Over the past week I have been discussing with the Wiki admins and other editors ways to improve the Wiki's usability. Stuff was ranging from reorganizing information to adding new template ideas. A common complaint with my ideas was that it would increase maintenance of the already hard-to-maintain Wiki. Then I had a moment of clarity: The Wiki seems to be lacking tools to keep track of when things are getting out-of-date! I wanted to devise something that should reduce blind maintenance, increase more meaningful maintenance, and draw more attention on much needed information.
My template ideas and the ideas being sandboxed before they go into effect, if at all
The first idea I started working on was a way to rate each problem a game has during emulation. The template logs problems into seven categories if there is missing data, such as how severe the issue is when playing (unknown), missing bug reports, missing revisions that correct the problem, and a flag that determines if the issue has been partially resolved (Sonic Heroes graphical glitches). The categories have an explanation what they mean.
The second idea I had was to overhaul the infobox to include information relevant to emulation. The current infobox is just a modified clone of what you find on Wikipedia containing a lot of useless information, such as genre, game series, and publisher details. More vital information would be compatibility rating, MD5 checksums, and DVD9 Wii discs. The sandboxed infobox I got going is still rough and a WIP. It is far from final. It barely looks different. I have a template talk going on brainstorming what should be in it.
The third and final idea I had was banners that flag articles that are out-of-date in various other ways (stubs and outdated templates). The idea is simple. Just plop the template on a article/section you think is out-of-date and hopefully it creates just enough of an eyesore that someone will fix it, prompting its removal. Yes, these templates categorize the out-of-date articles.
Right now, I need feedback. These templates may look rough on the surface (I got complaints about it and I am working with Kolano to make it more acceptable as he already improved the look of my problem rating idea) but I know at its core it is something the Wiki needs to help aid it's maintainability.
I don't think any of your plans will work out because there simply isn't enough manpower to regulate something like this. Besides, everyone's definition of what problems are serious are different. Lots of people will play a game despite what I'd consider critical, game breaking bugs, where as some people think some of the bugs I don't mind are these horrible things.
I'm not sure what else you want to do, but, just looking over that was pretty worrying. Standardization across the entire wiki would be impossible considering there are pages years old already. When I play a game and update the wiki, I don't want to worry about following some complex template, I want to write down what I did, put down a rating for the game if I'm confident I played enough, and note any bugs. The more complex you make it the less likely I am to contribute. I do not like the added complexity.
I do agree there are things the wiki could do better, sure, but I'm not convinced this is the right way to go about it yet.
(11-09-2015, 08:05 PM)JMC47 Wrote: [ -> ]I don't think any of your plans will work out because there simply isn't enough manpower to regulate something like this. Besides, everyone's definition of what problems are serious are different. Lots of people will play a game despite what I'd consider critical, game breaking bugs, where as some people think some of the bugs I don't mind are these horrible things.
The manpower problem can be solved. I find that the power of MediaWiki is heavily underutilized for Dolphin Wiki's implementation. MediaWiki is designed to be a website than anyone can edit and contribute to but I am not seeing much of that. Here is how I have come to understand the maintenance issues:
- The people that periodically check-in the Wiki the most, mostly admins, know the Wiki's declining state of being up-to-date. This number is very few. It's like they think it's the duty of the admins to keep things up-to-date. There are just too many articles for that to be feasible.
- There are a select few people that know the Wiki is out-of-date. There are many people that probably use the Wiki that are probably unaware that the article they are reading about is not up-to-date. There is nothing indicating that the page is out-of-date, probably reinforcing that the article to be thought of as up-to-date.
- The maintenance tools that can help keep the Wiki up-to-date are very out of the way and I don't think they are being used. There are useful templates that come default with MediaWiki that have been forgotten or flat-out deleted.
Dolphin Wiki in its current state is an odd beast of problems that other Wikis I devoted some time to don't seem to exhibit. Sure, there are maintenance issues on any Wiki, but I have seen better systems to aid the progress to get closer to the goal of keeping things up-to-date. I'm speaking from experience.
(11-09-2015, 08:05 PM)JMC47 Wrote: [ -> ]I'm not sure what else you want to do, but, just looking over that was pretty worrying. Standardization across the entire wiki would be impossible considering there are pages years old already. When I play a game and update the wiki, I don't want to worry about following some complex template, I want to write down what I did, put down a rating for the game if I'm confident I played enough, and note any bugs. The more complex you make it the less likely I am to contribute. I do not like the added complexity.
That is the beauty of my template idea. If you know how to use the issue, revision, and rating templates already available on the Wiki, you will know how to use my template idea. I fail to see why it would be impossible. The contribution rate is pretty low as it is. The system I am forming should encourage higher contribution rates if one person should happen to have the information being sought out. I have overhauled articles such as Super Smash Bros. Brawl and F-Zero GX while still staying within current Dolphin Wiki conventions. I have validated those articles as being up-to-date as possible.
(11-09-2015, 08:05 PM)JMC47 Wrote: [ -> ]I do agree there are things the wiki could do better, sure, but I'm not convinced this is the right way to go about it yet.
This is the part where you give me suggestions how to improve templates for articles such as:
We can fix this. I have the knowledge to help aid the Wiki's recovery and the rest of the community has the power to make it a reality into being more up-to-date than it is now. I really like Dolphin Emulator. I want it to be the best it can possibly be!
Oh, good, very good wildgoosespeeder, running to the forums now? To get opinion of the forum users that have no idea of what's going on? HA HA
It's actually funny that you also failed to mention to our fellow forum members that most of those "concepts" were promptly
rejected by a
widely negative response from
all Wiki Admins and most active Wiki Users, mostly because they add unnecessary maintenance and increase the complexity of the wiki for outsiders trying to add something new to the wiki, not to mention another set of N points and issues with those
craps templates you're proposing? That you simply keep evading instead of answering? (and that everyone can read by themselves in confusedly distributed wiki talk pages).
Seriously dude, JUST STOP, you keep saying that you're trying to improve the wiki but looking at your contributions reveals no useful contribuition other than what you did in the last days: suggest crap => get negative responses about that crap => keep working in the non sense you're proposing to make it even crappier (and say it was based in the negative responses) => overexplain a lot (to evade answering most questions) and then the game restarts. But hey! Something new in that game, now we have a new chapter called "running to the forums"
I don't know enough about the wiki to comment on this as a whole, but looking at the example pages you put up, I see a problem: The templates for each issue will prompt the user to create an issue report if there isn't one, even for things that would be obviously invalid if someone were to submit them to the issue tracker, such as EFB2RAM being needed. (The template is also weirdly positioned, making the first line of text very short.)
All that sounds kinda complicated and not necessarily helpful...
It might have been good to think some of this stuff through a bit more aaaaaaall the way back when all those wiki pages were made, but now I don't think there's much use to this other than confusing people and setting the bar higher to edit/update a page which most people already fret.
(11-10-2015, 07:05 AM)Jhonn Wrote: [ -> ]It's actually funny that you also failed to mention to our fellow forum members that most of those "concepts" were promptly rejected by a widely negative response from all Wiki Admins and most active Wiki Users, mostly because they add unnecessary maintenance and increase the complexity of the wiki for outsiders trying to add something new to the wiki, not to mention another set of N points and issues with those craps templates you're proposing? That you simply keep evading instead of answering? (and that everyone can read by themselves in confusedly distributed wiki talk pages).
I think the following statements I made originally
imply that there was some negative points to my ideas that I want to turn positive:
(11-09-2015, 05:26 PM)wildgoosespeeder Wrote: [ -> ]A common complaint with my ideas was that it would increase maintenance of the already hard-to-maintain Wiki.
Right now, I need feedback. These templates may look rough on the surface (I got complaints about it and I am working with Kolano to make it more acceptable as he already improved the look of my problem rating idea) but I know at its core it is something the Wiki needs to help aid it's maintainability.
I'm going to the forum for people's feedback, not as "crying to mommy when something is unfair" for lack of a better term. I realize that the conversations were spread out but Kolano has since fixed that. I thank him for that. Also keep in mind that I only got feedback from four or so people at the time. The forum just seems like a good place to get more than four people's opinion.
(11-10-2015, 07:05 AM)Jhonn Wrote: [ -> ]Oh, good, very good wildgoosespeeder, running to the forums now? To get opinion of the forum users that have no idea of what's going on? HA HA
Seriously dude, JUST STOP, you keep saying that you're trying to improve the wiki but looking at your contributions reveals no useful contribuition other than what you did in the last days: suggest crap => get negative responses about that crap => keep working in the non sense you're proposing to make it even crappier (and say it was based in the negative responses) => overexplain a lot (to evade answering most questions) and then the game restarts. But hey! Something new in that game, now we have a new chapter called "running to the forums"
I don't know what your beef is with me. Comments like this aren't helping me in the slightest. I see this as harassment than helpful. Please stop.
(11-10-2015, 07:21 AM)JosJuice Wrote: [ -> ]I don't know enough about the wiki to comment on this as a whole, but looking at the example pages you put up, I see a problem: The templates for each issue will prompt the user to create an issue report if there isn't one, even for things that would be obviously invalid if someone were to submit them to the issue tracker, such as EFB2RAM being needed. (The template is also weirdly positioned, making the first line of text very short.)
MaJoR also noted that. To quote my rebuttal on
Template talk:RatingProblemFix:
Quote:I think it's because the awareness of such an issue being sought is not explicitly expressed. I find the duplicate issues stemming from the lack of first reports not being in the Wiki in the first place. I find that a duplicate report is better than not having a known report at all. The Bug Tracker admins have flagged issues as duplicate in the past. This just means to me that the situation will sort itself out eventually if my system were implemented. Then it will be encouraged to replace duplicate reports with first reports (that is something I can't tell MediaWiki to flag because it is too complicated). Recently, it seems that Lucario fixed the URL to search first when clicked in my template. As for templates, I find that the templates are not categorized correctly. Two categories should be templates that are of use to Dolphin Wiki contributors and templates that should be ignored by regular users (and maybe protected from any edits).
I know the positions are awkwardly placed. Originally, they didn't do that. Kolano is working making the template more appealing. I suck with design but what I can do is get the core concept working at least.
(11-10-2015, 07:22 AM)StripTheSoul Wrote: [ -> ]All that sounds kinda complicated and not necessarily helpful...
It might have been good to think some of this stuff through a bit more aaaaaaall the way back when all those wiki pages were made, but now I don't think there's much use to this other than confusing people and setting the bar higher to edit/update a page which most people already fret.
That statement in bold is just telling me the problem may have lingered for too long or the admins didn't foresee such a problem occurring. I originally thought that but hearing it from you confirms it in my head.
Jhonn: Do you have some kind of grudge against this person...? Your reply to me seems overly hostile and rude towards wildgoosespeeder.
As a lazy user, a report submission form may be useful.