 |
This forum page has been archived. Please do not make any further edits unless they are for maintenance purposes. |
|---|
- If you use the Nukapedia Discord server, there's a pretty good chance that you've encountered one of these dataminers discussing lore, technical information, and even upcoming content for Fallout 76. Needless to say, they've been a real boon for our community, and lately they've even taken an interest in editing our wiki and improving our content.
- So I'm going to keep this pretty simple: I would like to be an advocate for an official affiliation between our two communities, and add them to our Discord Library as a resource for our users. I really can't see any downsides to such an affiliation, as I've really come to respect the people there and the time that they dedicate towards our mutual interest. 寧靜 
20:14, September 13, 2020 (UTC)
- Link: https://discord.gg/8GNHxpC
Comments[]
Only person from the miner's I had buisness with so far is intrepid. But boy, the stuff I learned from him while he answered all my questions patiently. If all of them are that way, I would instantly vote yes. --Findabair (talk) 20:39, September 13, 2020 (UTC)
- I'd like to point out that Scribe Howard is also a dataminer who has played a vital role in forging a connection between the wiki and datamining teams :) --Intrepid359 (talk) 21:18, September 13, 2020 (UTC)
Firm no from me. While I respect their contributions, I absolutely feel the dataminers have a wholly different view of the wiki. And they are more interested in bending the wiki to function along the lines of that view than actually contributing to it as it currently stands. I realize my voice may not stand for much, but that is my opinion. --Jeet-Maht (talk) 03:38, September 14, 2020 (UTC)
- I agree. JCB2077 (talk) 03:45, September 14, 2020 (UTC)
- That’s a little too vague to come across as ominous or even negative. There’s no useable information presented here to understand the basis for your opinions.
- From y’all’s perspective, what is “our” collective view of the wiki, since you have proposed such a view exists to be contested, what is their view, since you feel such a collective opposing view exists, and what makes these views incompatible? Additionally, what specific functions of the wiki have they altered or attempted to alter, and by what means have the forced or attempted to force the wiki to “bend” to their view points? If possible, please give specific instances which can be verified. And, if applicable, what makes their attempts to change the view of the wiki stand apart from any number of forums created by users and staff on the wiki side which exist only to change the status quo and challenge held beliefs? The Dyre Wolf (talk) 06:09, September 14, 2020 (UTC)
- So far, very little has been actively implemented in terms of policy, but there has been a great deal of talk in your server regarding it. This includes: 1.The whole debate about the existence of the Ghost Fleet. This involved the stripping of lore that was blatantly obvious to anyone who can see it from various pages was started as a result of discussion on the datamining server. The edits involved were carried out without even talking about it on the articles talk pages or the Discord. That's counteractive to proper cataloging of information on this wiki, as well as a healthy information of editing. 2. Intrepid himself has said that the wiki could "improve" with the help of the datamining server, stating that it's dedication to categorizing lore was "cult-like." You can call me personally biased against him, and I am. But these are things he has outright stated within the datamining server and demonstrate his feelings about wiki as a whole. And 3. Waster, in response to a question about when they should start recording Fallout 76's history as a game, says replies that it should happen after the dataminers "fix" the wiki as well as having once stated, and I quote, "We need to delete half the wiki were they read between the lines." As well as "Wiki is written by ding dongs who get things wrong. We have editing rights for a reason." These two individuals being the most prominent of the dataminers and editors on the wiki, with their willingness to casual edit in their own bias without discussion rather than talking about potential cuts before they happen, seem almost actively hostile to Nukapedia as we know it. Have they contributed good things? Yes. I just worry about what giving them more power of what the wiki might become. They want gameplay information to take precidence over the recording of lore and information on the Fallout universe, something that has been at the core of Nukapedia since it was known as The Vault. Thus, I cannot in good conscious allow them to be considered full affiliates.--Jeet-Maht (talk) 07:11, September 14, 2020 (UTC)
- Hi Jeet! I don't believe this is a fair or accurate assessment, and I'm struggling to see how it's related to the topic at hand. I believe you are referring to the Ghost Fleet discussion where I pointed out several sources simply didn't exist or were mis-attributed. Multiple admins confirmed that several lore assumptions had been made based on bad data. One particular member who has a reputation for keeping the lore his way and his way only did argue that the false data should be kept in place, so I am glad that the admins were able to step in, find the correct information, and rewrite the narrative in an encyclopedic fashion. I'd also like to point out that the fact you are aware of this subject is because it was indeed discussed on the wiki Discord. How would you be aware of a discussion that you claim never happened? This entire characterization doesn't sit well with me. In the brief time we've been around, we've made hundreds of edits, added hundreds of new files, and provided training on how to use several tools that open new possibilities for the wiki, and more. If we have ever violated a rule in our editing, no one has mentioned it. We are here to help and to play ball. :) --Intrepid359 (talk) 09:35, September 14, 2020 (UTC)
- So far, very little has been actively implemented in terms of policy, but there has been a great deal of talk in your server regarding it. This includes: 1.The whole debate about the existence of the Ghost Fleet. This involved the stripping of lore that was blatantly obvious to anyone who can see it from various pages was started as a result of discussion on the datamining server. The edits involved were carried out without even talking about it on the articles talk pages or the Discord. That's counteractive to proper cataloging of information on this wiki, as well as a healthy information of editing. 2. Intrepid himself has said that the wiki could "improve" with the help of the datamining server, stating that it's dedication to categorizing lore was "cult-like." You can call me personally biased against him, and I am. But these are things he has outright stated within the datamining server and demonstrate his feelings about wiki as a whole. And 3. Waster, in response to a question about when they should start recording Fallout 76's history as a game, says replies that it should happen after the dataminers "fix" the wiki as well as having once stated, and I quote, "We need to delete half the wiki were they read between the lines." As well as "Wiki is written by ding dongs who get things wrong. We have editing rights for a reason." These two individuals being the most prominent of the dataminers and editors on the wiki, with their willingness to casual edit in their own bias without discussion rather than talking about potential cuts before they happen, seem almost actively hostile to Nukapedia as we know it. Have they contributed good things? Yes. I just worry about what giving them more power of what the wiki might become. They want gameplay information to take precidence over the recording of lore and information on the Fallout universe, something that has been at the core of Nukapedia since it was known as The Vault. Thus, I cannot in good conscious allow them to be considered full affiliates.--Jeet-Maht (talk) 07:11, September 14, 2020 (UTC)
- From y’all’s perspective, what is “our” collective view of the wiki, since you have proposed such a view exists to be contested, what is their view, since you feel such a collective opposing view exists, and what makes these views incompatible? Additionally, what specific functions of the wiki have they altered or attempted to alter, and by what means have the forced or attempted to force the wiki to “bend” to their view points? If possible, please give specific instances which can be verified. And, if applicable, what makes their attempts to change the view of the wiki stand apart from any number of forums created by users and staff on the wiki side which exist only to change the status quo and challenge held beliefs? The Dyre Wolf (talk) 06:09, September 14, 2020 (UTC)
I am not affiliated with the data miners beyond interacting with the members who also use the Nukapedia server in the same way that I would interact with anyone else in our server. So my perspective is about as impartial as it can be.
1) Nothing abhorrent took place during the Ghost Fleet edits. One of the core values of the wiki is that speculation is not allowed, and the removal of speculative information requires little pomp and circumstance, especially on such a minor page and with information which has no basis in lore.
The edits as made by Intrepid held, not because some evil cabal wanted to see data miners come out on top, but because evidence, or lack thereof, supported his work. The edits were right to be made, and the wiki and the lore present on page are more accurate as a result.
Was the Discord exchange particularly polite? Not at times, no... but then the same could be said for those arguing in favor of keeping the Yangtze information on the article. Anyone who wants to shame Intrepid is going to have to point fingers all around, including at users who have no affiliation with data mining.
Leaving an edit summary explaining his actions fulfilled his due diligence. Are talk pages messages nice? Yes, but they are not mandatory, and neither is bringing every inconsistency on Discord.
2) The wiki always needs active members, and there is nothing hostile or scary about saying the wiki could be improved by an influx of editors with technical knowledge. Wanting to improve the wiki is goal that should be supported, not resisted.
You say “cult-like” as if it’s a bad thing, but remember this is a volunteer driven site which survives only because people choose to spend their free time working. There are several editors who could easily be labeled fanatics for spending a concerning amount of time working on the wiki, but no one I know hates them for it.
Just based on the rationale present so far, it does appear that these concerns are based in personal bias against one user, not a clear or present issue resulting from the data mining server.
3) The wiki is written by ding dongs. People who do not know what they are doing, people who mean well but have accidents, and people who actively edit to the detriment of the wiki. The wiki’s greatest gift, that anyone can edit, is also its curse. Managing this is why we have patrollers, mods, admin, and dedicated users who give their time despite any staff roles. So this is indeed why anyone, including data miners, can edit the wiki.
So far as needing to “fix” the wiki, I would point you to the projects page which documents a considerable amount of known fixes that need to be tackled, and to a not insignificant amount of F76 content which needs to be worked through. The wiki does need fixing, and as I said earlier, speculation is not allowed. If tackling unsubstantiated claims is Waster’s niche, there’s nothing wrong with that. Guesses, theories, and made up information do not constitute lore and should not be found on articles. We have the discussions platform, blogs, and personal pages to house these items. So the greatest sin of that quote is stopping short of deleting ‘’all’’ speculation. It’s not bias any more than it is for a user to target bugs or notable loot.
Giving them power isn’t really relevant here, either. Users, all users, must petition for rights, and an affiliation between the wiki and their server does not instantly crown anyone admin or ‘crat. If individual users follow the proper procedures to become staff, there is no weight against them simply because they were fans in a different community first.
And if you have evidence of a server wide conspiracy to replace lore with gameplay only, please share it. Otherwise, it appears a hyperbolic claim at best and slanderous at worst. Nothing said so far is indicative of this being the case. The Dyre Wolf (talk) 11:24, September 14, 2020 (UTC)
I think we should absolutely forward with this proposal. The only way we will be able to begin seeing eye to eye is by increasing our communication and strengthening our relationship. We have to keep in mind that our main goal is to make information available and accessible to as many people as possible in the most understandable format. Both sides have strengths that the other does not, and we can build on those strengths to everyone's benefit. -kdarrow 
take her for a spin! 17:10, September 14, 2020 (UTC)
"I really can't see any downsides to such an affiliation,..." I agree with this statement. There are really no downsides to it. I don't see any reason to say no. ( btw, sorry for the super short message, I'm not good with thinking ) CookieGamer733 (Talk
) 19:14, September 15, 2020 (UTC)
I've only had positive experiences with the data-miners I've interacted with. "Datamining" with the GECK was always a major boon for our Wiki and that's now a lot more difficult to do with 76. So I accept anyone with the ability to do so, and welcome them to the family - Chris 
23:55, September 16, 2020 (UTC)
I don't see the fuss, really. It's just adding a link to Discord Library to help our users find a related, active, high-quality community. Nothing more, nothing less. I assume the data mining server will be listed as a sister server? - FDekker (talk) 12:08, September 17, 2020 (UTC)