Suggestions for improvements (New forum)

[Damage3245]

While it's not a bad layout arrangement in theory, in practical terms we'd be talking about updating nearly 30,000 profiles - some of which have multiple keys - and for many of those profiles there's going to be a ton of Unknown values as most editors aren't going to be familiar with a ton of characters from that list in order to detirmine what belongs in each of those new speed entries.

 

[Omnificence]

While it's not a bad layout arrangement in theory, in practical terms we'd be talking about updating nearly 30,000 profiles - some of which have multiple keys - and for many of those profiles there's going to be a ton of Unknown values as most editors aren't going to be familiar with a ton of characters from that list in order to detirmine what belongs in each of those new speed entries.

Maybe we should separate the different kinds of speed such as attack, reaction, and travel speed on character pages like this:

Attack Speed:

Reacton Speed:

Travel Speed:

Well actually, this wouldn't be for every profile in the wiki. Just for the ones who have different speeds for their reaction, travel, and attack speed.

 

[Antvasima]

That's a large part of them, and we would still have to check through around 28,000 pages in order to find them, for very limited cosmetic gains. As such, this is not a realistic suggestion to apply.

 

[Antvasima]

The proposal looks good to me.

I think for the priority it should be 3 tiers instead

3 - Calc, or straightforward ability additions, adding scans, etc

2 - Bigger additions like new tiers, or some verse wide changes, etc

1 - Controversial additions like tier 1, Conceptual Manipulation, etc

Couldn't we include straightforward tier changes from accepted calculations in AKM's suggestion for type 4 instead? Still, I suppose that type 2 and 3 are similar. What do you think @AKM sama ?

The tiers are going to be vague regardless, and mainly reliant on the short description provided in any case, so I think less is more in this case.

I'd also include controversial revisions involving controversial verses/characters here. Something like revising Goku or any controversial character from HST should fall under this if the revision is controversial. It's really hard to define what is "controversial" though since it is based on context.

Okay, so are you otherwise fine with Ogbunabali's suggested structure?

@AKM sama

We need your help in order to be able to proceed here. Afterwards I can modify the earlier draft that I posted.

 

[AKM sama]

3 - Calc, or straightforward ability additions, adding scans, etc

2 - Bigger additions like new tiers, or some verse wide changes, etc

1 - Controversial additions like tier 1, Conceptual Manipulation, or significant revisions for controversial characters/verses, etc

Just use this.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. I will do so.

 

[Antvasima]

Here is a modified draft for the first post of our new wiki management thread:

"This thread can be used to link to discussions in the content revision forum regarding changes to verses or profiles, so that they may be seen and evaluated by staff members without the need of contacting them individually. In the event that posting the revision here fails to obtain enough attention, users can politely ask a few staff member who are listed in the related verse page or the knowledgeable members list to give it a look via their message walls.

Members can link to the revision here, but discussions regarding said revisions must be made in the respective thread to prevent derailments.

The comments should contain all of this information in them:

Priority: On a scale from 1 to 3, with lower numbers being more important.

• 3 - Revisions based on accepted calculations, or straightforward ability additions, where everything is blatant and sourced.
• 2 - More significant changes involving new tiers, a significant part of a verse, and similar.
• 1 - Controversial additions, such for tier 1 and/or 0, complicated powers such as conceptual manipulation, or significant revisions for controversial characters/verses, et cetera.

Verse: To specify the verse the revision is aimed for.

Description: A small summary of what the revision will modify.

Note: Any further information that might help getting the attention of staff members or other users.

Remember that a revision must contain all of the necessary information regarding the topic that it tackles, with links and evidence to support the upgrade, downgrade or modifications in general. Don’t link in this page revisions that are incomplete or that are lacking to prevent too many spam messages.

IMPORTANT NOTES:

This thread is supposed to give users one more way to get attention from both other users and staff members, but since there are many daily revisions the request should contain as many details as possible to attract more interest and to give everyone more relevant information.

Here are some important rules that should be noticed:

• Users can post each revision once and can bump it after 30 days from the first post, but the latter should only be done if a thread has a low participation.
• Only a single revision for each verse can be posted here per week, after which a new revision about the same verse can be posted again.
• Each user can post only one revision per week.

All of the rules above are made to prevent too much spam in the thread, so follow them as much as possible.

If a revision has been accepted or rejected, the member who posted a request for it should edit their comment to add a “Closed” on top of it, so that the staff can know which revisions that still need to be evaluated."

 

[Antvasima]

@AKM sama @Promestein @DontTalkDT @Ultima_Reality @DarkDragonMedeus @SomebodyData @Celestial_Pegasus @Wokistan @Mr._Bambu @Elizhaa @Qawsedf234 @ByAsura @Sir_Ovens @Damage3245 @Starter_Pack @Ogbunabali @Abstractions @LordGriffin1000 @Colonel_Krukov @SamanPatou

Is my last preceding above post acceptable?

 

[Qawsedf234]

Looks good to me.

 

[LordGriffin1000]

It looks fine to to me.

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you for the replies.

 

[AKM sama]

Seems fine to me as well.

 

[SamanPatou]

Each user can post only one revision per week.

I have some doubts regarding this, a week seems a bit long to me, mostly because a user may need help for two completely different verses equally important.

Everything else is fine.

 

[Antvasima]

We want to avoid too much spam. It is best if our members mainly post requests for the most important/crucial revisions.

Anyway, is it fine if I create the new wiki management thread now, and then link to it in our wiki navigation bar?

Also, what title should we give the thread?

 

[AKM sama]

You can create it now.

"CRT Promotion Thread" or something like that? I am not sure.

 

[Antvasima]

Maybe "Content revision promotions thread" or "Content revision thread promotions", or somesuch? Writing the word "thread" twice in a single phrase seems verbally inappropriate in any case.

Also, can somebody instruct me regarding the proper grammar for each phrase? I have ongoing problems with intuitively grasping where to use or not use multiple cases of plural in combination when using the English language.

 

[FinePoint]

Using "thread" twice is technically correct, just not pleasant.

"Content Revision Promotion Thread"
Should work. Nouns used as adjectives should never be plural. That would be like calling a "Hotdog Stand" a "Hotdogs Stand".

In this case, "Content Revision" and "Promotion" are adjectival nouns which describe the noun "Thread", and so are not plural.

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you for the explanation. I will try to remember it. So "Content Revision Promotion Thread" it is then. Should I create the new thread the next time I visit this one?

 

[Elizhaa]

Seems fine, yes.

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you. I will create the new thread then.

 

[Antvasima]

I have done so:

Content Revision Promotion Thread

This thread can be used to link to discussions in the content revision forum regarding changes to verses or profiles, so that they may be seen and evaluated by staff members without the need of contacting them individually. In the event that posting the revision here fails to obtain enough...

vsbattles.com

 

[Antvasima]

I also added a link to the new wiki management thread to our wiki navigation bar.

 

[Bobsican]

Could a proyect be done at some point to add categories for verses depending in terms of appropiatedness rating? For example, a category for verses with content appropiate for minors, a category for verses with content only suitable for adults, etc.

We could also add a template so younger viewers of pages may avoid verses or content that are too inappropiate for them.

 

[Antvasima]

That is likely a good idea, but not one that we can prioritise right now. We have some other ongoing and upcoming important wiki revisions.

Please keep it in mind for the future though.

"All-ages suitable verses" and "Adults only suitable verses" perhaps?

 

[Antvasima]

I will note down the suggestion in my community to-do-list.

 

[Urshani]

Dice system integration. So we can play DND 5e, 3.5e, Mage, Exalted 2e/3e, and many other games including custom games. I saw it on RPNation.

This is so people aren't bothered by 2,000 character limit on discord and also you can fancy up your content much more than on Discord like this.

 

[Antvasima]

So you want to get some kind of role-playing thread forum then? That seems to distract too much time from our main focus here, even though it might be fun for our members. My apologies.

 

[Urshani]

So you want to get some kind of role-playing thread forum then? That seems to distract too much time from our main focus here, even though it might be fun for our members. My apologies.

****

 

[Damage3245]

****

We're not expecting professional standards of posting here, but this kind of response is really unnecessary.

 

[Antvasima]

Well, I am not certain. Maybe other staff members here may think otherwise.

 

[Antvasima]

We're not expecting professional standards of posting here, but this kind of response is really unnecessary.

Well, it isn't like he insulted me. He was just disappointed.

 

[Antvasima]

So you want to get some kind of role-playing thread forum then? That seems to distract too much time from our main focus here, even though it might be fun for our members. My apologies.

Well, I am not certain. Maybe other staff members here may think otherwise.

What do other staff members here think about this?

 

[Urshani]

We're not expecting professional standards of posting here, but this kind of response is really unnecessary.

i apologize

 

[Urshani]

RPnation uses Xenforo (i think), you can ask them how it's done since they do it

 

[Antvasima]

Well, just adding a new sub-forum for RPG threads would be fairly easy at least, but I don't know about customisation.

Also, there is a big risk that our members would post story content that would violate Fandom's terms of use.

 

[Urshani]

Well, just adding a new sub-forum for RPG threads would be fairly easy at least, but I don't know about customisation.

Also, there is a big risk that our members would post story content that would violate Fandom's terms of use.

can you give me a quick summary of fandom's terms of use?

really, having a dice roleplay sub-forum would be no different from our current rp threads- but now they have stats and charts and charts.

 

[Bobsican]

It sounded to me more like a request of adding features to the forum to enable easier and funnier role playing.

In any case, I've seen threads of that nature in the Fun and Games board for years, so I don't think a whole forum for that would be required.

 

[Urshani]

It sounded to me more like a request of adding features to the forum to enable easier and funnier role playing.

In any case, I've seen threads of that nature in the Fun and Games board for years, so I don't think a whole forum for that would be required.

yes you could integrate it into the normal foruma

 

[Antvasima]

It sounded to me more like a request of adding features to the forum to enable easier and funnier role playing.

In any case, I've seen threads of that nature in the Fun and Games board for years, so I don't think a whole forum for that would be required.

Okay. Thank you for the information.

I am not sure what features that he specifically wants us to apply though.

 

[Urshani]

Okay. Thank you for the information.

I am not sure what features that he specifically wants us to apply though.

programming to allow us to roll dice onsite.