• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

TypeC Wiki project - general discussion

G

garbage

Guest
usernames "typology" and "mbti" were already taken wtf

Here's a barebones site: Typology Central Wiki. It's sparse and disorganized right now, of course. If we like this idea, I'll clean it up. (Or someone else can--after all, it's a wiki)

Guests can edit pages, so that people aren't disinclined to contribute by having to sign up for an account.

And if this takes off and the admins want control over the site, so be it--I'll gladly hand over the reigns. Random, if you think this approach is the way to go, and if you want the master username/password, slide a PM my way.
 

Randomnity

insert random title here
Joined
May 8, 2007
Messages
9,485
MBTI Type
ISTP
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Oh I'm happy to let that one be your baby if you're up for taking care of it, at least until you're tired of it. Organizing the type descriptions will be more than enough effort for my liking, lol.

Besides, I like the idea of this being a community project rather than an "admin" project. I guess I'm technically running the other wiki pages (except the intp one) but that's only because someone has to, and I don't mind. I don't plan on exerting any editorial power beyond that of any other member, though.
 
R

ReflecTcelfeR

Guest
Why not make a test while we're at it? Questions about each function are created by those who are 1.) extremely confident in their type and/or 2.) understand the functions well. If we could get a test that we could all take which is firmly based in motivations and not behavior we could know who peoples actual types are and then they can be sure to write in the appropriate page.
 
G

garbage

Guest
I want it to be a community-based project, too, definitely--I was adminning for the same reason you are: someone has to.

I think that all that's different in our ideas is that mine starts from a central page and "spreads out" to different pages that includes type descriptions, where yours is a collection of pages based upon type descriptions.

I think we should settle on one implementation or the other, though. If people like the idea of a type-based focus, then your implementation works well; if people like the idea of a generalized MBTI/Jung wiki with type descriptions being pages within the wiki, then wikia might be the better choice. I have no problem whatsoever discarding the wikia site if we want a type-based focus.

I'd love to get some more thoughts on which way we should go with this..

:popc1:
 

Randomnity

insert random title here
Joined
May 8, 2007
Messages
9,485
MBTI Type
ISTP
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
So having a "general" page that has links to the types, as well as information that applies to all types? I definitely like that idea - I'd prefer to have types on different pages just for ease of reading and simplicity.

So your wiki site thing also allows for different pages? In which case I guess it's just a matter of functional differences between the two sites? I don't know anything at all about this wikispaces thing but it seems that it lets you host up to 2gig which should be plenty (assuming text-only), for free, and surprisingly also without ads. Do you have to pay for your site?

btw I registered "typologycentral" on the wikispaces, too, just for fun. Might come in handy for something. Linking to the descriptions or whatnot. :shrug:
 
G

garbage

Guest
Or does your wiki site thing also allow for different pages?

Yup, the main site currently has links to completely separate pages for each type and function. We can edit the main site as we go to provide a better "table of contents."

We can even create "side pages," such as, oh, "Thoughts on ENFPs by ISTPs" or "Beebe."

Pages can also be categorized, so, say, the INTP description page can be categorized as "NT," "INTP," and "Type description."

In which case I guess it's just a matter of functional differences between the two sites? I don't know anything at all about this wikispaces thing but it seems that it lets you host up to 2gig which should be plenty, for free, and surprisingly also without ads. Do you have to pay for your site?

Nope, Wikia's completely free. There's some paid Wikia+ option that comes with more features, though.
 

strychnine

All Natural! All Good!
Joined
Jun 23, 2010
Messages
895
a generalized MBTI/Jung wiki with type descriptions being pages within the wiki

I support this, though I don't have any specific opposition to the other method. I prefer having one wiki with multiple pages, so that it's searchable, more easily linkable, etc. With wikispaces, correct me if I'm wrong, but it looks like if you're on the xxxx page and you want to see type yyyy you have to change the url (which is obviously fine for people who know typology, but I think at some point it would be helpful to those who are just starting to type themselves, to see all the descriptions together).

Edit:

Why not make a test while we're at it? Questions about each function are created by those who are 1.) extremely confident in their type and/or 2.) understand the functions well. If we could get a test that we could all take which is firmly based in motivations and not behavior we could know who peoples actual types are and then they can be sure to write in the appropriate page.

I think this is a good idea. With existing online tests, I find each test will have a handful of good questions while the rest suck. Even if we just recombined existing tests by selecting the best questions from each, it would be progress. I think your idea of using the functions is best though. That one test everyone takes now still kinda sucks
 

Randomnity

insert random title here
Joined
May 8, 2007
Messages
9,485
MBTI Type
ISTP
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
cool! I think either site would work for us then. Maybe if anyone has experience with either one they can weigh in on which might be better for us?

I think this is a good idea. With existing online tests, I find each test will have a handful of good questions while the rest suck. Even if we just recombined existing tests by selecting the best questions from each, it would be progress. I think your idea of using the functions is best though. That one test everyone takes now still kinda sucks
Yeah I like the test idea, too. Maybe either make a thread about it here, or a wiki page about it? I think discussion might work better in a thread, then the finished test could go up on the wiki?
 
R

ReflecTcelfeR

Guest
I think this is a good idea. With existing online tests, I find each test will have a handful of good questions while the rest suck. Even if we just recombined existing tests by selecting the best questions from each, it would be progress. I think your idea of using the functions is best though. That one test everyone takes now still kinda sucks

Agreed! I've always wanted to try something like this out, but only until now has their been so much motivation!

Yeah I like the test idea, too. Maybe either make a thread about it here, or a wiki page about it? I think discussion might work better in a thread, then the finished test could go up on the wiki?

I'll start a thread!
 

entropie

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 24, 2008
Messages
16,767
MBTI Type
entp
Enneagram
783
Basically tough to decide between wikia and wikispaces. They are pretty much alike. I defintly like to have an index page but you prolly can do that on wikispaces too. Wikia has ads running, I dont like that too much.

But since we have already an index set up on wikia let's use it, if the page would totally suck we can change it later.
 
G

garbage

Guest
I didn't realize wikia had ads, as I use Adblock :doh: I can see where ads would turn people off.

So, what do we need in a wiki package?
  • Allow accounts for individuals
  • Maybe allow the option for guests to edit; this is low priority, though
  • Simple formatting, such as bold and headings
  • Ability to organize type descriptions, function descriptions, resources (e.g. books and links), and other random thoughts on type (e.g. "T women" or "ENFPs' thoughts on ENTJs")
  • Categorize and/or tag articles (e.g. "Type description," "Resource"...)
  • Easily accessible and not too annoying to the end user, focus on content (e.g. ads are a disadvantage here)
  • Allow for some administrative control by select users (e.g. to set options for the entire wiki)

From this perspective, Wikia seems fine to me, but let me know if there's anything that I'm missing that we want in a wiki package, and I'll check it out. I haven't delved into Wikispaces too much yet.

Speaking of, our alternatives seem to be:
  • Wikia
  • Wikispaces
  • Server-hosted application (including pmwiki, dokuwiki, and others)

Wikia does seem good, but I'll check into wikispaces when I have time.

On a side note.. I don't think each type needs its own wiki. There are a lot of common elements between the types, and we also want to open up discussion about typology in general. We do, of course, need a way to organize or tag descriptions by type where necessary, though.
 
Top