People sometimes sign what they write in wiki, usually like this. --JohnAbbe
Most of the time signing is unnecessary, for example if you're updating a link, fixing some grammar, or writing some new information or summary.
If a full-fledged conversation breaks out, it can help in tracking who said what.
Though for short conversations that aren't really personal, italics works fine.
We could ask Ward if he'd be willing for us to leave this here. (from the bottom of Wiki:ToSignOrNotToSign):
The ideas you enter here should be thought of as a gift to the community. Gifts in the physical world are sometimes improved by signatures. A photograph, a book, an original work of art, all of these take on more meaning when signed. The gift is expected to stay whole and perhaps even be revered. Some postings here are like that. But there are a lot of postings here that are more like a box of lego bricks - meant to be mixed in with the rest. You could sign each lego brick to make sure that its source were forever recognized. Or you could just let them go. A helping hand with a tough job is a gift too. But extracting too much recognition for the help detracts from the gift. The same happens here. I offer this simple test: do you have to refer to yourself to make your story whole? If so, a signature is probably appropriate. If not, try writing without including yourself. You might be surprised how that makes you feel. --WardCunningham