Does Community Content Belong on the Wiki?

[yamamushi]

19 minutes ago, Hades said:

 

edit: 

So there is both a wiki and a gamepedia?  So why can't one just have official business, and the other have limited hubs/centers and let's see which one more people use.

 

1

 

 

They are terms used synonymously right now. When people talk about the "wiki" they are referring to gamepedia (the official wiki).

 

 

[John]

23 minutes ago, Hades said:

So there is both a wiki and a gamepedia?  So why can't one just have official business, and the other have limited hubs/centers and let's see which one more people use.

 

@Hades , the wiki is hosted by Gamepedia, the link here: https://dualuniverse.gamepedia.com/Dual_Universe_Wiki

and we also have the Community website hosted by NovaQuarks: https://community.dualthegame.com/

[ATMLVE]

10 minutes ago, Hades said:

Calling new players idiots isn't going to help the situation.  Like I said (or maybe I didn't? Either way...) it's hard to tell at the moment how new players will enter the game.  But, what I do know it's best to give them the utmost best experience possible. And this should not require them to seek out a community page they probably don't even know exists.

 

Whether it's through the wiki, or another way it doesn't matter.   The wiki sounds like a relatively simple fix for the situation, but as the creators it's your prerogative I suppose.  

 

I just havent seen a good argument other than "a hub can fall."  Which in my opinion, isn't a very good excuse.  The whole "but its community content not official" seems like a cop out to me to reinforce the argument.

 

When we are talking about a hub being placed on the wiki, it would have to have a long history and good standing.  If it does fall, great someone will take it off the wiki I imagine.

 

We aren't talking about adding every little thing to the wiki, just broad strokes.

 

suppose it's a moot point, gotta respect the wiki creators.

 

 

edit: 

So there is both a wiki and a gamepedia?  So why can't one just have official business, and the other have limited hubs/centers and let's see which one more people use.

 

There is not a difference between Gamepedia and the wiki right now. The official wiki, the one under discussion, IS the Gamepedia wiki. 

 

I did not refer to these theoretical players as idiots, I called them fools. An idiot is simply unintelligent, but a fool merely lacks wisdom/prudence. There's a difference. 

 

The reasoning is not a cop-out though, as I have no reason whatsoever to limit community content from the wiki other than what I've stated. I gain nothing from not having organizations on the wiki; there's no hidden agenda. What I do gain is the time it would take to update them based on their ever-changing status. There is the possibility of their rival attacking their page and then having to deal with the fallout, smaller organizations arguing about why they belong the wiki, the fact that adding community content dilutes the wiki so that it is more difficult to find official information, and the fact that any community content, once gone, becomes insignifacnt and therefore the page on the wiki becomes obsolete. Yes, then someone can remove it, and guess who has the authority to delete wiki pages? The administrator. Aside from that, that's just not what wikis are for, to create pages for relevant topics and delete them when they become obsolete. They are for documentation.

 

I have no hidden agenda. I have my opinions for the reasons stated above, and they are just that; opinions.  I have no hard feelings towards @RightBigToe or you @Hades, or anyone else that disagrees with my opinions. I want to be very clear and explain my position so that there is no animosity, and to ensure everyone that I am trying to be fair and reasonable in this situation. 

[RightBigToe]

13 minutes ago, ATMLVE said:

 

There is not a difference between Gamepedia and the wiki right now. The official wiki, the one under discussion, IS the Gamepedia wiki. 

 

I did not refer to these theoretical players as idiots, I called them fools. An idiot is simply unintelligent, but a fool merely lacks wisdom/prudence. There's a difference. 

 

The reasoning is not a cop-out though, as I have no reason whatsoever to limit community content from the wiki other than what I've stated. I gain nothing from not having organizations on the wiki; there's no hidden agenda. What I do gain is the time it would take to update them based on their ever-changing status. There is the possibility of their rival attacking their page and then having to deal with the fallout, smaller organizations arguing about why they belong the wiki, the fact that adding community content dilutes the wiki so that it is more difficult to find official information, and the fact that any community content, once gone, becomes insignifacnt and therefore the page on the wiki becomes obsolete. Yes, then someone can remove it, and guess who has the authority to delete wiki pages? The administrator. Aside from that, that's just not what wikis are for, to create pages for relevant topics and delete them when they become obsolete. They are for documentation.

 

I have no hidden agenda. I have my opinions for the reasons stated above, and they are just that; opinions.  I have no hard feelings towards @RightBigToe or you @Hades, or anyone else that disagrees with my opinions. I want to be very clear and explain my position so that there is no animosity, and to ensure everyone that I am trying to be fair and reasonable in this situation. 

 

40 minutes ago, Pang_Dread said:

Yeah to me and like others said, as well as ACEs official statement just above only including some Orgs or cities deemed in some arbitrary manor to be worthy of an entry on the wiki will cause so much drama and guild battles. That's fine for fan sites and in game gen chats but not for the official wiki page of the game.

 

The test pages have been marked for deletion and I am moving to work on other aspects of the wiki.  My only hope is more people are now interested in contributing to the wiki.  Please contact myself or @ATMLVE if anyone needs help with the somewhat awkward syntax of wiki pages.

 

Edited August 7, 2017 by RightBigToe
Grammar

[Hades]

2 hours ago, ATMLVE said:

 

There is not a difference between Gamepedia and the wiki right now. The official wiki, the one under discussion, IS the Gamepedia wiki. 

 

I did not refer to these theoretical players as idiots, I called them fools. An idiot is simply unintelligent, but a fool merely lacks wisdom/prudence. There's a difference. 

 

The reasoning is not a cop-out though, as I have no reason whatsoever to limit community content from the wiki other than what I've stated. I gain nothing from not having organizations on the wiki; there's no hidden agenda. What I do gain is the time it would take to update them based on their ever-changing status. There is the possibility of their rival attacking their page and then having to deal with the fallout, smaller organizations arguing about why they belong the wiki, the fact that adding community content dilutes the wiki so that it is more difficult to find official information, and the fact that any community content, once gone, becomes insignifacnt and therefore the page on the wiki becomes obsolete. Yes, then someone can remove it, and guess who has the authority to delete wiki pages? The administrator. Aside from that, that's just not what wikis are for, to create pages for relevant topics and delete them when they become obsolete. They are for documentation.

 

I have no hidden agenda. I have my opinions for the reasons stated above, and they are just that; opinions.  I have no hard feelings towards @RightBigToe or you @Hades, or anyone else that disagrees with my opinions. I want to be very clear and explain my position so that there is no animosity, and to ensure everyone that I am trying to be fair and reasonable in this situation. 

Don't get me wrong, I completely respect your decision.  It would be a major task to update the wiki with major hubs.  And how do you do so without favoring a certain group?  Except by having clear regulation for being admitted to the wiki.  Certain defenses, a certain length of up time, a certain amount of trading that occurs etc.  it would be a very large and time consuming task.

 

However, in other games where cities are static you are able to find pages on their wiki about these places and how you can get to them.  In dual universe planets are huge, you can't just say "go to planet 3, an epic city is there."  Even with a radar it would probably take time to find it.  But once again, unknown for now 

 

As for the new players being "fools".  The entire population hardly uses/reads the forums.  Far fewer will dig through a community page to find where they're supposed to go.

 

Granted, my point may be moot as (I believe, might be remembering incorrectly) the community page is going to be integrated into the game.  Depending on how that is implemented, and user friendly it is... it may be a non-issue.  

[yamamushi]

For those that want a community wiki with a place to record history, locations, organizations, whatever....

 

I've just created this wiki: http://dualuniverse.wiki/index.php/Main_Page

 

If anyone wants to help set it up let me know, otherwise you just need to create an account to have permission to edit it.

 

It still needs a better logo and tons of pages need to be created, otherwise it should be functional and usable at this point.

 

If you don't want to use it that's fine, just please don't go out of your way to berate me for doing this for free. 

[RightBigToe]

14 minutes ago, yamamushi said:

For those that want a community wiki with a place to record history, locations, organizations, whatever....

 

I've just created this wiki: http://dualuniverse.wiki/index.php/Main_Page

 

If anyone wants to help set it up let me know, otherwise you just need to create an account to have permission to edit it.

 

It still needs a better logo and tons of pages need to be created, otherwise it should be functional and usable at this point.

 

If you don't want to use it that's fine, just please don't go out of your way to berate me for doing this for free. 

 

Yama, we'll have to chat about this, I'd like to help work on the technical aspects at the very least 

[CyberCrunch]

I was just about to post a question about how to deal with all the community content, but yama was very fast to answer that...

So thumbs up for his wiki!!

To prevent the same discussion going on for the new wiki, we should first define some guidelines how articles on the community wiki should be handled.

 

I think we can learn from all the arguments in this discussion, and integrate them as rules for the new wiki. Basically everything that has been said also applies there.

My main concern is neutrality and factuality of the information.

As I've already expressed before, I think templates should be a good idea to easily channel the large amount of content the community will produce...

Also every org should be allowed to create its own wiki article to prevent discussions about game politics through the wiki. This might be a bit tricky to handle, but I think could work with certain restrictions.

 

 

Btw. i'm very happy with the outcome of this! These are exactly the problems to discuss early on, and it's a great to have such a clear conclusion!

[Hades]

55 minutes ago, CyberCrunch said:

I was just about to post a question about how to deal with all the community content, but yama was very fast to answer that...

So thumbs up for his wiki!!

To prevent the same discussion going on for the new wiki, we should first define some guidelines how articles on the community wiki should be handled.

 

I think we can learn from all the arguments in this discussion, and integrate them as rules for the new wiki. Basically everything that has been said also applies there.

My main concern is neutrality and factuality of the information.

As I've already expressed before, I think templates should be a good idea to easily channel the large amount of content the community will produce...

Also every org should be allowed to create its own wiki article to prevent discussions about game politics through the wiki. This might be a bit tricky to handle, but I think could work with certain restrictions.

 

 

Btw. i'm very happy with the outcome of this! These are exactly the problems to discuss early on, and it's a great to have such a clear conclusion!

I personally think each organization should have free reign with their pages as long as they don't target specific people and insult them or something.  I think organizational rivalry should be allowed on these pages, it would help setup the dynamics of the community.  However, with everything... keep it from being too caustic, and those instances would probably have to be handled by Yama.  Hopefully few and far between.

 

As for community cities/hubs there should be a few requirements.  Depending on what it is, of course. 

 

All of the following should have x amount of days being held peaceably.  (30-60?)

 

City:

X amount of traffic, not sure how to measure that.

 

Some type of political structure in place that handles development.  Not just some person who has too much time on their hands to make a bunch of structures.  Basically to keep from "build and forget"

 

Trade hub:

X amount of "GDP", if those statistics aren't provided perhaps just by traffic again.

 

Some type of policing system, could be military.  The actual hub would probably be protected of course, but the surrounding area should fee relatively safe for people to bring in their goods.

 

I'm sure there's more, but that's what I can think of for now.

 

I'm thinking a city can be a trade hub, but a city might not be a trade hub.  Therefore, it would be good to distinguish between the two.  With some type of way to recognize if a city is also a trade hub.

 

 

[yamamushi]

Let's discuss this on discord, that way we can have a more fluid discussion than back and forth here

 

Someone make one for the wiki and shoot me an invite and I'll happily join

[RightBigToe]

14 minutes ago, yamamushi said:

Let's discuss this on discord, that way we can have a more fluid discussion than back and forth here

 

Someone make one for the wiki and shoot me an invite and I'll happily join

 

https://discord.gg/J9WrGB, Realistically, no reason to not use this for collaborating across both wikis

[John]

17 hours ago, NQ-Nyzaltar said:

1) To keep some meaning for each website.
- The community portal is the place for all the community-created content (as it will evolve a lot with the arrival of a dedicated web developer joining the team soon).

 

 

I just have a little concern about the Community Wiki, after reading again NQ-Nyzaltar's post in this thread.

By creating a Community Wiki it might compete with the Community Portal, and spread information on even more common websites (I do not include websites managed by specific organizations)

[RightBigToe]

7 hours ago, John said:

 

I just have a little concern about the Community Wiki, after reading again NQ-Nyzaltar's post in this thread.

By creating a Community Wiki it might compete with the Community Portal, and spread information on even more common websites (I do not include websites managed by specific organizations)

 

The reasoning behind my argument was based on one big assumption: the information written in the community portal is self-regulated.  Meaning that it is also self- promotional.  The purpose behind having a community wiki or equivalent outlet is to have a source of neutral information about player organizations, cities, etc.  In my opinion, a wiki format is perfect for this sort of endeavour because it allows by default anyone to add or edit pages, but it's incredible easy to review that work, and selectively undo edits that people make. 

 

What that means to me is yes of course you would have people trying to turn their pages into advertisements to say they are the greatest organization in the universe, and others trying to delete entire pages, but all of that is tracked and can be undone at the click of an administrator.

 

I don't think anyone has an intention of trying to replace the community portal's function of providing a home for every organization to self-organize, recruit, and such.  The community wiki is intended to serve as an addition to both the community portal and official wiki.  The community wiki pages will link back to the community portal and there will be obvious banners and such explaining that it's unofficial community content, while providing a link to the official wiki.

[Hades]

4 hours ago, RightBigToe said:

 

The reasoning behind my argument was based on one big assumption: the information written in the community portal is self-regulated.  Meaning that it is also self- promotional.  The purpose behind having a community wiki or equivalent outlet is to have a source of neutral information about player organizations, cities, etc.  In my opinion, a wiki format is perfect for this sort of endeavour because it allows by default anyone to add or edit pages, but it's incredible easy to review that work, and selectively undo edits that people make. 

 

What that means to me is yes of course you would have people trying to turn their pages into advertisements to say they are the greatest organization in the universe, and others trying to delete entire pages, but all of that is tracked and can be undone at the click of an administrator.

 

I don't think anyone has an intention of trying to replace the community portal's function of providing a home for every organization to self-organize, recruit, and such.  The community wiki is intended to serve as an addition to both the community portal and official wiki.  The community wiki pages will link back to the community portal and there will be obvious banners and such explaining that it's unofficial community content, while providing a link to the official wiki.

Perfectly stated.  A new player (or any player tbh) should be able to find unbiased information on cities/organizations.  

 

Organization that controls City A could say it's the best for newcomers, because they'd profit from their traffic.  But in reality planet/city B would be the better option for the new player to get on his/her feet.

 

An organization might have control on the market of resource A and states it is the best material for creating ships.  When in reality resource B is more effective.

 

And many similar scenarios of course, doesn't just involve new players.

 

 

[Dhara]

On 8/6/2017 at 9:31 PM, Alianin said:

Hey guys, I'm a Gamepedia staff member and just wanted to throw some information in here. Player content does have a place on wikis, but it should be in a separate namespace and tagged as such, just so it's not confused as official game information. Here are some examples of how other wikis handle it:

Guilds on Wowpedia

Journals on No Man's Sky

Fan art on Ark

If you'd like to go this route, we can set up an "Organization" namespace, so pages will look like this "Organization:Terran Union". With that, you all will want to set up a template and some guidelines for people to follow as well. I'm happy to provide more examples or answer any questions.

 

This is exactly what I was thinking.  There is nothing wrong with having org info on the wiki, as long as it is separated out like this.  And since it is a Wiki, then players can add their orgs in themselves.  The only thing I would suggest would be from a moderation perspective.  Just make sure that if info on an Org is on the wiki, that the org in question is aware that they are on the wiki so they can keep an eye on it. 

 

If we do it this way then if it's important to an org to be on the wiki, then they can be on the wiki - if they want to put the time in to manage the page themselves.  I think an org could even request to be excluded from the wiki if they like, as well.  It's emergent game play in DU, so let it be the same with the Wiki.

 

Now all that being said, I have never run a wiki or even use them that much, tbh.  So I don't know if you can give specific permissions to specific pages to specific members.  But if you can, I'd probably try to set that up.  Just  make sure only the legate, or a person they approve, has access to edit that page. 

 

But if that's not possible, or sounds like too much work, then I would opt to not add them in at all.  Just let the community set up their own sites and simply have a section to post links to them.  Actually, that might be the best solution of all.  If an org feels like it's important enough to them to have a bunch of info online in a place other than the DU community area, then they surely have a website.  Let them submit the link for that site and then be done with it.

[Astrophil]

Organizations and player created content are just as much part of the game as game mechanics and hard concepts are. Dual Universe is an emergent, player driven game. Why shouldn't player creations, including organizations, be documented in a wiki? 

 

The only difference is that community-created content may not be permanent, and are not "NQ-official," so I have no problem with having a separate community wiki as @yamamushi has so kindly provided for us at dualuniverse.wiki . There's also a lot of other great websites and platforms documenting these kind of community events already as well, notably DUSleepers, Outpost Zebra, and the writers over at the Dual Universe Historical Society. I'm all for it, although I do have to say that before alpha, we ought to be a bit more lax on actual documentation, since nothing in-game has actually occurred yet.