|
Croatia9568 Posts
First of all, I'm sorry if this is not the right place to talk about this, but I guess this is BW related after all.
Ever since the Teamliquid vs BGHers showmatch, I was the one to encourage the acceptance of BGH map and players inside the low map scene. To this day, I'm pretty content with how the BGH scene has made a name for itself among the low map scene and nowadays, at teamliquid.net, you can talk about BGH without being called a noob and numerous other offensive terms (mostly thanks to the awesome teamliquid.net admins). On top of that, they even included the BGH section into the Liquipedia, a place that is forming to be a Starcraft bible.
Now I never was one to read about strategies and build orders, always preferred to do things "my" way, but being the BGH player that I am, I couldn't help but head on to the Liquipedia and browse around the BGH section there. It came to a pleasant surprise that the BGH section was accessed almost a 15,000 times. I thought wow, some people really want to learn about the magnificent world of BGH and then I went to read some of the guides there. That's when my enthusiasm fell down. I first clicked on the BGH Teamplay Guide, because it's something that most people (even some BGHers) don't quite get and I wanted to see if it was presented well. To my surprise, I saw something I hope that is a joke post, of someone quoting some guy retelling his adventures of pubbing (pubbing is a term BGH players use for playing public games. On the other hand inny/innying is a term for playing in-house/private games). Granted, his post is teamplay oriented, but it is a joke comparing to the comprehensive and exhaustive Teamplay Guide that easternPROTOSS wrote some time ago, which you can read here: easternPROTOSS' BGH Teamplay Guide (sorry for advertising).
I see that the article about teamplay on Liquipedia is "unreviewed", so that's a question I've been meaning to ask. Who is reviewing the BGH articles on Liquipedia, as I've also read some of the BGH Build Order guides, and while they can appear 'correct' to the non-BGH player, I can assure you that most of them are simply wrong. Now I'm a fairly decent BGH player and while I don't have much of the free time, I'd be more than willing to help out with the BGH section of Liquipedia, especially since it seems so popular, but who's to say that someone again might post some of 'bad' content like that, and to the non-BGH player who's reviewing those articles they might seem fine (like BGH Protoss Build Orders which are 'reviewed' I guess, but they're simply wrong).
Once again, I apologize if I went the wrong way about this or if I offended anyone, but I'm just a BGH player who would like to make BGH even more respected and popular.
|
|
|
Croatia9568 Posts
Yes, that post is how the Liquipedia BGH section should look like.
But if you read the BGH section on Liquipedia, you'll see that almost none of that content is there.
|
Liquipedia not having content isn't exactly exclusive to BGH 
|
On January 08 2010 22:36 2Pacalypse- wrote:
Yes, that post is how the Liquipedia BGH section should look like.
But if you read the BGH section on Liquipedia, you'll see that almost none of that content is there.
There is a solution to this problem, and it's called "you should edit Liquipedia." As an outsider I get the feeling that they're understaffed, and so if you know something about BGH (even if it's just editing and compressing an article) then you should do it.
|
Croatia9568 Posts
On January 08 2010 22:54 d3_crescentia wrote:Show nested quote +On January 08 2010 22:36 2Pacalypse- wrote:
Yes, that post is how the Liquipedia BGH section should look like.
But if you read the BGH section on Liquipedia, you'll see that almost none of that content is there.
There is a solution to this problem, and it's called "you should edit Liquipedia." As an outsider I get the feeling that they're understaffed, and so if you know something about BGH (even if it's just editing and compressing an article) then you should do it.
If you read my whole post, you'd see that I would be more than willing to do that (even though I've never written another wikipedia article, so I'm clueless about the syntax), but my concern is about who's reviewing the BGH section.
|
England2675 Posts
As someone who frequently edits Liquipedia it really pains me to see you sitting here complaining about the website and doing nothing to rectify the situation besides asking about it. Liquipedia is a big project and there's a small number of people consistantly editting it. It uses up more time than you seem to think. It seems to me like you have enough knowledge to help out this page so just edit it.
Just a note for everyone, bolded to get this through:
You do not have ask permission or seek encouragement before you edit liquipedia. Just edit it.
|
That's what wikipedias are for. Start doing it m8 and it may be the best place for bghers
|
On January 08 2010 22:36 2Pacalypse- wrote:
Yes, that post is how the Liquipedia BGH section should look like.
But if you read the BGH section on Liquipedia, you'll see that almost none of that content is there.
Insane's article is literally word for word from your link to easternPROTOSS. Its the second post under teamplay.
But yeah seriously, just edit it all yourself if you care and know that much.
Edit: Lol i'm dumb, insane cited EP at the bottom, dunno why I didn't check for that.
|
Lol I didn't either rebirth.
|
On January 08 2010 23:00 2Pacalypse- wrote:Show nested quote +On January 08 2010 22:54 d3_crescentia wrote:On January 08 2010 22:36 2Pacalypse- wrote:
Yes, that post is how the Liquipedia BGH section should look like.
But if you read the BGH section on Liquipedia, you'll see that almost none of that content is there.
There is a solution to this problem, and it's called "you should edit Liquipedia." As an outsider I get the feeling that they're understaffed, and so if you know something about BGH (even if it's just editing and compressing an article) then you should do it. If you read my whole post, you'd see that I would be more than willing to do that (even though I've never written another wikipedia article, so I'm clueless about the syntax), but my concern is about who's reviewing the BGH section.
Chances are, probably no one (or at least not anyone that is specifically dedicated to the BGH section, and then not frequently). Hopefully, you, because you seem to legitimately care about the quality of the section.
|
bgh is soooo overplayed if u ask me
|
Roffles
Pitcairn19291 Posts
On January 09 2010 00:59 NiGoL wrote:
bgh is soooo overplayed if u ask me
Fastest is so much better, right?
As for editing, go ahead. I'm sure a lot of people out there who play BGH in their spare time on pubbie servers would love to read the section.
|
Calgary26004 Posts
I don't understand why you don't just PM a liquipedia admin.
|
im a bgh/hunters 3v3 player :D
|
On January 08 2010 23:00 2Pacalypse- wrote:
If you read my whole post, you'd see that I would be more than willing to do that (even though I've never written another wikipedia article, so I'm clueless about the syntax), but my concern is about who's reviewing the BGH section.
You should hop onto the Liquipedia IRC channel in that case. There is usually a bunch of people there who are willing to help you with the syntax. 
http://webchat.quakenet.org/?channels=#liquipedia
|
|
|
On January 09 2010 00:59 NiGoL wrote:
bgh is soooo overplayed if u ask me
low money is soooo overplayed if u ask me
|
im the only fucking editor for bgh threads on liquipedia anyways
give me some credit jesus christ, i wrote half of the guides on there including 95% of the BOs
if you dont like em, fine, but any noobie just learning bgh will, you dont just get good by starting, you get good by memorizing basic BOs, and those were what I've listed in idealistic conditions on 3v3s
flamboyant where u @ son?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
