Congratulations to all of us. In about 7 months or so we have transformed an idea into reality. We have created an amazingly involved community where everyone has something to contribute. We are nearing 1000 unique threads, with 13,000 posts in those threads. We have just about hit 400 members, and on a personal note, I just hit 1500 posts!
:hat off
So with all this good stuff happening, there are bound to be some growing pains. The Wiki could use some serious help. Some pages are getting a little mismatched compared to others. You have to think of the Wiki as an encyclopedia. It’s a 3rd person’s perspective on Warhammer, specifically on Chaos Dwarfs. It is not an Army Book. We have to include sources so that facts are verifiable. An example of a good page is this: [[Rykarth the Unbreakable]]. It identifies what the page is, and who this character is, and names it source. An example of a bad page is this: [[Uzkulak]]. Where does this fluff come from? What is the source, is it from 3rd edition? Is it from Man o’ War? I don’t know! Many of the location pages need fixing up.
We also have many conversions that should be looked at. [[Chaos Dwarf Warrior Conversions]] is looking great but is still missing some crucial conversions. Head here to help out with that. Several other pages need help too, head to the [[Chaos Dwarf Hobby Articles]] section to help with those. Note the format of [[Chaos Dwarf Warrior Conversions]], I am trying to use that.
==Equisite Evil==[[Exquisite Evil]]'s [[BFSP]] Chaos Dwarf Warrior conversion. This was the first BFSP conversion on record and it is credited for kick starting the [[BFSP]] Chaos Dwarf movement.[[Image:Chaosdwarfwarriors2_ee.jpg]]
Name (not a link), description with link to the name, then the picture. Some other pages need fixing up for that. The blurb at the top of a conversion page should be a description of what a conversion would typically look like and off what edition that look would be based.
We are doing pretty good in maintaining the Compilation Threads but we should keep on our toes. Remember whenever a new thread is posted in the Showcase or Conversion section, it may be worth adding to the Compilation threads, make a post like described (Owner, Style, Link to Thread), and get a slave for your troubles! Many of these compiled pictures and conversions may have a home in the [[Chaos Dwarf Hobby Articles]] section! Add them to the appropriate page!
The best way to attract new Chaos Dwarf players is to make all our images and information readily available in an easy to read format! So it’s time to clean up a few messes here and there, and really polish this place! I am only one man, with a small team of staffers, but together we can be an army! Glory to Hashut! :hashut
An example of a bad page is this: Uzkulak. Where does this fluff come from? What is the source, is it from 3rd edition? Is it from Man o' War? I don't know!
I wrote that. It's based mostly on where it is on the map, the fact that the Chaos Dwarfs are known to have a fleet and they went to the trouble to build a tunnel to the sea and put a fortress there. As an example of fluff-by-implication it's hardly the worst example on the wiki...
Hehe, I don’t mean to call it the worst, it was just the first page I found like that.
If it is fluff by implication, you need to reference what you do know, and state that this is indeed an implication, and not hard fact:
"From the map of the [[Darklands]] it can be seen that _______ . This could possibly mean that _______ ."
Stuff like that. Source what you can, and state your implications as such. Having knowledge is great, but knowing where it comes from makes it reliable and trustworthy knowledge! If your friend said, “Apples taste the same as Oranges” would you trust him? Or would you want some evidence?
Thanks for your work Thommy H! We are not trying to discourage people, we just want to polish everything to a more professional level! Who knows, with more work you could even earn a Wiki badge, because I have noticed you are working hard.
Yeah, I’ve written or rewritten a number of the more questionable or chaotic articles (most recently [[Hobgoblins]]). I think the Uzkulak one was one of the first articles I wrote, because I saw it needed doing. I guess I was still figuring out the style, as I tend to be a lot more fastidious about referencing sources now.
The geography articles are probably the most lacking ones overall, in fact. I notice that a number of them have blatantly copy and pasted information repeated over several articles (check out [[River Ruin]] and [[The Blasted Wastes]], for example). I think it might even be worth correlating all the geography articles into one with multiple sections, since information is so sparse.
That sounds like a great idea. And maybe include a new map of the [[Dark Lands]] also, on that page; the current one is too small, we used it before the thumbnail code worked. Cheers and thanks!
It’s all doing really well. I agree about the Geography pages on the wiki, there seem to be a lot of small pages without much on them, probably because there isn’t that much to say.
I’m slowly gathering up the final loose ends in the wiki, with some pages that should absorb any useful-but-not-worth-a-page-of-it’s-own information, so we won’t need the creation of many more pages until GW publish more CD fluff or an army book. I’ve tried to identify the remaining “required” pages in the [[Wiki Plans]] page and made a [[Wiki Editing]] page to help newbies.
Saying that, everytime it seems there is an end in sight, something appears and the end vanishes into the distance again.
On the next news thingy, could you direct people to sign the petition please! If we could get all the members signatures, then it would really hold some weight, I think you saying something would add a lot more credibility to it as we all have so much respect for what you have done with this site!
It's all doing really well. I agree about the Geography pages on the wiki, there seem to be a lot of small pages without much on them, probably because there isn't that much to say.
I'm slowly gathering up the final loose ends in the wiki, with some pages that should absorb any useful-but-not-worth-a-page-of-it's-own information, so we won't need the creation of many more pages until GW publish more CD fluff or an army book. I've tried to identify the remaining "required" pages in the [[Wiki Plans]] page and made a [[Wiki Editing]] page to help newbies.
Saying that, everytime it seems there is an end in sight, something appears and the end vanishes into the distance again. ;)
cornixt
Whoa, those pages are awesome! Perhaps add something to the scope about how we are an encyclopedia, and that we report data based on facts and references, we do not write fluff.
Another note, what has been done with Grim's fluff? I think it doesn't belong anymore in the scope of the project.
On the next news thingy, could you direct people to sign the petition please! If we could get all the members signatures, then it would really hold some weight, I think you saying something would add a lot more credibility to it as we all have so much respect for what you have done with this site!
Hammerhand
I will talk to the staff members about this. Personally, I am not a big fan of Online Petitions. If I were to promote a petition of any kind, I would support a written letter petition all directed at Jervis Johnson's Standard bearer. Written letters carry a lot more weight (literally and figuratively) with companies.
However, I am not one to reject an idea based on just my own beliefs. This forum is for the Chaos Dwarf community and I support all actions that favour our cause.
Personally, I am not a big fan of Online Petitions.��If I were to promote a petition of any kind, I would support a written letter petition all directed at Jervis Johnson's Standard bearer.��Written letters carry a lot more weight (literally and figuratively) with companies.
Xander
The plan is to have a letter to send to GW/Jervis with the petition to back it up and show support for it's content. It also would demonstrate the popularity of the Chaos Dwarfs and underline the point we are trying to make. The letter will need careful consideration on the wording, the petition is a show of support rather than a demand for action!
We don't want to receive the same response as we got from Brian Aderson. As long as we don't make demands or issue ultimatums, the petition can only help our cause. If we get enough signatures of course!
