4 ms·
I think the default media wiki implementation suffers from there being no nice "page of contents" - Wikipedia is the same but many articles have a lot of manual
by mattlondon 2y ago
I think the default media wiki implementation suffers from there being no nice "page of contents" - Wikipedia is the same but many articles have a lot of manually curated "see also" or "other foos from bar" type table of links that helps a lot, but without it, it feels to me like the default discoverability and search on media wiki are terrible.
So if you are setting up your own wiki then you need to spend a lot of effort to create and maintain the ToC/landing page and build those interconnections up, and just hope Google indexes everything so you can search etc (... and if you have an internal wiki at work then you are basically screwed because Google won't index that). Otherwise you write your articles and they "disappear" and are not readily found.
At least that was my experience of working with media wiki and dokuwiki - the sites always felt "empty" even if you had teams of people contributing articles, because it was hard to see what was there in a meaningful way. And so they always felt moribund and abandoned even if they actually weren't.
Patiently waiting for someone to create an overhauled UX. Potentially one that does some sort of clever LLM-powered hierarchy so people can browse and peruse page hierarchies sliced-and-diced by some sort of topic/area-of-interest. So say I enter "engines" or something as my area of I treat, the LLM auto-categorises the pages into a sensible hierarchy that I can view, then I change my term to e.g. "steam engines" and it recalculates the hierarchy and shows something sensible for that etc.