Talk:Wikireview

A flaw with Wikireview

I think that Wikipedia can include a neutral summary of the book/issue/thing, as well as a summary of critical reviews, including links to reviews. It seems that Wikireview is proposed to allow opinion to be added, but then how are contrasting opinions going to be handled in a coherent manner? Since coherent prose may be impossible when opinion is added, this proposal may be nothing more than Wikibate focused on a narrow set of topics. If a person wants to write a review of a book, they can set up a blog. AdamRetchless 01:09, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Someone could easily start a blog, but it probably would not get that large. However, if we have many people from around the world working on it, it can become a very large index of opinion, rather than many smaller ones. You certainly do have a point that Wikireview requires a NPOV part in each article, however. I'll be sure to add that. Messedrocker 14:27, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Not totally agree, there's several variations on 'review'-subject, think about these ..

(I'm sure a non-exhaustive listing):

Formal reviews, among a board, similar to RFC and IETF, with a pre-determined set of members and limited in time with fixed form of feedback comments. This can be elaborated to types covered by what is known as 'Document Review and Approval' in traditional Document Management area.
Informal reviews, among a wider community, but limited in time, useful for Project Scoping (in 'Open Software' projects), necessary to be scoped prior to initiation.
Feedback reviews, much like a debate where everyone has their own opinion (this is the one form, I believe, you suggest can be used at all times).
Document Approval (covered slightly above) for retrieving formal acceptance (by proxy, perhaps) to a fixed set of members in a community, such as a approval board, again within a limited time frame.

Well, there is definely more to it than this, but I suggest to 'design' the information model behind WikiReview, before starting a development. For example, for a given document type (media type, I suppose), review feedback has to be moderated if the feedback is meant to be incorporated into the object being reviewed. A talk of Roles is also important (Reviewer (Feedback Evaluator), Editor (maybe not the Author), Moderator, Bureaucrat (as Wiki defines it, I suppose) and so on.

So I warmly suggest the WikiReview to be progressed. Regards Peter Rosenberg IT Consultant

Reviews Wikicity

As a "pilot project", maybe people could start some reviews at the Reviews Wikicity. --Memenen 15:18, 16 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipinions

My idea might be a subset of the Wikireview concept, or maybe it could just be a different name for Wikireview.

I would like to see a wikipinions.org site set up. The idea would be that people could freely post their opinions on products, companies, institutions, and possibly even public figures. Like epinions.com but better because it would be wiki and not a commercial site.

Jonathan Kovaciny 15:38, 16 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid about legal implications though. I vividly remember when BrickBay was threatened by eBay and changed their name to the less cute BrickLink. Certainly I think the name sounds great as it has that catchy wiki project ring to it, but I am worried about epinions becoming angry. Garrett 03:07, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Allowing reviews of personal work, a bad idea?

I think allowing any idiot to publish something and expect people to review it is opening up a real can of worms. With Wikipedia we have a heap of trouble keeping nonnotable things out of the wiki, but what safeguards would there be if you're explicitly allowing people to add their own stuff?

I don't think we should allow that, there needs to be some sort of standard of quality or notability or something. Of course the "will never get reviews" proviso covers a lot of this stuff, but I'd like these things to be able to be "shot on sight" by admins instead of dragged through a Vfd with all of its inherent problems.

Of course this is all my own opinion, but then again that's what this wiki is all about isn't it? :) Anyway, see what you think. Garrett 03:24, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikireview example

I've drafted a sample at User:Garrett/Wikireview example. It's missing a packshot, but other than that you get the idea.

Each product type would of course have its own unique rating categories, but the head rating box design would be made universal by using a parent template.

Anyway, see what you think. The sooner we actually make a start on this project the better. Garrett 04:52, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]