Hi guys...

(don't thumb me down before reading the post lol)

You see, there are gamegrep points, neo-points...what if there were wiki-points? That way we could see the true contributors, and the one's that edited one or two times just to get the tag...

What do you think?


(preparing to be thumbed down...)

I like the idea, but I can already see how it could be abused. Updates don't go through a team before they're added like contributions to Neo do, which means that people could get points by changing one little word on a page. They could also get more points for adding new pages; which is a good thing if they plan on finishing them, but I highly doubt some will.

I'm all for the idea if they can find a way around that.

It's a nice suggestion that would certainly work with a solid system behind it. Maybe based on edits per day.

quote Agrias

That way we could see the true contributors, and the one's that edited one or two times just to get the tag...

quote Agrias

(don't thumb me down before reading the post lol)

quote Agrias

(preparing to be thumbed down...)

quote Xenctuary

Thumb down?

<sub>It's a good idea, but, as Xenc said, the requirements to get the Contributor tags are going way up, if members lost their novelty contributor tags, they'd stop editing.

It would only be staff or dedicated contributors that would get any points, which may not be a bad thing, but, still.</sub>

quote Xenctuary

It's a nice suggestion that would certainly work with a solid system behind it. Maybe based on edits per day.

Wouldn't members keep contributing if they kept getting points for editing?

It could be on a character system. Maybe 100 characters equals one point, 200 two points, etc.

It would make sense to, because wiki contibuting isn't much different than other contribuing, but I see issues with people not producing good material. Do we really want to give even more recognition to those who have bad spelling/grammar/punctuation, incorrect information, and plagiarized work? A CRS system would simply not be practical, as there are huge amounts of edits all the time, and 'by letters' or 'by edits' systems don't work because the info might not necessarily be helpful.

If we do have this though, I suggest we implement a sort of 'thumb' system for Wiki pages, and you would get points for each thumb based on how much you contributed to that page. For example, if I make a page that is 1000 characters long and it gets a thumb, I would gain 1000 points, which would be divided by 1000 or something to make 1 point, a manageable number, plus maybe a another point for making the page. If someone goes and adds 1500 characters to it and it gets a thumb, they would get 1 point and the other half would be stored away for later, and I would get another point.

Of course, that would have to be tweaked quite a bit, but I think that sounds like a decent plan.

[size=1][color=#666666]This message was edited by Catboy14 on Jul 05 2008.

I don't see that working, Catboy. I doubt many people would leave a thumbs up or thumbs down before leaving the Wiki page.

I don't like the idea. As it was previously said, plagiarism would bypass character or byte-based requirements. I also think submitting things through the CRS would flood up their system. :/

I think the current system is fine. :\

<sub>It's a good idea, in theory, it would need to be fine-tuned.

Most of the contributors think the current system is good. Just wait 'til the requirements go up</sub>

Okay; I'm glad you all approved it.

Let us hope an admin or something reads the thread!

I'm going to put is as pub in the TV (LOL, nevermind)

Please, PLEASE do not add this. I can see this easily getting abused, even moreso than people do to CRS. Having points in this system would greatly reduce the purpose of people contributing to help out. It's bad enough that we already have Wiki Contributor tags that people blatently abuse to get, and this would honestly ruin the point of the Wiki's and contributing in general. We will no longer see people contributing to help complete Wiki's, but just submitting useless crap to get points and feel important.

Please do not add this, if you do, without thinking about it for a long while. I really think it will destroy everything that these Wiki's stand for, even moreso than the Contributor tags have already done.

There would have to be a way to count the wiki points, however, I suggest:

Number of bytes added to an article.

or:

A number of edits that have been marked as "informative", but this would cause problems because a person who did the minimum to get their edit marked as "informative" and a person who GREATLY exceeded the mark's minimum would be counted at the same.

I also think contributors should be chosen in this way.

However.. I don't agree with the wiki-points idea. Just throwing my suggestion out there.

Okay...I see this is going to be difficult...