Would you like for us to make an integrated Wiki?

[Lianru]

This is assuming

1. we get a wiki
2. I get to be an editor
3. you get to be an editor
4. you're mean

[RadiantBeam]

4. you're mean

Kyte is plenty mean!

[Techlet]

Voted yes, on the condition that someone else does all of the hard work.

Team work - Where the team does all the work.

[Lianru]

Kyte is plenty mean!

He's not mean to me.

[Kyte]

This is assuming

1. we get a wiki
2. I get to be an editor
3. you get to be an editor
4. you're mean

Assuming all that, of course.

Kyte is plenty mean!

This woman knows me.

He's not mean to me.

You're too lovable. :3

[Nortan the Bunny]

Stupid question: Would this wiki have translations of stuff on there, such as translations of official character profiles and the scenes of Fate/Prototype (the Fate/Prototype script thread), etc.?

Anyways, for troubled pages, I'm not too familiar with the way wikis work, but surely, there's a way to deal with any potential issues such as edit wars. Such as some sort of approval system or having a mod keep an eye on such pages on a constant basis etc. Also imagines that you could ban certain people from editing certain pages too.

Is just going to use Sakura as an example since she was brought up. Surely, there's no problem in mentioning that she killed people in the Heaven's Feel arc, which is fact. No doubt that the section that summarizes her role in the Heaven's Feel arc would elaborate on this further.

[SeiKeo]

Is just going to use Sakura as an example since she was brought up. Surely, there's no problem in mentioning that she killed people in the Heaven's Feel arc, which is fact.

For a given definition of Sakura.

[Mike1984]

It sounds like a good idea to me, and I have enough of a lack-of-life to offer to be dedicated editor, following Five's suggestion.
Only one thing: No interpretations allowed. None. Zilch. Zip. Nada. That way any and all edit wars are avoided.

Well, that is of course obvious but, even with that, you still have to be clear what is an "interpretation", and somtimes such a thing is just unavoidable.

If you want an example of what I'm talking about, look at the Wikipedia article on "Taiwan". There is a long argument on the talk page about whether it's a "state", a "sovereign state", a "country", as "disputed territory" or God-knows what else. Not to mention issues with the name itself....

Obviously, such things should be avoided as much as possible, but sometimes it's quite difficult to do so, and we have to be very careful to ensure that the article doesn't imply things it shouldn't, too (such as, for example, if you say Sakura "killed" thousands of people, the implication there is that she is at fault for it when, really (IMO at least), she's not).

Some characters are more debate-able than others and we all know that. Furthermore, while some have very clear motivations and such, even the protagonists' motivations change (Fate Shirou != UBW Shirou != HF Shirou). Thus I think it would be best if all viewpoints are presented... though I would say "interpretations" should be kept as a separate page from base, "known" facts. The fact that Shirou has Avalon in him is known; whether he knows it or not is another matter entirely. This way the factual pages aren't cluttered, and if people want to debate powerlevels or "which one is the right one" there's pages for that. This keeps both camps reasonably happy, I'd think.

Yeah, that's probably fair. I have no problem with it as long as it's fair, and does not (implicitly or explicitly) follow one viewpoint. I've managed to edit TV Tropes reasonably successfully (with only one edit war, which went unresolved (with the entire section being deleted) due to the other guy being unwilling to compromise despite my efforts and then the moderators stepping in in a totally stupid manner), so I should be able to cope with it here, as long as people remember that it's supposed to be unbiased (and, if it's not, don't object to me editing it)....

Also, remember, it doesn't have to be right first time around. It's quite possible for someone to write an article, me to edit it into a form that I am happy with, them to edit it back to something intermediate and for us to then alternate editing whilst gradually converging on something mutually acceptable. As long as the other person is willing to actually compromise, then so am I.

IMO, this will only work out if not every single forum user can edit it for the trolls and lulz. But then the problem arises that people would complain of unfairness of not being able to edit. If it's the case that everyone can edit, we'd need wiki staff to supervise the pages, and I dunno you'd need someone neutral to do that probably.

No, sorry, if we have it, then it has to be editable by everyone (maybe with some, relatively low post or time qualification to stop people signing up to vandalise the wiki). Otherwise, how do we decide who is allowed?

But if we can manage to not have edit wars, I'm all for it. It would be a nice place to gather the crapload of material that's scattered all over the place, and it might motivate me to translate the Tsukihime material since there would be a place to put it. Plus, I love organizing things.

Yeah, definitely. Even if it is mainly just a collection of useful information rather than a real wiki, it is still useful to have. Pages on the characters etc. would still definitely be useful, though, if only to allow people to find the relevant information.

Wiki organizing, well, I'd have a better idea of how it would work if there's enough yes votes to convince me buying it is a good idea. I mean, we could always certainly add a "Wiki Admins" userclass or something. It depends on how extensively it integrates into forum structures and whatnot, something I don't know without actually having the package, of course.

Well, I would assume it would be the existing admins, mostly. Hopefully the community is small enough (and what disagreements we might have predictable enough) that we won't need too much moderation (because I don't think the admins should be decreeing whether Dark Sakura is "really" Sakura or whatever), and I doubt there is anyone on this forum who is truly impartial enough to judge a TM argument anyway (for the same reason that Wikipedia admins are discouraged from judging debates on pages they edited). We all have our own views on the Nasuverse, after all, or else we wouldn't be here....

Also imagines that you could ban certain people from editing certain pages too.

Hell no. Just because my opinions are strong, that doesn't mean I don't have useful information to add. Obviously, long edit wars that are going nowhere are another matter entirely, but those can be dealt with without such a stringent restriction.

Is just going to use Sakura as an example since she was brought up. Surely, there's no problem in mentioning that she killed people in the Heaven's Feel arc, which is fact. No doubt that the section that summarizes her role in the Heaven's Feel arc would elaborate on this further.

The implications of that are a lot worse than the reality, though. It's like having an article about some celebrity that had once been in the army and, at the top, saying "he killed 100 people" without any context as to why.

[Kratosirving]

One way to solve edit wars is that the users that are primarily involved in them and acting completely childish can get permabanned from editing the page.


No matter what the eventual action would be in regards to edit wars...is it bad that I already foresee wars in at least the following character pages?

Sakura
Arcueid
Medea
Saber

[I3uster]

Dunno, Dartz is pretty good in sourcing his information, I doubt he'd start an edit war.

[Mike1984]

One way to solve edit wars is that the users that are primarily involved in them and acting completely childish can get permabanned from editing the page.

That's totally unfair, though. It just means that the side with the most support ends up winning, regardless of the strength of their argument or whether they're being reasonable.

No matter what the eventual action would be in regards to edit wars...is it bad that I already foresee wars in at least the following character pages?

Sakura
Arcueid
Medea
Saber

No, it's not surprising. They're the controversial topics, so it figures that a wiki page about them will be controversial....

Dunno, Dartz is pretty good in sourcing his information, I doubt he'd start an edit war.

That doesn't mean it won't cause edit-wars.

[terraablaze]

Dunno, Dartz is pretty good in sourcing his information, I doubt he'd start an edit war.

He's good at having sources. Whether his sources mean what he says they mean is sometimes up for debate.

[Bloble]

How about for editing controversial pages there could be some wiki moderators that have to approve any changes to each page before they are shown? That should prevent any edit wars, or at least slow them down.

[Mike1984]

How about for editing controversial pages there could be some wiki moderators that have to approve any changes to each page before they are shown? That should prevent any edit wars, or at least slow them down.

Honestly, I don't see the point. It just makes life more difficult for everyone (especially given that there are not that many mods around).

If we do get into edit wars, then so what? They'll calm down eventually, and it's not like this is Wikipedia, where the detailed content of the wiki is the whole point of the site. Maybe if a edit war does occur, the mods could temporarily take that approach, but having it done permanently is not a good idea.

[Kyte]

Well, that is of course obvious but, even with that, you still have to be clear what is an "interpretation", and somtimes such a thing is just unavoidable.

If you want an example of what I'm talking about, look at the Wikipedia article on "Taiwan". There is a long argument on the talk page about whether it's a "state", a "sovereign state", a "country", as "disputed territory" or God-knows what else. Not to mention issues with the name itself....

Obviously, such things should be avoided as much as possible, but sometimes it's quite difficult to do so, and we have to be very careful to ensure that the article doesn't imply things it shouldn't, too (such as, for example, if you say Sakura "killed" thousands of people, the implication there is that she is at fault for it when, really (IMO at least), she's not).

Very easy! [citation needed]
No citation? Not factual. Away it goes.
Simple!

Yeah, definitely. Even if it is mainly just a collection of useful information rather than a real wiki, it is still useful to have. Pages on the characters etc. would still definitely be useful, though, if only to allow people to find the relevant information.

Wiki pages are collections of useful info?

Well, I would assume it would be the existing admins, mostly. Hopefully the community is small enough (and what disagreements we might have predictable enough) that we won't need too much moderation (because I don't think the admins should be decreeing whether Dark Sakura is "really" Sakura or whatever), and I doubt there is anyone on this forum who is truly impartial enough to judge a TM argument anyway (for the same reason that Wikipedia admins are discouraged from judging debates on pages they edited). We all have our own views on the Nasuverse, after all, or else we wouldn't be here....

No way, a) Forum and Wiki are different beasts and b) they just hired mods to lessen their workload. Why would they get more work piled on them? Especially since Wiki admins tend to require a more proactive role as they not only police, but clean up and whatnot.

Hell no. Just because my opinions are strong, that doesn't mean I don't have useful information to add. Obviously, long edit wars that are going nowhere are another matter entirely, but those can be dealt with without such a stringent restriction.

You shouldn't be using useful information to smuggle your opinions, anyways.

The implications of that are a lot worse than the reality, though. It's like having an article about some celebrity that had once been in the army and, at the top, saying "he killed 100 people" without any context as to why.

That's loaded writing, of course it'd be eliminated.

That's totally unfair, though. It just means that the side with the most support ends up winning, regardless of the strength of their argument or whether they're being reasonable.

Uh, no. Ideally, both sides get a editpage-ban for starting an edit war. After all, neither was willing to compromise.

No, it's not surprising. They're the controversial topics, so it figures that a wiki page about them will be controversial....

Only if you make the mistake of writing opinion.

That doesn't mean it won't cause edit-wars.

You can't argue facts. That's why the easiest way to avoid any issues is to simply eliminate opinions attached to the facts.

If we do get into edit wars, then so what? They'll calm down eventually, and it's not like this is Wikipedia, where the detailed content of the wiki is the whole point of the site. Maybe if a edit war does occur, the mods could temporarily take that approach, but having it done permanently is not a good idea.

Edit wars spill over into the forum and turn over into flame wars. No thanks. That's when editors need to apply the Lock Hammer. Plus, having correct information's the whole point of DP sinking $70 + 35/yr on this, at the very least it's a courtesy to the dude who pays for the stuff.

He's good at having sources. Whether his sources mean what he says they mean is sometimes up for debate.

Well, the Wiki shouldn't have anything debatable on them, anyways. It should have the information (and sources) there for others to use on the forum, but there shouldn't be any opinion or interpretation attached to the info.
That also includes extrapolation and calculations of the kind Dartz's so fond of. At the very least, they'd be relegated to their own namespace outside the main wiki.

How about for editing controversial pages there could be some wiki moderators that have to approve any changes to each page before they are shown? That should prevent any edit wars, or at least slow them down.

Approval for every page and edit is too slow and cumbersome, and swamps the editors with busywork that distracts from the main issues.

[Kotonoha]

What if we made a wiki that contained just translations and nothing else.

[Mike1984]

Very easy! [citation needed]
No citation? Not factual. Away it goes.
Simple!

Of course, it that doesn't change the issue where there are multiple sources which contradict each other, which given the Nasuverse is probably quite often....

To give a non-Sakura example, the argument about Shirou tracing Excalibur. He does appear to do it in HF, but then it's said he cannot do it (rather cryptically) later on. So, did he, or didn't he...?

The editors/admins/janitors/staff/whatever. All Wikis have it.

Yeah, but how can they reasonably decide who gets to edit without pissing off the people who aren't allowed (and, that does matter, because they will still talk to them on the forum). And, for that matter, how do you do it without it appearing like you endorse their viewpoint?

Wiki pages are collections of useful info.

Yeah, but usually edited into a more easily-readable and searchable form....

No way, a) Forum and Wiki are different beasts and b) they just hired mods to lessen their workload. Why would they get more work piled on them? Especially since Wiki admins tend to require a more proactive role as they not only police, but clean up and whatnot.

It makes sense for the two to be integrated, though. Even if there are lower-level admins who have wiki control and not forum control, the top-level admins will have to be the site admins (in fact, that's required by the nature of the mod, I believe).

You shouldn't be using useful information to smuggle your opinions, anyways.

Of course, but that has nothing to do with what I just said....

That's loaded writing, of course it'd be eliminated.

Well, I'd hope so, yes....

[Kyte]

Of course, it that doesn't change the issue where there are multiple sources which contradict each other, which given the Nasuverse is probably quite often....

To give a non-Sakura example, the argument about Shirou tracing Excalibur. He does appear to do it in HF, but then it's said he cannot do it (rather cryptically) later on. So, did he, or didn't he...?

Say something like "Interpretations vary" or "Results inconclusive", then give all the relevant information for the reader to interpret on their own and maybe provides a link to a forum thread where the topic can be discussed. Since this is a wiki integrated with a forum, we gotta leverage that integration. The idea's for the Wiki to be a reference, not an authoritative source on all the interpretations of canon.

Yeah, but how can they reasonably decide who gets to edit without pissing off the people who aren't allowed (and, that does matter, because they will still talk to them on the forum). And, for that matter, how do you do it without it appearing like you endorse their viewpoint?

Simple: They piss the people off. Nobody said being a mod/admin/editor is a nice job. And there should be no viewpoint, otherwise they're doing their job wrong.

Yeah, but usually edited into a more easily-readable and searchable form....

I fail to see the problem. Editing won't make it lose neutrality so long as the writer is competent.

It makes sense for the two to be integrated, though. Even if there are lower-level admins who have wiki control and not forum control, the top-level admins will have to be the site admins (in fact, that's required by the nature of the mod, I believe).

Yeah, but top-level admins would be arbitrators, not editors.

Of course, but that has nothing to do with what I just said....

Well, you said "Just because my opinions are strong, that doesn't mean I don't have useful information to add." If you don't smuggle opinion with fact, then the question is immaterial and the issue resolves itself neatly since there's nothing to argue.

[Mike1984]

Say something like "Interpretations vary" or "Results inconclusive", then give all the relevant information for the reader to interpret on their own and maybe provides a link to a forum thread where the topic can be discussed. Since this is a wiki integrated with a forum, we gotta leverage that integration. The idea's for the Wiki to be a reference, not an authoritative source on all the interpretations of canon.

Fair enough....

Simple: They piss the people off. Nobody said being a mod/admin/editor is a nice job. And there should be no viewpoint, otherwise they're doing their job wrong.

Yeah, but having a bunch of people on the forum that a large chunk of it don't like is not a good idea....

I fail to see the problem. Editing won't make it lose neutrality so long as the writer is competent.

Editing it still involves adding some personal opinion, though, in general.

Yeah, but top-level admins would be arbitrators, not editors.

Well, yes, mostly (although I would imagine that they would make some contributions, particularly in the case of Elf and Altima), but they are still there to arbitrate. And, honestly, with the size of the community (about 90% of the posts are probably made by about 10-20 members), I think that having a huge admin layer is just overkill, to be honest.

Well, you said "Just because my opinions are strong, that doesn't mean I don't have useful information to add." If you don't smuggle opinion with fact, then the question is immaterial and the issue resolves itself neatly since there's nothing to argue.

It's not if they block me anyway....

[Kotonoha]

See, translations are great because everyone likes them and they are neutral and don't show people's opinions (usually (that Nasu/Takeuchi/Urobuchi interview translation recently, looooool))

That is why I think it would be pretty cool if we just stuck translations in there instead of bullshit subjective articles about shit we already know

Wat think