Aceflyer Posted April 19, 2008 Author Report Posted April 19, 2008 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 Agreed.
Animate Dreams Posted April 19, 2008 Report Posted April 19, 2008 Oh !@#$%^&*, time to make some "Most Popular Player" tags for my wiki
LiveForce Posted April 19, 2008 Report Posted April 19, 2008 major influence... vip... these are all very subjective... I wouldn't categorize players as 'normal' players and 'key' players, honnestly... let the user judge if a player is a key player or not by reading his page yeah, i agree. it's always going to be subjective.. there have been countless SSC zone owners and sysops. Would you say that they were all worthy of being on this list? How about a player with the top points/best rec ever in a specific zone? It's difficult to know when to stop. Either have specific rules for who can be on the list or just have a general one.
»doc flabby Posted April 19, 2008 Report Posted April 19, 2008 (edited) I think it's senseless to start debating about the ASSS article as of yet, there's barely anything on that page (and much of the rest). It's a wiki, so you can edit it and try to improve it; you can't necessarily expect everything to be perfect when it's first created. Besides providing more concrete examples though, we should try to cite (external) sources where possible, but the only problem is that you can't add inline references since the feature hasn't been implemented. I'm hoping someone will consider adding this soon, since bibliographies aren't that useful, and adopting MLA would just be ugly.I picked the ASSS article as an example of what people are doing wrong in ALL the wiki articles...Bascially giving opionions without backing them up. Adding there own personal bias to an article. I know there is alot of work to do, but its good to bring up these issues now, rather than later. I'm !@#$%^&*uming the objective of the wiki is to provide a balanced and accurate encylopedia of SS. Balanced means you provide both sides to every argument. Accurate means information can be verified. Personally I don't think we need the "VIP" player category. Any player that fits this category will have a wiki article about them anyway. IF they don't have an article they arn't that well known or important. Remeber all these VIP people would be nothing without the un-named players that are the real people who keep this game going. The reason this game is still going is because people still play it. Alot of these "VIPs" never even play anymore, i dont think they deserve a separte category, players are as important as them. You could always create an article that looks at what you think is the key players of subspace. Or analyses the importance of certain players. Or compares the contributions of players. For example the article on the SSC council could look at the role and contributions of each player in the Council has in Continuum. Edited April 19, 2008 by doc flabby
Aceflyer Posted April 22, 2008 Author Report Posted April 22, 2008 I picked the ASSS article as an example of what people are doing wrong in ALL the wiki articles...Bascially giving opionions without backing them up. Adding there own personal bias to an article. I know there is alot of work to do, but its good to bring up these issues now, rather than later. I'm !@#$%^&*uming the objective of the wiki is to provide a balanced and accurate encylopedia of SS. Balanced means you provide both sides to every argument. Accurate means information can be verified. Agreed. The objective is, ideally, to have a high-quality wiki for Continuum. Personally I don't think we need the "VIP" player category. Any player that fits this category will have a wiki article about them anyway. IF they don't have an article they arn't that well known or important. Remeber all these VIP people would be nothing without the un-named players that are the real people who keep this game going. The reason this game is still going is because people still play it. Alot of these "VIPs" never even play anymore, i dont think they deserve a separte category, players are as important as them. Agreed, besides there's a lot of issues around deciding who's a VIP and who isn't - that's liable to be a very subjective thing. You could always create an article that looks at what you think is the key players of subspace. Or analyses the importance of certain players. Or compares the contributions of players. For example the article on the SSC council could look at the role and contributions of each player in the Council has in Continuum. True.
Aceflyer Posted April 22, 2008 Author Report Posted April 22, 2008 Heh I don't blame you, this thread has careened through quite a few topics by now.
Recommended Posts