Sorry for being the ignorant one here, but what exactly is a 'wiki' (And I'm assuming we're not discussing cricket here...)?

A wiki is a type of website content management system that normally allows any visitor to add and/or edit the pages of content so that a collective body of community content can be created. It includes revision control so if someone abuses it by spamming or bad information the page can be easily reverted back to the text on there before the edit. Most wikis include some formatting stuff to make it easier to link to other pages on the wiki, add tables, index, lists, etc...

Wikipedia encyclopedia is probably the best known wiki based site. The entire encyclopedia is written by normal users and its constantly getting bigger. I use it on a daily basis, great source for links or just researching stuff you don't know much about. It's been invaluble in my work on Openlancer. There are entire books written on wiki systems too. See Wikimedia Foundation for more information and their other sites.

It doesn't get much better than that for community content creation and its great for content management too.

EDIT: Fixed link. Also wanted to note in implementing the wiki it would just replace the static game information pages with links to the wiki and transfer some of the special forums. Nothing else would need to change. It might also be possible to get the wiki to use the same user database so people would be automatically registered on both sites.


-Burn

"Only the dead have seen the end of war"-Plato

Edited by - MegaBurn on 1/3/2006 10:07:00 PM

Too, a wiki would allow people to create new categories for any games they want rather than having to add new forums or group them together into an "other topic". Just add a "Games" category with topic pages for each game and as it grows subcategories can be added for each game. If it gets too big reorder the games by genre or something. That could turn TLR into a one stop informational resource for game information. It would have a major advantage of the other gaming sites in that people can contribute directly to the sites content rather than having to wait for site staff to add games or write articles.

Another important point about this is a wiki is based on a relational database management system. That allows for a single list of articles to be organized into different sets of categories. So by having a main Freelancer topic on the main page, a Freelancer topic in the games category, and a Freelancer topic in the space sim games subcategory it would all lead back to the same Freelancer topic. Just like a normal hyperlink, except its a reference. Adding a reference is easy, just put double brackets around a keyword, makes adding links to other stuff in the wiki extremely easy.

You don't have to use MediaWiki. Its just one of the most common systems and a lot of people already know how to use it. It's also free, open source, easy to manage, easy to install, as a large number of extensions, etc...

So, can we get a wiki? Please?


-Burn

"Only the dead have seen the end of war"-Plato

The odds of allowing members to creat new area for TLR are nonexistant. It would lead to a mega out of control forum. We need to limit the number of games to cover to keep it under control and manageable. At this time, there is still the other foum code under consideration as well.

It wouldn't necessarily be out of control. MediaWiki includes support for permission controls and a bunch of anti-spam features. The permission controls allow you to restrict adding/editing content to registered users, designate sysops who have roughly the same powers as forum moderators, designate “bureaucrats” who can create sysops, and designate developers (admins). The anti-spam features include content blocking for regular expressions (e.g. block any combination of characters like bad words, bad topics, bad url's, etc), spam blacklsit extension to add lists of known spammer expressions (e.g. spam urls) to blacklists, proxy block, and other extensions that can add more content and/or permission controls.

Effectively the wiki could have tighter controls than the forums. However in the sense that it would generate a large volume of information, yes, it would probably grow at a feverish pace for a while. Controlling that seems like it should be rather simple for sysops, they can lock pages, lock categories, move stuff around, bury pages about other games in a general “other stuff" category or delete them outright, etc... Abusive users can be banned by username and/or IP. Certain keywords (regular expressions) like “cloak” or critical parts of the INI code to make cloaking work could be automatically rejected when the user attempts to submit the content. Checking up on new content is easy too, just click “Recent changes” to get a full list. If you don't like the changes made to a certain page just revert it back to the previous version (takes like 3 mouse clicks), you can compare different versions of a page with a side by side list of changes by line number, and all revisions are tagged with a username/IP and date/time stamp.

I think overall content management and control would be far easier on the moderators than managing the forums. You wouldn't have to argue with people, reason with them, worry making the right choice in wiping a page, or even proof read for bad language. If you see something you don't like just hit edit page, click on the text box, ctrl+a (select all), hit delete, paste in a prewritten statement to the effect “Dear User: Please review the rules of our wiki (link) and revise the previous content of this page by reviewing the page history and then resubmit the content.”, and hit save changes. Simple enough...not to mention normal users can edit other user's content, so if someone submits something bad it might be removed by another user before a sysop even notices!

Think about how useful this could be for building a massive Freelancer reference library covering the original game, all mods, all tutorials, and on going projects. Openlancer will use it for primary development, mainly for writing content – storyline material. In time we could write whole novels based on the Freelancer universe and highly detailed manuals covering all aspects of editing, and it can be exported to PDF then downloaded like any ebook (or rather exported to XML then converted to almost any format).

Again, please reconsider.


-Burn

"Only the dead have seen the end of war"-Plato

---

You wouldn't have to argue with people, reason with them, worry making the right choice in wiping a page, or even proof read for bad language. If you see something you don't like just hit edit page, click on the text box, ctrl+a (select all), hit delete, paste in a prewritten statement to the effect “Dear User: Please review the rules of our wiki (link) and revise the previous content of this page by reviewing the page history and then resubmit the content.”,

---

lol - its bad enough with our "1984 communist censorship and opressionistic ways" already, without bending over for fallout on that type of thing!! TBH I don't even see a benefit, as I don't believe it would get used by anyone other than yourselves (just the way I see it).

Now the good news , I have sod all to do with the site - I only moderate the forums, finito - so not only does what I think not make a slight bit of difference or even remotely matter with concerns for the site... I wouldn't even necessarily be one of the people to tend to it if you managed to get it implemented, so it wouldn't "cost" me anything either (as in not my job to do it, so why should I care?!).

You need to talk to the admins instead, maybe email them about the thread or something?

Yeah, replacing content like that is a bit extreme but theres no data loss so its effective, all revisions are kept in the page history. Same as editing a forum post to replace 'objectionable content' with "snip" except there the data is lost unless the user has a local copy. The moderation aspect of the wiki is the same, point is its not a forum, doesn't replace the forum but is excellect for managing and developing almost any text based content.

I think if a large amount of static content like game information and tutorials is moved over to the wiki people will probably start using it on a regular basis. Openlancer will make heavy use of it but I doubt that our content will be the majority of the total content.

This could certainly include details about Evolutions too. Like a general page with the scope of the mod and maybe a category for developing new news, rumors, and item descriptions. Like I mentioned on one of the Pathfinder's forum threads, you could use “wiki modding” to rapidly develop/redevelop a system (e.g. Florida). Just post the what you want done, some general concept ideas, and the existing content on the wiki with a link on the Pathfinder's forums. I haven't checked or followed up on that thread but my part in that offer still stands. Haven Enterprise is still working on the Beyond Sirius mod, which is based on Evolutions and as such I think most of HE would be happy to help contribute to Evo. It would be far easier for HE or anyone else to help with Evo or any other project if a general community wiki was in place.

I'll email bakedpotato about the wiki and this thread.


Thanks,
-Burn

"Only the dead have seen the end of war"-Plato

No reply from bakedpotato. I'll email Eraser about adding a wiki. Seems odd not to get a "formal" response after five days. I'm sure they're busy, and what not, but I find it hard to believe they haven't read this thread by now. Some communication here would be nice...


-Burn

"Only the dead have seen the end of war"-Plato

While a wiki for TLR seems pretty much in the dumpster nowadays, i did get a wiki up for openlancer (http://wiki.openlancer.com), so if megaburn or anyone else needed the wiki for anything openlancer related, there it is.

I suppose i could lend some more of my webhosting space (thanks to Boyd, of course) and we could "try out" a wiki for TLR and see how it works out...

I really don't know, and i'm not a moderator, so its up to the admins. I'm just throwing out possibilities here and trying to help.


Openlancer Lead Developer

Edited by - Blackhole on 2/22/2006 10:44:49 PM

Edited by - Blackhole on 2/22/2006 10:45:07 PM

Well, if it proves/proved popular etc, then I am sure it will help people (especially people like me, who are mardy old gits) to come around and see the potential benefits of the system

Indeed! Seems like people won't listen to reason, trust that an otherwise proven system will work in this setting, or even give it a small trial run. They have to wait for others to step up and do it themselves. Just so that it can be proven, yet again, to be a powerful tool and invaluable resource. Funny, same sort of reaction I would expect from TLR's web host (both a wiki and Openlancer are OSS after all).

I do realize TLR needs a new server but I don't see anything being done about it. Ask for donations, hold a full blown donation drive, get the word out, etc...or ask Gates, maybe he's in a generous mood.

Well done Blackhole. Now if we can get a CVS/SVN and DAM server we'll be set.


-Burn

"Only the dead have seen the end of war"-Plato

Megaburn, your misconception is amusing.

They don't have any say in whether their is a wikki or not, period. Predictable post though, and 100% bollocks.

The site design needs a redesign of the code, and an overhaul for the community. A project which remains vapourware does not superceed the every single other persons projects that are tangible , or the site itself (which you appear to believe it should). A wikki is up to BP, Eraser and Stinger - but I would imagine that a wikki for one project comes LOWER on the priorities than improving the site for it's current content, membership, and future direction. Now of course, BP, Eraser and Stinger may decide that it can be bumped up due to simplicity, or they may wish to support you perhaps, although this would be a snub to every other mod maker whom has worked extremely hard and hasn't been granted such prestigious status, despite featuring in magazines, having tens of thousands of downloads and more (you know, things that really keep the site going).

As for Openlancer, we've all seen promises, statements and more 1000 times with regards to mods, projects and more. This project is more ambitious, requires alot more work than others, but also remains firm vapourware at this time. Once there is solid development, some tangiable evidence as to progress, then I am sure Eraser, BP and Stinger will be delighted to help you all out, but until they are 100% sure of it's ability to make progress under its own steam, they maybe wasting valuable time that should be employed in the site firstly and foremost.

Until that day, it'll be "Just another project" as far as I am concerned, and therefore be treated like everyone else . I'm sorry if you feel this is unfair and unsupportive (although i don't speak for the site), it is also putting your firmly in perspective, and not looking through your own "rose tinted glasses".

Oh come off it Chips, there is no misconception there. The wiki isn't just for Openlancer, nor is the CVS/SVN or DAM server. They would be great community assets. I know TLR needs a new server before they add something like a wiki and that the site code is being upgraded. My point is if TLR needs a server and the owners can't pay for it than why don't they ask the community for help. Why not start a donation drive or if nothing else move the donate button to the top of the main page and at the very least say we need some money for a new server. It doesn't have to be some grand event of a fundraiser but that probably would work faster. If not by donations or ads, or something else we don't know about, then asking Gates for a little scratch would probably have as much chance at getting the required funds.

And, yes, that probably does amount to zero chance.


-Burn

"Only the dead have seen the end of war"-Plato

I haven't heard of TLR needing a new server, not sure why it needs one either - but yeah, it would be nice for Eraser, Stinger and BP to not foot the bill.

As for the wiki, i think its a "if you build it, they will come"... but more of "if it proves a viable alternative to the current forums method of information storage and sharing, then it could occur". The problem lay with the idea that I think it should be proven to be workable/useful, whereas others think admins should jump in and invest their time/effort simply at the whim of people. I know, whim isn't a great word, but when you don't see the benefit like others, it can be said to be a "whim" can it not