Spiral Knights - Moving Custom User Content to Userspace

Moving Custom User Content to Userspace

11 replies [Last post]

Sun, 04/08/2012 - 20:21

Aecarus

I propose that all custom user content (such as Guild pages and Knight pages) be restricted to Userspace. This means all such pages that currently exist outside of Userspace (i.e. in the Mainspace) should be moved by whomever manages them, or subject to removal.

I think this is more than reasonable given that such player-created articles are not part of the game mechanics, are irrelevant to the majority of players, and flood the Search pages with meaningless match-ups. If a user really wanted to include custom user pages in their search, such as Guild pages and Knight pages, they could simply do an advanced search and include Userspace. :)

Also, personally, I'm a bit tired of seeing the Recent Changes page littered with modifications to Guild pages, whether or not I use filters. (Not to mention the vast majority of which are minor changes where the Preview function should have been used instead of submitting entirely - but this is a whole separate issue.) If these pages were located within Userspace instead, we could use the drop-down box to filter out Userspace - right now this does not work.

Typically, and definitely in the case of the SK wiki, a wiki's Mainspace should not be a place to advertise social/personal content (e.g. your Knight or your Guild). It is meant to be a visual, organized encyclopedia of information collected by players over time. Custom pages such as Guild pages and Knight pages should not be mixed in with this information, but rather separated, under Userspace. If this is accepted, it would be nice to have an additional warning when modifying or creating new pages, and/or at least a correcting modification to the locked Creating a guild page article.

Thank you for any consideration. (Hello, Equinox. :] )

Tue, 04/10/2012 - 15:22

Windsickle

I agree with and support this idea.

Thu, 04/12/2012 - 16:20

Aecarus

I wouldn't mind moving the Guild pages myself.

I wouldn't mind moving the Guild pages everyone else has made, if that's an issue. This would involve me searching for any pages with _(Guild) in the title, going through each, and moving them to the userspace of the original creator. For example, Aether_(Guild) would be moved to User:Aecarus/Aether_(Guild) (I've already done this particular move as an example). Any leftover pages would then be marked for deletion.

Wed, 04/11/2012 - 15:43

Bopp

maybe we should agree on that

Before you do massive, systemic changes to many pages, maybe there should be a wider consensus formed.

I myself generally support your idea, for practical reasons (filtering Recent Changes) but not theoretical reasons (your concept of what a wiki should be seems based on Wikipedia, which this is not --- a wiki can be whatever its community wants it to be).

Wed, 04/11/2012 - 17:15

Aecarus

No worries!

Bopp, I do not plan on doing any major changes until a wider consensus is formed. This was the primary reason I had created this thread~

Also, allow me to apologize for, and to correct, my statement - I don't think I worded that sentence to be as specific as I should have. What I mean is this: the mainspace of the SK wiki is not meant to serve as a social playground for advertisement of Knights and Guilds and such, but rather to serve as a rich encyclopedia of useful game reference material (actual game content). Userspace is typically utilized for personal/custom content, so that wiki editors can express themselves, have a certain degree of customization (not to mention fun :] ), and keep better track of things. I'm not a GM, so this is just my assumption/opinion, mostly based off of other wikis. Although, I'd think most people would agree on this anyhow.

I think the most important feature of my proposed change is the actual separation of custom user content from actual game content, as explained above. (Particularly in the case of searching and filtering.) I'm sure there are many users (especially non-wiki contributors) that might not truly understand the importance of this. You seem to recognize the importance, though. :)

Wed, 04/11/2012 - 18:41

Bopp

we agree

I think that we agree, and that I was just thrown by the particular word "will" near the end of your post #2. No problem now.

The traffic on this Wiki Editors forum is so thin that I'm not sure how a consensus would be formed. I mean, there are very few people here, to discuss something that may anger many guild masters and other people. Maybe you have to mention this idea in the General forum?

Wed, 04/11/2012 - 19:35

Trying

Changing it would make it

Changing it would make it harder to search for guilds since you would have to use the advance search instead of the regular search bar search. I would support the change if the search bar would search through everything on the wiki.

Wed, 04/11/2012 - 20:34

Katmint

I think a much better

I think a much better solution would be to make a guild namespace, so they would go under pages like Guild:Name like userpages go under User:Name.

Of course, only a wiki admin with access to this file can make a new namespace, just moving them to Guild:x won't get them out of the main namespace until the new namespace is created.

Thu, 04/12/2012 - 11:29

Aecarus

Thanks for the replies so far.

Bopp, that sounds like it might be a good idea. My only fear with this is that many users may not fully understand the implications, and would disagree simply because it seems harder to search for guilds on the wiki, and/or too much work to move their already-created page.

This moves me on to Rangerwill's point. The Guild Recruitment subforum, explicitly labelled "The place to go to join or advertise a guild", is most likely the first place users go to actually search for a Guild - not to mention the forum search bear. I think most users search here first, or use the various "looking for a guild" threads, and then proceed to the Guild's wiki page via direct link.

Keep in mind there is also a handy wiki category for Guilds!

Even if a user wanted to manually search the wiki for a Guild, the hardly extended process would be similar to searching for another player/Knight: click "Search" rather than "Go", check-off "User", and then click "Advanced Search". This tiny extra bit of work involved is so simple I personally have trouble even calling it negligible. ;)

Katmint, I believe Equinox has previously been requested to create special namespaces that involve Knights or Guilds, and the answer was always a strict "no". Relating to this: I recall Equinox trying to enforce the rule of keeping Knight pages under the account owner's userspace. This only strengthens my belief that other sorts of personal/social pages (namely Guild pages) should be located under userspace as well.

Thank you everyone for the sincere replies so far. :) Although I do believe the final decision is strictly up to the GMs (most likely Equinox in this case), it can still be heavily influenced by the reasoning and opinions of the users.

Thu, 04/12/2012 - 13:19

Katmint

Regardless of whether the

Regardless of whether the namespace is made or not, I think the guild pages don't belong in the user namespace because they are about and contributed to by multiple users and are not a user's personal page.

A large amount of guild pages are not made by the GM of the guild, and many guilds have multiple GMs with no de facto leader, which would only cause further problems since editing someone else's userpsace is usually frowned upon.

Thu, 04/12/2012 - 16:25

#10

Aecarus

Reminiscing...

That's a very good point, Katmint. All I can say right now is this: there are much more subtle solutions for this multi-user-editing downside, versus those for the array of downsides that come from having Guild pages located in the Mainspace. For example, I'm sure Guild masters wouldn't mind their members editing a subpage of their Userspace, given that the changes are done only to the Guild page. (You could say this would simply be one of the downsides of hosting your Guild page on the wiki, rather than making your own site/blog for it.)

Now that I think about it... I recall a similar (and perhaps relevant) conversation that started with an old friend Kitty, way back in the beta times. It seems this is when I originally created the GuildInfo template (on my old account/Knight Chronus), for everyone to use on their Guild pages. Keep in mind that the linked thread, as well as the template, are nearly a year and half old. (I think Equinox has locked the template since.) As I look back now, I feel partly responsible for the utter mess Guild pages have turned in to. (Maybe this is where part of my drive to fix the problem comes from! >_< )

Some very good points are brought up in this archaic thread, despite its age, and the presence of the NDA. Many are still relevant even now:

http://forums.spiralknights.com/en/node/685#comment-4253
http://forums.spiralknights.com/en/node/685#comment-4340
http://forums.spiralknights.com/en/node/685#comment-4412
http://forums.spiralknights.com/en/node/685#comment-4497
http://forums.spiralknights.com/en/node/685#comment-4534

Anyhow. Cluttery and mixing with actual game content is my reason for bringing this up in the first place. Despite the very legitimate problems Katmint brought up, Userspace still seems to be the most viable location. Call it my opinion if you will, but I still think these downsides outweigh the others.

Perhaps pages dedicated to Guilds were never meant for the wiki in the first place. Guild masters should really be creating their own websites for their Guilds, as it remains their own area of the internet, inherently separate from the wiki, and adds a lot more (simple) customization features. Not to mention there are plenty of free hosting tools available.;)

Sun, 04/15/2012 - 13:00

#11

Equinox

Game Master

Guild pages will remain in

Guild pages will remain in the main namespace. We'll eventually get a Guild namespace and move them there.

However, I would welcome a discussion about future rules for the Guild namespace as to what kind of content should be allowed and what sorts of standardization should be used.