Lost Tamoachan
Post new topic Reply to topic Page 3 of 51, 2, 3, 4, 5
Author

User avatar

Grandstanding Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 6720
Joined: Jul 16, 2005
Last Visit: Feb 02, 2021

Post Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 12:47 pm 
 

Keith the Thief wrote:Once completed, it looks like the Wikipedia dungeon module project will be a pretty good source for my previous question on Tomoachan.

If you haven't seen it, the link is
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Du ... ns_modules

Of course, you never quite know what you get with Wikipedia, but it's a fun place to visit.

Keith


I clicked on the Wiki link.  It seems pretty straightforward.


"But I have watched the dragons come, fire-eyed, across the world."

  

User avatar

Grandstanding Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 7970
Joined: Jun 23, 2003
Last Visit: Aug 14, 2022
Location: DFW TX

Post Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 3:02 pm 
 

bclarkie wrote:
I'd be hesitant to do anything with D&D stuff on Wiki.  It has a well earned reputation of being run by a bunch of 3E fan boys, so any info that you are going to get is very likely to be heavily slanted to how its "Not 3E".  :roll:   We had a brief discussion about it over on DF if anyone cares to look:

http://www.dragonsfoot.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=21508


I agree.  Grain of salt necessary.  The 3E fanboys will beat the hell out of it every day, forcing you to continually change it back, ad nauseum.  One of the main reasons I've decided never to involve myself in anything Wiki related....

Mike B.


"THE MORE YOU THINK ABOUT WHY i DONE WHAT i DONE THE MORE i LAUGH" Cougar
"The Acaeum hates fun" Sir Allen
"I had a collecting emergency" Nogrod
Co-founder of the North Texas RPG Con
http://www.ntrpgcon.com

 WWW  


Prolific Collector

Posts: 190
Joined: Dec 30, 2002
Last Visit: Apr 21, 2008

Post Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 3:37 pm 
 

Someone should rent some space on the Acaeum server and start a D&D wiki. 8)



  

User avatar

Verbose Collector

Posts: 1026
Joined: Jun 05, 2005
Last Visit: Jul 15, 2022
Location: Huntsville, Ala.

Post Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 4:07 pm 
 

dcas wrote:Someone should rent some space on the Acaeum server and start a D&D wiki. 8)


Such an effort would really help those of us who have gaps in our knowledge of vintage D&D material.

Keith


"Never let it be said I didn’t do the least I could do."

 WWW  

User avatar

Grandstanding Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 6720
Joined: Jul 16, 2005
Last Visit: Feb 02, 2021

Post Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 7:54 pm 
 

Badmike wrote:
I agree.  Grain of salt necessary.  The 3E fanboys will beat the hell out of it


Could someone give an example of this?

How is this done?

Is there an example of an inaccurate statement?


"But I have watched the dragons come, fire-eyed, across the world."

  


Grandstanding Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 6455
Joined: Dec 13, 2004
Last Visit: Apr 26, 2022

Post Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 8:13 pm 
 

MShipley88 wrote:
Could someone give an example of this?

How is this done?

Is there an example of an inaccurate statement?


How about reading the thread from DF I posted....


"He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." -Neitzche

  

User avatar

Grandstanding Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 6720
Joined: Jul 16, 2005
Last Visit: Feb 02, 2021

Post Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 8:28 pm 
 

I see.  So, you would argue that the Wiki entries are biased for what they do not say.  

I was focussing on what they do say.

The discussion I just read was dominated pretty well by cloak and dagger, who made the strongest and and most pertinent points against Wiki's critics.  The others did not seem to understand his points.

But then again, I am not necessarily a partisan of 1st edition.

I would have to read a lot more to see the bias.  So far as I can tell the main criticism seems to be that the Wiki editors do not say that 3rd edition sucks.

I have to agree that a discussion of Castle Greyhawk must include discussion of Castle Zagyg and similar late additions to the canon.

What I perceive is more of a bias in favor of TSR products and against non-TSR products than in favor of 3rd edition.

I would also agree with cloak and dagger that the 1st edition rules were "clunky" in many areas.  I would only add that the same "clunkiness" was what we actually liked about the rules.

Mark   8)


"But I have watched the dragons come, fire-eyed, across the world."

  


Grandstanding Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 6455
Joined: Dec 13, 2004
Last Visit: Apr 26, 2022

Post Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 8:38 pm 
 

MShipley88 wrote:I see.  So, you would argue that the Wiki entries are biased for what they do not say.  

I was focussing on what they do say.

The discussion I just read was dominated pretty well by cloak and dagger, who made the strongest and and most pertinent points against Wiki's critics.  The others did not seem to understand his points.

But then again, I am not necessarily a partisan of 1st edition.

I would have to read a lot more to see the bias.  So far as I can tell the main criticism seems to be that the Wiki editors do not say that 3rd edition sucks.

I have to agree that a discussion of Castle Greyhawk must include discussion of Castle Zagyg and similar late additions to the canon.

What I perceive is more of a bias in favor of TSR products and against non-TSR products than in favor of 3rd edition.

I would also agree with cloak and dagger that the 1st edition rules were "clunky" in many areas.  I would only add that the same "clunkiness" was what we actually liked about the rules.

Mark   8)


Mark, the problem is not what is on there now for the most part, it is what will be there once it expands.  D&D on Wiki as is obvious right now is pretty limited, so its tough to get a true feel for what happens.  The real problem lies in the bias that will done after it is completed in more detail, because then you will truly be able to see the bias against 1e and for 3e.

With that in mind, I would have to say that saying that the rules are clunky is a matter of personal opinion and it is not rooted in fact.  That all by itself is supposed to go against Wiki's own standards and yet when someone tried to change it so that it wasn't as slanted as it was, they were admonished by the "editor" and the article was changed back to the way that it was.

*<edited in several places, because my original post made no sense at all in places.>  :?


"He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." -Neitzche


Last edited by bclarkie on Wed Jan 24, 2007 9:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
  


Prolific Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 479
Joined: Nov 25, 2006
Last Visit: Apr 24, 2022

Post Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 9:01 pm 
 

I've noticed wiki cops recently as well. I had a wiki web page saved to disk, and when I went back to the web, it had been changed. The editor also clearly indicated what he felt the content should be. In particular, he had removed some links that I thought were very helpful.

 WWW  

User avatar

Grandstanding Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 7970
Joined: Jun 23, 2003
Last Visit: Aug 14, 2022
Location: DFW TX

Post Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 9:26 pm 
 

MShipley88 wrote:I see.  So, you would argue that the Wiki entries are biased for what they do not say.  

I was focussing on what they do say.

The discussion I just read was dominated pretty well by cloak and dagger, who made the strongest and and most pertinent points against Wiki's critics.  The others did not seem to understand his points.

But then again, I am not necessarily a partisan of 1st edition.

I would have to read a lot more to see the bias.  So far as I can tell the main criticism seems to be that the Wiki editors do not say that 3rd edition sucks.

I have to agree that a discussion of Castle Greyhawk must include discussion of Castle Zagyg and similar late additions to the canon.

What I perceive is more of a bias in favor of TSR products and against non-TSR products than in favor of 3rd edition.

I would also agree with cloak and dagger that the 1st edition rules were "clunky" in many areas.  I would only add that the same "clunkiness" was what we actually liked about the rules.

Mark   8)


My biggest problem with the D&D Wiki is that if you arenot part of a hard core circle that have made it their live's duty to police the entry, your contributions will be immediately removed...over and over and over again...until you finally quit out of sheer frustration.  Effectively a small cadre of 3E enthusiasts pretty much control the entry.  Whether for ill or good, this approach is what turns me off of the Wiki experience totally.  They guys may be well meaning, or they may be asshats, problem being they have decided among themselves they are the final authority on the subject, and I thought that was precisely the mindset Wiki was against.  Other than that, honestly, I don't have any gigantic problems with the definitions, except to know that if I ever decided to share my knowledge and post it would be immediately removed.  

Mike B.


"THE MORE YOU THINK ABOUT WHY i DONE WHAT i DONE THE MORE i LAUGH" Cougar
"The Acaeum hates fun" Sir Allen
"I had a collecting emergency" Nogrod
Co-founder of the North Texas RPG Con
http://www.ntrpgcon.com

 WWW  


Verbose Collector

Posts: 1676
Joined: Sep 03, 2003
Last Visit: Aug 09, 2022
Location: Portown

Post Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 9:55 pm 
 

The only thing I've ever added to Wikipedia was on this page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dave_Arneson

I added the following:
"In 1986, Arneson wrote a new D&D module set in Blackmoor called "The Garbage Pits of Despair", which was published in two parts in Different Worlds magazine issues #42 and #43."

This was last Spring. It's still there. It's such a straight forward statement of fact that I guess it didn't offend too many Wiki police...

 WWW  


Grandstanding Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 6455
Joined: Dec 13, 2004
Last Visit: Apr 26, 2022

Post Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 9:58 pm 
 

zhowar wrote:The only thing I've ever added to Wikipedia was on this page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dave_Arneson

I added the following:
"In 1986, Arneson wrote a new D&D module set in Blackmoor called "The Garbage Pits of Despair", which was published in two parts in Different Worlds magazine issues #42 and #43."

This was last Spring. It's still there. It's such a straight forward statement of fact that I guess it didn't offend too many Wiki police...


I am suprised the Wiki police didn't remove it for being arbitrary and unnecessary. :roll:


"He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." -Neitzche

  

User avatar

Grandstanding Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 6720
Joined: Jul 16, 2005
Last Visit: Feb 02, 2021

Post Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 10:27 pm 
 

How does one become a Wiki editor?  Do you just type over whatever someone else has posted?  That sounds like chaos.


"But I have watched the dragons come, fire-eyed, across the world."

  


Grandstanding Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 6455
Joined: Dec 13, 2004
Last Visit: Apr 26, 2022

Post Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 10:34 pm 
 

MShipley88 wrote:How does one become a Wiki editor?  Do you just type over whatever someone else has posted?  That sounds like chaos.


Yes and no.  Wiki's entries can be created and/or manipualted by anyone, but there is a group of specific volunteers assigned to all these different Wiki groups as "editors".   It kind of works like our VB here works.  The "editors" in question have the final say as to what the articles can say and what they can't say, so if you find yourself in a disagreement with an official Wik "editor", you are pretty much SOL.  You can appeal it to the next level of "editor" who is in charge over that "editor"  in question, but the chances of that person taking your side is likely nil and its becomes not really worth the time to fight it out.


"He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." -Neitzche

  


Sage Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 2884
Joined: Nov 04, 2004
Last Visit: May 09, 2020

Post Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 10:36 pm 
 

Wikipedia is a disaster. It is, with no doubt at all in my mind, the world's classic example of "good intentions, poor execution."

I heartily recommend following a plan I came up with a few months ago: ignore Wikipedia like it's a one-legged hooker with oozing sores. Seriously, what will you be missing? A site where the entry for Pokemon is easily 50 times better than the entry for the Louisiana Purchase? And they have the stones to call that an encyclopedia? It's a sad joke, is what it is.

+++++

Sidebar: For those who never saw it, The Onion's take on Wikipedia is an absolute must read. Be prepared to laugh out loud ...

The Onion tells it like it is

 WWW  


Prolific Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 479
Joined: Nov 25, 2006
Last Visit: Apr 24, 2022

Post Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 10:36 pm 
 

Yep, just edit - that easy...as long as someone else doesn't happen to live there. It could be some of the more reclusive trolls just hang out at wiki.

 WWW  

User avatar

Long-Winded Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 3596
Joined: Dec 20, 2003
Last Visit: Aug 15, 2022
Location: Canada

Post Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 10:47 pm 
 

Xaxaxe wrote:Wikipedia is a disaster. It is, with no doubt at all in my mind, the world's classic example of "good intentions, poor execution."

I heartily recommend following a plan I came up with a few months ago: ignore Wikipedia like it's a one-legged hooker with oozing sores. Seriously, what will you be missing? A site where the entry for Pokemon is easily 50 times better than the entry for the Louisiana Purchase? And they have the stones to call that an encyclopedia? It's a sad joke, is what it is.

+++++

Sidebar: For those who never saw it, The Onion's take on Wikipedia is an absolute must read. Be prepared to laugh out loud ...

The Onion tells it like it is


Wikipedia is a disaster because people vandilize it on purpose just to see if someone notices or it is funny to them :?


Games can get you through times of no money but money can not get you through times of no games!!

 WWW  

User avatar

Grandstanding Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 7970
Joined: Jun 23, 2003
Last Visit: Aug 14, 2022
Location: DFW TX

Post Posted: Thu Jan 25, 2007 2:06 am 
 

Xaxaxe wrote:Wikipedia is a disaster. It is, with no doubt at all in my mind, the world's classic example of "good intentions, poor execution."

I heartily recommend following a plan I came up with a few months ago: ignore Wikipedia like it's a one-legged hooker with oozing sores. Seriously, what will you be missing? A site where the entry for Pokemon is easily 50 times better than the entry for the Louisiana Purchase? And they have the stones to call that an encyclopedia? It's a sad joke, is what it is.


Well, your comparison of the Louisiana Purchase and Pokemon is so true it made me laugh.  Often, definitions of pop culture, obscure historical figures, TV shows, rock stars, etc are very accurate and informative; however, try to find anything useful from entries such as Democracy, France, United States of America; Bill Clinton or George Bush, everyone with a political axe to grind defaces the definition (sometimes thousands of times daily).  It's a gigantic joke.  Wiki is at it's best when you want a really quick look at something that's not important enough for anyone to really care about (I recently, for example, looked up entries for Jericho (the biblical city), Heywood Broun, and the TV show Daybreak; all were reasonably useful and helpful).  Other entries are the very definition of misinformation and chaos.  Take everything there with a grain of salt.

Mike B.


"THE MORE YOU THINK ABOUT WHY i DONE WHAT i DONE THE MORE i LAUGH" Cougar
"The Acaeum hates fun" Sir Allen
"I had a collecting emergency" Nogrod
Co-founder of the North Texas RPG Con
http://www.ntrpgcon.com

 WWW  
PreviousNext
Post new topic Reply to topic Page 3 of 51, 2, 3, 4, 5