Guide: The Artifact Tier List

[OmikronWarrior]

Originally Posted by CthulhuDreams

@Omnikon

Your intro was amazingly bad - why bother claiming personal credit?

Hey, they all cannot be winners. First off, do not single me out for claiming personal credit. The original article had Frozen Lama and Turmantor's names on it. It still does. Admittedly, that was Maerlande's doing, but the point remains. I kept the original names to give them credit for the original list which despite my many reworkings was still the basis for my improvements and deserved the mention and threw on my own so people would know who did the improvements. At least that was my thinking at the time. If names truly had no place on the list, they are easy enough to remove.

Neither of you seem really interested in doing that - blanking the page when someone edits it is just silly, but so is the intro claiming moral superiority over all comers.

I never claimed moral superiority, just plain old fashioned improvements. Like I stated earlier, I was not doing it for credit. My intro was to explain why I made the changes and who made them. Admittedly, that probably should have gone into the discussion section. Ooops.

[LDiCesare]

Originally Posted by Squirrelloid

The problem was making it vanilla instead of CBM.

Virtually every user contribution to the wiki is CBM (1.6 or later in most cases). The only vanilla content is the stuff that's *autogenerated* from the game code.

Utterly false.
Most content is vanilla, or just agnostic (modding advices or example).
Look at nation guides, which are imo the most interesting part and the one that is most impacted by mods:
EA: Abysia: Both are vanilla (see salamander cost, blood stones mentions)
Agartha; 2/3 vanilla, 1 is CBM.
Arco: Vanilla (Pretender cost)
etc. I won't list them all, but I counted 3 (maybe 4) out of 28 EA nation guides which are CBM-specific.
That is about 85% vanilla. So if 'virtually every' means about 1 in seven, then yes, you are right. But I think you're just totally wrong, sorry.

[TheConway]

The whole CBM/Vanilla argument is pretty immaterial. The point is, we wrote it from the perspective of CBM, and would like to keep it that way. If Omnikron or someone else wants to make their own artifact guide for vanilla I couldn't care less. It would probably be an excellent idea.
Anyways, the majority of his contributions, the item-specific strategy advice, have been added back in on the individual items' pages, which are probably the best places anyway.

[sector24]

If you want to improve the quality of a guide, you should contact the author. Second best would be leaving a comment on the talk page. A distant third is editing their work in a significant way without their knowledge or consent. There are more and less polite ways to go about implementing change, and I think most if not all authors are open to having their work improved upon, but getting their consent goes a long way.

[Edi]

sector24 does have a good point, especially given that the Dom3 wiki community is small enough to make that kind of courtesy viable. Such an approach is not required, but it is recommended.

However, mostly what happens at other sites does not, or should not, concern this forum. I would much prefer it if disputes related to the Dom3 wiki stayed on the Dom3 wiki instead of spilling over to this forum.

[Fantomen]

Originally Posted by Edi

However, mostly what happens at other sites does not, or should not, concern this forum. I would much prefer it if disputes related to the Dom3 wiki stayed on the Dom3 wiki instead of spilling over to this forum.

What?

This dom3 community is a cluster of several sites and services, of which this forum is one leg. There's the wiki, dom3mods, llamaserver, dom3minions, shrapnel forums and the IRC channel. (Tell me if I missed any.) They not only concern each other, they're part of the same whole. Trying to keep them from "spilling over" into each other is a fools errand.

In this case, where the intention was to open a public debate concerning the wiki page, the fora is a more efficient communication tool than the wiki, as it will reach more people faster.

[13lackGu4rd]

the main problem with your arguments here is that the entire wikipedia, of all its subsites, is built upon the simple concept of mutual public, somewhat anonymous, public work with disregard to credits. the dom3wiki did have credits, especially for the guides posted in it, but that was a diversion from the other wikis rather than the standard.

if you want your work to be credited to you, and not edited without your concent than don't post it on a wiki, post it on a forum or even upload it as a file like maps and mods.

[Gandalf Parker]

I agree that the community is a community of many sites. And Edi would be within moderator rights to request that any of those sites handle its problems away from here if he feels it detracts from the friendly supportive feel that the forum is meant to embody.

BUT I think that does NOT get to apply to the Wiki. In fact, of the list of sites that people have mentioned its just about the ONLY thing listed that cannot be requested to be fought elsewhere. There are multiple instances of Shrapnel owners and staff referring to the wiki as apparently the Official Dom3 Wiki. There are numerous instances of them pitching it both here and in articles around the net. I was surprised when they did it and would not have recommended it. But they did do that.
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showthread.php?t=44186
http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=174819056976

As to the discussion here, Im just a participant having fun.
But if I were to try and mediate it to a close I might point out things like the definition of Wiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiki
or maybe lch's definition of this particular wiki
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showthread.php?t=44152
both of which seem to specifically cover the situation that occurred.

[Edi]

Originally Posted by Fantomen

What?

This dom3 community is a cluster of several sites and services, of which this forum is one leg. There's the wiki, dom3mods, llamaserver, dom3minions, shrapnel forums and the IRC channel. (Tell me if I missed any.) They not only concern each other, they're part of the same whole. Trying to keep them from "spilling over" into each other is a fools errand.

In this case, where the intention was to open a public debate concerning the wiki page, the fora is a more efficient communication tool than the wiki, as it will reach more people faster.

What I mean is that ideally events at one site should not cause undue uproar here. Not that everything is hermetically sealed.

In this case, page edits at the Dom3Wiki are causing a flamewar here, which is exactly the kind of thing I mean. If people want to discuss the merits of a different list of things or such on the wiki, by all means they are welcome to do so. In an appropriately civil manner. If that standard can't be met, that particular discussion gets shut down.

It is a further demerit in the record of the people engaging in flaming that a Wiki by its very nature is a publicly editable resource and things cannot be expected to stay static. This applies even to radical alterations, though as pointed out, in a community this small, the courtesy of asking an original active author about it beforehand is not an especially onerous task.

If we want to take a different hypothetical example, if people were saying less than friendly things about me elsewhere (say, the stardestroyer.net or heavengames.com forums), that's still not going to affect how I interact them with here. However, if a flamewar over something started at one of those places or somewhere else migrated here, then it would become an issue on this forum and other moderators would need to deal with it.

In this respect, the Dom3Wiki, Dom3Mods, the IRC channel and other venues that form the aggregate larger community of Dominions 3, are separate from this forum. And in this respect they should stay separate.

Does that make my position clearer?

[Fantomen]

Your position is quite clear, but I don't agree with it.

You example is of an issue in one community migrating to another, while this is an issue migrating within the same small community moving from one form of communication to another. pretty much like starting a conversation on the phone and finishing it on facebook.

I think Gandalf summed up quite well why it is specifically natural to discuss the wiki here, well spoken.

Regarding the so called flamewar, you could argue that settling on a praxis on how to do major edits in the wiki is worth a little flaming. Just like so many other issues need to go through a phase of conflict before leading to productive conclusions.

I think this discussion is quite good actually, it will hopefully help avoiding future drama on the wiki. A nice compromise would be to agree that the wiki rests upon the wiki principles, but you could still try and be a little bit thoughtful when replacing entire pages.

So we have two major contributions to the wiki as well as the fora (the guides and item tips), we also got a nice chance to discuss different perspectives on wiki editing courtesy and I even got a rare chance to agree with Gandalf Parker on something!

So we had a few harsch words and pouty lips during the process, big ****ing deal.