So, I made a poll.

Should we incorporate other wiki information, affiliate, or just do it ourselves?

Pros of incorporate: more content, easiest to do.
Cons: could lose visitors to required source links. May need permission first.

Pros of affiliate: A kick-started wiki. Popularity boost to us.
Cons: it would be hard to break apart from an affiliation. They also may not want to affiliate back.

Pros of doing it ourselves: we own all the content. We are in full control of our own wiki.
Cons: would take time, and may be incomplete.

Poll away!

PS: please allow us to poll everywhere, thank you. Had to move to Off Topic to get the thing to show up.

Sven wrote:
I'm fairly certain that we have done a poll exactly like this with the majority of votes going for "do our own wiki."

"do our own wiki" does not mean affiliate or copy from other wikis. it means make our wiki from scratch.

we know we want a wiki. we now need to know how it's going to work. it's a second part of the poll that's desperately needed.

Wikis take a LOT of time and a lot of work in order to even get to a form of basic functionality. Dozens of templates have to be created in order for the more complex, and REAL, work to even begin. As it stands right now we have very few pages that are only linked to eachother via the main page. We don't exactly have a large audience to cater to (IE ourselves) so I --

Screw it I'm too upset to even finish typing this stupid post.

TL;DR VERSION

Yes we need to get our shit together for the wiki but I don't see anyone coming up with ideas other than the idea of "WE NEED IDEAS."

I wrote:
I made it a wiki on suggestion on several members in the early stages of the site.

With so much disagreement about it, I'm beginning to question that decision, though.

If we're going for something less wiki-oriented, it would be perfectly possible for me to create pages similar to the Forum rules page that have the PHPBB header and footer but different midpage content. I could probably also make a form for uploading articles and autocreating threads for them.

I don't want to do any of that unless we're sure we don't like the wiki format, though.

Also gonna move this to site feedback, it's not really off topic.

We just need to define what kind of wiki setup we want. It shouldn't take more than a week, max.

But the most important thing is, we don't rush it. We've made a wiki, found an affiliate AND still don't know what to do with it all! We must be calm, relaxed, and focus on what we really want for this community, rather than run around like headless chickens.

Over-eagerness kills projects, websites, video series etc. We need to just take it easy, and calmly figure out what to do.

By now, everyone knows my opinions from working with a major wiki organisation, and I will not push them at all. I just felt obliged to lend my experience on this matter. But is isn't a personal attack at all, on anyone. Everyone's just trying to rush it out. So, let's just take it easy for now, k?

Kizzycocoa wrote:
Guys. Guys. Chill. This is not a rush decision.

Says the guy who made a replica of the topic and the poll about the wiki.

Kopeke wrote:

Kizzycocoa wrote:
Guys. Guys. Chill. This is not a rush decision.>

Says the guy who made a replica of the topic and the poll about the wiki.

This is not a replica. It is a much more precise version of the last poll.

The last established we do want a wiki. This establishes what model we want for said wiki.

Have our own wiki = Create our own content

Use theportalwiki.com = Incorporate another wiki's information

Have our wiki link to theportalwiki.com for some content = Affiliate with an existing wiki

Kopeke wrote:

Have our own wiki = Create our own content

Use theportalwiki.com = Incorporate another wiki's information

Have our wiki link to theportalwiki.com for some content = Affiliate with an existing wiki

The latter two can both be seen as affiliate, or as copy. However, when you come here, you see none are copy.

The latter is the most vague. "for some content". Also, I've not seen a single thing we plan to do with the wiki. All I've heard is tutorials. We still don't have a solid base on what the wiki is even about! It's worrying.

Sven wrote:
cough Portal 1 is obsolete cough

Kopeke wrote:
...Yes...Yes we do...The wiki was and is still, going to contain mapping/modding/sourcesdking tutorials about Portal 2 and the Source engine itself.

If it's just tutorials, we might as well use a forum format then. a wiki, just for tutorials? it's just wasteful, and adds a lot more stress to the admin's workload.

but, if there's other content than tutorials, we need to work that out.

This is the disadvantage about two topics on the SAME topic, similar argument;

VanSuilli wrote:
Wikis are nice looking and clean. They are easy to edit. The search feature will just pop you to a page with that title if one exists, which a forum does and cannot. From what I've seen of people contributing to the wiki so far, there's very little need for moderation at all at the moment. If we find that there are shitty tutorials when people start joining up, then we can restrict access to who is allowed to contribute. To add something, you'd just write a nice email that says 'I'd like to write about this. You can see what I've done about it here.' That keeps the quality high, the content nice and clean, and everybody gets a nice even shot at it.

Kopeke wrote:

Sven wrote:
cough Portal 1 is obsolete cough

coughdontforgetyouroriginscough

groxkiller585 wrote:

Kopeke wrote:

Sven wrote:
cough Portal 1 is obsolete cough>

coughdontforgetyouroriginscough

coughletsmakeportalinquakethencough

Kopeke wrote:
coughletsmakeportalinquakethencough

coughyourmissingmypointwhichwasthatportalcamefirstandyoushouldrespectiteventhoughportal2mighthave
overshadoweditbecauseportalstillhasthatflashthatportal2cantreproduceandportalshouldbemappedforanywaygiven
itscheaperandmostwilltryitaftertheygetportal2soIstillthinksvenhasapointcough

groxkiller585 wrote:

Kopeke wrote:
coughletsmakeportalinquakethencough>

coughyourmissingmypointwhichwasthatportalcamefirstandyoushouldrespectiteventhoughportal2mighthave
overshadoweditbecauseportalstillhasthatflashthatportal2cantreproduceandportalshouldbemappedforanywaygiven
itscheaperandmostwilltryitaftertheygetportal2soIstillthinksvenhasapointcough

coughiagreewithgroxcought

No but seriously lets not derail the thread with our respiratory contractions.