Clean-up of the decks

[Gyrodiot]

Hi everyone,

The decks on the Wiki are... messy. Some decks are old. Some are very badly commented. Some decks are... not well-built (understatement).

He're a sample of the decks of the Mono-Decks section :

Adrenaline Scorpion - Life

Code: [Select]

5bs 5bs 5bs 5bs 5bs 5bs 5bs 5bs 5bs 5bt 5bu 5bu 5bu 5bu 5bu 5c2 5c2 5c3 5c7 5c7 5c7 5c7 5c7 5c7 5c8 5c8 5c8 5c8 5c8 5c8Aether Power Rush Upgraded - Aether

Code: [Select]

6rn 6rn 808 808 808 808 808 808 808 808 808 808 808 808 808 808 80b 80c 80c 80d 80d 80d 80d 80d 80d 80f 80f 80f 80f 80fAether stall deck - Aether

Code: [Select]

61o 61o 61o 61o 61o 61o 61o 61o 61o 61o 61o 61o 61o 61o 61o 61o 61o 61o 61t 61t 61t 61t 61t 61t 61v 61v 61v 61v 61v 61vAnubis Immortifier - Aether

Code: [Select]

5rg 5rg 5rg 5rg 5rg 5rg 5rg 5rg 5rg 5rg 5rg 5rg 5rg 5rg 5rg 5rk 5rk 5rk 5rk 5rm 5rm 5rm 5rm 5rm 5rn 5rn 5rn 5rn 5rn 5roArmy of the Immortals - Aether

Code: [Select]

61o 61o 61o 61o 61o 61o 61o 61o 61o 61o 61o 61o 61q 61q 61q 61q 61q 61q 61r 61r 61s 61s 61s 61s 61s 61s 61u 61u 61v 61vBig Bang: Mono-Aether BOOM BOOM. - Aether

Code: [Select]

7dm 7dm 7dm 7dp 7dp 7dp 808 808 808 808 808 808 809 809 809 809 809 809 80a 80a 80a 80a 80e 80e 80i 80i 80i 80i 80i 80iCards waster (mono entropy) - Entropy

Code: [Select]

4vc 4vc 4vc 4vc 4vc 4vc 4vc 4vc 4vc 4vc 4vc 4vc 4vc 4vc 4vc 4vc 4vc 4vc 4vc 4vc 4vc 4vc 4vc 4vc 4vc 4vc 4vc 4vc 4vc 4vc 4vc 4vc 4vc 4vc 4vc 4vc 4vf 4vf 4vf 4vf 4vf 4vf 4vg 4vg 4vg 4vg 4vg 4vg 4vi 4vi 4vi 4vi 4vi 4vi 4vn 4vn 4vn 4vn 4vn 4vnCC Graboid Rush - Time

Code: [Select]

6rk 6rk 778 778 778 778 778 778 778 778 778 778 778 778 77g 77g 77g 77g 77g 77g 77h 77h 77h 77h 77l 77l 77l 77l 77l 77lCfreddy’s super vulture - Death

Code: [Select]

52g 52g 52g 52g 52g 52g 52g 52g 52g 52g 52k 52k 52k 52k 52k 52l 52l 52p 52p 52p 52p 52p 52p 52q 52s 52s 52s 52s 52s 52sDevonian time stopper (mono time) - Time

Code: [Select]

5rm 5rm 5rm 5rm 5rm 5rm 5ro 5rp 5rp 5rp 5rp 5rp 5rp 7q0 7q0 7q0 7q0 7q0 7q0 7q0 7q0 7q0 7q0 7q0 7q0 7q0 7q0 7q0 7q0 7q0 7q0 7q0 7q0 7q0 7q0 7q0 7q0 7q0 7q5 7q5 7q5 7q5 7q5 7q5Drainage (Darkness)

Code: [Select]

5ul 5ul 5um 5um 5um 5um 5um 5um 5up 5up 5up 5up 5us 5us 5us 5us 5ut 5ut 5ut 5ut 606 606 606 606 7ta 7tb 7td 7td 7um 7umOne of them isn't a Mono. But as said the author : "Amazingly straight-forward, albeit super-gimmicky, somewhat mono-aether deck (if you count cremation and subsequent elements as new elements, that is)"

Before trying to classify the decks on the Wiki, we need to remove the decks that are not functional. But there's plenty of decks, and I need some feedback first before starting... removing stuff.

Thanks for your help !

[pikachufan2164]

'Tis a mess indeed.

Some thoughts on the matter:

Make it so that all submissions need a corresponding forum thread before they can be submitted. This should draw more people to the forums and community instead of just posting something in the Wiki on their own. Plus, it might discourage people from posting their less-than-amazing decks since they now need to put a bit more effort into it (i.e. having to sign up for the forums, make a thread, learn how to use the deck code generator, etc.).

Maybe also a system similar to what the Card Ideas forum is doing? (i.e. Smithy -> Crucible -> Forge -> Armory -> Reliquary) Make it so that decks have to reach a certain level in the Deck Workshop before they're allowed to have an article in the Wiki. That should increase the quality of the decks and make sure that if someone wants their deck on the Wiki, they need to become involved in the community first.

[chum3]

Heh, I've wanted to delete things from the Wiki, too, but I wasn't sure how to go about doing that. Obviously the main concern is whether or not you're deleting something important. Perhaps we can make a thread to dump articles/decks into that we believe to be sub-par, and get opinion to remove it or not? Would be nice to hear from the Wiki Editors on this.

I think I've suggested it before, but perhaps make just one page for each element in terms of mono decks. That single page can include the most popular mono decks and then different variations of it (e.g., some cards you can vary in quantity/add to customize the deck). Another idea would be to organize the mono page so that it's broken up into 12 different tables/tabs and have the decks organized that way.

And while we're on the subject of the Wiki, is it just me, or is this deck stuck in the first slot of "Recent Posts," even though it's from September (http://elementswiki.co.cc/decks/fast-swarm/)? I was wondering if someone fiddled with the coding to make it stick there. And, unfortunately, the deck isn't even good.

[suxerz]

Honestly, I couldn't see the reason why there are public sections in the wiki since we already have the forum. Though I understand the significance of certain decks like RoL/Hope, USEM, DEMA, etc. but enabling user to post their own deck in the wiki seems to me as redundant if not pointless. To me wiki is something that is definite and final - everything there should be correct and up-to-date.

I'm not familiar with wiki editing but maybe we could filter every topics submitted in wiki - meaning a topic has to be approved by the wiki editor before it can be displayed.

In regards of pikachufan2164's ideas (i.e. Smithy -> Crucible -> Forge -> Armory -> Reliquary), how about using the similar concept of "featured cards poll" for the deck in wiki? I think it'll be much easier. We could also use the help of our deck helpers and the community here to determine/verify the decks suitable in the wiki - mono, duo/trio/rainbow, FG, etc.

[Gyrodiot]

I was thinking about making a page for each strategy and their variations. Shrieker rush, Poison rush, Cremation Rush (with Golems or not), Fire stall, etc. Some of them (Speed Rainbow for example) can be quite big, but nothing we can't handle.

For FG farmers, a precise version can be documented extensively, with stats for the different variations.

About the Deck Workshop idea, I was thinking about simply picking the ones of the Deck Archive of the forum, which are supposed to work well.

[suxerz]

I think this thread deserve a bump.

I'm wondering does the contributor, editor & super editor function as described here (http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,4991.0.html) applies to the wiki now?
Looking at the current mess, I'm not sure it does...

_{p/s: @Gyrodiot - never noticed that you're a wiki editor; is that new?}

[Gyrodiot]

As far as I know, the are standard contributors, and Wiki Editors (who have some editing options I don't know yet, apart from article deletion).

As for the Wiki Editor status, it is new

We can now start the cleaning process. We need first to choose which decks we'll eliminate without further consideration, and those which need improvement. I'm not sure how.

I can now view, create and edit categories (that will be useful). We'll have to think to a more precise system to organize them.

I'll post later some ideas. Feel free to share yours !

[suxerz]

Gratz on the new title!

My main point is actually regarding the approval steps. I really feel that any article posted by standard contributor needs to be approved - does this happens now? This will eliminate any useless post in the future.

As for deck category, I prefer to have it grouped by AI3, AI5, FG, PVP, etc. Deck archive is a good idea for reference but do note that not everything there is efficient. This is where I hope that the deck helper can help on verifying the decks. On a different note, I really hope that future decks should be tested before putting into the archive, but that's not relevant to the wiki subject.

[Scaredgirl]

My main point is actually regarding the approval steps. I really feel that any article posted by standard contributor needs to be approved - does this happens now? This will eliminate any useless post in the future.

This is how it was originally but people weren't too happy about it.

I think that a rating system is the answer to all the problems. It will bury all the bad deck ideas and articles, and bring forward the good ones. On top of this, our Wiki Organizers can of course get rid of all the worst ones.

[suxerz]

My main point is actually regarding the approval steps. I really feel that any article posted by standard contributor needs to be approved - does this happens now? This will eliminate any useless post in the future.

This is how it was originally but people weren't too happy about it.

I think that a rating system is the answer to all the problems. It will bury all the bad deck ideas and articles, and bring forward the good ones. On top of this, our Wiki Organizers can of course get rid of all the worst ones.

I'm quite skeptical with the rating system since it can also invite trolls putting everything with low ratings. Does registration required before giving ratings? On top of that, I think there's not many people registered to wiki to actually bump a useful article. However, I do agree this is less work for the wiki editor and thus might just be a plausible solution.

[chum3]

As for the Wiki Editor status, it is new

We can now start the cleaning process. We need first to choose which decks we'll eliminate without further consideration, and those which need improvement. I'm not sure how.

Congrats on the title!

As for the cleaning process; you can eyeball a lot of the decks that aren't up to par. There isn't a quantitative way of determining what decks aren't effective; some of them just don't have synergy/are horribly made. Like I said earlier, maybe a thread where people post what decks they think should be tossed and leave it to the Wiki Editors to decide.

[GG]

As for the Wiki Editor status, it is new

We can now start the cleaning process. We need first to choose which decks we'll eliminate without further consideration, and those which need improvement. I'm not sure how.

Congrats on the title!

As for the cleaning process; you can eyeball a lot of the decks that aren't up to par. There isn't a quantitative way of determining what decks aren't effective; some of them just don't have synergy/are horribly made. Like I said earlier, maybe a thread where people post what decks they think should be tossed and leave it to the Wiki Editors to decide.

It's gonna be a huge, huge amount of work, and now that I have a fellow editor (yay! congratz ), I think we could start it. We'll probably going to see how the decks generally look like, and also use quanta index to briefly decide whether the deck is reasonable or not.

As for the future decks... I'm not really sure. I was thinking about grading system where people can grade how good/bad the decks are and decks with high grades gets promoted to some sort of an area; however, seeing how noobs could post random grades to a really good deck just because they failed against certain counter deck or something, i don't think this method'll be that much viable.