Board Thread:Consensus Track/@comment-658634-20131216220021/@comment-658634-20131219035133

Kroq-gar78 wrote: I do not understand how you consider having six separate, completely independent wikis (aside from "staff" and users) more of a burden than having more templates with different names (each specifying the game within the template names) in a single wiki. Less of a burden I presume. Each wiki would represent the game it is handling without stammering the games name in its article name, categories, templates, hyperlinks, headings and actualy anything wiki related. Kroq-gar78 wrote: Splitting the wiki would require much more work to be done in replicating the settings from one wiki to the next, and also in having any changes mimicked in other wikis' settings. Wiki handling about Daggerfall does not need to have the same features than Oblivion has, no need to mimic everything. Also replicating work already done is one copy & paste away. Kroq-gar78 wrote: Also, in many cases the end result of what you are suggesting seems to simply be moving the game name from the article's name to the wiki name, as such as the following: Leather Armor (Skyrim) w:c:skyrim:Leather Armor Except that would only be done if needs rises to link to other game than Skyrim. When moving within the same game, no need for stammering the games name everywhere is needed. There is hardly a difference in the case of articles. If we had a higher capacity for custom namespaces, however, this problem would be easily resolved. We would use a similar structure to that of the "other site", which, I believe, is better than ours. This namespace card has been played in several wikis, never really succeeding. Namespaces are used for high/meta level tool. Kroq-gar78 wrote: For templates, new ones will have to be created either way (single wiki vs. multiple) for each major game, since the mechanics are not exactly the same between games. Yes, so what is your point side the fact that in the centralized wiki you need to stammer the games name? Kroq-gar78 wrote: On the note of "misleading information, irrelevant information": The link you provided me (Leather Armor) does not have "irrelevant" or "misleading" information. It is a page that simply acts as a list. You can read more about disambiguation pages here. You are either misreading on purpose changing subject on fly is not cool. I provided example about a problematic page that you requested. You also demonstrated quite swiftly one of the problems, disambiguation pages simply acts as a lists. They are disambiguation between games, not between same named articles. Kroq-gar78 wrote: [..] there is no benefit to doing this (especially in the case of setting duplication). No need to repeat the games name in template name, article name, header name, disamg pages can be used correctly, only relevant templates, clearer structure, easier to maintain game related content, game specific theme to name some benefits. Quite a understatement saying 'no benefits'. Kroq-gar78 wrote: Also, if you are suggesting that having smaller ones would be better, then why has Wikipedia not split? [...] I do not remember any serious discussion of splitting the wiki by topic every emerging. Wikipedia has 'splitted'. It is a encyclopedia, not a wikipersona, newswiki, gamewiki, fishingwikin, travelwiki and so on. Deyvid Petteys wrote: You may not be aware that this Wiki was originally three separate wikis that merged together, due to the consensus of contributing editors. No, I did not. Deyvid Petteys wrote: I think splitting the wikis would ruin this one, be completely messy, and decrease navigability. So, my formal vote is "no". I don't see how it could be messy compared the current one where Leather armor can mean a leather armor from six different games. DarthOrc wrote: We know that if those with your preference were in the majority, we wouldn't be having this debate as the Wiki's we cited, as well as many others, would have been split up long ago. You ...know? Is that a fact or a assumption again? If those with my preference would be the majority they would keep on doing the same thing, look for more focused and better organized wiki. The wiki is great if you are playing six games at the same time but most of players are not and if they are looking information, they are interested about the information about that game they are playing right then. Best I have seen are two different games at the same time. Lordkenyon wrote: it would decentralize and splinter the great community we've amassed here. Why would the community be shattered?