Poll

How should we treat the wiki?

Only display facts and mechanisms, while leaving the strategy for the forums.
Keep the strategy, but put it after all the facts.
Use it for the strategy mostly, with the facts pretty much buried.

Author Topic: How should we treat the wiki?  (Read 2071 times)

Offline Pumpkin

  • Hero Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,194
  • Neinzul Gardener Enclave
Re: How should we treat the wiki?
« Reply #15 on: April 24, 2015, 03:18:30 PM »
I would post-pend.
Post-prepend? You mean append? :P

I English good.
Too for me ;D

Ahem.
Something else bugs me: plural in page links/names. For instance, we have "AI Reinforcements"; also I was planning to create a page for general waves mechanisms, should I call it "Wave" or "Waves"? Should I link one form to the other? (idem for Golems, albeit it is a list of all the golems, so... dunno)

I would vote for a standardized "no plural" form, and for the sake of simplicity avoid plural-named pages redirecting to singular-named pages.
Please excuse my english: I'm not a native speaker. Don't hesitate to correct me.
Pumpkin>> Do I need another cure about paranoia on top of overexcitement?
Mal>> We play AI War, enthusiasm and paranoia are both required!

Offline Draco18s

  • Resident Velociraptor
  • Core Member Mark IV
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,924
Re: How should we treat the wiki?
« Reply #16 on: April 24, 2015, 03:27:07 PM »
Flip a coin.  Some wikis use singular, others use plural.  Everyone redirects from the one to the other.

Offline Pumpkin

  • Hero Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,194
  • Neinzul Gardener Enclave
Re: How should we treat the wiki?
« Reply #17 on: April 24, 2015, 03:33:00 PM »
Once again, it's something we could change latter. So I'll do some plural hunting and convert them to the singular religion that advocate absolute byte saving for sake of computation speed, low power consumption and green coding.

(STOP WRITING IN CAPSLOCK BECAUSE INTERNET IS NEARLY CLUTTERED)
Please excuse my english: I'm not a native speaker. Don't hesitate to correct me.
Pumpkin>> Do I need another cure about paranoia on top of overexcitement?
Mal>> We play AI War, enthusiasm and paranoia are both required!

Offline TheVampire100

  • Hero Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,248
  • Ordinary Vampire
Re: How should we treat the wiki?
« Reply #18 on: May 13, 2015, 09:51:26 AM »
I noticed that most ship stats in the AI War wiki are awefully outdatted and of the scale. I think these are the prior-8.0 stats (also, because they still use crystal in their costs).
Someone against it that I try to edit that all stats fit the current values? At least for the ships that I currently see in my games.

I would also say that it would be a good idea that stats that are not already know are put in bracktes [] so people, that use the wiki know, that these stats are not accurate anymore.

Offline Draco18s

  • Resident Velociraptor
  • Core Member Mark IV
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,924
Re: How should we treat the wiki?
« Reply #19 on: May 13, 2015, 10:45:29 AM »
Moat of the ship data was done via automation. Exported from the game, then run through a wikifier, and posted.

I don't remember who did it though.

Offline TheVampire100

  • Hero Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,248
  • Ordinary Vampire
Re: How should we treat the wiki?
« Reply #20 on: May 13, 2015, 11:33:28 AM »
Ah, well, it is outdatted anywhere. So I see this just as "Yes, update it".
It's very confusing at the moment.

Offline Draco18s

  • Resident Velociraptor
  • Core Member Mark IV
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,924
Re: How should we treat the wiki?
« Reply #21 on: May 13, 2015, 11:41:43 AM »
Oh yeah, update the bejesus out of it.
I'm just saying that it was automated at one point and it might be easier to do it that way.

Offline TheVampire100

  • Hero Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,248
  • Ordinary Vampire
Re: How should we treat the wiki?
« Reply #22 on: May 13, 2015, 11:47:55 AM »
It might but I don't lnow how to do it XD
Also I like it more if it's done personally, then I know exactly what's done and what's not done.