EPT[SC2B] Liquipedia Update I - Page 2
| Forum Index > News |
|
StayFrosty
Canada743 Posts
| ||
TheFallofTroy
Canada780 Posts
Now back to work we go... | ||
Pholon
Netherlands6142 Posts
 Spells and Abilities. Please use the AbilityTemplate for the latter! Thanks! | ||
|
Julmust
Sweden4867 Posts
On March 17 2010 07:27 LuDwig- wrote: You judge a player good because he has played a game for 3 weeks? seriously? The game is still unbalanced and unexploreted. I know the comments like this one seems not productive but I don't find real professional the "player list" at this stage of the game. Your example (boxer hot,...) is totally different from the actual situation. and about tournament: you don't understand what i mean. If i organize a tournament at my house it will go to liquipedia? i suppose it will not happen. So we have to put some requirement. Number of players? Fame of the site? Skill level? and for each of this point we have to discuss how to decide resepctable sites, skill level, etc etc Yes I think a player such as Dimaga, who has won 2/3 zotac cups, good. I find players such as Orly who has won one zotac, finish second in another, good. I find a player such as LaLush who has gone to the quarterfinal of every single tournament he has been in, good. Also we're not professionals. We don't get paid. We don't get anything in return for editing liquipedia, besides the times we pat ourselfes on the shoulder, and quite frankly I find your tone condesending and extremely provocative. What's so wrong with adding players to the list? Even if they don't make it once the full version launches, they've still ACHIVED something. Lets say StarCraft 2 is as good as Brood War and people, 10 years from now, find a well written article about Dimaga. Lets say I 10 years from now find a well written article about Dimaga. That's nostalgia. We're not just creating a wiki imo, we're creating a historic document. Why arent you arguing about us adding the patch notes? They're COMPLETELY irrelevant once the game has launched. Should we delete those? No, it'll be a fun thing to go back in a few years and laugh at how overpowerd X unit was in the beta. And are you REALLY complaining about what we put on liquipedia? I decide what I feel is neccesary to add to liquipedia. So do you, so do everyone else who edits it. That's the main thing: if there's intrest in something regarding SC2 it should be on liquipedia. Look at the tournaments portal, I've made almost every single thing there. Tell me one thing, just one fucking thing, that does not belong there. One tournament. Is it the Zotac cup? Who will run weekly with 100 euro to the winner? Is it the ESL weekly who also runs every week but does not give out prizemoney? Maybe liquibition because I mean my god what a silly thing to do. No cash prizes, just two guys playing while its being streamed. Nothing special at all. | ||
|
duartesito
Dominican Republic32 Posts
| ||
Flicky
England2669 Posts
On March 17 2010 08:45 duartesito wrote: Where is the Psio build vs P for the terrans... i was planning on using that tonight!!! anyone knows if is gonna go up again? It will end up back on there, we're just doing a bit of fiddling with it  .Ludwig, I understand your opinion and I understand that you may feel it un-necessary but it's part of the wiki and I think it is important. Yes, it's early beta and the players will all be better in a few months, but a great part of it is prediction of who will be worth looking at. Say a player wins a tournament in a year, I would not want to have to trawl through old pages and articles to find out their Starcraft 2 history which is why we're documenting it now. Doing the work as we go along is the sensible way to do it. I think you should read through Slugbreath's recent post on the The Anthill of Starcraft. If the information is there now, it is not damaging anybody, but if it is not there in the future, it is. This is all assuming that you read the newspost where I went over our criteria for which players we are adding. In case you missed the link, here is is again: Talk:Portal:Players. If you have any more concerns about this content, feel free to send a member of staff a PM, or find us on IRC. | ||
|
LuDwig-
Italy1143 Posts
On March 17 2010 08:40 Julmust wrote: [Why arent you arguing about us adding the patch notes? They're COMPLETELY irrelevant once the game has launched. Should we delete those? No, it'll be a fun thing to go back in a few years and laugh at how overpowerd X unit was in the beta. You are taking it too emotional. In my opinion you did not understand the point of my posts. Pherpas i have to say that I have editeted Liquipedia I and that I will edit Liquipedia II as much as i can to make(for what i know), so I am interested in making Liquipdia a better place not to throwing shit to your work. And with this feeling I post my idea. My only fear is that liquipedia could become a "trash can" where everyon will put his own profile or friends' one. The main thing I was asking are more "Common Criteria". As now they seem to be to generalists and I would like more stricted ones | ||
|
Tommylew
Wales2717 Posts
| ||
Aesop
Hungary11305 Posts
On March 17 2010 14:53 LuDwig- wrote: And with this feeling I post my idea. My only fear is that liquipedia could become a "trash can" where everyon will put his own profile or friends' one. The main thing I was asking are more "Common Criteria". As now they seem to be to generalists and I would like more stricted ones It's a common misconception that "loose criteria" equal "free for all (= total chaos)". We are carefully judging each addition, discuss the "notability" of the player added, and you are welcome to voice your concerns about specific players on their talk-page. That means, despite not offering rough-and-ready criteria that would have to be bent in any and every direction once we meet "reality", we have standards that are applied, maintained and which we believe to be successful so far. | ||
|
Talic_Zealot
688 Posts
| ||
|
Holmen
Sweden7 Posts
http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/3_Warpgate_Rush_(vs._Protoss) My suggestion is that you introduce some kind of "patch variable" that admins can set globally and all pages need a revise after each sc2 patch or if possible do some check at dates. Pages not updated since last sc2 patch gets a warning in the start of the article. | ||
|
Mystlord
United States10264 Posts
On March 18 2010 03:13 Holmen wrote: I will start editing but first I need to know how do we keep track of information that is valid for specific patches? At the moment I have only seen a "warning" on the strategy sections. http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/3_Warpgate_Rush_(vs._Protoss) My suggestion is that you introduce some kind of "patch variable" that admins can set globally and all pages need a revise after each sc2 patch or if possible do some check at dates. Pages not updated since last sc2 patch gets a warning in the start of the article. All directly relevant pages to whatever gets changed by a patch gets changed almost immediately, same with Patch Notes. It does take a while for the implications of the patch to get figured out though, so that's why we're holding off on other articles that are relevant to past patch changes. Don't worry, it'll get sorted out eventually . As for adding a "patch variable", I'm not exactly sure if that's possible at this point without changing every page individually.Although for that specific case, I think it's clear at this point that the rush is no longer viable. | ||
|
Holmen
Sweden7 Posts
On March 18 2010 15:11 Mystlord wrote: All directly relevant pages to whatever gets changed by a patch gets changed almost immediately, same with Patch Notes. It does take a while for the implications of the patch to get figured out though, so that's why we're holding off on other articles that are relevant to past patch changes. Don't worry, it'll get sorted out eventually . As for adding a "patch variable", I'm not exactly sure if that's possible at this point without changing every page individually.Although for that specific case, I think it's clear at this point that the rush is no longer viable. Of course, changes in unit stats and so on get changed pretty fast, no doubt about that but I was thinking about e.g. the new strategy categories/modular thinking and "warnings" for old strategies. I'll explain with an example. --- Example 1 - The current state of the wiki --- After each patch nothing special happens unless someone goes into a strategy article and adds a box with a "warning" like the 3 warpgate rush page has now. --- Example 2 - Another way of thinking --- All strategy articles get a php script or similiar running at the top of each article that will print a box with a "warning" that says "This strategy hasn't been updated since <date>/<patch> and may be out of date". The pros with this one is that all strategies listed that doesn't have the warning has been approved by someone as a viable strategy in the latest patch, some kind of quality assurance and this will make it easier for new players to find a strategy that is up to date. Perhaps it creates to much work to go thru all articles after each patch...but that is something that has to been done anyway sort of. | ||
|
NightmareX
New Zealand31 Posts
This is great!!! | ||
|
SC2Phoenix
Canada2814 Posts
| ||
|
Juvator
Netherlands199 Posts
I dunno how that is for the terran or zerg because its not my main race and I don't really know that much about them to see if its the same deal. I myself find great use in the builds that are shown there and was wondering if the community could add more to this for example the PvP part only has 1 or 2 strategies showing but I reckon there are more right ?as P player I find that playing against another P can sometimes be quite frustrating  | ||
| ||
