WikiLifecycle

This page is a summary of the ideas generated in the breakout workshop session on Wiki Lifecycle, an the afternoon of the Wiki Workshop on 8 July 2009.

PLEASE FEEL FREE TO ADD TO THIS, OR INSERT QUESTIONS FOR OTHERS TO ANSWER

We thought six stages could be identified. These are named and described briefly below. toc

1. Identifying the need
People don't always realise there is one. There is a risk of setting up a wiki just 'because it seems like a good idea' rather than thinking through the need and implications of that. Ideally you would be looking at the cost-benefit of a wiki, but that may well need to be a subjective judgement if hard figures aren't available.

2. Deciding to adopt a wiki

 * When the case is made the expenditure and return, whether financial or otherwise, can be projected.
 * It is important to identify the scope of the problem/opportunity - or the scale of the contribution - that the wiki is expected to make so that contributors have a notion of the likely quality and quality of what they write should be. Seed content (See point 3) helps give this kind of context.
 * A curator or editor needs to be found (there should be someone to nurture the content). It may be helpful to identify other roles such as 'leader', 'facilitator' etc.

3. Setting up and commissioning

 * Some personalisation, perhaps even skinning though this can often be very minimal.
 * Need to choose appropriate platform [link to useful advice on this?], which could be a third party provider, or obtaining and configuring appropriate software and server.
 * Seed content/structure should be added (starting a wiki with one blank page gives potential users nothing; headings or links show the way that the content could develop).
 * N.B. the design of the site can influence whether people take up the wiki and use it. This could be the attractiveness, how easy it is to see how to edit a page, whether the structure makes it easy to know where to add information, etc.

4. Launch
An opportunity to find people who should be taking part and talk to them face to face with a demo:
 * getting their attention, and
 * showing them that the collaborative writing task need not be daunting in its own right.

5. Sustaining
The natural life of a useful wiki, once it's up, could be anything from days to decades. This will depend on the circumstances of its creation and intended use. Lack of editing activity or page hits might not indicate that it will never be useful or active again.

6. Shutting down
Closing a wiki down shouldn't be taken as a sign of failure; if it has delivered what it was intended to then obviously it is a success. If the discussion has moved on or the need abated, there's no reason why a wiki has to stay in place.
 * It may be worthwhile for a curator/editor to write a precis of the wiki's purpose and the content in its final form.
 * It may be worth attempting to incorporate the content into other projects/wikis - or this may already have happened - in which case it will be best if the 'dead' wiki remains accessible.
 * It may be possible to archive the wiki and remove it, but it may be easier and more useful to lock the wiki for editing purposes and leave it online.