Camera wrote:
Ah yes, linking... Here you go.

i.e. instead of quoting...

p0rtalplayer wrote:
Welp, why not put some of the content from it on the wiki?

How about ask the author?

I find it odd that mAI seems to want to copy everything into the wiki. Whatever happened to doing it ourselves?

EDIT: did you see the slogan on the main wiki page?

"Science....from scratch!"

Just sayin'

Kizzycocoa wrote:
I find it odd that mAI seems to want to copy everything into the wiki. Whatever happened to doing it ourselves?

Time, motivation and lack of either. You seem to be the most enthused person on here about the wiki, why don't you take it on, seeing as your such an experienced...wiccan.

Jomonay wrote:

Kizzycocoa wrote:
I find it odd that mAI seems to want to copy everything into the wiki. Whatever happened to doing it ourselves?

Time, motivation and lack of either. You seem to be the most enthused person on here about the wiki, why don't you take it on, seeing as your such an experienced...wiccan.

Wrong

I am qualified to run a wiki. Not necessarily to put in the content. I am able to put in the rules, to moderate user edits and the like. I am an admin. contributor? It depends on the content of the wiki.

But, a note is, the MCwiki purposefully bans quoting other wikis. To do so means to give credit, and to give credit means less traffic.

A good professional wiki has copyright over all of its content. A low quality wiki links to other wikis.

Again, having the insider scoop on the inner workings of Curse, the decisions should be:

A) Affiliate with a wiki, both ways.
B) make our own content from scratch.

Any mid ground, and we'd be wasting our time making the other pages, as they'll just use the VDC we linked to.

Go talk to Wynthst on the wiki, our go-between between the community and Curse. She'll repeat everything I've said here.

We as a site are meant to be a service. Sure, we like having people on here, but we shouldn't get to the point where we jealously hoard all our users. If we link to the VDC, and they want to keep going on there, I don't see why that's a problem.

We can keep people on our site by providing content that isn't also on the VDC. Complex tutorials, example VMFs. what have you. I don't care how some corporate fat cat network does it, I say if we think having content from other wikis will benefit our site, we shouldn't hesitate to use it.

Keklolzor wrote:

Camera wrote:
Ah yes, linking... Here you go.> i.e. instead of quoting...

You're using i.e. wrong.

p0rtalplayer wrote:
I think that's a rather...selfish way of looking at it.

We as a site are meant to be a service. Sure, we like having people on here, but we shouldn't get to the point where we jealously hoard all our users. If we link to the VDC, and they want to keep going on there, I don't see why that's a problem.

We can keep people on our site by providing content that isn't also on the VDC. Complex tutorials, example VMFs. what have you. I don't care how some corporate fat cat network does it, I say if we think having content from other wikis will benefit our site, we shouldn't hesitate to use it.

It may seem like that, but there's no denying that is the way the wikis work.

I'd not say we'd be jealous. Why is making our own content classed as being jealous and selfish? I am merely saying they'll migrate if other wikis have more content, which is true, which means less wiki visitors. I we wish to link to a wiki rather than create one, that's fine. But to create pages for a wiki they won't visit will just waste everyone's time to edit.

We could do that, yes. But if so, then, as suggested earlier, why not just make a tutorials forum section instead?
I am only saying, if you do choose to copy other wiki pages to your wiki, regardless of how nice it makes our wiki, we'll still need to link to theirs, wich will dent visitors to our own wiki

It is like we're a book club. We're directing people to get books from the library, where a second, larger, more developed book club is. We won't win that scenario.

Kizzycocoa wrote:

I'd not say we'd be jealous. Why is making our own content classed as being jealous and selfish? I am merely saying they'll migrate if other wikis have more content, which is true, which means less wiki visitors. I we wish to link to a wiki rather than create one, that's fine. But to create pages for a wiki they won't visit will just waste everyone's time to edit.
It is like we're a book club. We're directing people to get books from the library, where a second, larger, more developed book club is. We won't win that scenario.

What do you mean by winning? You don't seem to understand that nobody else seems to want a professional wiki, we just want a wiki with information that works, that's it. There's no point discussing optimum ways of attracting traffic because that's not the idea of the wiki. Realisitically, mAI is a small Portal fan-site and we don't need a "professional" wiki because we are not a professional entity.

Jomonay wrote:

Kizzycocoa wrote:

I'd not say we'd be jealous. Why is making our own content classed as being jealous and selfish? I am merely saying they'll migrate if other wikis have more content, which is true, which means less wiki visitors. I we wish to link to a wiki rather than create one, that's fine. But to create pages for a wiki they won't visit will just waste everyone's time to edit.
It is like we're a book club. We're directing people to get books from the library, where a second, larger, more developed book club is. We won't win that scenario.>
What do you mean by winning? You don't seem to understand that nobody else seems to want a professional wiki, we just want a wiki with information that works, that's it. There's no point discussing optimum ways of attracting traffic because that's not the idea of the wiki. Realisitically, mAI is a small Portal fan-site and we don't need a "professional" wiki because we are not a professional entity.

I fully understand this. However, all I am trying to put across is we may very well lose users. Which is true. Professional or not, we want to keep what little users we have.

Kizzycocoa wrote:

I fully understand this. However, all I am trying to put across is we may very well lose users. Which is true. Professional or not, we want to keep what little users we have.

What little users we have are not going to be swayed by a wiki.

Jomonay wrote:

Kizzycocoa wrote:

I fully understand this. However, all I am trying to put across is we may very well lose users. Which is true. Professional or not, we want to keep what little users we have.>
What little users we have are not going to be swayed by a wiki.

I am thinking ahead to, where it may be popular.

Kizzycocoa wrote:

Jomonay wrote:

Kizzycocoa wrote:

I fully understand this. However, all I am trying to put across is we may very well lose users. Which is true. Professional or not, we want to keep what little users we have.>>
What little users we have are not going to be swayed by a wiki.>
I am thinking ahead to, where it may be popular.

Can we get there first?

groxkiller585 wrote:

Kizzycocoa wrote:

Jomonay wrote:
What little users we have are not going to be swayed by a wiki.>>
I am thinking ahead to, where it may be popular. >

Can we get there first?

By the time we do, we'll be committed more and more.
For example it's better to toast bread first, and then butter it. Not the other way around. That is where this wiki is right now.

Kizzycocoa wrote:

By the time we do, we'll be committed more and more.
For example it's better to toast bread first, and then butter it. Not the other way around. That is where this wiki is right now.

But I just eat it without either...

Kizzycocoa wrote:

By the time we do, we'll be committed more and more.
For example it's better to toast bread first, and then butter it. Not the other way around. That is where this wiki is right now.

French toast?

Kizzycocoa wrote:

groxkiller585 wrote:

Kizzycocoa wrote:

I am thinking ahead to, where it may be popular. >>

Can we get there first?>
By the time we do, we'll be committed more and more.
For example it's better to toast bread first, and then butter it. Not the other way around. That is where this wiki is right now.

But buttering the toast first and then toasting is how toast art is made.

Sven wrote:

Kizzycocoa wrote:
By the time we do, we'll be committed more and more.
For example it's better to toast bread first, and then butter it. Not the other way around. That is where this wiki is right now.>
But buttering the toast first and then toasting is how toast art is made.

Starting to think the toast analogy is flying over people's heads