Difference between revisions of "Artifacts/BestOf"
From Exalted - Unofficial Wiki
m (link fix) |
m |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | Oh well | + | Oh well. |
:I think the artifact compilation was a brilliant idea, and its slow implementation is not a conceptual fault at all. The problem, as I experienced it, was that there are literally hundreds of great artifacts on the wiki, and even more decent ones, making it extremely extremely difficult to pick out favourites - I absolutely <i>know</i> I'd miss many that deserve the attention. | :I think the artifact compilation was a brilliant idea, and its slow implementation is not a conceptual fault at all. The problem, as I experienced it, was that there are literally hundreds of great artifacts on the wiki, and even more decent ones, making it extremely extremely difficult to pick out favourites - I absolutely <i>know</i> I'd miss many that deserve the attention. | ||
| − | :If you did feel like resuscitating the compilation, might I suggest we make a shortlist in a very straightforward way? Perhaps each active contributor could nominate two or three of their own artifacts, and someone arbitrarily pick from inactive contributors? This would give us the opportunity to pick out a selection that every Wikizen has the time to read through and enjoy. Still, if you'd rather the project stayed dead, I understand... | + | :If you did feel like resuscitating the compilation, might I suggest we make a shortlist in a very straightforward way? Perhaps each active contributor could nominate two or three of their own artifacts, and someone arbitrarily pick from inactive contributors? This would give us the opportunity to pick out a selection that every Wikizen has the time to read through and enjoy. Still, if you'd rather the project stayed dead, I understand...DeathBySurfeit |
::If you want to run such a nomination process, I'd certainly read it. In my opinion, readers are better judges than the writers are when it comes to determining what is useful to them, but I guess they can't be bothered. Maybe if there was a "nomination list" that anyone could edit (but you couldn't nominate yourself), people might get more into it. I doubt it, though, particularly since you [[InterPageLinks|can't actually link to individual artifacts]] anyway. - [[Wordman]] | ::If you want to run such a nomination process, I'd certainly read it. In my opinion, readers are better judges than the writers are when it comes to determining what is useful to them, but I guess they can't be bothered. Maybe if there was a "nomination list" that anyone could edit (but you couldn't nominate yourself), people might get more into it. I doubt it, though, particularly since you [[InterPageLinks|can't actually link to individual artifacts]] anyway. - [[Wordman]] | ||
| − | :::That's a good idea. Why not take advantage of the Wiki's nature by copypasta'ing all the nominated artifacts into one indexed page? That requires only a little extra effort on the part of the nominator, and condenses everything nicely. If you're feeling a wee bit disenchanted, too, I'll happily sort out the formatting... | + | :::That's a good idea. Why not take advantage of the Wiki's nature by copypasta'ing all the nominated artifacts into one indexed page? That requires only a little extra effort on the part of the nominator, and condenses everything nicely. If you're feeling a wee bit disenchanted, too, I'll happily sort out the formatting...DeathBySurfeit |
=== From When We Were Trying === | === From When We Were Trying === | ||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
== Votes & Standings == | == Votes & Standings == | ||
| − | * | + | */BestOfRating0 |
| − | * | + | */BestOfRating1 |
| − | * | + | */BestOfRating2 |
| − | * | + | */BestOfRating3 |
| − | * | + | */BestOfRating4 |
| − | * | + | */BestOfRating5 |
| − | * | + | */BestOfRatingNA |
Revision as of 19:31, 15 January 2008
Oh well.
- I think the artifact compilation was a brilliant idea, and its slow implementation is not a conceptual fault at all. The problem, as I experienced it, was that there are literally hundreds of great artifacts on the wiki, and even more decent ones, making it extremely extremely difficult to pick out favourites - I absolutely know I'd miss many that deserve the attention.
- If you did feel like resuscitating the compilation, might I suggest we make a shortlist in a very straightforward way? Perhaps each active contributor could nominate two or three of their own artifacts, and someone arbitrarily pick from inactive contributors? This would give us the opportunity to pick out a selection that every Wikizen has the time to read through and enjoy. Still, if you'd rather the project stayed dead, I understand...DeathBySurfeit
- If you want to run such a nomination process, I'd certainly read it. In my opinion, readers are better judges than the writers are when it comes to determining what is useful to them, but I guess they can't be bothered. Maybe if there was a "nomination list" that anyone could edit (but you couldn't nominate yourself), people might get more into it. I doubt it, though, particularly since you can't actually link to individual artifacts anyway. - Wordman
- That's a good idea. Why not take advantage of the Wiki's nature by copypasta'ing all the nominated artifacts into one indexed page? That requires only a little extra effort on the part of the nominator, and condenses everything nicely. If you're feeling a wee bit disenchanted, too, I'll happily sort out the formatting...DeathBySurfeit
From When We Were Trying
Votes & Standings
- /BestOfRating0
- /BestOfRating1
- /BestOfRating2
- /BestOfRating3
- /BestOfRating4
- /BestOfRating5
- /BestOfRatingNA
