maybe - be to move the Different bunker treads ( Fortifications, Luftwaffe radars etc. etc related treads ) out of the Equipment tread into a new Fortification tread with some structured "undertreads", so that it gets a tread of its own !!!!
Then make some relevant subtitles and / or categories to put the items, photos, articles, etc. fx. Heer, Marine, Luftwaffe with subtitles as Regelbau, Radar, HKB, MKB and so on.
Then we would get some more structure on the different things - which today are spread all around.
Just an idea, but what do you all say to that proposal.
Regards
Kurt
kstdk.
As Erik says, its a interesting idea !!!
A possibility could maybe, and i say maybe - be to move the Different bunker treads ( Fortifications, Luftwaffe radars etc. etc related treads ) out of the Equipment tread into a new Fortification tread with some structured "undertreads", so that it gets a tread of its own !!!!
Then make some relevant subtitles and / or categories to put the items, photos, articles, etc. fx. Heer, Marine, Luftwaffe with subtitles as Regelbau, Radar, HKB, MKB and so on.
Then we would get some more structure on the different things - which today are spread all around.
Just an idea, but what do you all say to that proposal.
Regards
Kurt
kstdk.
-
AvB
- Financial supporter
- Posts: 3428
- Joined: 20 Jun 2004, 01:00
- Location: Utrecht, Netherlands
- Contact:
As Erik already mentioned, not a lot of questions are asked about bunkers. I also encounter this with my own website. I've built up an entire collection of armoured parts used in German bunkers and never had any feedback on it. There must be some mistakes but I never had one correction sent to me. I don't think the community is big enough and after some time only a couple of people will be editing the Wiki.
-
LegalAssassin
- Member
- Posts: 353
- Joined: 25 Oct 2003, 18:24
- Location: Kalmar, Sweden
The problem with making changes on a normal site is that you have to actually contact the webmaster. The webmaster then has to check his mail and make edits to the site, upload the page and then it's done.
I, for one, never contact authors unless I'm extremely interested in hearing more or recieve a clarification. The reason to this being that I really can't be bothered to open my Hotmail account, write the letter and then, most often, see no change to the site or even recieving mails going along the lines of "Shut up! We know better than you", but written in a more friendly manner. What the mail means remains the same, however.
Instead, on a Wiki, if I see a spelling error or would like to add something to help out, I can do so straight away without having to bug the admin and wait for him to do it.
Also, as you said, it might not be a lot of questions asked, but so what? Once it's been up for six months and there's a solid amount of contributors we wont have to search the web, this forum or ask someone if they have a drawing of R501 etc, we can just find it straight away.
As for splitting it into new sections of the forums, it's bound to become chaotic. I've seen a forum for ammo collectors doing it and I usually end up being more confused than before looking. Then we might as well have it this way.
The bunkerthreads now consists of... 40 pages or something? I'm not sure about everyone else, but I find it almost impossible to browse through that much "junk" information to find what I need.
When I know those 40 pages with 700 posts could be 80 pages with 100 posts, a catalog structure and interconnecting links, I tend to find the Wiki version preferable.
Anyway, it's just a suggestion, but I fail to see a reason not to do it, aside from the amount of space it'd need. Then again, the only way it wouldn't take up space is to make cut information away, as sites for said reasons tend to do.
AvB, what's the adress to your page?
I, for one, never contact authors unless I'm extremely interested in hearing more or recieve a clarification. The reason to this being that I really can't be bothered to open my Hotmail account, write the letter and then, most often, see no change to the site or even recieving mails going along the lines of "Shut up! We know better than you", but written in a more friendly manner. What the mail means remains the same, however.
Instead, on a Wiki, if I see a spelling error or would like to add something to help out, I can do so straight away without having to bug the admin and wait for him to do it.
Also, as you said, it might not be a lot of questions asked, but so what? Once it's been up for six months and there's a solid amount of contributors we wont have to search the web, this forum or ask someone if they have a drawing of R501 etc, we can just find it straight away.
As for splitting it into new sections of the forums, it's bound to become chaotic. I've seen a forum for ammo collectors doing it and I usually end up being more confused than before looking. Then we might as well have it this way.
The bunkerthreads now consists of... 40 pages or something? I'm not sure about everyone else, but I find it almost impossible to browse through that much "junk" information to find what I need.
When I know those 40 pages with 700 posts could be 80 pages with 100 posts, a catalog structure and interconnecting links, I tend to find the Wiki version preferable.
Anyway, it's just a suggestion, but I fail to see a reason not to do it, aside from the amount of space it'd need. Then again, the only way it wouldn't take up space is to make cut information away, as sites for said reasons tend to do.
AvB, what's the adress to your page?
-
AvB
- Financial supporter
- Posts: 3428
- Joined: 20 Jun 2004, 01:00
- Location: Utrecht, Netherlands
- Contact:
That's http://bunkersite.com
About mailing to web authors, you should really do that.
For some reason people take our info for granted even if they have their own thoughts on it. I even try to encourage people to mail me by asking questions in some pages, with a link to our mail address, can't be easier I guess. I'd rather have an answer to my question either positive or negative instead of havening nothing at all.
About mailing to web authors, you should really do that.
For some reason people take our info for granted even if they have their own thoughts on it. I even try to encourage people to mail me by asking questions in some pages, with a link to our mail address, can't be easier I guess. I'd rather have an answer to my question either positive or negative instead of havening nothing at all.
Well, you all rise some good points, but starting a Wiki style would mean a total change of the AHF (Atleast the bunker part) as we know it....
This field of interest is just a drop in the ocean compared to the huge amount of other messages posted in this forum.
Lets say there are some 10-15 of us actually creating these topics and uploading our photos... Do you really think a Wiki would be justified only for us??
As long as people don`t participate in the threads, I don`t see why they should do it elsewhere. This would in general mean that the same bulk of 10-15 people make this Wiki, and it stays unchanged after we have written what we know.... Thats nearly the same as the web pages are today.
But please continue to post your views on this!
Erik E
This field of interest is just a drop in the ocean compared to the huge amount of other messages posted in this forum.
Lets say there are some 10-15 of us actually creating these topics and uploading our photos... Do you really think a Wiki would be justified only for us??
As long as people don`t participate in the threads, I don`t see why they should do it elsewhere. This would in general mean that the same bulk of 10-15 people make this Wiki, and it stays unchanged after we have written what we know.... Thats nearly the same as the web pages are today.
But please continue to post your views on this!
Erik E
-
Christian Ankerstjerne
- Forum Staff
- Posts: 14053
- Joined: 10 Mar 2002, 15:07
- Location: Denmark
- Contact:
-
LegalAssassin
- Member
- Posts: 353
- Joined: 25 Oct 2003, 18:24
- Location: Kalmar, Sweden
The current bunker section on AHF (see the link below) will be greatly expanded by the addition of material from some of the stickies here and the material will also be presented in a much more organized manner than is possible here in the forum, all under the guidance of Erik E, I'm sure it will become an excellent resource.
http://www.axishistory.com/index.php?id=1382
Personally I'm not in favour of using the Wiki concept, ironically for much the same reasons as you are in favour of it, that is anyone can change it without "bothering" an admin of some sort, this leads to a total lack of quality control and structure as any passerby can edit, add and remove material and considering some of the individuals who are interested in this era, I don't think that is such a good idea.
I'm of course aware of the possibilities of restoring the text to earlier versions, but to be honest, I'm sure I'm not the only one who have better things to do than to constantly clean up after troublemakers, some of whom can be very persistant, just look at some of the often banned members here.
/Marcus
http://www.axishistory.com/index.php?id=1382
Personally I'm not in favour of using the Wiki concept, ironically for much the same reasons as you are in favour of it, that is anyone can change it without "bothering" an admin of some sort, this leads to a total lack of quality control and structure as any passerby can edit, add and remove material and considering some of the individuals who are interested in this era, I don't think that is such a good idea.
I'm of course aware of the possibilities of restoring the text to earlier versions, but to be honest, I'm sure I'm not the only one who have better things to do than to constantly clean up after troublemakers, some of whom can be very persistant, just look at some of the often banned members here.
/Marcus