Wiki related questions Options

[SpiralSpectre]

Okay so got some questions about the wiki. Could use some opinions/directions on these,

Should all the Fortification add-ons be on the same page like this or do they look too crowded and some of them need separate pages?
Fortification

Does the Troop Crawler page need an overhaul after the last patch or is it too early for it?
Troop Crawler

Is it okay to update pages based on the info in this thread?
http://forums.swr-productions.com/index.php?showtopic=4439

What would be a suitable name for the category of primary resource gatherers like Osprey, secondary gatherers like Hackers or resource gatherers in general?

[Dynamo128]

Hello. So this thread has not seen some activity in some time but nonetheless I would like to answer to some stuff, ask some questions and hopefully clarify other stuff as well.

First off, I am one of the admins of the wiki. I have recently become active again on it after a long hiatus (real life and stuff). My main activities on the wiki have been article building of the unit pages, by adding pictures, templates, descriptions of what the units do and how they work where they were missing. One complaint I have noticed not only by reading this thread, but also by a few comments on the ModDB page, is that there is a sort of mockery on the wiki in regards to the lore sections. Personally, my involvement with lore-related material has been almost non-existant so I don't really know exactly what is wrong with it or who is responsible but I would like to state nonetheless that the VDV case that was mentioned above proves a good example: from my understanding, the lore was added by someone who is apparently obsessed with battlefield 3 (a game I never played, I don't really play modern games). Parallel Universe kindly removed the information, but apparently the same user immediately reverted it back and put the false lore back where it used to be. Now, I've removed it again (though this is by now old stuff) and I can deliver appropriate punishment to said user if the people here deem it to be necessary. Nonetheless I think this is worth mentioning because it proves how the problem is twofold: on one hand, one issue ROTR has, has always had and likely will always have, is an abudance of people who for some reason feels this mod needs to be their "modern warfare" wet dream. So these people constantly bring up battlefield or call of duty and try to shove ROTR lore and timeline into it for some bizarre reason, but also, even aside for games, there is the constant complaints of "Why are you not replacing this old plane with the hyper realistic next generation USA/Chinese/Russia plane??????", which is something that both the wiki and the moddb page has to answer basically every week. To be honest at this point I have a feeling that putting a sticker somewhere that says "This mod is not meant to simulate real life and any complaints about the units not reflecting the actual real life arsenal of the respective countries will be ignored" would not be a half bad idea. But that's just me. On the other hand though this also exposes a fundamental issue with Wikia, and that is that from my understanding it is impossible to force only registered users to be able to edit articles. If such a policy were implemented the quality of the wiki would improve massively because then we wouldn't have to track down every random edit from IP addresses (for example I recently had to clean up a whole bunch of articles from a completely random unregistered user who was ruining the punctuation and grammar on random articles. like, really.). I have been thinking about messaging the wikia staff to try and get this issue sorted but I cannot predict whether they'll listen or not. It's worth a shot if you people deem these issues to be big enough that it warrants giving it a shot.

However... there's the question I wanted to ask given the (albeit months old as said) posts I am seeing here. There is talk of making an official wiki of ROTR ran by the SWR team itself. I would like to ask if this, as of now, is a project that is actually being undertaken or just an idea that was floating around due to issues with Wikia (certainly not the first time that has happened, see the doom wiki) or with the current rotr wiki itself, or... whatever else it may be. The reason I'm asking is because I have spent literally years working on this wiki and improving it visually and content-wise (at least as far as the unit pages go) and was even in the process of describing and documenting some of the skirmish maps (at least the official maps). If the wiki is going to be abandoned to make room for a completely new one then I wonder whether it's even worth it continuing to work on this. Personally I've enjoyed documenting the ROTR universe as best as I could, and I am a long time fan, having played the mod from way before GLA was even re-introduced into the game. But, if the issues are mostly related to what has been described in this last page (i.e., the lore is not as faithful or up to date as it could be and it being hijacked by strangers), then, at least personally, I think that's a minor part of the wiki and solving the issues related to it shouldn't prove too difficult or time consuming as long as people are willing to help with it.

To conclude... I think this post has been a good opportunity to bring back talk about both the current plans the ROTR team has in regards to a possible new wiki (if any such plans exist), and, in either case, about how you, ROTR community, deems the wiki should be further improved. I have not paid attention to this thread as much as I should have but I think I speak for the entirety of the ROTR wiki staff when I say that cooperation can only do us all good.

Thanks for your attention and I hope you have a good day.