Sign in to follow this  
Wossoo

News #70: Wurmpedia Improvements

Recommended Posts

Choice of words is important, Slickshot. If it was truly one of the reasons Marni would have said so and not referred to it as a "side-effect". Of course, anyone else can come along and say "well, that's not what he meant" so pointing this out may be moot.

 

One last thing I want to point out here is that this Wurmpedia Team will be successful in cleaning up the wiki and will be inevitably praised for it. What many people don't realize, though, is that even if account registrations were left open like before Marni became WM this project would still be just as successful. So when the day comes for the praise about how much better the wiki is in both content and appearance, know that the team's success is not due to the restrictions on editing access or the imposing of a hierarchial power structure but instead because there's a dedicated team behind this. And in the end everyone really needs to ask themselves whether needlessly killing the spirit of the wiki was worth it in order to achieve something that could have been achieved anyway.

 

He also said, in the very beginning of your quote, "That is not 'all' we're trying to accomplish..."  This implies that that is indeed one of the things they are trying to accomplish.  Again, as you say, choice of words is important. :)

 

Arguing about it, nonetheless, is very unimportant.  This change is coming, and this change is good.

Edited by Slickshot
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm. I always felt the wiki had basically two problems:


 


  1. Nobody ever tidied it up (it's got a lot of redundant pages), including me obviously so not pointing fingers.
  2. It's got a LOT of speculation because the facts are simply not known as they are not published and direct questions to devs are not answered (for whatever reason). This often leads to point 1 - I might document my own observations but not dare to delete someone else's old observations because for all I know they're right and I'm wrong.

The only thing being proposed that I think will help either of those is the direct cleanup. I don't see how removing everyone's access to start with will help with this, sort of runs counter to how a Wiki is supposed to work (share the work out as broadly as possible) and strikes me as a little authoritarian for no apparent reason. Everyone who currently has access, has already applied for access, and was judged worthy of it. Presumably everyone who misused that access (if any?) has had it taken from them already.


 


Nothing being proposed addresses point 2, which to me is the biggest problem with the wiki. On the whole though, I always thought Wurm's wiki was pretty awesome, with most features documented down to the finest detail. Can anyone point to another game with a better, more accurate, and more detailed wiki?


  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing being proposed addresses point 2, which to me is the biggest problem with the wiki. On the whole though, I always thought Wurm's wiki was pretty awesome, with most features documented down to the finest detail. Can anyone point to another game with a better, more accurate, and more detailed wiki?

 

http://runescape.wikia.com/wiki/RuneScape_Wiki

 

Guess best we can do is join the Waytensee tribe.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I don't think the developers should be forced to spell out how every feature of the game works. That is not the game I started playing some years ago, and not the game I wish to see it become. I don't need a developer to hold my hand, I can sort out mechanics on my own. As for facts, you do not need a developer to provide you with code or specifics on how said code works to discover the facts. Have you ever heard of the scientific method? If not, you should take a look as it's how some of the greatest discoveries in our modern times have been found. In real life, there is no developer passing us information about how things such as gravity works, yet we are able to establish facts just fine.

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since there are others commenting on wiki, here is my take.

 

I think this whole thing is a mistake. Everything these folks are doing could be done without their special titles. The only thing that has changed is now certain individuals can make changes and not have to worry about other players challenging their opinions.

 

I'd like to point out that the Wurmpedia staffers in this thread seem to be more interested in telling everyone about their grand plan then they are in listening to what the community desires. Yes, just like all other Wurm "officials" its always what they think is best and the community can either praise it or stfu. Although, there is that rare occasion where large portions of Wurm agree and voice enough opposition that Rolf steps in to grant the communities desire. I don't see him doing that here since It seems most people don't care about the "new wiki" approach.

1. I don't like PM's. Anything that needs to be said should be said in front of the community. What -> I want <- is irrelevant. What the majority of the community wants is what you should be addressing.

 

2. "the biggest", hu? I asked the community what they thought of this adventure and most seemed to be for it. After this I haven't said anything about it until this thread. Again, I saw the community commenting on it and I put in my opinion. Also, I made one post in this thread, well this is the second.

 

3. You misunderstand me. I'm not afraid of uncertainty. Again, privileged editors don't need special titles or power over a standard editor to make improvements to the wiki. This power is only needed if it is desired to have some kind of oversight over the wiki.

 

Wurm wiki hasn't needed oversight for 10 years, Wikia's vast collection of game wiki pages doesn't need oversight, Wikipedia doesn't need oversight. The spirit of a wiki is where anyone can contribute. The only time oversight is needed or an admin should step in is when there is malicious edits, vulgar content, or various spamming. imo, under the current wiki plan, admins will have more power then those three items.

 

It is almost as if select folks decided that the community can't agree; therefor, they can never make a quality wiki. Further, so in order make a good wiki we need to shift power into the hands of a few who can impose some conformity. And hopefully this conformity will improve things.

I'm unhappy and really disappointed with the way things have headed, to the point where I feel sorry and even ashamed to have defended the idea so insistently and reassuringly that something like this would not happen. I was not expecting Wiki accounts to have permissions revoked, or now being disabled entirely even, and access barred.

Saying they're not disabled because you can apply to be an editor is an affront, and the reasons given are questionable in my opinion. Arguments have happened throughout the Wiki's life time, but vandalism, or justified security concerns are largely unheard of. You can not be an independent contributor anymore, and that is a sad fact.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can not be an independent contributor anymore, and that is a sad fact.

 

You can.

 

Nobody said we had to use Wurmpedia. We could always just make a competing Wiki.

Edited by Dairuka

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can.

Nobody said we had to use Wurmpedia. We could always just make a competing Wiki.

One with meditation answers, because let's be honest; getting to wait a month for a second chance to guess the answer of a vague riddle should not be the fun part of a game.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wurm is not growing lol. Sorry but its smaller than it was a few months ago.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm in favour of the changes on the principle that the quality of the wiki should improve over time.


 


What I'd like are the procedures for adding / correcting / challenging page content are crystal clear and that everything that is requested to be added/corrected/challenged is queued and at all times visible.


 


In other wiki I would expect much more use of the discussion page and that when the content is challenged that the page is immediately marked as challenged and the challenge be recorded in the discussion then when a definitive answer (anathema for Wurm I know....) is provided then the source is noted and the page properly corrected.


 


The problem is that definitive answers will mostly come from the server team which are usually too busy to worry about the wiki so there needs to be a pipeline where they are fed questions which they can then answer as they work on progressing the game.


  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So does only one person choose who gets to edit? If so who is that person? If its more than one person then who are they?


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice to see that this made me spit my tea out. Hilarious hahahah love the conspiracy jokes. They never get old

 

 


The first three replies to this thread all start with "Nice to see..."

Coincidence? I think not.

Wurminati.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About the Wiki changes:


1) You acknowledge that the Wiki is incorrect, but there isn't a single "action" stated there that will address that issue.


2) Nothing new from the old post about this.


3) This is nothing more than "cleaning up the house" in terms of users, nothing else. Its a good thing, but doesn't really improve the wiki in terms of content, maybe in terms of structure.


4) "The why" is all bs. Growing? Growing what? More empty spaces?


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Myself being a (somewhat) active wiki account holder, I'm not sure how to feel about this. While I understand the point of the restructure, so to speak, is to really help put proper information and make sure everything runs smoothly, and pages link together in a logical manner, I can't help but think that this is... basically unnecessary. I only say this because of how the wiki has been running up until this point. I'm not against this, but I do feel the need for those "30 active users" to be given a pass to be a  'Wurmpedia Editor.'


 


Consider this. Not many people prior to this have edited the wiki, as stated before, out of 1K+ accounts. Out of those 30 active people, offer them a 'pre-production' slot and run a trial period to see exactly how the role will work in actuality. On paper it looks exactly the same as it's always been running, except with more top-down involvement from a structured staff, rather than it being a mishmash of people collaborating. Plus the application, which until i see I can't really speculate on.


 


TBH I have seen no "Wiki wars" going on in terms of information. I have had my own material corrected, or rather reworded to something easier to understand, and that's the idea I get of this. I can submit a new page on... Giant Trees, or something, and as more people experience it, they revise the initial material and work it to the facts, or as close to facts we can get without being thrown exact specs from the devs.


 


As far as acual information integrity, the only way to confirm things is to test them out. I'm sure things were tested at some point in time, and got updated and you know the rest. That typically only occurs on lowkey updates, and things probably get overlooked. In most cases, we're given a heads up about major mechanic changes, especially if they're 'main features' of the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well meanwhile there have been some updates to Wpedia, such as this tag found at the top of the Religion page:


 


Cleanup-icon.gifTo meet Wurmpedia's quality standards, this article or section has recently been reviewed and cleaned by the Wurmpedia Team.


 


I think that's new. Also, the intro on the home page seems to have had some tinkering.


 



Welcome to the Wurmpedia

The Wurmpedia is a player driven encyclopedia for the game Wurm Online. Anyone with a registered Wurmpedia account may contribute to the database, for information on how to obtain an account visit this forum post. The information on the Wurmpedia is gathered by the players as Wurm Online is considered a Sandbox of Discovery, however from time to time we do get information provided to us by developers to aid us in our quest for knowledge. The Wurmpedia currently has 2,637 articles and more are being added all of the time! Why not write one yourself or begin reading?


 


I guess that answers that.


 


I'm noticing some other cosmetic changes that are welcome.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More true formulas in wurmpedia. I still hope a library ingame branch from wurmpedia.


Edited by ftoz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The wiki software is built to lower barriers to contributions. The restrictions on accounts and approval processes before someone even starts to contribute raises those barriers back, and a lot more.


 


Wurmpedia only had 30 active editors from the start of the year, and therefore you disabled the very accounts of active editors? I must have misunderstood this part. But it seems what has been said here. That's not an incentive for players to contribute. And surely not for those new to wurmpedia (not to wurm) to contribute err, to submit for approval their intention to contribute (because they can't contribute anyway, before they apply for shiny titles and go through bureacracy).


 


Unfortunately for the new system (and the old one alike), more bureaucracy is never the answer to lack of contributions. I've learnt that lesson the hard way.


 


 


What will happen and is happening already is that the remaining few are more motivated for short term to work harder, among other reasons because it's all on their shoulders. No one from outsiders can help them do the hard work, at most we can sit on the sidelines and share an idea or two in chat or forums.


That's on short term. On longer term... bureaucracy is not how you create community driven (... stop calling it that please) content. Anyhows, good luck with the project. It's not a direction of a project I'm motivated to take part in, to my regret because the content is interesting.


Edited by Anarres

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My experience is, that latest "improvements" to how wiki works have been a step backwards. Information on wiki has been given under control to only couple of people and communiy has no control over the information there any more.

I tried to do a contribution too and share my long-time observations: http://forum.wurmonline.com/index.php?/topic/127047-tundra/

Even proof with picture evidence has been ignored(if necessary, I could even post more picture proof of my claim). If wiki management doesn't want to trust the contributers and their tests, why even bother pretending like it is a community project.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't expect it to be strict for contributing. I'm just for the general improvement of wiki information handling.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given that WU is becoming a thing, I'd like to be able to edit the wiki again, since I'd rather not confine the knowledge I have of the game to what's in my user page for any longer than necessary.  Right now, I have several subpages to my user page which I intended to eventually become complete pages on the main namespace once they were ready for it, but I won't be able to do that without an Editor account now.  I don't plan on contributing as frequently as appears to be required for such an account though, so I won't be applying for an upgraded account.  That's sad, because there's a lot I could contribute if this change was not made.  


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given that WU is becoming a thing, I'd like to be able to edit the wiki again, since I'd rather not confine the knowledge I have of the game to what's in my user page for any longer than necessary.  Right now, I have several subpages to my user page which I intended to eventually become complete pages on the main namespace once they were ready for it, but I won't be able to do that without an Editor account now.  I don't plan on contributing as frequently as appears to be required for such an account though, so I won't be applying for an upgraded account.  That's sad, because there's a lot I could contribute if this change was not made.  

 

It's unlikely that it will be used unless an account is non-contributing from the start and we'll always contact people before reverting accounts.

 

Please drop me a line and I'll get you added to the Editor list.

Edited by Marni

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for clarifying.  That works for me.  It probably won't be until October (when WU comes out) when I'm able to contribute again though, as my WO characters are currently without a home to go to.  However, it'll give me some time to iron out the kinks in my healing cover guide.  


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We also need to consider that WU and WO might have to get seperate wiki's or pages will need "WU Specifics"... in the case of WU, many variables/grades/scales will be different, and the WO wiki is a warehouse of numbers pertaining to WO (2 bricks in a catapult, on a 32ql foo does 18.44 dmg) and so forth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We also need to consider that WU and WO might have to get seperate wiki's or pages will need "WU Specifics"... in the case of WU, many variables/grades/scales will be different, and the WO wiki is a warehouse of numbers pertaining to WO (2 bricks in a catapult, on a 32ql foo does 18.44 dmg) and so forth.

 

This is definitely on our radar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this