The problem with wikis...



  • Cyreph said:
    Possum said:
    I couldn't help but being amused by the alignment of these two topics in the forum.
    I don't know why I'm suddenly having such trouble adding images in posts.  Here's the Imgur link:

    For imgur, if it's a picture, add .jpg to the end of the page url, and if it's a gif, add .gif. If you test this, it will usually send you to a URL starting with i.imgur... Copy that link to the attached image button and voila.  :)
    Thanks for the tip!
  • lexmax said:
    Herdo said:
    @nagash You cannot just post a pic of an anime without the name!!!! :dizzy:
    Tell us! :3

    nagash said:
    Herdo said:
    nagash said:
    lexmax said:
    nagash said:
    you can do the loving and I will do the hating ^^
    You're such a loveable hater @nagash. Sometimes you let that inner grain of goodness shine right through.
    I think thats a fire ball. but I like your thinking 

    @nagash You cannot just post a pic of an anime without the name!!!! :dizzy:
    Tell us! :3
    I have no idea ^^

  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited June 2017
    Herdo said:
    Nyt said:
    Herdo said:
    @Freelancer @Nyt @Mykkala Well, I'd choosen the gamepedia wiki for a certain reason.
    I had bad experience with self-hosted community sides in the past. Something will - for 100% - end up in drama, mostly for some stupid reason.
    I, too, have experienced similar situations.  These efforts are typically new endeavors with a new group of people that is unfocused and lacking in credible content.  I have also seen quite the opposite, where community hosted wiki's are far superior than SaaS solutions.  If the wiki focuses on credible factual information, there is no room for opinions and drama.  
    Herdo said:
    However, both and are SaaS sites, powering many wikis - either as public organisation or as a company. Both have a major interest in keeping all their wikis alive. Arguments inside wiki teams will - in the worst case scenario - be handled by a super administrator.
    Of course they do, it's a revenue stream.  They're making $$$ off your effort.
    Herdo said:
    On the other hand, self-hosted wikis always come along with the founder (or later owner) having financial problems or a dispute with some other team members.
    I really don't care about pages having ads. If you provide content, ads are fine :P You somehow need to keep the servers running :)

    I think our team at the gamepedia wiki doesn't add much information due to the most being stand-alone statements from discord or live-streams. I guess most editors are waiting for the dev blogs to appear ^^

    We've been around for decades and have had no financial issues, ever.  You're just as much at risk with those 2 corporate SaaS, as they could experience financial issues or get acquired... or any other possible scenario that communities never face.  

    You seem to have a solid plan to add content to your wiki.  ;)

    Remember, you started this thread, with a relatively empty wiki.  What was your goal?  For other efforts to stop and flock to Gamepedia?  Why would cease to continue, when it has FAR more content and continuously adding as it becomes available?  We're obviously finding the content.
    Herdo said:
    @Freelancer You should clear the user list of your wiki ;)

    Further more, I'm a little bit scared why you are hiding important information: --> Empty :( --> Proxy :(

    Want to keep all your information private? ^^
    In case of one of the above "bad" scenarios happens? ;D

    ^^ Thanks for providing an example of stirring up drama. Apparently, it happens from gamepedia as well.

    Good luck, and have fun.
    This is indeed true :)

    I'm fine with a company making money ^^ Why not? :D

    Oh, you have been? ^^ You mean your team, or the wiki, or whoever? That's the point I was getting at with the "hiding important information" I was talking about ;)
    Who are "you"? :)

    Well, a plan is a plan :)

    To raise generell awareness of this topic (wikis) - that there are already existing wikis and to prevent from even more than the current 5 (I found) to be created ;)
    Rather join the existing wikis :)

    Remember, there is neither drama nor competition here :)
    For someone who says theyre not starting drama you sure are appearing to be starting drama. I pointed out key comparisons, empirically-measurable comparisons on content, citations, sources, and presentation. You brought up the "about" page and spam bots? Really? I linked game mechanic pages to compare, you dodged it.

    Curse is a business, their focus is advertising and making money. Our focus is the content and accuracy of said content - references, links, consistency. The "about" page is the least of our priorities. The about page serves to promote the authors, it has nothing to do with game mechanics. If we wanted to elevate the status of our authors wed have a forum signature etc. Thats just not us. We can agree to disagree there.

    Before you say your focus is content or the community, compare any page that is on actual game mechanics. Are you providing links referencing what you are posting? Is it complete? I invite anyone to make those comparisons. If i wanted to truly help the community, id not only make sure the information is there, but i wouldn't tell them "take my word for it". Id instead give references and links to the devs.

    Tonight after the livestream, do these other wikis have teams putting up notes, citations, timestamps in the discord and Reddit like we have consistently done? Or will they paraphrase and link the original notes our wiki has? (Sometimes pulling it word for word). 

    Im sure youre a great guy. You probably dont even know that the volunteer work you do is just used to make Curse money. Its not about them paying for servers. Hosting that wiki runs less than 50 dollars a month. Nothing. Guess how much they make off the mass-advertisements. Is that for this community or their bank account? How much of that do you get? Not to beat a dead horse.

    Ultimately we come full circle around to the only thing 99% of the AoC fans here care about - accuracy and complete information. Most could care less even about the ads. Theyre just tired of wasting time on bad information from bad wikis. On those two points alone, we invite anyone to compare. 

    Compare any page to any other wiki's same page. Check for references, citations, sources, accuracy. Be smart, even if you could care less about ads.

    All this aside, i have a lot of respect for you Herdo, and there is certainly nothing saying there cant be more than one wiki. I think we can agree there. Your group and ours both do a ton of work, that simple. 

    Edit: sorry for grammar. On mobile >.>
Sign In or Register to comment.