Concern about BG Wiki

[theo]

I'd thought this idea of a BG wiki was supposed to be an alternative to ffxiclopedia so the entire FFXI community wouldn't have to associate with the slugs responsible for this whole fiasco.

I'd have agreed with you, however at the moment it doesn't look like anyone else actually cares. I seem to recall BG being called elitist for even speaking out on the subject. So with that in mind, does BG wiki really have anyone to impress other than BG itself?

A quick scan of the Alla main forum didn't locate any threads about the wiki issue, however I did have the joy of stumbling across a light luggage rant, a rant about throwing away ra/ex items, and a "CFH Guide" made by xylia.

[Elmer the Pointy]

I think a restrictive BG wiki would be a step in the wrong direction. We're trying to fill a void where the FFXIclopedia once stood. It's not a task where you want to be excluding people and turning away potential contributors.

Plus, you'll only be shooting yourself in the foot when you run across people without access to BGwiki during parties, quests and missions. We can't berate players for being noobs while denying them access to information that will improve their performance.

[Elmer the Pointy]

A quick scan of the Alla main forum didn't locate any threads about the wiki issue, however I did have the joy of stumbling across a light luggage rant, a rant about throwing away ra/ex items, and a "CFH Guide" made by xylia.

They do have a thread about it in General Discussion.

ffxiclopedia fraud

[theo]

A quick scan of the Alla main forum didn't locate any threads about the wiki issue, however I did have the joy of stumbling across a light luggage rant, a rant about throwing away ra/ex items, and a "CFH Guide" made by xylia.

They do have a thread about it in General Discussion.

ffxiclopedia fraud

Clearly, this is what I get for skimming pages at 5 AM.

[Rocl]

I hear we have UNLIMITED POWAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH so it should all be public. Besides having a wiki restricted just to us sounds really gay, sorry lol

After all, we're the elitist BG forumgoers, we're supposed to know everything, yknow

[Zalius]

I hear we have UNLIMITED POWAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH so it should all be public. Besides having a wiki restricted just to us sounds really gay, sorry lol

After all, we're the elitist BG forumgoers, we're supposed to know everything, yknow

but can you see why kids love cinnamon toast crunch?

[Rocl]

I hear we have UNLIMITED POWAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH so it should all be public. Besides having a wiki restricted just to us sounds really gay, sorry lol

After all, we're the elitist BG forumgoers, we're supposed to know everything, yknow

but can you see why kids love cinnamon toast crunch?

It has cinnamony swirls in every bite.
What now, fucker?

[mikazuki]

bazaar comment set to:

http://wiki.bluegartr.com
your source for accurate and fraud-free
ffxi information!

[Kensaki]

It actually grew to 6 pages? I just made the thread when Taj linked it in chat and stayed around abit.

The funny part is that I got about 3 times as much hostility from ffxionline.com that allah, over the thread.

I guess their afraid of losing their precious ffxiclopedia.

[Nikkei]

Ok, just to explain some concerns people have. The servers were donated to us in return for some banners regarding a hosting company. (No IGE bullshit) BG admins do not pay anything to have these servers nor the amount of bandwith they will use. This is why Sonomaa has stated we do not take donations towards the wiki. We do however take donations towards the forum servers since they do cost us money.

That being said, since it's no money out of our pockets for how much bandwith we use, there's no reason to restrict who has access. Most of the sections will be free to the public to add to, we are in the process of reviewing moderators who will simply help organize and edit where it needs to be done.

I think a restrictive BG wiki would be a step in the wrong direction. We're trying to fill a void where the FFXIclopedia once stood. It's not a task where you want to be excluding people and turning away potential contributors.

Plus, you'll only be shooting yourself in the foot when you run across people without access to BGwiki during parties, quests and missions. We can't berate players for being noobs while denying them access to information that will improve their performance.

Exactly. This wiki is being created to fill a void for people who no longer feel comfortable going to the FFXIclopedia. We need everyone to add what they know, whether it be end game or lower level, missions or quests. It all has to be done. I've never liked the whole BG elitest thing, though, don't get me wrong, I am just as annoyed when newbie topics pop up in advanced or questions come up that there are obviously threads about but someone new to the forums was too lazy to use the search function for. So, honestly people need to put aside their dislike for someone because of the ffxi forum they use and just help us create a new place to use for FFXI information. If and when problems come up with something someone posted, there will be admins and moderators to help fix it. But there is absolutely no reason to restrict simply adding any information to only BG users.

[sleekmotorwurkz]

I can see it now... some example definitions

Suppa - Reward for completing divine might
Bushi - LoLNotSuppa
Abyssal - LoLNotSuppa
Chausable - Crafting item, cannot be worn
Mandau - best relic weapon money can buy


In all seriousness, this could be a great thing as long as we keep opinions out of it and stick to the facts :D

[Zarath]

I can see it now... some example definitions

Suppa - Reward for completing divine might
Bushi - LoLNotSuppa
Abyssal - LoLNotSuppa
Chausable - Crafting item, cannot be worn
Mandau - best relic weapon money can buy


In all seriousness, this could be a great thing as long as we keep opinions out of it and stick to the facts :D

But it's true...

[Ceiyne]

We can't berate players for being noobs while denying them access to information that will improve their performance.

Out of all the smart things I've ever read on BG, this might be the wisest.

[Delekii]

Not sure why you would want to limit access to the Wiki in any event, since despite all the big talk, fairly often a lot of good research comes from sites other than BG.

[Sasarai]

No reason to limit it at all, BG Wiki won't have the same problem as FFXIclopedia (misinformation being kept up because the admins are noobs too).

[Sho]

Leave it [BG-wiki] open to damn near everyone, restrict moderation to dedicated BGpeeps. Seems like a well off trade.

[Ashira]

From everything I could glean from our chatter, there is no plan to limit access to BGWiki at all.

And from the looks of those volunteering, there will be many many more checks and balances so that varying mods can't just lockdown pages when something they are SURE OF OMG I SAW IT I SWEAR is contradicted/refuted on pages.

[ringthree]

I don't post much, but I've been a member a long, long time. This is the only FFXI page I frequent for info outside of the old Wiki. While I'm certain what I'm quasi-suggesting is a little out of sorts, I wanted to bring up that in one thing, Ganiman does have a point. He wanted to make he and the admins wanted to benefit from the work they did. So should the up and coming BG wiki. To wit, how much possibility is there in allowing the BG wiki to only be accessed/updated by BG members?

I'm sure percentage-wise it's probably .01% but, let's look at it this way. Why should Alla be allowed to benefit from BG *or* why should the people at the new wikiffxi bullshit shoveling feces loving backstabbing thieves (oh my goodness, turrets) not just log into the BG wiki for their updates? It seems that since we as endgame players are better at disseminating new information on a much larger scale than the other FFXI websites, wouldn't it be unseemly to allow that same effort to go into a Wiki that would simply be pirated to another source? Isn't that the kind of raging douchebaggery that the good ol' folks at the Wiki would take advantage of?

Anyway, I don't pretend to know the answers to half of the questions in this post. Maybe some of it merits discussion, then again, likely not.

Well, limiting it to BG members would be a bit restrictive, but the BG forum community would be acceptable. I suggested elsewhere tying BG forum accounts to the BG wiki accounts, and limiting edits to those with a certain postcount (something trivial, like 100). It could be possible to limit viewing to those with certain postcounts, as well. If edits/views were limited to 100-postcount or above, it'd keep out people who don't frequent BG and deter vandalism. There are people who lurk more than post who still make valuable contributions when they do post, so that's why I wouldn't suggest anything much more than 50-100 posts... just enough to ensure someone didn't just make an account 10 minutes ago to check out or edit the wiki.

I have generally noticed that people that are likely to do the most grunt work (compiling game information on weapons, gear, jobs, the not as fun stuff) are generally not very high posters. They prefer their own thing than getting involved on the forums. It's probably a good thing too. A good set of moderators for the wiki would prevent abuse. You could limit contentious pages (paralyze a WS) to a certain tier of account, but the problem with that is that the people most likely to engage are people that post a lot (they like to be heard). In essence, I don't think that even 10 posts is a good limit for most contributer. It's a wiki after all, its part of the risk run with that type of resource.

[ringthree]

From everything I could glean from our chatter, there is no plan to limit access to BGWiki at all.

And from the looks of those volunteering, there will be many many more checks and balances so that varying mods can't just lockdown pages when something they are SURE OF OMG I SAW IT I SWEAR is contradicted/refuted on pages.

I think a general POIDH policy for contested issues would actually be a good idea here.

[Retrieving/C.D/Searain]

I can see it now... some example definitions

Suppa - Reward for completing divine might
Bushi - LoLNotSuppa
Abyssal - LoLNotSuppa
Chausable - Crafting item, cannot be worn
Mandau - best relic weapon money can buy


In all seriousness, this could be a great thing as long as we keep opinions out of it and stick to the facts :D

It'd be great if there was a box or containing some random informations about BG lore/meme's/running jokes/historical background concerning the subject the article above was revolving around, including links to the respective thread on the forum.

Just to make a few example off the top of my head the Ninurta's Sash page should provide some info regarding the "lolsash" stuff and Map (now I bet he's gonna post a line lol), the AV page would mention Ebon Panels and whatnot while the Ridill one could show the lyrics of "throw some Ridellz on some shit" and so forth.