Inaccuracies in Player Pages

[Aceflyer]

A perfect example of what people are doing wrong in the wiki.

 

!@#$%^&*S (A Small SubSpace Server) is an open source server created by [[grelminar]]. It offers more features and greater flexibility than [[subgame]], but requires more technical knowledge to implement.

 

"It offers more features and greater flexibility than [[subgame]]"

 

Does it? Where is your references to back up that opinion

 

It may be rather difficult to find appropriate references for SSWiki material as I think there are rather few reliable do!@#$%^&*ents having to do with Continuum to start with. This is in sharp contrast to most Wikipedia material, which can easily cite scientific data and/or articles written by the press.

 

As far as ASSS goes, it is pretty obvious it offers more features and greater flexibility than Subgame. For example, I'd love to give Moderators the ability to /*prize in SWE, but that is not possible because Subgame doesn't allow it. ASSS, on the other hand, would allow that easily. Sure, you can argue that, in this example for instance, using a bot could allow Moderators to give out prizes in a Subgame zone, but that doesn't change the fact that bots are not part of Subgame.

 

"but requires more technical knowledge to implement." Another personal opinion.

 

Now this I agree is an unquantifiable opinion that shouldn't be there.

 

Personally I dont think the player pages are very important except to boost some egos.

 

Ideally, if personal player pages on SSWiki were held to the same standards of quality that pages about specific people on Wikipedia are held to, personal player pages on SSWiki would serve as an accurate, central, convenient, and impartial source of information on specific Continuum players. This is something that could be quite beneficial to the community overall.

 

Of course, as it is currently implemented, the personal player pages on SSWiki are indeed more or less useless. Unfortunately.

Edited April 18, 2008 by Aceflyer

[»Lynx]

Possibly a template should be provided for the players to follow, and anything else should be removed.

 

Something like:

 

Section 1: Player Information

Section 2: Zones which plays

Section 3: Accomplishments in the game

Section 4: And so on..

[Sass]

On the one hand, this topic is specifically geared toward Rootbear (the other personal wiki pages are horribly written, but not inaccurate) and thus is mildly irrelevant, but on the other, it does bring up part of a broader discussion - that of the anti-Rootbear complex which almost everyone here seems to be afflicted with. I'd like to see an actual topic on this for once, because while I can sympathize with both sides of the debate, it seems a little too much like american politics - complete polarisation and stealth attacks towards the other side, and meanwhile no progress. But that's just my view.

 

Implying that someone embodies 'politics' would probably necessitate that the person is of some stature within the community. I suppose rootbear has been around here a few years but he's little more than gabby and overbearing. Aceflyer who brought up the topic of rules for wiki seems to have a point about moderation. I recently attempted to write up an article in the real wiki about my hobby shop and little did I realize that it would be shot down for not having historic importance. (Now I know). So indeed, some type of moderation is needed and I'm sure in time, polix and the others will come up with something. On the other hand, Ace, just from my outside looking-in opinion, it seems like you have a tiff with rootbear about his moderation experience. Generally that makes you look silly since anyone who has actually moderated in a large zone knows that his experience isn't really that noteworthy.

[Aceflyer]

So indeed, some type of moderation is needed and I'm sure in time, polix and the others will come up with something.

 

Hopefully they will.

 

On the other hand, Ace, just from my outside looking-in opinion, it seems like you have a tiff with rootbear about his moderation experience. Generally that makes you look silly since anyone who has actually moderated in a large zone knows that his experience isn't really that noteworthy.

 

I couldn't care less about the particulars of rootbear75's moderation experience. My main purpose for starting this thread was to hopefully stimulate discussion about implementing a reasonable moderation system for the individual player pages at SSWiki. I felt that I needed an example of why such moderation would be necessary, and hence used rootbear75's page as an example. In retrospect I should have left out the specific example altogether; oh well.

[Samapico]

Possibly a template should be provided for the players to follow, and anything else should be removed.

 

Something like:

 

Section 1: Player Information

Section 2: Zones which plays

Section 3: Accomplishments in the game

Section 4: And so on..

Yeah, that would be nice

[»Lynx]

Maybe we should come up with all the possible pragmatic sub-headings and provide them here for people to copy, it would also make the Wiki look a lot better.

[»doc flabby]

It may be rather difficult to find appropriate references for SSWiki material as I think there are rather few reliable do!@#$%^&*ents having to do with Continuum to start with. This is in sharp contrast to most Wikipedia material, which can easily cite scientific data and/or articles written by the press.

Well you could just cite yourself in that case. If you think your opinion holds enough weight why not.

You could probably simply reference the ASSS readme file or userguide to back up the more features.

 

As far as ASSS goes, it is pretty obvious it offers more features and greater flexibility than Subgame.[/u].

Its only obvious to people familier with both subgame and ASSS. To someone who knows nothing about ASSS, that line is like a advert.

 

I know we can't be exactly like wikipedia but i think if you make an opinion in a wiki doc you should put your name, or someone elses (who said something similar) to it. Or its useless, who says something is often as important if not more important than what is said.

 

If some newb says ASSS has more features then subgame, it doesnt mean much.

If Greminlar or Mr Ekted says ASSS has more features, it holds alot more weight.

 

I take issue with the term "more features" but thats another arguement

Edited April 18, 2008 by doc flabby

[Aceflyer]

Well you could just cite yourself in that case. If you think your opinion holds enough weight why not. You could probably simply reference the ASSS readme file or userguide to back up the more features.

 

FYI, I wasn't the person who wrote that particular article on SSWiki.

 

I am also aware I am far from being an authority on either Subgame or ASSS.

 

Its only obvious to people familier with both subgame and ASSS. To someone who knows nothing about ASSS, that line is like a advert.

 

No, if SSWiki were known to have strict quality standards, that line would be taken as a statement of fact - which it is.

 

Or its useless, who says something is often as important if not more important than what is said.

 

Granted.

 

I take issue with the term "more features" but thats another arguement

 

And just why is that? I am pretty sure ASSS has more features than Subgame; the only feature I know of that Subgame has that ASSS doesn't have is a more flexible /*sendto command, but that isn't much of an advantage and I am pretty sure that could be implemented in ASSS if they wanted to.

[Samapico]

Just giving a few examples of what ASSS can do would back that point effectively.

 

 

Like:

it offers more features and greater flexibility than Subgame, because it can handle the packets server-side in any way you want by creating modules. For example, it is possible to

-Send various commands to an entire team (*prize, *warpto...)

-Have different ship settings for each player in the arena (reference to hscore or something)

-Grant custom command permissions sets. You could, for instance, specify that a certain group of mods is allowed to prize other players

 

 

My sentences are ugly and I don't know !@#$%^&* about ASSS, but something along those lines would back up the point pretty well.

[»doc flabby]

Well you could just cite yourself in that case. If you think your opinion holds enough weight why not. You could probably simply reference the ASSS readme file or userguide to back up the more features.

 

FYI, I wasn't the person who wrote that particular article on SSWiki.

 

I am also aware I am far from being an authority on either Subgame or ASSS.

 

 

I know you were not the writer of the article, i picked it as an example of what people are doing wrong in the wiki. i meant yourself in the 3rd person. As in oneself. So if you or anyone else were wanted to give their own opinion in any doc they should state they made that opinion in the lack of any other evidence. It wasnt directed at your specifically (apologies for not being clear)

 

I take issue with the term "more features" but that's another argument

 

And just why is that? I am pretty sure ASSS has more features than Subgame; the only feature I know of that Subgame has that ASSS doesn't have is a more flexible /*sendto command, but that isn't much of an advantage and I am pretty sure that could be implemented in ASSS if they wanted to.

 

My problem with "more features" is it doesn't tell you anything. Its like saying windows vista has more features than windows XP. Does that make it better? Some people would disagree. It would be better to compare the features between the two servers and allow the reader to make up their own mind which is more better. Samapico pretty much hit the nail on the head, you need to back up your arguments.

[Aceflyer]

I know you were not the writer of the article, i picked it as an example of what people are doing wrong in the wiki. i meant yourself in the 3rd person. As in oneself. So if you or anyone else were wanted to give their own opinion in any doc they should state they made that opinion in the lack of any other evidence. It wasnt directed at your specifically (apologies for not being clear)

 

Ah, I see. It appears I misunderstood you earlier, my apologies.

 

My problem with "more features" is it doesn't tell you anything. Its like saying windows vista has more features than windows XP. Does that make it better? Some people would disagree. It would be better to compare the features between the two servers and allow the reader to make up their own mind which is more better. Samapico pretty much hit the nail on the head, you need to back up your arguments.

 

Granted. I too agree with Samapico's !@#$%^&*essment of the situation.

[Hakaku]

I think it's senseless to start debating about the ASSS article as of yet, there's barely anything on that page (and much of the rest). It's a wiki, so you can edit it and try to improve it; you can't necessarily expect everything to be perfect when it's first created. Besides providing more concrete examples though, we should try to cite (external) sources where possible, but the only problem is that you can't add inline references since the feature hasn't been implemented. I'm hoping someone will consider adding this soon, since bibliographies aren't that useful, and adopting MLA would just be ugly.

[Samapico]

If I had the slightest idea how to implement such things, I'd do it

[Hakaku]

You can take a look here if it helps:

http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Cite/Cite.php

[PoLiX]

I wouldn't call player pages as much as an ego booster, as just an information page for many. Few may see it ego boosting, but not all...

 

http://wiki.ssforum.net/index.php/PoLiX - Good Template Idea I came up w/ for my page.

 

Edit: For developers, could add in place of Websites and Staff, etc. All sections optional, but just a template idea.

[PoLiX]

http://wiki.ssforum.net/index.php/Category:Players

This Category is mostly meant for key players of our community, but does, as would be expected, contain pages from many other players of our community. Not all information here can be kept 100% accurate, but the key members pages are pretty well monitored for any abuse or issues.

[LiveForce]

i might be in an immature mood, but http://www.ssforum.net/index.php?showtopic=20003 cracked me up.

[rootbear75]

i might be in an immature mood, but http://www.ssforum.net/index.php?showtopic=20003 cracked me up.

who are you?

[»Purge]

some RS n00b.

 

anyway, "inaccuracies" on player pages shouldn't mean much at all since they won't drive Continuum into the brink of extinction or anything of the sort. player pages should just provide some basic information about the players, but it looks like it will turn into a huge database of players that play Continuum.

[rootbear75]

New category: Key Players

[LiveForce]

some RS n00b.

 

anyway, "inaccuracies" on player pages shouldn't mean much at all since they won't drive Continuum into the brink of extinction or anything of the sort. player pages should just provide some basic information about the players, but it looks like it will turn into a huge database of players that play Continuum.

 

 

Who is this rootbear guy?

[Samapico]

New category: Key Players

Bleh... define what makes a player a 'key player'

[rootbear75]

Someone who has had somewhat major influence to the game. Zone owners, devvers etc..

 

or VIPs

[Samapico]

major influence... vip... these are all very subjective... I wouldn't categorize players as 'normal' players and 'key' players, honnestly... let the user judge if a player is a key player or not by reading his page

[PoLiX]

^^ exactly.