Where do I go to ask questions about CivWiki?
I wanna know if it's appropriate if I made a shitter category for the most infamous players ex twinkie, vanax, saren solaris, etc
Server list cleanup
wanted to get the ball rolling since spec suggested it. i honestly think we can safely discount "test servers" like civrev and civredemption from the list since they're not really civ servers in and of themselves. civvie and civcubed also straight up just aren't live so i'm not sure why they're on the list to begin with, their creators should be adding themselves to list of civ servers in development instead (maybe a link to that page could be put on the main page somewhere?).
as a separate point, is there any interest in factoring in how active a server actually is when deciding whether it belongs on the main page? eg. vintageciv is still techinically Live but hasn't seen any kind of activity or development for like 10 months, and this was the same issue with civrealms and devoted hell before they Officially went offline. -Des23 (talk) 15:30, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
- my take: split live servers into upcoming and live, show only servers on main page that have had y edits on the last x days --Metriximor (talk) 15:33, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
- The intention was (before RoTC and Cubed started pushing me to add their servers to the page) was that we would mostly segment these out to a "list of Live servers" or as you mentioned, also segmenting that off into List of Civ servers in development and then linking that onto the main page, and I'm hoping to start working on that when I have a lot more time to do nothing but edit CivWiki anyways lol
- In the past when we started "actively modifying" the active server list we generally have been sorting by the perceived amount they've been active -- which is why I was very pissed when CivVie attempted to try to take the first spot in pretty much every list possible (see edits on List of Civ Servers). Obviously that's a topic of general discussion of whether to really keep them on the list, but I desperately do want to cull down the number of "active servers" on the main page. Additionally, I'm hoping to represent servers that aren't on the main page but were servers (e.g. Sovereignty Ascending, TheRealmsMC) on the side pages that list the servers themselves, but that's a story for another time. But TL;DR, yes I'm hoping to start culling the main page's server listings by relegating some to just a "server list" page, and be a bit more selective on what gets featured. Feedback encouraged! Specificlanguage (talk) 15:38, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
i think metrix's idea is good but would ultimately result in even more clutter on the main page, which seems the opposite to the direction we actually want to go in. ultimately it's probably going to have to result in more active management since it would be up to editors to keep track of how active a server is. what kind of guidelines do you think should be implemented in order to qualify what counts as an active server and what doesnt? more harsh guidelines would probably require more management (eg. determining exactly how many days its been since a server has been active) but would probably also be the most accurate Des23 (talk) 15:58, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
either way, at this point i am in favour of at least removing the ones that aren't live at all (civvie and civcubed) as well as the test servers (civrev and civredemption) Des23 (talk) 16:30, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
Adding the Civ101 guide by Reddevel to the main page "Quickstart" section:
Please add the Civ101 guide (Civ101) by Reddevel to the main page. I believe it is still a work in progress but it is a very comprehensive guide and it is also catered somewhat more toward the current most populous civ server - CivMC - so I think that it could quite justifiably be put at the top of the "Quickstart" section. Another reasoning for doing so would be that it encompasses multiple of the other pages there within 1 page, including getting started info + mechanics/plugin info.
Since, the subject of editing the "Quickstart" section has come up it may also be a good idea to remove the timelines for CivRev and Civclassics from this section. Neither of these are anywhere near important information for a "Quickstart" now, as civclassics has been down for nearly 2 years at this point so its history isn't relevant to a "quickstart" and similarly CivRev is no longer up either and its history is not relevant to a "Quickstart" at this point.
- I do agree that Civ101 should be added to the main page, which I'll do soon. However, as a reminder, this is a wiki for all Civ servers, not just CivMC, and we don't have a timeline for CivMC quite yet. Showing history is important on the wiki to show the genre's depth, so I don't really like the idea of removing the timelines. There is a lot of space on the "quickstart" section, and I do think history is worth keeping. -- Specificlanguage (talk) 17:09, 1 September 2023 (UTC) I do agree that history is important too.
- Maybe a new box could be added below quick start entitled something along the lines of culture/history of civ/the genre. I feel like links put under the title of "Quickstart" are implied to be relevant to getting a quick start in currently active servers. However, the two timelines under the title currently - although historically relevant - actually have little relevance to any of the currently active servers or to any of the ones in development. So I feel like to keep that section along the lines of information needed for a "quickstart" it'd be better to move them to a "intro to the culture/history of the genre" section instead. As in reality none of the information in either of the timelines is really something new players need to be reading to obtain a quickstart. I'd say that if a CivMC timeline is created, or if timelines are created for any other active server, then those would belong in the Quickstart section as they'd be relevant to getting a quickstart on those servers. -- Solitaire7