On Dec 15, 2010, at 6:10 PM, Krzysztof Kosiński wrote:
A wiki does not preclude a structured approach to information, particularly with newer version of MediaWiki - see wikibooks.org.
The problem of insufficient documentation will not magically disappear if we move it somewhere else. What you perceive as a problem with the wiki is in fact a problem of insufficient manpower. It doesn't really matter where the documentation is stored; storing it on the wiki has a distinct advantage in that it has a low barrier of entry, so anyone can improve it. If we remove the incomplete documentation from the wiki we might end up not with better documentation, but no documentation at all.
What is needed is a concerted effort to organize the information available on the wiki, and remove outdated information.
Fair enough. Taking the wikibooks.org example, their information is clearly laid out and organized into easily readable sections, with drafts clearly defined as such. Making edits is easy and anonymous.
The current wiki is difficult to navigate (visually), and how to edit is not too obvious (instructions hidden behind WikiSyntax I believe). Getting back to the main website is confusing. I would gladly help tidy up wiki documentation but don't feel in a position to do so (I use Inkscape daily but am just a user - I don't know much about the technicalities of the project nor about writing/editing user documentation).
Also, some information may be easier (or more appropriate) to organize on the main website (long sections of general information). There is some good content but when it's on a wiki it can feel like unstable (therefore unreliable) information to a new user.
Cheers, duckgoesoink