Mabinogi World Wiki is brought to you by Coty C., our other patrons, and contributors like you!!
Want to make the wiki better? Contribute towards getting larger projects done on our Patreon!
NOTICE: Enchants are being worked on and the "by type" pages are not working at the moment.
Also seems like daily VIP shadow missions may be wrong occasionally!!
If you need me immediately you can contact me via the board messages or email here, I get alerts for these on mobile. You can also find me as Kadalyn in the Official Unofficial Mabinogi Discord Server but I will only respond if I'm on my computer.
|Thread title||Replies||Last modified|
|Staff Forums||1||21:59, 13 March 2016|
|Referring to the Marijuana Page.||1||06:54, 13 May 2014|
|Add something to||0||14:18, 9 March 2014|
|Possible Exploit?||0||13:39, 17 February 2014|
|Preemptive Strike(?)||0||23:06, 12 February 2014|
|Video Policy proposal||6||14:59, 31 January 2014|
|Macha Revisions||46||08:01, 5 September 2013|
|Well||3||00:13, 24 August 2013|
|Seebarsch/Seerbarsch||1||00:32, 28 April 2013|
|Reminder||4||15:36, 14 March 2012|
Now that we are moving to WikiForum, where does the Staff section go to? Such as "Forum Moderation" "IRC Moderation" "Wiki Moderation" and "DFO-World".
I'd like to request some modules over on DFO-wiki. Thanks!
Some certain special snowflakes (on Facebook) decided to troll the Mabinogi Wiki with that page. I know action has been taken so far with one account, but I would probably advise moderators or such to watch the page in the next few days. Just in case they try to override the I.P. / Account ban and try to make other troll pages.
I think "not stray from its intended purpose" is really vague. I would rather acceptable purposes be given. Like "This can only be used for tutorial purposes" or whatever. Probably in better wording.
Also I would change this "If music must be added, it must be in-game at a lower volume than the sound effects, or any track used in Mabinogi." to "If music is present, it must a track used in Mabinogi, and must be at a lower volume than the sound effects."
The reason being that using "present" includes "added" or "already playing from within the game". I only switched the order cause it sounds better to me. Either it's relative importance, or just English chime.
The rest is good to me, thanks for this. (Of course that doesn't mean it's instantly implemented, I'll have to discuss it with Ange and such.)
Of course. I figured the video policy kinda just...sit there while the image policy seems to be getting more dated than videos.
Also, I haven't really thought about doing anything about it and see is good as is, at least to me. The wording can be changed to fit policy needs and I want to see something to be done to the policy since it sits around in its current form as...for a while I think.
I've been spending my spare time on updating the policies, but it's been going slowly cause I'm pretty busy.
Trying to reform the wiki is a gigantic pain in the ass.
That's okay, I know how life can be and yes...a giant reform is a pain :x I should know since I had a colloege project looking at reforms of the past regarding society...I miss my college days.
Well don't worry Kad, we're all here to pat your back, right Mika?
This was way before someone removed that line.
Hm, could use a link in your edit message or on the discussion page there, still.
Either way, you even admit it's just a coincidence in that thread, so why keep it? You know, not everything you notice needs to be in the trivia.
That doesn't heavily imply anything besides the fact that they supposedly look alike. You're drawing conclusions based on circumstantial evidence.
You also really have to weigh if it's useful or even interesting information. In this case, it's a conclusion someone can draw on their own. It makes for an interesting discussion thread, which is just as viable as an offering of information as the data on the main page.
Do consider it.
If an information has to be useful, what's the point of a trivia section?
Trivia sections should be avoided. If they must exist, they should in most cases be considered temporary, until a better method of presentation can be determined.
So it has to be interesting AND useful, not interesting or useful?
You should note that Ikkisuki linked a policy page from Wikipedia, and not here.
However, it's becoming increasingly evident that we need to adopt a policy specifically regarding trivia sections, external comparisons, and other weird, currently poorly defined areas.
We will notify users of the policy update when it takes effect.
Might as well just make trivia sections against the rules than make a policy for it. . .
That would be a policy either way, wouldn't it? Personally, I like some of the trivia, and would rather not do away with all of it.
I say either barely touch it or do away with it altogether, no need to step over toes; in my opinion.
I think the line Kevin quoted from Wikipedia's policy would be the best way to handle it.
I'd rather Trivia sections not be allowed than that, to be honest.
It's not so much tiptoeing as it is that we're trying to find a way to keep certain information that would otherwise be lost, as it has no place in the article.
For instance, comparisons to the Celtic myths or original Shakespearean plays are not really viable content for the main article because they frankly don't matter - people read those articles for help with the questlines. However, it's interesting content that many people might want, perhaps because it may even inspire someone to read the original stories. Therefore, it has a place somewhere on the wiki, and the goal of the new policy is to specifically determine where.
This of course applies to other information, as well.
So what you're saying is, no information will be lost, more that it is about what deserves to be wear? Because frankly, nothing angers me more than the loss of information over time, no matter how unimportant one may think the information is.
I'm not saying "no information" but I can't tell you what information will and won't be. However, it's not something to fret over.
Any information that is deemed to be otherwise fully removed may go on your user page, of course.
The reason for needing a policy on it is for: cleanup, usability, readability, professionalism, less is more, etc etc. Also clearer yet hopefully less rules regarding content to make things friendlier for new contributors, and still keep current users out of the revert wars they seem to be constantly stuck in over this stuff. So I hope to reduce arguments and increase contributability. Surely, there are plenty more reasons...
My post was about that.^
What's the point of adding it to the userpage? Nobody cares, nobody reads it. If it's not on a main article, it might as well not exist.
(And yes, I do consider the Bread of Nao thing an oversight, but I do think it's valid to stay on the Trivia section, in my opinion.)
I agree. I don't think anyone reads my User:Infodude575/Vindictus page anymore.
So then don't make a user page about it. It is an option, though. If your concerns were really with "not losing data" rather than "people need to see my contributions" I would suspect that you would be okay with using a user page to store such things.
The fact that no one views these pages may very well be because it is less interesting information than you thought.
It's not about "my contributions", if it was, then there would be a point to the userpage vanity. But if people don't see it, information might as well be lost. I do not think 90% of trivia should be removed, at most, moved to other sections of the same or different page.
Or maybe because only my page directs to it and I doubt most non-users on this wiki would want to read userpages.
There are people who read userpages.
@dude575: Since you brought it up, your page about Vindictus is poorly organized and much of the information is speculative and/or incorrect.
May I suggest a direct vote-like policy about whether or not a pierce of trivia should stay and/or be added, rather than adding things like "do not post __ in a trivia section or anywhere else in the wiki".
It's there in the case that a user needs to see it. Regardless, you're fretting. We will not be losing 90% of our trivia or any other dramatic number, which is why I originally told you not to worry about it.
And no, a policy like that cannot work, Pyrus. There are a total of maybe 5~10 people who actually speak on the wiki that would ever involve themselves in these votes, and I do not want such a minority deciding the direction of the wiki.
Quality assurance is best done absolutely, not relatively.
I don't really see how an absolute policy is any better, it's just a flat non-negotiable decision, even if only two people out hundreds agree with it.
It is non-negotiable, but we take input from the experience so far as well as the site's users. Mostly the former, admittedly. Obviously the goal is to find a happy medium, so that more than two people out of hundreds agree with it.
In that respect, there will obviously be parts of any policy that you personally don't like. Considerably because I get the impression that you don't like change in general. However, for all parties, it's worth it to put up with a few limitations to create a peaceable and beautiful experience overall. Because should we be able to provide that, the community should be better able to grow and mature.
I admire your ideals, but what I'm worried about is the type of judgement you might use. It's not change that I don't like, otherwise what's the point in me contributing to a wiki. It's loss that disturbs me. I can't really think of any, there might be ways but I can't imagine any at the moment, policies that won't immediately remove the rights of some lines being on the wiki without first being negotiated. Something should be negotiated before it is removed, not negotiated before it's allowed to be readded without even discussing removal in the first place. Can you please give an example of what this policy would entail
No, we need to design it first. Ideals and goals is all I can offer for now.
However I find your opinion on data incorporation a little backwards. If information is contested, it shouldn't be on the main article, because most people will read that article assuming that its contents are true. I would rather not litter the pages with "Some of this article is contested" or "[Citation needed]", so it's best to leave it out until the discussion is resolved. The data is available on the discussion page during the dispute for those who need it.
If the policy were to say that some things should be decided by a vote, I think the number of people actually discussing things on instead of having revision wars. And even if it is still a small minority voting, it's not like those decisions would be final; if a lot people who didn't vote end up hating a change that was made, the talk page is still there.
Wouldn't an absolute policy on something like trivia have to be insanely long to cover everything?
If the wikipedia page is any example, not really. If we strip out the legalese that article isn't too long.
It won't be a listing of specifically allowed or disallowed things, of course.
I think Bread from Nao should be moved because I feel that's it's lost its status as trivia and should be removed or moved else where. It was funny when only a couple NPCs had it but now it's just...bring up all sorts of crap.
^^^ pretty much that. I'd hate to see the day someone joins and suddenly kills off trivia sections. at least keep it as a place to put interesting information (subjective yes, but if it's interesting enough with something to back it up...maybe.) and maybe something to poke fun at, like uhh...Heart's age.
Also I think a line needs to be drawn somewhere when trivia isn't interesting anymore...like Bread from Nao. kinda sick of going to every other page to find that "[NPC] has Bread from Nao in their inventory." Maybe it was a developer oversight or something automatically generated...or maybe cause you're the Milletian and you basically have the bread and just happen to take it with you in the RP. blah blah blah...
Subjective no. Subjective discussion is meant for discussion pages, not trivia sections.
I think trivia sections got a bit out of hand from their original intention. It was originally something like Ikkisuki said, then someone read "trivia" and thought "okay yeah I can put trivial information here in a poor effort to contribute something".
Also yes I would assume the bread from Nao is an oversight as well, resultant of copypasting. Theoretically, whoever does want to maintain that information should start a User:x/NPCs_with_Bread_from_Nao page to list those NPCs in, rather than placing the mention of bread on the NPC page. I would even allow a link to that subpage on the Bread from Nao page's trivia section, but not every NPC's.
I hope that gives some idea of the goal, here.
Maybe the policy should say that new users who aren't allowed to have user pages yet are also not allowed to add trivia that might cut down on people using trivia as a "poor effort to contribute something".
Err... So you're saying the Macha trivia is not fine?
I don't want to disturb Saiyr anymore.
The last thing that I want is banishment, for anyone, even Kevin. Despite what he's done, he's made good contribution and he's not replaceable, no one is. Its like Romeo and Juliet; even after Romeo was perma-banned from Verona, screw Paris, no one could replace Juliet's lover.
Taking on criticism, I know that's a requirement, but I don't think that's an easy thing for me to do. I'm simply going to point out that I have social issues, namely ADHD and Asperger's Syndrome, "Mentally Retarded" as what Kevin would say. But, that's not an excuse, am I right?
In my opinion, I can't see how gossiping someone is a "personal statement". Its making me very uncomfortable, because it feels like negative commenting towards me, not to mention it already caught the eyes of others.
Anyway, thank you for preaching and trying to get this aside.
I never did mean permanent bans; though potentially long-term, anyway.
It's not an excuse, no. Syndromes aren't licenses to run rampant. If you're going to take part in a society you do need to, you know, take part. I don't really recall that as being a deficit of either disorder though, but I won't say it isn't I guess. Even if you naturally feel aggravated or whatever by criticism, it's about realizing when that happens, and trying to take a step back to figure out what's going on. It may be a struggle, but it's certainly something you can do if you put your mind to it. It's probably going to be difficult to notice exactly when something is simply a criticism that's affecting you, I don't know, but you should at least be able to notice the response to your response after it, and use that moment to take a step back and realize that the former statement wasn't laced with ill intent or anything, and apologize for taking it in a terrible way or whatever. I'm not entirely sure what the issue is, I guess, but I assume it's something like that.
Political, not personal. In the sense that it may be something that you do, that he's making a statement about, but it's not about you specifically, and rather those actions that others are doing as well.
Of course, boss.
Bleh, ignore the typo qq. But those statements are all about my editing, so its all my actions, no?
Also, if I may ask, what of my contributions do you find "silly and unwarranted if not outright misinformed"? I'm only one of the few working on The Saga: Iria, individual characters on progressing storyline, Dual Gun Skills, and so forth, but if my contributions are put into question by an admin, I can't ignore it.
Those statements may be inspired by your editing, but are likely a trend by multiple contributors. I'll refrain from dropping names right now, as I would rather bring it up directly as needed.
Well namely, bare hands aren't weapons. Weapons are easily defined in-game as items equipable in the weapons slot. That's one thing I noticed from the link Ikkisuki gave. To be honest, I don't really want to troll your contributions and find more, but I have seen things in the past, too. I believe we had quite an argument on the Gods page, too, long ago.
Last I checked, when you talk to Karpfen, she addresses herself as "Seebarsch".
Template message removed, be sure to read the policy for an explanation on why you got this message on your talk page.
Hello random guy who's not a mod when I am. :T
And I make plenty of edits when I see the need to.
Oh and yes, I have 30 edits that improve the wiki and are significantly different than other edits.
No you're not, at least, not anymore if you are. Special:ListGroupRights (And I don't intend to pose as one either if you got that impression.)
Either way, that's irrelevant. And it's about frequency of helpful edits, according to the policy. (Note that that first message was a carbon-copied message I give everyone who has created a user page and is violating the policy or one that hasn't been on in a long time and just got on.)
Hi Pyro, while we appreciate your interest in making sure users adhere to the policy of the wiki, please avoid attempting to moderate site and community staff, or those users who are following the policy anyway (if you had, in fact, checked to make sure they were complied with). If you have any concerns that a user is not following the rules, please bring it up to a staff member instead of trying to moderate them yourself.