Don't Call It the WingKiPedia (August 11, 2007)

[Bandit LOAF]

In general, the CIC staff are old fashioned internet gentlemen. We don't advertise or Podcast or YouTube or MySpace or anything of the sort... and, on rare occasions, we've been known to turn up our noses at these new fangled things kids today love. Well, our readers have made one thing painfully clear in recent months: they want a Wikipedia.

At first we demurred - the concept isn't one we've ever loved. Let anyone who wants to change anything they went to about an encyclopedia? One needs look no further than the current Wing Commander entries on the Wikipedia proper to see that it doesn't always work. Then, we realized: it wouldn't just be anyone editing the database... it would be WingNuts, the best community in the world!

Nevertheless, we're going to do this on our terms: it's not a permanent open database, it's a project to create the greatest Wing Commander Encyclopedia ever... and it has a timeline - at this time next year, we absorb it into the rest of the site. You have to register to use it and we've selected a license that doesn't give all our work to the Wikipedia corporation.

Everyone who contributes can consider themselves Wing Commander grad students... and you get your degree when the whole thing is finished! For my part, I'll be there every part of the way, writing entries as frequently as humanly possible and checking everyone else's research to make sure it lives up to our impossibly high standards!

We've set up a blank page and made it look like the CIC -- you can begin creating the WCPedia here.

... and as for the name in the update subject? Heed its warning, lest KrisV hunt you down.

​

--
Original update published on August 11, 2007

 

[Dundradal]

I look forward to creating this dynamic archive of WC history. The biggest draw for me from WC was the rich history that surrounds it, oh and the games of course Next week after my seminar ends I plan to get to work on filling this up. Great idea guys and great implementation.

 

[meisdavidp]

I love that you're doing it from an in-character (IC) viewpoint. Let Wikipedia be stuffy and non-point-of-view. I hope I can find something to contribute.

One suggestion, though. In addition to the rules page, you might add a "How this works" page where you would explain how the entries are to be written. The other possibility is trying to find a way to hard code a view of the rules page and signature that "researchers" agree to the rules before they can edit.

The one other thought I had was possibly having a separate section of the wiki where non-IC matters could be discussed (Origin, EA, Sales, reviews etc.)

 

[Kevin Caccamo]

Just a general Wikipedia question: How am I supposed to get to all the Wiki pages you guys have made? I know you've started an article on the Darket, but when you guys do mass production of articles and I don't check the Recent Changes page often enough, how am I supposed to get to these new articles?

Will it eventually be organized and sorted out with links on the Main Page?

<EDIT>: Go to Special Pages, then go to All pages, then click on your article of choice.

 

[AD]

I love that you're doing it from an in-character (IC) viewpoint. Let Wikipedia be stuffy and non-point-of-view. I hope I can find something to contribute.

I wouldn't worry about needing to find something to contribute. If you look up a topic and see it's not there, the best thing you can do is start an article on it with what you know even if it is basic. If it's a ship for example, use the darket page we already made as a template and fill in what you know. Someone will see the addition and add to it where necessary. It's a lot easier, and more incentive, to work on the entries that are started than to figure out what article to start next.

There really isn't a whole lot of articles yet though so the more help the better. As of right now I think there are a total of four pages: Christopher Blair, The Darket, Cloaking devices, and Bear (bondarevsky). The only one that has any semblance of completeness is the Darket article.

 

[Dundradal]

Yeah, as the rules say, no entry is too small for a start. I like the setup of the Darket entry and I think that should be the template that should be used for fighters and capships.

I started the Bondarevsky entry because he's my favorite character, so if you are looking for something to start think of some of your favorite things and add it in. Don't worry if it's only a few lines, all of us are here to help each other fill this up.

 

[Vinman]

Before we get this project on a roll, I'd just like to be sure of something. Will ships be referred to as the TCS Blah Blah, or simply as TCS Blah Blah? Tradition dictates that a ship would be simply referred to as TCS Blah Blah, but people often say "the" before a ships name. I'd just like to set a standard so the pages will match.

Oh, also, should we bold the first mention of the topic in an article the way wikipedia does?

 

[LeHah]

Not sure what I can add to this project but I can't wait to help on it!

 

[AD]

Before we get this project on a roll, I'd just like to be sure of something. Will ships be referred to as the TCS Blah Blah, or simply as TCS Blah Blah? Tradition dictates that a ship would be simply referred to as TCS Blah Blah, but people often say "the" before a ships name. I'd just like to set a standard so the pages will match.

Oh, also, should we bold the first mention of the topic in an article the way wikipedia does?

The CIC's original entries uses "the" before ship names so I would just continue in that standard unless it makes gramatical sense not to. Honestly not using "the" sounds quite ackward in actual speech.

Regarding bolding, unless there's a very good reason to do so, I wouldn't worry about copying the way regular wikipedia does anything. So I'd first ask what fuction bolding the first mention of a topic in an article provide?

 

[Vinman]

Quick question. How are we supposed to refer to the events of Wing Commander IV? I've seen "2673 conflict" and "black lance incident" so far. I thought it was called the Black Lance Affair, but I don't remember where I heard it, so I'm not sure of its veracity.

 

[ChrisReid]

The Official Guide to Prophecy calls it the "Border Worlds Conflict, also known as the Black Lance Affair." Star*Soldier makes a reference to the "Black Lance crisis," but with the c lowercased.

 

[Vinman]

The Official Guide to Prophecy calls it the "Border Worlds Conflict, also known as the Black Lance Affair." Star*Soldier makes a reference to the "Black Lance crisis," but with the c lowercased.

So should we go with Border Worlds Conflict?

 

[ChrisReid]

If you're doing an entry specifically about it, then probably. That entry would also want to prominently note that Black Lance Affair was also used to describe the event. If you're mentioning it in something else, then either would probably be acceptable depending on the context.

 

[Vinman]

If you're doing an entry specifically about it, then probably. That entry would also want to prominently note that Black Lance Affair was also used to describe the event. If you're mentioning it in something else, then either would probably be acceptable depending on the context.

It would be best to have a single entry on it that other pages can link to or expand upon. As it is, there are multiple entries referring to the same event, but are calling it multiple things, making it awkward to link to the yet-to-be-created page.

Should references to the events of Wing Commander IV lead to a page called Border Worlds Conflict?

 

[ChrisReid]

Yeah, I don't think I have anything else to add besides what's in the post above.

 

[Kilrathikiller]

What is with Saffron Burrows picture for Angels main pic not saying she didn't do a good job but this site is mostly for the games that we fell in love with so in my opinion(please no one shoot me for this) It needs be from WC 1 or 2 and I hope its fine that I mean to change it if I don't soon or someone else beats me to it.

 

[AD]

What is with Saffron Burrows picture for Angels main pic not saying she didn't do a good job but this site is mostly for the games that we fell in love with so in my opinion(please no one shoot me for this) It needs be from WC 1 or 2 and I hope its fine that I mean to change it if I don't soon or someone else beats me to it.

Opinions of the movie aside, there is no reason not to use the movie photo. But, since most of the other character pages use Wing 1 / 2 photos I would tend to use those as well.

Though there *Should* be a photo of movie angel in a gallery attached to the devereaux page as well as a WC3 photo of Angel.

 

[Kilrathikiller]

Opinions of the movie aside, there is no reason not to use the movie photo. But, since most of the other character pages use Wing 1 / 2 photos I would tend to use those as well.

Though there *Should* be a photo of movie angel in a gallery attached to the devereaux page as well as a WC3 photo of Angel.

I went and changed it and did exactly what you said. Personally I like the movie. Its in no way a great movie but its alright when your a Wingnut it definitly makes it better.

Also I like that you just cut the pic i put in there, or who ever did. WiCipedia is a joint its all of the communities efforts to put it in. I kept the old Saffron pic in there too I switched it.

Also I'm guessing this is all from the perspective of in character and the Real world place is the only room for talking about the actors and such that played them and which media they appeared in and such.

 

[Vinman]

Also I'm guessing this is all from the perspective of in character and the Real world place is the only room for talking about the actors and such that played them and which media they appeared in and such.

Right. Just in case you haven't read them over, the rules explain what to do with behind the screens stuff like actors and wing commander media.

How are you enjoying the 29th century, fellow researcher?

 

[Dundradal]

When talking about ships "the TCS/KIS ....." should be used. It sounds odd and looks dumb without it.