Re: Apple2Guide.net wiki: A small problem...

["Smohn Jith" <robwiles@optonline.net>]

Why you should contribute?  Because I would like to see $FD8E in a wiki with 
what the ROM location does, how it works, and example code.  I would like to 
see Prodos MLI calls, GS/OS calls, Toolbox calls, and all the techniques 
that aiiaddict is trying to resurrect in some kind of searchable database. 
Wikipedia is not conducive because it's to generalized....Do I care whether 
the //gs came with xxx and yyy, no because I already know that....


"PZ" <skierpaul@yahoo.com> wrote in message 
1139122205.629422.268400@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com">news:1139122205.629422.268400@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> I'm not denying that you've implemented a "real" wiki.  Its just that
> it seems that you're trying to reinvent the wheel.  Why try to
> duplicate entries from Wikipedia on the Apple II, Apple IIGS, Applle
> IIc, 65816, GS/OS, Prodos, peripherals, etc when these are already
> extensively developed in Wikipedia.  It just doesn't make sense to me.
> Besides, many tens of thousands of people already use Wikipedia as a
> resource, however your wiki will only be used by people who stumble on
> it.  I'm not knocking the info you already had on the site, I think
> your Apple II Guide was a nice resource.  I'm just not sold on why I
> should contribute to your wiki rather than to Wikipedia if I have to
> choose between the two.
>
> - Paul
>
>
> Gabriel wrote:
>> PZ, the Apple II wiki is as "real" a wiki as the Wikipedia-- It use the
>> same software and its own database. If you want to contribute to the
>> Wikipedia that's great, but I don't see why we can't have our own Apple
>> II-specific wiki. Not everything has to be thrown together into the
>> wikipedia. When a user comes to Apple2Guide.net he is looking for Apple
>> II info, and that's all that he will find-- in detail. He doesn't need
>> to be encumbered by the non-related material he would find on the
>> Wikipedia.
>>
>> But if you can't even think of Apple2Guide.net as a "real" wiki, then
>> of course, you wouldn't see the point at all.
>