What is the purpose of creating it in DMCGI when you can create a real Wiki? <_< (one similar to Wikipedia.org).
http://www.wikia.com/wiki/Start_a_new_Wikia
ID:183704
 May 15 2007, 4:21 pm
|
|
|
May 15 2007, 4:23 pm
|
|
Jon88
 |
BYOND key integration, and you put in the features you want. And DMCGI is faster. >.>
|
So I see. I don't like the Bwicki (the one that we currently have) but I think Nadrew or someone is making one, so I don't know how that's gonna work out. I think a real wiki is a much better solution than the current bwicki. <_<
| |
The current bwicki did its job and quite well at one point. Eventually, due to the kind of content people started posting on it, it degenerated to the point where it's much less useful, and fewer people bother updating the useful parts.
| |
You ever notice that Wikipedia enjoys the hell out of deleting entries? It's one of those things you might not see too often but Wikipedia will delete anything that is not 100% to their liking. So putting something there is probably gonna get deleted if you don't put hours of work and citing into it.
[offtopic][rant] Wikipedia seems to decide that a page of information on every single pokemon is more important than getting a detailed backround of multiple webcomics and authors who have won awards.[/offtopic][/rant] | |
Evil-Inuyasha wrote:
[offtopic][rant] Wikipedia seems to decide that a page of information on every single pokemon is more important than getting a detailed backround of multiple webcomics and authors who have won awards.[/offtopic][/rant] <offtopic><nitpicking>It annoys me too, but you closed your tags in the wrong order.</nitpicking></offtopic> =P | |
Koil wrote:
So I see. I don't like the Bwicki (the one that we currently have) but I think Nadrew or someone is making one, so I don't know how that's gonna work out. I think a real wiki is a much better solution than the current bwicki. <_< Bwicki 2 is already out and it has the exact same feel as the normal Bwicki. Only it uses MySQL databases and the admin panel is stronger, I believe. | |
I do my best to correct the vandilization, but with no sort of saved history or a revert option, there's little I can do when an entire useful article is converted to "lol hi".
| |
Popisfizzy wrote:
I do my best to correct the vandilization, but with no sort of saved history or a revert option, there's little I can do when an entire useful article is converted to "lol hi". Happened before? | |
Crispy wrote:
Evil-Inuyasha wrote: aaah come on, I'm used to forums where it didn't matter how you closed your tags, as well as the [][/] instead of the <></> (>.<) | |
Evil-Inuyasha wrote:
Crispy wrote: But this is no ordinary forum. And the [] and [/] tags are not used in this forum either. | |
Evil-Inuyasha wrote:
[offtopic][rant] Wikipedia seems to decide that a page of information on every single pokemon is more important than getting a detailed backround of multiple webcomics and authors who have won awards.[/offtopic][/rant] More like "there are more people on Wikipedia who care enough about Pokemon to give each one individual pages than there are users who want to write up detailed backgrounds of multiple webcomics and authors who have won awards." With Wikipedia, you get out what everybody puts in. Wouldn't it go against the purpose of the website if the owners could dictate what was and wasn't allowed to be added? While I haven't added anything to it, the nice thing about Wikipedia is that if you really care about award-winning webcomics that much, you're more than welcome to make your own pages on the subject. Your post makes it sound like Wikipedia editors are a single person that picks and chooses what to add. | |
Sarm wrote:
With Wikipedia, you get out what everybody puts in. Wouldn't it go against the purpose of the website if the owners could dictate what was and wasn't allowed to be added? While I haven't added anything to it, the nice thing about Wikipedia is that if you really care about award-winning webcomics that much, you're more than welcome to make your own pages on the subject. Your post makes it sound like Wikipedia editors are a single person that picks and chooses what to add. Wikipedia tends to delete "niche interest" pages, and the people who ultimately decide whether a site is niche interest or not are the administrators, who have total veto power over any votes on the Talk pages. It happens quite frequently. For instance, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UnReal_World | |
Evil-Inuyasha wrote:
aaah come on, I'm used to forums where it didn't matter how you closed your tags It doesn't really matter how you close your tags on these forums, or when writing HTML. It's just for neatness, and a nicer looking output when looking at the source. | |
Popisfizzy wrote:
I do my best to correct the vandilization, but with no sort of saved history or a revert option, there's little I can do when an entire useful article is converted to "lol hi". There is a page history, but only Bwicki admins can view it or revert pages. I don't know if there's a list of Bwicki admins anywhere, but I know at least Lummox JR, Nadrew, Mike H, Deadron, Jtgibson, and myself are on the list. | |
Not just Bwicki admins, but the people who started the page as well. As well, I've tried to get in contact with a few of the Bwicki Admins before, to no avail, so I have to wait until one shows up.
| |
Nadrew, myself, and several others are beating on bwicki2 (installed on digitalBYOND.net) during the next week or so. once Nadrew is happy all the 'show-stopper' bugs are dealt with, then maybe we can open up to the public. stay tuned!
| |
