Wishlist

[ddevans96]

Lately there's been renewed interest in the wiki - it gets brought up in chat on occasion, people like eaglgenes have been doing solid work on it lately, etc. This is very good news, as right now it isn't much to go through, and wikis are an excellent resource when built right. Right now, ours isn't, and we should change that.

I don't have any real authority to do this, but given that I'm both an Elements 'veteran' (some people say, anyways - in reality I just have too much free time) and experienced with wikis already (including work I did on ours in 2012), I'm definitely not a bad person to be posting this. We need to remember that both forums and wiki are resources, but forums are a discussion board, and wikis aren't. Wikis are geared for complete, encylopedic information. There's a lot of overlap right now, which isn't bad, but there's some things that should be developed more on the wiki.

So, as such, I'd like to form a list of things people would like to see on the wiki. Not going to say all of it will be done, becuase some of it might not be viable, or efficient, but it's a start - and a start is really what we need here.

[EmeraldDagger]

Some of the decks and card pages are outdated. The SoP page still says that SoP gives +4|+4 to flooded creatures. I edited it so it says +5|+5.

I've encountered a few outdated decks, mostly FG grinders. Some still need the uncatagorized Shards, some are no longer effective because of changes in the FG's AI.

So, my wishlist is:
1) No more outdated decks
2) No more outdated card pages

I am more than happy to help improving and editing the wiki. Heck, we should have a new Council member to do it! I don't think we have anyone officially on duty to edit the wiki.

[antiaverage]

Chapuz was talking with me extensively about this. I'm all for having a Wiki Editor position, but since anyone can edit the wiki, their chief job wouldn't be so much editing as it would be organizing a brigade of editors. They'd be more like a Wiki Wrangler. I'm for it.

[ddevans96]

Some of the decks and card pages are outdated. The SoP page still says that SoP gives +4|+4 to flooded creatures. I edited it so it says +5|+5.

I've encountered a few outdated decks, mostly FG grinders. Some still need the uncatagorized Shards, some are no longer effective because of changes in the FG's AI.

So, my wishlist is:
1) No more outdated decks
2) No more outdated card pages

I am more than happy to help improving and editing the wiki. Heck, we should have a new Council member to do it! I don't think we have anyone officially on duty to edit the wiki.

You're looking at the wrong site. We only have one deck on our wiki - the main page is here.

[antiaverage]

You're looking at the wrong site. We only have one deck on our wiki - the main page is here.

What? There are a ton of decks on the wiki...

Granted, they're not all organized into the http://elementscommunity.org/wiki/Category:Decks category, but they are within many other articles.

[ddevans96]

Really? Link some of them.

[antiaverage]

Really? Link some of them.

http://elementscommunity.org/wiki/Special:Random

Just click Random Page in the left bar and you'll hit them many times over.

http://elementscommunity.org/wiki/Lionheart
http://elementscommunity.org/wiki/Akebono
http://elementscommunity.org/wiki/Horned_Frog
http://elementscommunity.org/wiki/Aflatoxin
http://elementscommunity.org/wiki/Firefly_Queen <--- one with old shards

etc etc etc

[ddevans96]

Yeah, I did that, and hit exactly zero. A quick look over the All Pages 1 || 2 also leads me to believe the only player-use deck posted on the wiki is Instosis.

So...what decks are you referring to, exactly?

EDIT: Oh, you mean decks in card articles...alright, fair point. But you don't talk about those as decks posted 'on the wiki', because they're not. They're just references to the forum.

[antiaverage]

But you don't talk about those as decks posted 'on the wiki', because they're not. They're just references to the forum.

No, they're not references to the forum. Oftentimes they don't have a link back to the forum, they are a deck posted to the wiki within an article. Some are just examples, others are recommended decks, etc. Many are outdated or use cards that aren't available anymore (e.g. - old shards, tweaked cards, etc).

[ddevans96]

EDIT: Oh, you mean decks in card articles...alright, fair point. But you don't talk about those as decks posted 'on the wiki', because they're not. They're just references to the forum.

You missed this part - every deck in the card articles links back to the forum, because that's how Blood/Kuro/furball formatted them, and there's no detail there except for one deck being shown (which is totally unneeded), hence my point, references to the forum.

I'm obviously not disputing they aren't outdated - the decks listed and shown on card articles need updated, and the oracle counters need removed.

[antiaverage]

Yes, but there are decks in things other than card articles.

The point being that there are many decks on the wiki, many of which need to be reviewed and left alone, updated, or removed.

[EmeraldDagger]

Glad to know that you're on to this as well, antiaverage. So, are we considering having a Council position for this?