New Wiki and 3 different membergroups: Contributor, Editor and Super Editor

[Scaredgirl]

Contributor 
Facts:
- Anyone who registers to wiki will start as a Contributor
- You can add new posts or edit existing ones
- Your posts or edits won't become visible until approved by an Editor or Super Editor.

Editor 
Facts:
- You can add new post and edit existing ones
- Your edits become instantly visible
- You can approve or disapprove pending edits and posts made by Contributors 

Requirements for becoming an Editor:
- you are motivated
- you want to actively add more content to wiki
- you can work independently without the need to be told what to do

Super Editor 
Facts:
- Same rights as an Editor but with some advanced options
- can edit wiki navigation
- can edit categories
etc.

Requirements for becoming an Super Editor:
- Same as Editor
- you want to make wiki better, easier and more efficient to use, and have ideas on how to achieve that
- you know html and css
- knowledge of other programming languages is a plus. For example php, javascript, flash, etc.

[Bloodshadow]

Wait, what? You have to be a programmer to be a Super Editor?

[Scaredgirl]

Wait, what? You have to be a programmer to be a Super Editor?

The thing is that wiki is basically a web page, so knowing how web pages work is a huge advantage. Sure you can do most of the stuff with visual editors and plugins, but when you want more advanced custom stuff, you need to go look at the code.

I can't even begin to describe how awesome it is to have guys like Planplan and Lyelle to give me ready-made actual code that I can just copy-paste. That saves tons of my time and really helps a lot.

Correcting grammar is something anyone can do. What separates Super Editor from others is coding skills. That's what will take our wiki to the next level.

[miniwally]

It's not as if super editors have anything better than the normal editors that isn't to do with coding so if you don't know coding it seems a bit pointless to be a super editor as the only advantages of them over normal editors is stuff to do with coding.

[Bloodshadow]

I do know some HTML, so I'm not completely clueless when it comes to coding...

But for the old wiki, the reason why I originally signed up to be a sysop was to moderate. Deleting spam, banning those who vandalize, etc. Is that not necessary with the new wiki anymore?

[akromat]

While we're (kind of) on the topic of the old wiki... a lot of the articles spawn copied over are literally directly copied over. All the old links are still in place and much of the information is so outdated it may even be harmful to include some of it. This is not a slight against spawn or all the work he did to bring it over, but I don't feel like it is a good idea to have links linking back to the old wiki.

I really have been trying to work on the wiki lately, but between all the other things I have going on (work/social/etc) and trying to fix bugs, I haven't gotten around to adding or editing any articles lately.

[Scaredgirl]

I do know some HTML, so I'm not completely clueless when it comes to coding...

But for the old wiki, the reason why I originally signed up to be a sysop was to moderate. Deleting spam, banning those who vandalize, etc. Is that not necessary with the new wiki anymore?

There's no need for deleting spam anymore. We have the revision system which means that unless you have "Editor" in your title, all your posts and edits have to be approved before they go live.

Approving posts is the most important job for Editors. You go through the edits, see what's been changed, and approve it if the change is good. There's a very easy and fast way to do this by comparing old and new version side-by-side.

Banning won't be necessary anymore. We can ban, but since there's no way to spam, there probably won't be a reason to ban either. We'll see how it plays out.

While we're (kind of) on the topic of the old wiki... a lot of the articles spawn copied over are literally directly copied over. All the old links are still in place and much of the information is so outdated it may even be harmful to include some of it. This is not a slight against spawn or all the work he did to bring it over, but I don't feel like it is a good idea to have links linking back to the old wiki.

I really have been trying to work on the wiki lately, but between all the other things I have going on (work/social/etc) and trying to fix bugs, I haven't gotten around to adding or editing any articles lately.

Spawn moved tons of threads at the same time and I'm pretty sure he only did a copy-paste, with some small fixes here and there, so there are bound to be errors.

All the links and hotlinked images from the "old" wiki need to be replaced at some point.

Also the layout of the articles have to be more uniform.

[Bloodshadow]

It's not as if super editors have anything better than the normal editors that isn't to do with coding so if you don't know coding it seems a bit pointless to be a super editor as the only advantages of them over normal editors is stuff to do with coding.

The way I see it, Super Editors don't necessarily have "advantages" over normal Editors. I thought Super Editors are part of the forum staff, and thus they're obligated to work and improve the wiki, instead of volunteering to work. As SG said, if a Master cannot do the card articles for his/her element, then SG will unleash the Super Editors to do the job. Correct me if I'm wrong, SG, but right now my impression of Super Editors is "staff/admin" instead of "coder".

[Scaredgirl]

It's not as if super editors have anything better than the normal editors that isn't to do with coding so if you don't know coding it seems a bit pointless to be a super editor as the only advantages of them over normal editors is stuff to do with coding.

The way I see it, Super Editors don't necessarily have "advantages" over normal Editors. I thought Super Editors are part of the forum staff, and thus they're obligated to work and improve the wiki, instead of volunteering to work. As SG said, if a Master cannot do the card articles for his/her element, then SG will unleash the Super Editors to do the job. Correct me if I'm wrong, SG, but right now my impression of Super Editors is "staff/admin" instead of "coder".

Both Editors and Super Editors are basically staff, and both titles require the person to actually do something to keep that title. Of course it doesn't mean a person has to do edits 40 hours a week, but if he does nothing, he will be replaced.

People who want to edit the wiki every now and then completely on their own terms should not apply for Editors position. They should be regular volunteers aka Contributors instead.

Difference between Editors and Super Editors is that Super Editors are one step higher in the hierarchy and have access to more advanced wiki editing methods. This is why they are required to know a bit more about coding and how websites work.

[Bloodshadow]

But just how much coding knowledge is required to be Super Editor? I mean, I do have a basic idea of how websites function (I was able to fix the quantum icon bug in the Darkness cards without further instructions); but compared to Chriskang or Planplan or Lyelle, I'm basically nothing.

And about the Contributors... I think that the edits of normal people not being shown unless approved by Editor is a bit too impractical. It would discourage a lot of people from editing. What if someone makes a really important edit, but no Editor was online for two hours? If this happens, then some people will think that it's a waste of time to edit the wiki, since their edits seem that they'll never be approved.

I suggest that you do something similar to the forum levelling up system we have right now. For example, a Contributor can make edits without approval after he had registered for a certain time period, made a certain number of edits, etc, etc. Making everyone a permanently "newbie-like" status could really discourage a lot of people from editing.

[miniwally]

Without it though the new wiki becomes as cluttered as the old one with useless topics everywhere overflowing with ideas that either don't exist or simply don't work with false details.

[Scaredgirl]

And about the Contributors... I think that the edits of normal people not being shown unless approved by Editor is a bit too impractical. It would discourage a lot of people from editing. What if someone makes a really important edit, but no Editor was online for two hours? If this happens, then some people will think that it's a waste of time to edit the wiki, since their edits seem that they'll never be approved.

I suggest that you do something similar to the forum levelling up system we have right now. For example, a Contributor can make edits without approval after he had registered for a certain time period, made a certain number of edits, etc, etc. Making everyone a permanently "newbie-like" status could really discourage a lot of people from editing.

Like miniwally said, giving full editing rights to everyone is a disaster waiting to happen. The "old" wiki is a living proof of that, with things like "THIS DECK DOESN'T WORK!" posted in between paragraphs. With the current system we are in much better control, and things like posting porn links inside article will never even happen because they won't get past the approval stage.

If a person cannot wait for a couple of hours to get his/her post approved, then it's probably a good idea for that individual to not post at all because he's most likely an angry kid with bad grammar (yeah, even worse than mine). Patience is a virtue.

Everyone who contributes a lot to the wiki will naturally either be made Editors, or given the ability to bypass approval.