(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.

1. 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.
2. There are a select few people that know the Wiki is out-of-date.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 There is nothing indicating that the page is out-of-date, probably reinforcing that the article to be thought of as up-to-date.
3. 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.
   

(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.

(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.

• F-Zero GX/sandbox
• Super Smash Bros. Brawl/sandbox
• Schlag den Raab/sandbox
  

(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).

(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.

(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"  

(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.)

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).

(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.