CPCWiki forum

Because some people already mentioned about shining with superficial knowledge and sites containing "not sure, maybe, possibly"
I created this poll now.

Please vote for YES when you think, non-CPC-related things or superficial knowledge sites should be removed.
YES also contains: when a site is partwise useful, it should be edited   and only the suggestions or non-CPC related, un-useful things should be   removed.

Please vote for NO when you think, we also need non-CPC related things and also need "not sure maybe probably" contents.

Well maybe there should be a "Speculations" category!

I don't think the Triumph Adler thing is completely irrelevant...

/Ygdrazil

Quote from: Devilmarkus on 09:42, 26 April 10
Because some people already mentioned about shining with superficial knowledge and sites containing "not sure, maybe, possibly"
I created this poll now.

Please vote for YES when you think, non-CPC-related things or superficial knowledge sites should be removed.
Please vote for NO when you think, we also need non-CPC related things and also need "not sure maybe probably" contents.

YES also contains: when a site is partwise useful, it should be edited and only the suggestions or non-CPC related, un-useful things should be removed.

In fact it would be great when a native English speaking person could edit these pages and also correct the "beautiful potatoe-English"

If the data has some link to the CPC then it has every right to be there, but if it's pictures of women in bras you're looking for, there are much more suitable sites out there, full of such content (Or so I hear ;) ) The Fawlty-Undenying-whatever mentioned in the other thread is definitely non-CPC and should be deleted. As the poster also stated, it's not even correct anyway.

Bryce.

Please also regard:
The wiki has 100gb webspace.
Traffic is unlimited, but when uploading too many "crap" files, the webspace is filled and we can't create really useful content.
So, please think twice, when uploading photos with 2-3mb size!!!!
(Do we really need wonderbra's in a CPC-wiki? ??? )

Edit: it's not possible to delete files from server! We can only hide them...
To delete files, it's necessary to do this directly on server and is a huge amount of work!

I think all these comments are directed to all wiki contributors.. and not meant to single anybody out.
Really I think that the wiki should look professional. And if the info is not known to write "not known" and not to speculate too much.
Maybe speculation could be on "Talk" pages, but main page should say something like "Not known which company this name relates to. Used in same context as these other companies: Schneider and Awa".

Quote from: arnoldemu on 11:30, 26 April 10
I think all these comments are directed to all wiki contributors.. and not meant to single anybody out.
Really I think that the wiki should look professional. And if the info is not known to write "not known" and not to speculate too much.
Maybe speculation could be on "Talk" pages, but main page should say something like "Not known which company this name relates to. Used in same context as these other companies: Schneider and Awa".

Of course it's directed to all wiki contributors.
Another "idea" is to have 5-10 real "contributors" who are the only people allowed to create/change sites in the wiki and whoever has new ideas, stuff etc, could post them in a special forum thread.
But this means that the wiki is not as free as it should be.

Quick question: Who would offer to edit the bad English spelled sites and clean them up?

I have been editing mistakes I found randomly when I notice them, but it's difficult to keep track of what's been checked and what needs to be checked. It's also very time consuming, so I only get around to doing it when time permits.

Bryce.

I voted yes, but found it hard to do so. What I don't want is a policy where new contributers are scared away because they don't feel welcome or even censored. The emphasis should be on correcting bad phrasing ("probably, maybe"). Deleting pages should only be used as a last resort for pages that don't contain useful and cpc related information at all or against vandalism. While examples of such pages do exists, I guess the bigger issue are pages that are only partly useful.

Quote from: nurgle on 12:41, 26 April 10
I voted yes, but found it hard to do so. What I don't want is a policy where new contributers are scared away because they don't feel welcome or even censored. The emphasis should be on correcting bad phrasing ("probably, maybe"). Deleting pages should only be used as a last resort for pages that don't contain useful and cpc related information at all or against vandalism. While examples of such pages do exists, I guess the bigger issue are pages that are only partly useful.

Yes you are right!
Nobody should think it's restricted to post things and sites there.
But IMHO everyone should think twice before posting a new site in a CPC! related wiki.
And also think twice, what he want's to tell us with his page.
Don't forget: The Wiki should also be good for people who never saw a CPC and are only interested in old 8 bit stuff.

We can use the forum to post our superficial knowledge. Then it could be discussed if should find a place in the Wiki and how.

Any REAL CPC information is of course useful and shouldn't ever be deleted, but we're not talking about real CPC information here, we are talking about opinions, questions and completely non-CPC related stuff such as the Triumph page mentioned earlier. there has to be some sort of limit to how far from the core subject we are willing to allow in the CPC wiki. Otherwise we'll end up with pages about "All my favourite red things" 1) The escape Key 2) Clowns noses (See wiki page "Clowns Noses". And the real information will be lost underneath the junk.

Bryce.

P.s. We'll probably get a take-down notice and/or Lawyers Letter soon regarding the Triumph page picture, I doubt anyone asked for permission to use this image.

Of course, nice girls would improve the wiki!
e.g.: (http://cpc-live.com/amstrad_cpc_thumb.png) (http://cpc-live.com/amstrad_cpc.png)

(Taken from retroaction video and photoshopped a bit)
Click to enlarge (the image, not your CPC!)

Quote from: Bryce on 13:07, 26 April 10
P.s. We'll probably get a take-down notice and/or Lawyers Letter soon regarding the Triumph page picture, I doubt anyone asked for permission to use this image.

Yes thats right! I also found screenshots of a webpage. I then mailed to the website's owner if it's allowed to use them.
- Dear Wiki-contributor: If you use non-self made photos or texts, please ASK the owner for permission to use them!

Edit: Also taking screenshots is a copyright issue! You have to ask the owner of the original stuff for permission!

I just edited the "Triumph" page:
http://cpcwiki.eu/index.php/Triumph

I think that's quite enough information.
I am also the opinion, that all ROM names should be assembled in 1 single page only!

We need more hot stuff in the wiki:
e.g. Like this!!! (http://cpc-live.com/sab.png)

Ehmmmmm who wants sites like these? (I don't!!!)

Ok, quite a few issues here;

-First, the two options are very limited. The answer is, of course, that useless or irrelevant articles should be deleted, but there's a due process for that. This means, first you try to make the article better. If it's hopeless, or if it's totally off-topic, you mark it for deletion. Then a discussion on that page may commence, and the outcome can be decided based on the discussion. So the answer to the poll has already been decided by the wiki's very nature...
-Let's not make a big deal out of it. Yes, we have a couple of irrelevant articles, so go ahead and delete them - these are clear-cut cases of stuff that shouldn't be here. So let's delete them and move on instead of spending grey matter on introspective issues.
-Having a select team of few that are allowed to edit the wiki is, of course, mostly out of the question as it goes against the grain of the very essence of the wiki
-Using logos or screenshots or whatever is perfectly legal and no prior consent is required, if you use them in an article/review/critique/something. Read up on your copyright laws guys. If someone claims otherwise it's just because they want to retain the utmost control on their logos/products, but it doesn't mean they have the right to. In this context, the logo of Triumph was used to illustrate an article, even if it's the wrong Triumph. The only thing Triumph can do, if they care, is send a letter saying that we have got the facts wrong and will we please correct them. That's all.
-Sabrina was a goddess.