| Line 71: | Line 71: | ||
:I suggest having something like [http://incubator.wikimedia.org/ Wikimedia's Incubator wiki] that is used for all conworlds to get started. Once they have 5 users, they can branch off into a separate new Wikia site. [[User:Angela|Angela]]<staff /> ([[User talk:Angela|talk]]) 03:01, 7 February 2008 (UTC) |
:I suggest having something like [http://incubator.wikimedia.org/ Wikimedia's Incubator wiki] that is used for all conworlds to get started. Once they have 5 users, they can branch off into a separate new Wikia site. [[User:Angela|Angela]]<staff /> ([[User talk:Angela|talk]]) 03:01, 7 February 2008 (UTC) |
||
| + | ::So the only essential difference between Miles' and Angela's ideas is that Miles is suggesting splitting by article count, whereas Angela is suggesting splitting by active user count. This wiki (conworld) will be the scratchpad/incubator for the small (whether defined by article count or user base) conworlds, until they have proven their potential (which more or less addresses Yunzhong's concerns I think). -[[User:PanSola|PanSola]] 00:14, 11 February 2008 (UTC) |
||
Revision as of 00:14, 11 February 2008
I think the main page is getting an enormous size, new conworlds being added, often with additional information and images. I visited the Novelas Wikia and started to wonder, if the conworlds could be moved to the very left here too. -User:Elioe 20:12 3.1.2007
some thoughts about conworlds on wikia
Dear Angela, Dear Worldbuilders,
I've thought about the way conworlds currently work in wikia.
Conworlds are currently very unstructured.
current state
Some can be found in the RPG Wikia, some in Fiction Wikia (Novelas), others are on Conworld Wikia. Basilicus is also a repository for "Worlds" (or at least galaxies).
problems
The problem is many worlds are mixed up together. In future this will result in name duplicates and confuses the authors. Every Conworld uses it's own rules for worldbuilding (wich is completely ok!). But if you have different naming conventions this just won't fit.
Let me give you a comparism on how this can't work: It's like a science fiction wikia, a television wikia, a books wikia. Now if you want to add content for a World like StarTrek you have to choose: is it a book, a TV-show or is it SF? Of course it's all of this! So a very own StarTrek-Wiki makes total sense. The same goes for conworlds: Each conworld is a world with massive potential information that at some point won't florish if it has to share the space with other projects (think of coordination, namespaces, categories etc.).
Another comparism would be wikipedia: it is an encyclopedia of ONE (our real) world. One world - one wiki. For the same reason wikis like DC Comics were created, because there wasn't enough room for another world in wikipedia.
a solution?
My proposal would consist of a structural change:
- One Center for Meta-Conworld-Building (guidelines, tutorials, comprehensive list and metainfo of all conworlds out there)
- a Wiki for small conworlds (<50 pages), think of a Wikia Scratchpad for conworlds.
- for each (bigger) conworld - ONE wiki
The Conworlds wiki would be an ideal candidate for the first two (at least the name suggests it).
one world - one wiki
Bigger worlds (50+ pages) are
- Kay Eriya (>197 pages, rpg wiki)
- Layflat Castle Falkenstein (>95 pages, rpg wiki)
- Star Wars: Dark Times (>56 pages, rpg wiki)
- 20x Universe (>152 pages, conworlds wiki)
- Nearly Real World (>98 pages, conworlds wiki)
- Retrovian Empire (>110 pages, conworlds wiki)
- the Neverending Wiki (>280pages, novelas)
- Lorica (>380 pages, novelas)
and some more (hard to say because of the category mess...)
Basilicus would not be touched, because they are heading another way (building a big universe).
The RPG-Wiki would more concentrate on small RPG-Systems and less on worldbuilding (though combinations of worldbuilding and a unique RPG ruleset would fit nice in there). When the RPG grows (50+ pages) it can be transfered to its own wiki.
This way the big worlds have a good chance to grow and are more visible than the small ones. They also profit from beeing more self sufficient and can organize themselfs in a better way.
conclusion
For Wikia this means creating about seven new Wikias. IMHO 50+ pages is a good rule of thumb and authors who want to start from scratch have this opportunity at the Conworlds wiki.
Please give me some feedback what you think about this idea. Greetings, --MilesTeg 11:07, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
feedback
I like the idea of having a central 'hub' wiki with others for individual conworlds attached. The problems are:
1) Most conworlds have either 1 or 2 users working on them or are abandoned entirely, so they will not be stable communities.
2) This will open a Pandora's box of people requesting wikis to host what they think are good conworlds but which are not.
Of course, there is potential to working out these problems.
--Yunzhong Hou
Just use categories, though I suggest all conworlds be kept on conworld.wikiaUser:Serprex 20:41, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
- I suggest having something like Wikimedia's Incubator wiki that is used for all conworlds to get started. Once they have 5 users, they can branch off into a separate new Wikia site. Angela (talk) 03:01, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
- So the only essential difference between Miles' and Angela's ideas is that Miles is suggesting splitting by article count, whereas Angela is suggesting splitting by active user count. This wiki (conworld) will be the scratchpad/incubator for the small (whether defined by article count or user base) conworlds, until they have proven their potential (which more or less addresses Yunzhong's concerns I think). -PanSola 00:14, 11 February 2008 (UTC)