Try as I might, and even with half the company espousing their virtues, I have yet to drink the wiki Kool-Aid. I suspect it's more an implementation detail than anything, as most of the wikis I've seen seem to be aimed toward wiki-lovers (and, thus, have some rather odd usage and interface conventions). Perhaps when someone creates a wiki-for-the-rest-of-us I'll enjoy using them more.
If I were in your position, I'd probably go with a weblogging engine with modified templates. Despite appearances to the contrary, these tools can be pretty powerful, and aren't just a place to say what your dog ate for breakfast.
I wouldn't do much of anything of any sizable scale with manually created HTML pages, though. Just about every site I've created since 2000 or so has either been based on a readily available CMS, generated on the fly using a single PHP/Perl script I wrote, or was written to disk by a single PHP/Perl script I wrote. With all of these options, odds are very good that a database of some kind actually held the 'content' of my site. In each case, my end goal was to be able to make global changes to a lot of files with the least amount of work.
- Jeff @ DreamHost
- DH Discussion Forum Admin