Open the FAF wiki
-
Your thread is so wrong on so many levels.
- The old mediawiki was open and it was in a terrible state the whole 5 years I was responsible for keeping it running. (Wrong in a sense of outdated and wrong infromation and there were no masses coming in and fixing it)
- The internet has changed since and we have even people registering to FAF and using the single sign on to sneak their shitty website urls into their signature and do trash posts. So we will not open it to registration for everyone.
- Everyone who asks for it gets access. I have not heard of a single case where we did not allow it. You just need to invest 10 minutes of work to ask around who can give access and you will get it.
- It was intended to run with single-sign-on just as the forum does (so basically every FAF user can get it), but it's pretty low on our priority list.
This has nothing to do with democracy. This is the dumbest shit I have heard in a while. Right now it is 100% a technical decision and no I will not let anyone vote on this as long as I'm responsible for tech.
-
The FAF wiki sorely needs current info about units , all the stuff on the FAF wiki now is simply about how the client works, how to make mods, some very outdated strategy guides etc. All of that info is currently on the Supreme Commander Wikia using GPGnet era balance.
And Wikia/Fandom Wikis became fucking awful after 2018 when they got bought out by some other Silicon Valley blob and changed their revenue model towards aggressive plastering of ads and autoplay videos. Using one of those sites on a phone is deeply upsetting.
put the xbox units in the game pls u_u
-
@brutus5000 said in Open the FAF wiki:
You just need to invest 10 minutes of work to ask around who can give access and you will get it.
This ^.
-
This post is deleted! -
Every single person who has asked me for accesses to edit the wiki I've given it to them I've not said no to anyone. like brutus said.
-
@zeldafanboy Feel free to spend the time and add all 400+ units to the wiki
-
There's a massive difference between having to ask someone for an account and being able to register asynchronously. Seriously. Very few people are going to go out of their way to ask for an account even assuming that they knew how to go about doing that. I would bet most wiki contributors (in other wikis) get started just by adding something small randomly one day and there's just way too big of a barrier to entry for that in faf, even it it's "just" asking "someone".
-
The lack of that manpower in the wiki is also reflected in the lack of admin manpower to patrol for stupid changes. If we had the latter you could have it be more free. But we don’t.
-
This is what an "anyone can edit" wiki looks like
-
@blodir said in Open the FAF wiki:
There's a massive difference between having to ask someone for an account and being able to register asynchronously. Seriously.
The history / experience of the old wiki proves you wrong. Seriously.
-
Blodir is not wrong. In the case of the wiki it didn't make a substantional difference sadly. You are both correct
-
@brutus5000 said in Open the FAF wiki:
@blodir said in Open the FAF wiki:
There's a massive difference between having to ask someone for an account and being able to register asynchronously. Seriously.
The history / experience of the old wiki proves you wrong. Seriously.
I mean it's of course possible that people won't contribute either way. The faf wiki specifically has 0 momentum behind it. Very few people ever use the faf wiki for anything as far as I know (I think there's some mapping guides there?). People don't want to contribute if they feel like nobody will care about their contributions. So yea anyway multiple reasons of course and there's no guarantee that being open will make people want to contribute on its own, but being closed is definitely a big impediment.
