Wiki Talk.

Anybody have any comments, suggestions on new topics, or any feedback for our NBA Live Wiki? (Click on the link on the top left side of the page if you haven't done so already)

I personally think it's a great tool for newbs to learn a thing or two before they set foot onto the forum.

I havent seen too much of it so far. But i did look at the people category, and found it very interesting. Nice to know a bit more about who's in charge and the history of the site.

What's the point of a Wiki if users can't edit it?

Looks nice!

Last edited by ixcuincle on Tue Jun 19, 2007 1:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Only team members and mods? Lame.

Should make pages for other "significant" members as well.

What's the point of a Wiki if users can't edit it?

It suits our content management needs, allowing team members to easily add new articles without worrying about vandalism.

Only team members and mods? Lame.

Should make pages for other "significant" members as well.

The Wiki is not complete. I wanted to cover some of the base articles and NLSC related topics by the time the new design was launched with the intention of continuing to expand the Wiki as time progressed, there's a lot of pages about sites and people in the Community that will be added. We did not intend to snub anyone, it's simply a work in progress.

Well, then I wouldn't call it a Wiki. It's just using the Wiki software to do another fraction of the site managment if users cannot edit it.

I see no reason why it could not be moderated even easier than something like Wikipedia. There are plenty of tools in the software for managing "vandalism" or worthless edits. And considering a smidgen of users will be dealing with it, the risk is negligble.

You can't even view the history page and there are no discussion options for the entires. And a whole host of errors are in the entires.

As it is, it's just another bunch of pages on the site. Hardly serves in the spirit of a Wiki. Should at least make it registerable like the Forum.

Is ther someone who really can tell me right away something he/she would like to change?

I don't see it as a bad thing that it's not open to everyone. Change the name then if it's bad that it's not just like the wiki consept. I prefer good articles and less trash, which will certainly occur if the wiki becomes free-for-all editable.

This is a work in progress, and we've just started on it. Keep that in mind. We've got so much we want to do with it, but it's still very early.

As of now, we are limiting visitors to using the 'Submit An Article', e-mailing us and to posting here in order for them to add, remove and edit the content. So far.
But it is my hope and intention to expand this aspect in the future. The most likely next step is (as you suggested) giving people the chance to sign up for accounts (or handing them out).
That's something we'll be looking to do in the future. But, as I said, it's still very early.

And for now, if you find errors, please submit an edit/let us know..

I don't see why there is any need to remove the community from a community encylopedia. "Vandalism" and "trash" are just boogeymen to eliminate openness and keep the "unwashed" from "messing things up" by adding more information.

http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension ... ntegration

The "Submit an Article" section is just going to cause more problems. How would I go about submitting the pages of errors? Do I do it one by one, or a big list? What about all the pages I want to add? Then I have to allow it to be "approved" by the powers that be and posted when they get around to it. That's no different from the site and is less user friendly than the forums.

If you want to not allow the community any access to the "Wiki" then at least enable the discussion pages for each item. It would be a lot easier to post edits there than to "Submit" a whole new article, and have it rejected without explanation or ignored.

Not that it matters, but I don't see the issue in it not being that open to public.

What it is now is a small and safe base that we will be expanding (a lot) upon. We wanted to keep it this way to start with, since it's still very early and we're still developing it. And we do have lots of stuff we want to do with it (which, as I've already said, includes opening it up more).

And since you brought it up, we are running on PmWiki, not MediaWiki, due to server limitations. But going with MediaWiki is one of those things that we'd like to do though, and I am already looking into the possibility of getting a separate server for the Wiki (and some other stuff). And if we can do that, we might use the User Integration to open it up more. If not, we will be looking into other ways of doing it for PmWiki. In due time.

Patience, dude..

Well, I just feel without any user interaction you:
A) Can't call it a Wiki.
B) It will die quicker.

I mean, I'd like to make the Wiki comprehensive, and more like Wikipedia for NBA Live, and currently there is no way to do that.

http://www.pmwiki.org/wiki/Cookbook/AuthPhpBB2

Yeah Andrew, going with Benji on this one its not a REAL Wiki

For what you did misewell of just used a FAQ software not a Wiki

^ Don't mind this putz. Just another banned poster trying to come back for the 10th time and cause trouble. Hooray losers!

I checked it out once & it looks cool. What I would like to see is more non-NLSC member profiles (i.e. someone makes a Cocobee profile, detailing a couple of dynasties he did & what he did for dynasties on forums & maybe with links to them). Then when a newbie hears someone write, Cocobee's dynasties inspired me, they can wiki for him. Just an idea, although you might have already thought of that.

Those kind of profiles are definitiely in the books. Unfortunately it's been hard to put much work into the Wiki the last week with the server issues we've been trying to resolve. Everything should be back up to speed fairly soon.

just to be 100% accurate, aren't I a 'retired team member'?

Perhaps there should be a 'Retired Team Member Who Called The 99% of the Entire Community An Idiot' section.

at any rate, I think the wiki is a great idea... and though i'm totally for free editing of wikis... i think having the security is good for this one.

Last edited by Donatello on Sun Jun 24, 2007 9:56 am, edited 2 times in total.

Fricking oddball.

I think instead of "Next Gen" and "Current Gen" dividers for the Lives we should designate the Lives by generation of engines...

First Generation (Sprites):
-Live '95
-Live '96

Second Generation (Polygons):
-Live '97
-Live '98

Third Generation (Facial Animations):
-Live 99
-Live 2000

Fourth Generation (First PS2 Builds):
-Live 2001
-Live 2002

Fifth Generation (Freestyle Engine...Question if this is just an edit of the above engines though...I'll have to install it again and see):
-Live 2003

Sixth Generation (Physical/"Bumping"/Five-man Engine):
-Live 2004
-Live 2005

Seventh Generation (Superstar):
-Live 06 (PS2/Xbox/PC)
-Live 07 (PS2/Xbox/PC)
-Live 08 (PS2/PC)

Seventh and a Half Generation:
-Live 08 (Wii)

Eighth Generation:
-Live 06 (Xbox 360)
-Live 07 (Xbox 360)
-Live 08 (Xbox 360/PS3)

It could even include a "Zero Generation" unless we consider it the true First Generation of Lakers v. Celtics, Bulls v. Lakers, Bulls v. Blazers and NBA Showdown.

^ Not a bad idea at all Ben.

Good idea, but no Gamecube love.

Was Live 06 on the GameCube? I only designated the consoles in my list above to seperate the 360 and previous gen versions.

GameCube has my favorite games from last gen (Wind Waker, Metroid Prime) and the backwards compatbility is part of why I bought a Wii. So plenty of GCN love from benji!

Woot! And yep, 06 was on the 'cube. Only one I kept when I traded in the 'cube for my Wii is Live 2004, though- just can't get rid of it. Oops... off-topic. Back on!

>.>

Nice idea...