| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Gelcur |
Posted - 12 Mar 2008 : 13:31:07
I don't know how many of you frequent wikipedia but I for one do so a lot. It has just recently been brought to my attention that there is a conflict of interest within wikipedia's moderation, reference article here.
You may wonder how this is relevant to the Realms? Well apparently some FR articles have been removed by the side that believes in deletion. Here are some recent deletions I was able to dig up, Nethril, Delete FR-related articles, and Deletion Log.
I often use wikipedia for quick mid-game searches if I forget the domains of a god or if I need some quick info but I guess it might become harder and harder to do so if this is kept up.
I figured others here might want to know about this I am not sure if we could do anything about it. |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Afetbinttuzani |
Posted - 11 Apr 2008 : 15:34:44
To ensure that this is a well informed discussion, I suggest the following links on Wikipedia:
A Wikipedia document regarding policies on "Notability" and "Inclusion" guidlines:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability
A discussion about the nature of "Noteworthy":
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:What_Wikipedia_is_not/Unencyclopedic
Cheers,
Afet |
| Afetbinttuzani |
Posted - 11 Apr 2008 : 15:15:59
A common --and I think legitimate-- criticism of FR articles on Wikipedia is that in their writing styles they fail to delineate clearly between the "real world" and "in-universe". They often make patchy note of the fact that they refer to a fictional world or a series of products, and sporadically switch to an "in universe" style.
I think Wikipedia (not FR wiki) should only have FR articles for the general reader who wishes to understand what the Forgotten Realms is as a series of products and related Fandom in the "real world". I agree with deletions of FR articles from Wikipedia when they fail to accomplish the mandate of Wikipedia and fail conform to its guidelines. Wikipedia should not be a quick in-game reference source for DMs or Players of D&D.
Specific articles about the, people, geography, history, culture etc. of the Realms properly belong to the FR wiki, whose purpose is to serve as a reference resource for D&D players. Here articles can be freely written in an "in-universe" style. |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 11 Apr 2008 : 14:42:16
But as I mentioned before, I'm sure you can find plenty of things on Wikipedia that have nothing to do with being "scholarly" (I'm sure Britney Spears still has a page there). My point is that if Wikipedia is so concerned with subjects are scholarly, they aren't applying that criteria equally. |
| Vangelor |
Posted - 11 Apr 2008 : 03:30:58
Wikipedia has standards as to what is "noteworthy". Outside our hobby, the Forgotten Realms aren't referenced, do not have broad, cultural impact, and while I do love the setting, I can understand the deletion policy.
When fantasy game settings become the subject of journalism or scholarly review, we can think about posting up on Wikipedia. For now, a wiki devoted to our particular hobby or setting is the way to go. |
| Wenin |
Posted - 28 Mar 2008 : 00:34:01
You write that as if I should have known? |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 24 Mar 2008 : 13:34:47
quote:
Originally posted by Wenin
quote:
It just struck me as 'odd' that the guy who started the FR Wiki started it IMEDIATELY following the announcement at Gencon that WoTC would be hosting one on their site. Call me paranoid, but I don't feel like busting my hump producing material for something that someone plans on making money on without me.
Ummm FR Wiki has been around for YEARS before WoTC ever mentioned doing a Wiki at GenCon.
Yes, he knows that. |
| Wenin |
Posted - 23 Mar 2008 : 03:33:39
quote:
It just struck me as 'odd' that the guy who started the FR Wiki started it IMEDIATELY following the announcement at Gencon that WoTC would be hosting one on their site. Call me paranoid, but I don't feel like busting my hump producing material for something that someone plans on making money on without me.
Ummm FR Wiki has been around for YEARS before WoTC ever mentioned doing a Wiki at GenCon.
|
| Fillow |
Posted - 17 Mar 2008 : 20:20:58
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Kuje, that was WIKIPEDIA, NOT the FR Wiki - ...
The FR Wiki seems the more accurate and better organized (as far as FR articles are concerned),
As I wrote above, I agree with that. Even if I'm not a great specialist of the FR. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 14 Mar 2008 : 03:01:02
Kuje, that was WIKIPEDIA, NOT the FR Wiki - they are two seperate things. From what I understand, the FR Wiki is better maintained and monitored, and since only FR fans will likely even find the site, there is only a VERY slim chance that someone will come along and "mess with it".
The FR Wiki seems the more accurate and better organized (as far as FR articles are concerned), but as I have stated above, I have my own reasons for not wanting to contribute. |
| Kuje |
Posted - 13 Mar 2008 : 21:23:30
quote:
Originally posted by BlackAce
I've been perusing the FRwiki the last few days too it's got potential but needs some dedicated hours from a few people of Kuje's and George Krashos' powers before it'd be really useful.
I'd love to help but not if it feels as if I'm going to waste my time because someone came by and deleted entries they felt they didn't want to read, etc. :) |
| Markustay |
Posted - 13 Mar 2008 : 20:38:53
I stopped contributing to Wikipedia after the deletion. Before that, I used to contribute here, and was invited to contribute to the FR Wiki (by its creator), but in both cases thought better of it. You see, I really don't think WotC has the gumption or the talent to put anything decent together in that regard, so I have a funny feeling they will be looking to 'purchase' one that is already built by a 3rd party (FR Wiki, here, some others...), just like they did when they purchased Brian's wonderful, formerly FREE, GHotR.
It just struck me as 'odd' that the guy who started the FR Wiki started it IMEDIATELY following the announcement at Gencon that WoTC would be hosting one on their site. Call me paranoid, but I don't feel like busting my hump producing material for something that someone plans on making money on without me.
If they ever actually get around to having a Wiki (that we MUST PAY FOR), I'm am 95% positive that they will get it from somewhere else, and like the GHotR, charge us for a resource that used to be free.
They aren't doing us any favors here, believe you me. 
If there is any 'theme' to their online endeavors thus far, I think it would best be described as 'half-@ssed'. 
quote:
Originally posted by Alisttair
Well I for one have now bookmarked this FR Wiki page...looks pretty good. The regular Wikipedia is a strange place (after all, wrestler Chris Benoit's murders were reported there before anywhere else...)
You know... I went to look up Gary Gygax after hearing about his death, and the Wiki entry was the FIRST online resource to have a death date posted...
Weird....  |
| Alisttair |
Posted - 13 Mar 2008 : 20:02:37
quote:
Originally posted by Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Agreed--I love the BG series, myself, but it's almost a seperate fandom (same goes for Drizzt, really).
I also love the BG series and am a fan of Drizzt but I am an even bigger fan of FR overall also. |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 13 Mar 2008 : 19:03:57
quote:
Originally posted by BlackAce
It also suffers from an abundace of Baldurs Gate players and Drizzt fans who haven't quite grasped the concept of canon/non-canon and opinions formed on the basis of reading a couple of Bob's novels don't quite trump 20 years of established canon! 
Agreed--I love the BG series, myself, but it's almost a seperate fandom (same goes for Drizzt, really). |
| BlackAce |
Posted - 13 Mar 2008 : 17:16:00
Hmm I hate to say it but apart from the 2ed free downloads and some of the designer articles, WotC's online content has never particularly impressed me.
I've been perusing the FRwiki the last few days too it's got potential but needs some dedicated hours from a few people of Kuje's and George Krashos' powers before it'd be really useful.
It also suffers from an abundace of Baldurs Gate players and Drizzt fans who haven't quite grasped the concept of canon/non-canon and opinions formed on the basis of reading a couple of Bob's novels don't quite trump 20 years of established canon!
[edited for fat fingers (new ergo-keyboard)] |
| Alisttair |
Posted - 13 Mar 2008 : 13:29:21
Well I for one have now bookmarked this FR Wiki page...looks pretty good. The regular Wikipedia is a strange place (after all, wrestler Chris Benoit's murders were reported there before anywhere else...) |
| Markustay |
Posted - 13 Mar 2008 : 07:03:22
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I'm not trying to be negative; I'm just looking at their past track record.
Or Ed's articles on the Border Kingdoms, which stopped half-way through (and NOT because of Ed), or the fact that they offered the first digital issue of Dragon (360) as a download, but since then you have to compile the articles together yourself! What the point of them even 'doing covers' if they aren't going to be presented in book format?
Yeah, it seems like they are good at starting something, and then they just let it Fizzle after awhile.
I wonder if a company can get ADD?  |
| Caolin |
Posted - 13 Mar 2008 : 06:23:16
quote:
Originally posted by Mace Hammerhand
quote:
Originally posted by HawkinstheDM
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Bah. They'll update it for several months, maybe even a year or two, and then forget about it. It's what they do with most of their online content... A classic example is their Presenting... Seven Millennia of Realms Fiction timeline, which was published circa 2000 and never updated.
I'm not trying to be negative; I'm just looking at their past track record.
That is because (IMO), even though they will not say it outright, WotC's actions show that they secretly hate the Realms. However, since the novel line is so lucrative, they are unwilling to just discontinue the franchise and let the rights revert to Ed. Instead, they have to beat it into the ground and humiliate first. (Sorry, bitterness for the atrocity that they are calling the 4e Realms seeping out.  )
I doubt they are hating it... but as their design philosophy (if it can be called such at any rate) changes, so do the settings... to accomodate that philosophy.
Maybe they don't like the Realms as much as say Eberron because so much stuff has gone before WotC's FR, about one decade of lore that does not target the magic-crowd etc. Maybe they've come to realize that the old Realms are actually the intellectual (by the fullest LITERAL meaning of the word) property of the fans who can pinpoint screw-ups far more accurately than the editors etc.
They need to get control back, even if that means alienating everyone else. Hell, who knows, maybe they already have designed a plan to sell Drizzt etc action figures via Hasbro. To get those cross-sales running they need to get rid of those people who would have none of that... namely us
They ARE trying to court the Magic crowd aren't they? Maybe thats why the cover of Dragon issue 363 bugs me so much. It looks like it came right off of a Magic card. Argh!!
|
| Caolin |
Posted - 13 Mar 2008 : 06:17:23
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Caolin
I was watching an interview with Chris Perkins on YouTube and he made a quick mention about them creating an official Forgotten Realms wiki:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jXlzewwShU0
Not sure how this will affect the one thats out there already though.
Bah. They'll update it for several months, maybe even a year or two, and then forget about it. It's what they do with most of their online content... A classic example is their Presenting... Seven Millennia of Realms Fiction timeline, which was published circa 2000 and never updated.
I'm not trying to be negative; I'm just looking at their past track record.
Oh I totally agree with you on that one. What stuck me in that interview though is that WoTC somehow feels that they know what is best for the Realms and that really irked me. |
| Hoondatha |
Posted - 13 Mar 2008 : 01:24:31
Hey, thanks Wooly. I've been trying to find that resource since they moved urls and my bookmark broke. |
| Lord Karsus |
Posted - 12 Mar 2008 : 23:12:04
-Feh, look at how much information pops up when you type into Wikipedia 'Karsus'. I'm telling ya... |
| Mace Hammerhand |
Posted - 12 Mar 2008 : 21:52:47
quote:
Originally posted by HawkinstheDM
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Bah. They'll update it for several months, maybe even a year or two, and then forget about it. It's what they do with most of their online content... A classic example is their Presenting... Seven Millennia of Realms Fiction timeline, which was published circa 2000 and never updated.
I'm not trying to be negative; I'm just looking at their past track record.
That is because (IMO), even though they will not say it outright, WotC's actions show that they secretly hate the Realms. However, since the novel line is so lucrative, they are unwilling to just discontinue the franchise and let the rights revert to Ed. Instead, they have to beat it into the ground and humiliate first. (Sorry, bitterness for the atrocity that they are calling the 4e Realms seeping out. )
I doubt they are hating it... but as their design philosophy (if it can be called such at any rate) changes, so do the settings... to accomodate that philosophy.
Maybe they don't like the Realms as much as say Eberron because so much stuff has gone before WotC's FR, about one decade of lore that does not target the magic-crowd etc. Maybe they've come to realize that the old Realms are actually the intellectual (by the fullest LITERAL meaning of the word) property of the fans who can pinpoint screw-ups far more accurately than the editors etc.
They need to get control back, even if that means alienating everyone else. Hell, who knows, maybe they already have designed a plan to sell Drizzt etc action figures via Hasbro. To get those cross-sales running they need to get rid of those people who would have none of that... namely us |
| Hawkins |
Posted - 12 Mar 2008 : 21:33:06
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Bah. They'll update it for several months, maybe even a year or two, and then forget about it. It's what they do with most of their online content... A classic example is their Presenting... Seven Millennia of Realms Fiction timeline, which was published circa 2000 and never updated.
I'm not trying to be negative; I'm just looking at their past track record.
That is because (IMO), even though they will not say it outright, WotC's actions show that they secretly hate the Realms. However, since the novel line is so lucrative, they are unwilling to just discontinue the franchise and let the rights revert to Ed. Instead, they have to beat it into the ground and humiliate first. (Sorry, bitterness for the atrocity that they are calling the 4e Realms seeping out. ) |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 12 Mar 2008 : 20:50:34
quote:
Originally posted by Caolin
I was watching an interview with Chris Perkins on YouTube and he made a quick mention about them creating an official Forgotten Realms wiki:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jXlzewwShU0
Not sure how this will affect the one thats out there already though.
Bah. They'll update it for several months, maybe even a year or two, and then forget about it. It's what they do with most of their online content... A classic example is their Presenting... Seven Millennia of Realms Fiction timeline, which was published circa 2000 and never updated.
I'm not trying to be negative; I'm just looking at their past track record. |
| Kentinal |
Posted - 12 Mar 2008 : 20:44:12
Well I am aware that Eilistraee article is subject to posible deletion. This in part because of edits made by non members. It also in the past was defaced. To protect FR material it appears one must both become a member and reference sources as much as posible. |
| Caolin |
Posted - 12 Mar 2008 : 20:43:19
I was watching an interview with Chris Perkins on YouTube and he made a quick mention about them creating an official Forgotten Realms wiki:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jXlzewwShU0
Not sure how this will affect the one thats out there already though. |
| Fillow |
Posted - 12 Mar 2008 : 20:12:36
quote:
Originally posted by Ergdusch
mmmh, trustworthiness of wikipedia or not - I use it sometimes but only rarely since I have my books and this very board to consult on matters at question. Therefore I actually don't care much about deleted FR-articles. Anyhow, a few days ago I 'did' search FR related with wiki and came to this site
Forgotten Realms Wiki
Now, whats the deal with that one?
I sometimes use this site. I did not find mistakes yet.
On the contrary from wikipedia, only FR fans go to forgottenrealms.wikia! By definition !
I think the risk of deletions because of irrelevant articles is less high than wikipedia's one !
I must admit I never had time... courage in fact, to add new information within this knowledge source. |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 12 Mar 2008 : 19:02:05
This guy's very biased towards the FR, or all articles about fictional settings?
I don't see the point in singling out the FR setting but ignoring in-universe articles about, say, Star Wars.
How have they decided what's irrelevant? For example, is Wikipedia only going to contain articles that you could find in, say, the Encyclopedia Britainica (sp)? Or, are they going to leave in articles about "trivial" subjects such as American Idol or celebrities (complete with People Magazine style celebrity gossip)? |
| Markustay |
Posted - 12 Mar 2008 : 17:42:16
I had my Najara entry deleted - Reason: Fictional geography is irrelevant!
I did a check on the guy who did the deletion - he targets TONS of FR and other fantasy articles, deleting them whenever he comes across them.
In his comments, he even says his editting is 'very biased', and he removes whatever he personally doesn't care for.
He also writes a LOT of articles about Finland.
I tried to find some way of reporting his articles... because Finland is irrelevant. 
I was also going to go on a rampage, reporting EVER fictional refernce in Wiki, but that would eliminate at least half of whats in there, and besides, that would put me on the same level as that turd.
You see, thats the whole problem with Wiki - ANYONE can wield the power. |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 12 Mar 2008 : 15:11:21
Wikipedia isn't the best source for FR information.
That being said, I have to admit I like using it to look up "trivial" matters, even though deep down I know the really trivial stuff isn't quite encyclopediac. |
| StarBog |
Posted - 12 Mar 2008 : 14:35:30
This isn't the first time something like this has happened. I've seen other deletion-sprees targeted at anything fictional.
Mind you, Wikipedia isn't very reliable at the best of times.
As pointed out. the FR Wiki seems a good alternative, if a bit threadbare at the moment. Is there anyone here involved in that? |
