Adom-Wiki v2

[DirtyFinger]

Yet another adom wiki.

ok, i did it because i didn't know there already was one at wikidot and when I found out, I already posted some stuff that simply looked better than over there.

http://adom.wikia.com/wiki/Attributes#Attribute_Tables
note the sortable attribute tables. quite handy if you have it.

http://adom.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Classes
just a few classes in this category yet, but if you'll click on one class you'll notice the ordered design. and if you edit the page you'll notice the template making the creation of classes-pages pretty easy.

http://adom.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Races
same for the races category. you might also note the linked skills, which brings us to:

http://adom.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Skills
This category has subcategories which contain skills with distinguishing properties, like "need materials". This concept works very well and can easily applied to other future articles, like - uh- "quests that require lawful alignment".

Anyway, like I said, i started it because i didn't know about the http://adom.wikidot.com/ wiki and i think i presented the available articles in a rather more visually pleasing and structured form.

i wouldn't mind scrapping this in favor of wikidot - after all why should i do the work if no one appreceates it - but i'd like to hear some opinions.

cheers!

[edit]
I also managed to get category navigation working in the sidebar.
Check the left sidebar and hover over races/classes/skills. A nice feature of the monaco-sidebar.

[Epythic]

This is what I think would be the "best way ever" (TM):

- Use plain text files.
- Manage then with a Distributed(!) Version Control System, like Bazaar (http://bazaar-vcs.org/).

Advantages:

- everything works offline, even making changes (!!)
- full history
- everyone can work with it, but no spam (you decide from whom you pull changes)
- if you want nice html, there are tools to convert wikitext (or whatever format we choose) to html

This is the way most source code gets written. It fits documentation quite well, as long as it is plain text (no .doc files etc, only .txt).

Note: i hate webinterfaces. Why not use an editor? Thats what they are for!!

[DirtyFinger]

dude, i know people that think that the mouse was a step in the wrong direction ... so don't go there.

[Epythic]

The mouse WAS a step in the wrong direction.

My post was meant seriously. I don't see why you don't like what I said.

[DirtyFinger]

lacking mind-reading technology the mouse was the best input device for graphical user interfaces you could come up with.

And even though command line interfaces - or hotkey interfaces - are the fastest way of getting complex actions done, i don't want them everywhere.

i also like web interfaces because they don't require you to install numerous programs and make contributing amatingly easy and i think mediawiki is the best collaboration tool for low security environments ever.

And counting being able to work offline barely counts as an advantage these days with flatrates available for a dime.

[Shadow_2014]

I hate to go and get a post back on track like this, but as far as the actual question of the wiki itself goes, I like it. I think the sidebar is an exceptionally useful feature, and one which alone makes this wiki favorable to the previous one. It's nice to be able to find what you're looking directly from the homepage, without having to use a Search feature.

So, I would like to know whether the ADOM Community is favour of:
(a) having a wiki at all
(b) using the one provided by DirtyFinger
(c) porting the Guidebook in, piece by piece

That way I know whether I (and obviously DirtyFinger) should bother making the wiki something worth updating and keeping alive. Because I would be interested in helping get all the info on ADOM collected in one place. As it is, everything's a bit scattered.

[Grey]

Permission must be sought before the Guidebook can be ported over! Please don't anyone go violating copyrights with an ADOM Wiki.

I would help out with such a wiki in the summer perhaps, but not right now. Also note that TB has stated that he will be hosting a Wiki on adom.de in future. Do we want to put effort into a Wiki now to find we have to redesign everything for a new one in a couple of months?

[spectre]

[So, I would like to know whether the ADOM Community is favour of:
(a) having a wiki at all
(b) using the one provided by DirtyFinger
(c) porting the Guidebook in, piece by piece]

Err, this insignificant piece of ADOM community claims:
The Guidebook is functional as it is, maybe it's not that hyperlink heavy, but come on.
When in doubt, you can always ask on the forum. We'll be happy to answer any questions, as it makes our postcount go up, and makes us feel like better people.

[DirtyFinger]

i'll ask the guidebook dude. but to fill the thing with anything at all, i had to copypaste something.

and if a wiki will be hosted at adom.de using the mediawiki software then i have no problems with transferring everything over to here, templates included.

i'm just not sure if the sidebar is included in free distributions of mediawiki ...

and regarding the guidebook: That thing is ok, but it's not a wiki.
Functional ? Yes. Up-to-date ? Depends on the effort of a few people.
Includes playing tips or the latest insights from YOU ? Nah. (ok, the wiki has them neither, but it could change).

The greatest advantages of a wiki is the low barrier against participation and the instant results.
Like Stephen Colbert once claimed: Put it in Wikipedia and it's reality.

[Grey]

Need I point out the many flaws in wikis too? Not only is there the risk of inaccurate information, but many people (including myself) will object to code-dived information being entered. Has the potential to start a silly flame-war. Andy Williams has always acted as a good form of quality control on both counts.

[Shadow_2014]

So, short answer: No. Don't bother putting work into a wiki yet. Check.

[spectre]

"Need I point out the many flaws in wikis too? Not only is there the risk of inaccurate information, but many people (including myself) will object to code-dived information being entered. Has the potential to start a silly flame-war. Andy Williams has always acted as a good form of quality control on both counts."

Couldn't have phrased it better, Grey.
So Speaketh Him And So It Is Written
or
QFT

[seepage87]

I'm going to cast my vote pro-wiki. I like Dirtyfinger's adom wiki (http://adom.wikia.com) (links to boost page rank) more than the wikidot one, but whatever. The idea that a wiki isn't a good idea and better alternative to the guidebook blows my mind. Have you read the spoilers to Nethack and compared that experience against nethack.wikia.com? I know many of you don't play Nethack, so maybe you wouldn't know, but navigating the adom guidebook is even more a pain in the ass than the Nethack spoilers; there aren't enough specific topics, and they definitely aren't well arranged. When wanting to thoroughly research a topic, you have to dig through tons of sections, while on a wiki everything you knew was relevant is presented in blue links right there, as well as things you didn't know were relevant.

Dirtyfinger, I think you're hearing from a vocal minority (indeed, the people who post here are already a minority of adom enthusiasts, and probably the wrong people to ask anyway). I think a wiki is definitely worth the effort, even if an official wiki is coming; porting is very easy. Don't worry about inaccurate information, it will be infrequent, often corrected, and rarely harmful.