People wishing to edit Barry may subscribe to the newsletter.
I am also interested in supporting the Witcher 3: Wild Hunt by subscribing to such a newsletter and helping improve my community.
Kind of the idea, really.
People wishing to edit Barry may subscribe to the newsletter.
You can call it wiki, wikia, online encyclopedia, Barry or whatever you choose. I do not mind what is official and what is not. I want as many fans & customers to find information about The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt as possible. I know Marcin is working with great people and sites he has worked with in the past, I am working with wikia, who are also great.
I do not really care about any sort of past disputes between groups. I care about our Witcher Community. The more good websites that work with us to help promote The Witcher, the better. I am perfectly happy for their to be multiple fan sites for Wild Hunt. I am also perfectly fine with there being multiple wiki/wikia sites. I understand that the people who run those sites work hard to do good work, and we fully support them. If one is "Official wiki" and another is "Official wikia" and another is "Official Barry", as long as they are accurate, helpful and happy to work with us, I will work with anyone I can.
I, for one, do care that wikia continues to capitalise on what is largely my work.
Anyone you can? I invite you gladly to the Cursed gamepedians
Besides disputes and etc. there is also an issue of fragmentation and limited resources. While having many encyclopedias is OK, in practice I doubt you'll be able make a good second Wikipedia for example all on your own. Simply because resources are limited. Or it will end up with one copying from another all the time, same as happens with forks in free software. At some point one has to consider the usefulness of the fork. In this particular case I don't see a point in two Witcher wikis. It does increase confusion, causes unnecessary duplication and overhead.
DiamondDove said:Marcin just joined our group. Maybe he can say some words about "what it does mean to be an 'cdpr supported wiki'", because till now I haven't seen any actions in this direction for the gamepedians (except of the former link on the news page, which is actually gone).
And I'd like CDPR to know, that 90% of the contributions done in the English and in the German Witcher wikiA came from persons, who moved to gamepedia (or stopped editing at all). Also the French, Italian and Greek part is strong at the new place. In the Polish and the Russian or another wikiA it maybe another. But let me show you some numbers:
I compared some statistics a few days ago:
- at witcher.gamepedia there are about 300 more articles, i.e. content pages, than on witcher.wikiA; I don't talk about "sites", because this would contain also forum talks - the most activity on witcher.wikiA in the last few months. So the community is more active on wikiA, no doubt.
- witcher.wikiA has 31 active contributors in the last 30 days - we: only 8. But among those "active users" on wikiA is no true contributor in nearly 2 years (when i read the tables in the right way), and the most edits by far have been done before the switch, and very likely all by "escaped" contributors (game_widow, ausir, aeon, ... petra_silie).
witcher.wikiA has no admins, no bureaukrats, no moderators any more - we have 13 admins and 4 bureaucrats! All hard working for making the new place the better witcherly wiki.
- Please correct me if I'm wrong, but as far as I've seen most of the actual contributions are done by wikia staff themselves. They just prepare for editing, but the current users only read, write in the forums and go away. But those users perform still enough clicks for wikia for being worth hold this wikia alive.
That's why it seems to me that the witcherly wikiAs have been able to survive the last two year only by the intervention of wikia staff. I watched it myself on the Polish wiki (maybe Smiki can confirm that): single people suddenly rush into the wiki, make very useful, mostly structural changes (rather no new content!), and leave the wiki as fast as they where coming in - this looks for me like the internship of potential wikia staff.
I'm neither in the position to demand something from CDPR nor I even wish to. We dealt in good faith bringing the wiki to a new, less restricted place. All wikis have their right to exist and help to promote The Witcher 3. This is the main fact and more important than any personal sensitivity, that's for sure!
But say "thank you" for the content to the wikians is rather a thank to the users, not to the contributors, as I'm interpreting the message it was originally intended.
So my question is, why doesn't CDPR at the very least treat the new wikis at gamepedia equally to wikia? Is to be the "official wiki" only a tile, simply two words, nothing more?
Hey guys,
Both Wiki and the Wikia have our full support. Wiki at Curse remains our Official Wiki and nothing changes here. Wikia became the official Wikia page which doesn't make it any more official than the one at Curse. Actually, it's the opposite. The one located at Curse is the main official Wiki. I hope this won't cause any further confusion.
This is the only reason, why I'm still an admin of hexer.wikia.com - to protect the work of 6 years from vandalism... But on witcher.wikia.com all valuable admins have been banned - so who wants to be voluntarily next? :/Dunno if you have any power in this, but I'd suggest you to find some more constant, serious and continuative contributors for the TW Wikia too, as leaving as it is with no moderation aside Wikia beaurocrats is a real mess. And I frankly don't know how approximative or even vandalized Berry-encyclopedia can be of any use to CDPR and to the game. To name just one thing, news are constantly updated on Curse only.
/2cents 8)
This is the only reason, why I'm still an admin of hexer.wikia.com - to protect the work of 6 years from vandalism... But on witcher.wikia.com all valuable admins have been banned - so who wants to be voluntarily next? :/
This whole wordplay with wikia / wiki doesn't really look nice at all to me. Since CDPR have some partnership with Wikia now, it's not just them endorsing it, it's some financial deal.
What I worry about is that community will be split.
Bookmark the Curse site: http://witcher.gamepedia.com/Witcher_Wiki. Use it often.
Tough to find, though. If you google witcher 3 wiki or even curse gaming witcher 3, you get the wikia site. Kind of sucks.
To be sure, no one at Wiki was getting ad revenue or anything were they? I mean, not the contributors. I'm really not familiar on how these fansites work, but Game Widow seemed to suggest they were getting screwed over. I assume this has to do with endorsement only, and therefore site traffic? At any rate, if the new site has silly regulations ( *cough* San Fran *cough*) and not a fraction of the experience doing this, seems like a no brainer to me.
Bookmark the Curse site: http://witcher.gamepedia.com/Witcher_Wiki. Use it often.
Tough to find, though. If you google witcher 3 wiki or even curse gaming witcher 3, you get the wikia site. Kind of sucks.
It's the same with any wiki that uses curse. The World of Warcraft wiki switched to curse as well but the wikipedia one still shows up in search rankings.
Frankly I think both wikis are a bloody mess, many articles on crucial characters are bare bones.