Uhm wth wikia?

[homerun]

With such a girly looking browser i'm surprised you left the windows layout unmolested.

[ringthree]

That's happened to me on other websites, I don't know if it's harmful or just some biproduct of an update they're doing.

What was done with the money was understandable given the circumstances. Some were just too impatient to wait for an explanation and jumped right into the mob mentality. Either way, the original wiki might have some problems, but the bg wiki is a joke if compared to it.

BG? Mob mentality? NO WAI!

[Mayareira]

No problems with "Those who we don't speak of" wiki here. Running no script.

[Not Kuno]

If you guys don't think our wiki has a lot of info, go help and edit it.

[Seraph]

If only you could somehow improve BG wiki by adding the information it lacks and crediting the source. Maybe in a few years wiki technology will reach that point.

[Malacite]

Wiki still works if you use any link that doesn't take you to the front page.

[Deimos]

If you guys don't think our wiki has a lot of info, go help and edit it.

Or I could just go to ffxiclopedia instead. What possible benefit would be gained by duplicating the information onto BG wiki?

ffxiclopedia has better design, layout, and functionality, and has more information and contributors by an order of magnitude. BG Wiki's existence is pointless. It's the FFXI Stratics of FFXI wikis. Don't get me wrong, it was a good initiative to attempt when the ffxiclopedia drama happened, but it's long past time to realize that it failed. Any work on BG Wiki at this point is just wasted time.

It's been a thought of mine for a while that BG Wiki should re-conceptualize itself to be more of a "strategy" wiki than an informational one. If it documented the types of things that are brought up in threads here constantly, it would be an extremely useful resource. If it had pages documenting strategies (low-man or otherwise) for events in depth, math showing why Item A is better than Item B, etc. Pages actually documenting these things, instead of just knowing "oh I think someone answered that in Random Questions #2 somewhere". BG Forums currently contain a ridiculous amount of information, but it's a lot of work to track that information down.

Yes, it's possible to put this sort of information on either BG Wiki or ffxiclopedia currently, but they're not designed to be used that way. They're set up with a focus on factual data, and strategy is just something that can be attached as side-notes. A wiki designed to be used for strategy would fill a gap, in my opinion.

[Funkworkz]

that is not harmful. it happens when apache is being rebuilt on the server side, so it just spits out a page of html for you to download and view instead of displaying it properly in the browser

edit: i should say, instead of automatically saving it in your browser cache to display for you, it asks you to save it as a file instead so theres no need to worry

[Mistress Stowastiq]

Say what you want about the FFXI wiki, the people that update that wiki do a ton more work than almost all the BG people combined. (Admittedly, some of it is completely crappy, but that is the nature of any wiki).

And whatever the wiki people did is now long forgotten and it's time to end this stupid "other" wiki thing when in fact almost everyone here uses the "other" wiki and not the BG one.

Water under bridges, etc.

I try both for my searches because I am always curious to see the differences between them.

[Lahan]

This is why we don't use the other wiki.

whats the addy of BG's wiki?! I never knew there was another one...

[Gergall]

Main Page - BGWiki

[Lahan]

Main Page - BGWiki

Thank you I am going to add you guys to my ffxi resource link page.

[Sonomaa]

hurr hurr u guyz donut updat ur wiki so i dun uze eet

No, because we arent the only ones who are supposed to update it, and considering a great portion of information comes from BG forums and is posted to the otherwiki UNCREDITED, that really is where the problem comes from and why the hostility does exist.

And yes, it has been a while, and it might be "water under the bridge" for some people, but not for all, some people feel very slighted that they were intentionally deceived so somebody could make a paycheck. BGwiki was made as an alternative yes, and while it is by no means complete and possibly will never be complete without a serious push from the community to help with updating it, it will remain just that, an alternative, one that was not made for a cash grab.

We never entirely expected bgwiki to become this new mecca because honestly, a great portion of BG forum users posted all the information on otherwiki to begin with, why would they feel the need to repost it all over again. And yes, we could have easily gone the shady route and did a full info dump of the otherwiki and just put it in ours, copypastedone. But then we would be doing the same thing they did to countless other forum posts and sites. No, we simply sit here as an alternative, not the best one by far, but one you have.

BG Forums have been approached by countless people wanting to buy. Shady and legitimate companies have wanted to invest in us or outright take over the forum structure entirely, money has been offered and it has been substantial. Some have just wanted the domain name and would relaunch as a new forum, scrapping the old. Weve been given hosting offers that were generous and some that were simply laugh out loud worthy, this includes several from gani himself.

But no, the forums will remain exactly how they are for as long as we can keep them up, and as things shift to 14 we will shift as well. XI will end up dying, its been written for years that it will come to pass. But BG will live on for endgame information and I will go to sleep content that we did everything we did without having to tell people one thing and do another behind their back.

So all of you who might bash our wiki for being incomplete, thats fine, go ahead, were cool with it. If you want to do something about it, help out, edit in a few things, give us a hand, we will appreciate it. For those who dont, thats fine, no hard feelings, we wont take it for granite.

[Meian]

I doubt anyone is bashing BG Wiki really. It just seems some people bash ffxiwiki (why call it otherwiki? Wasn't it there before BG wiki?) for little reason so they comment on bgwiki in comparison.

[arshesney]

That error is like an "hiccup" by the webserver, nothing harmful, it is just not being recognized as a webpage to be served (due to a service restart or a bad redirection) so your browser thinks that is some file to be downloaded.

The "application/x-httpd-php" explain this: application because it is a dynamic page to be parsed server side then sent to the client with http, PHP is the language in which wiki is coded.

[Not Kuno]

I doubt anyone is bashing BG Wiki really. It just seems some people bash ffxiwiki (why call it otherwiki? Wasn't it there before BG wiki?) for little reason so they comment on bgwiki in comparison.

Because they do not deserve to be mentioned by name.

[pahnphoenix]

bgwiki really hasn't matured well enough, but from a quality standpoint i wish it had. besides for quest info (which you could have got on alla, or *bradyguide*, or asking your friends), the most useful stuff on wiki is the battle mechanics stuff (all crossposted from gobli/anonymous JP testing, bg testing, alla testing, lj shit). however, the interface doesn't particularly guide people there, and the moderators on the forums don't seem to have a grasp of the information either. therefore, the only information of lasting value on that site is shit that you usually only get directed to from alla, KI, or BG (not coincidentally the places from which the info came in the first place). when i first heard about bg wiki, i hoped that it would compile the very directed, useful stuff that starts (or quickly ends up here) and guide people toward it. the beginning looked promising, but people didn't really keep up--so it goes.

interestingly, wiki has never produced any independent contributions of its own. while i can see why people defer to it instead of propping up bgwiki (or using KI/alla's shitty quest/mission/enemy pages), i think this fact does back up the spirit of what sonomaa seems to be trying to get across. the strength of any community is ultimately its members, not its url or whatever else you can buy. really, the work gobli, anonymous JP posters, KI/alla/ffxionline/BG users put in ended up buying the owners of ffxi wiki whatever wikia paid. their UI isn't anywhere near revolutionary or even particularly functional enough that they should benefit from our work (after lying about fundraiser money, no less).

but, no one wants to spend the effort to build a competitive wiki (i sure don't; i barely play now), so there you go. some jerks cashed in everyone else's passion, and now they have bradyguide v.9.999 where you can find any quest or mob you want, plus plagiarized reverse engineering work and forums populated by morons. (shrug) obviously the people who did the real work didn't expect to get paid for it anyway. this is kind of how things often work...

[Sho]

Or I could just go to ffxiclopedia instead. What possible benefit would be gained by duplicating the information onto BG wiki?

ffxiclopedia has better design, layout, and functionality, and has more information and contributors by an order of magnitude. BG Wiki's existence is pointless. It's the FFXI Stratics of FFXI wikis. Don't get me wrong, it was a good initiative to attempt when the ffxiclopedia drama happened, but it's long past time to realize that it failed. Any work on BG Wiki at this point is just wasted time.

It's been a thought of mine for a while that BG Wiki should re-conceptualize itself to be more of a "strategy" wiki than an informational one. If it documented the types of things that are brought up in threads here constantly, it would be an extremely useful resource. If it had pages documenting strategies (low-man or otherwise) for events in depth, math showing why Item A is better than Item B, etc. Pages actually documenting these things, instead of just knowing "oh I think someone answered that in Random Questions #2 somewhere". BG Forums currently contain a ridiculous amount of information, but it's a lot of work to track that information down.

Yes, it's possible to put this sort of information on either BG Wiki or ffxiclopedia currently, but they're not designed to be used that way. They're set up with a focus on factual data, and strategy is just something that can be attached as side-notes. A wiki designed to be used for strategy would fill a gap, in my opinion.

I have to agree with Deimos on all of that; BGwiki would more than likely be better off geared towards battle tactics and whatnot, while FFXIclopedia would maintain a "General" information wiki.

The problem isn't that people don't wish to contribute, it's just that it seems kinda overdone if people repeat the same general facts that are already compiled semi-decently elsewhere. FFXIclopedia simply has a shit ton more man/woman hours put in than BG, then from there a lot of followers, scammed or not. However most "guides" and battle strats on other wiki are utter shit. Example out of the 30-something BLU Guides on that site, I can only count 2 that are very informative. Same for other jobs, and NMs, etc.

BG has a lot of promise for NMs and shit, I mean everyone from everywhere else comes and temporarily lives here after a major update with added NMs/events, til BG cracks down on each new one. A lot of that can be converted into BGwiki info, for example:

Absolute Virtue - BGWiki

For all that that is discussed on BG about AV, this page really shouldn't be so bare as it is.

Maybe it's just me >.>

[Yugl]

The main characteristic of BG is its forums, not the BGwiki page. When you consider that, it's to see why BGwiki neither has nor needs guides (Bar-Quest/Missions).

[Sho]

The main characteristic of BG is its forums, not the BGwiki page. When you consider that, it's to see why BGwiki neither has nor needs guides (Bar-Quest/Missions).

Exactly my point! However, I do believe most of the info could be transcribed onto BGwiki. That would tie up loose ends for people that want to get a strat quickly, rather than looking at BGs huge forum backlog and sometimes subsequently pulling a topic out from the grave with a huge necrobump.