"Thats funny... I could have sworn your post said "280 seems quite good for that article" last time I looked... hmm, shifty..."
According to his profile that's indeed what he said. Maybe he rethought it and changed his mind."
Yeah I guess so, I just would have thought he would have said something like "Edit: On second thought, maybe 350 points" Anyone else think my mockup is a good idea? I just like getting opinions on my ideas.
Somewhere in the 350 range sounds good to me. Newten said:
"Like others have said, I think seperating the wiki points and image points is a good idea. Articles should definetly be worth more than they are at the moment though, or it would take far too long to get to 1000. Looking at the length of the GoW2 page, with the links and thumb nails included, I think it should be worth atleast 350 points, if not somewhat more than that.
Heres a little mockup I did of how I think points could work if they were to be seperated. Mockup The same point barriers could be used but seperately for the wiki stuff and the images, so 1000 image points = images don't need to be moderated. But untill the user has 1000 wiki points, the edits they do to wiki pages still have to be moderated. Oh and I just threw image mod points in there for fun, still waiting to see what the deal is with those ^_^"
I really, really like this idea. It lets users know exactly how others are contributing to the site.
It is a nice mockup, but currently image points are the exact same thing as wiki points, and I think it might be impossible to separate them. So we'd end up with a wiki point count inflated by our previous image uploads.
"It is a nice mockup, but currently image points are the exact same thing as wiki points, and I think it might be impossible to separate them. So we'd end up with a wiki point count inflated by our previous image uploads."
Hmm, that's a good point, I didn't think of that. Well the "guys upstairs" will have to let us know if it's do-able. I think it should be, it tells you in your profile what you got points for so it should be possible to seperate them into images and wiki. Adding images gives you image points and pretty much everything else would cound as wiki points I think.
We really don't want to separate the scoring system into separate scores. While it might seem like a good idea to you veterans, the more point systems we use the harder it is for peeps to understand the site when they jump in. As guessed at before, this isn't something we can retroactively fix, so it's not something we can switch up on a dime.
Don't worry, we've got other things in the pipeline for breaking this kind of stuff out. A lot of them will be realized before the year is out.
"Like others have said, I think seperating the wiki points and image points is a good idea. Articles should definetly be worth more than they are at the moment though, or it would take far too long to get to 1000. Looking at the length of the GoW2 page, with the links and thumb nails included, I think it should be worth atleast 350 points, if not somewhat more than that.
Heres a little mockup I did of how I think points could work if they were to be seperated. Mockup The same point barriers could be used but seperately for the wiki stuff and the images, so 1000 image points = images don't need to be moderated. But untill the user has 1000 wiki points, the edits they do to wiki pages still have to be moderated. Oh and I just threw image mod points in there for fun, still waiting to see what the deal is with those ^_^"
Full of win... yet Snide doesn't seem to think so. It has it's pros and cons but over all I think it's great. Confusing to new ones, but whatever.
I think Snide would agree that it is a great idea if they could implement it for all users, but they can't implement it now because the point system does not recognize individual sources, it accumulates as a whole. It would only work with new users. It's too late, it can't be done. But Snide said they are working on other stuff, so I'm sure we'll see something that will help distinguish the points.
If a single person wrote all of that, I'd say 250-350 in that range. I also think pictures should give you 1 point for every 4 or 5 pictures you post for a specific game instead of 1 to 1. People who write up stuff should definitely get more than people who just take a few shots they see around the net and put them up here.
"If a single person wrote all of that, I'd say 250-350 in that range. I also think pictures should give you 1 point for every 4 or 5 pictures you post for a specific game instead of 1 to 1. People who write up stuff should definitely get more than people who just take a few shots they see around the net and put them up here."
sorry for going somewhat of topic
It is not the fact that people get points for uploading images that is wrong it is the fact that a small portion of people somewhat "exploit" this system to rake up points. In my opinion it would be better if say a screen shots gallery has less than 30-50 screen shots you get the full 2 points for uploading an image and once this gallery has more than say 50 screen shots you get less points for uploading a new image, i guess this will keep people from exploiting it without harming those who add screenshots to game that dont have much or any. However this system could only be used for specific galleries that only hold screenshots and not the official artwork since the amount of concept art made for a game is finit. Which raises the problem of how such a system would recognize which galleries hold concept art and other finit images and the galleries that hold screenshots which are infinite. Also linking images should stay the way they are, it might be easy to link a bulk of images you upload to a specific console gallerie but linking an image to a character page is a pain.
back on topic, 200 points like a said in my previous post.
"I think Snide would agree that it is a great idea if they could implement it for all users, but they can't implement it now because the point system does not recognize individual sources, it accumulates as a whole. It would only work with new users. It's too late, it can't be done. But Snide said they are working on other stuff, so I'm sure we'll see something that will help distinguish the points."
I'm sure Snide and the guys could seperate the points out, if I remember correctly, a rollback system was talked about a while ago and it was going to be retroactive. That tells me the site must have some sort of record of all of the edits to the site. Plus if you go into the "Pending Subs" section of your profile it shows you what you got points for. I never said it would be easy, but I'm sure there would be a way to do it.
But Snide doesn't seem to like the idea anyway, I can't see it being that confusing for new members. "Image Points" is fairly self explanitory and aslong as they know what a "Wiki" is they should be able to figure the rest out too. Plus they can check the stickies out in the forums to find out how everything works.
And Endogene... dude, 200 points? That's most likely less than you would get for that page on the current point system. The reason this thread was made is because people are complaining that they aren't getting ENOUGH points for the hard work they are putting into writing articles like that.
And Endogene... dude, 200 points? That's most likely less than you would get for that page on the current point system. The reason this thread was made is because people are complaining that they aren't getting ENOUGH points for the hard work they are putting into writing articles like that."
Im considering how long it would take me to write that (considering i know the game flawlessly and i am a native English speaker) and how many image points i could get in that same amount of time (looking for them, downloading them, uploading them and linking them to character pages)
I would say that more points based on quality is not a good idea at all. plus it would be hard to implement. Also separate points for images? Thats just pointless. He stated in the first post some people have trouble writing in english so the best they can do is upload images. Why have their points be separated from people who write articles?
"I would say that more points based on quality is not a good idea at all. plus it would be hard to implement. Also separate points for images? Thats just pointless. He stated in the first post some people have trouble writing in english so the best they can do is upload images. Why have their points be separated from people who write articles?"
Because if all someone wants to do is upload images they can do that and they will get past the 1000 mark, and when they do actually edit the pages it will go to the mods so they can check it out and make sure it is ok because they still haven't passed the wiki 1000 mark, only the image one. Seperating it means we wont have people uploading hundreds of images to get past the 1000 mark, because then all they would be able to do is upload more images. I imagine it would stop a lot of this "point gaming" stuff.
And all the points would still be added to a total anyway, look at my mockup.
Theres about 100 lines of text, guessing about 25 words/ line, then GOW2 has about 2500 words, or about 250 points.
Having 10 words/point seems too small, but 5 words/ point (giving the article 500 points) seems a bit too big. Maybe 7 words/ point? (about 350 points)
That size article? Takes a long time to write that, and probably alot of research too, so I would have to say somewhere between 300 and 400 points.
Also, I think good reviews deserve to get points as well. Takes almost as long to write a good and legnthy review as it does to write a description for a game. In sometime cases it takes even more work if you ask me since there's such a thing as actually having to play the game to its fullest if one wants to write a good review.
"That size article? Takes a long time to write that, and probably alot of research too, so I would have to say somewhere between 300 and 400 points.
Also, I think good reviews deserve to get points as well. Takes almost as long to write a good and legnthy review as it does to write a description for a game. In sometime cases it takes even more work if you ask me since there's such a thing as actually having to play the game to its fullest if one wants to write a good review."
Personally, I don't think reviews deserve points, unless it is a whole separate point system for them. Reviews are to get other people's opinions about a game, wikis are to inform people. I'm sure you'd see many people abuse the review system (by not writing "real" reviews) and just using it to get points if that happened.
"That size article? Takes a long time to write that, and probably alot of research too, so I would have to say somewhere between 300 and 400 points.
Also, I think good reviews deserve to get points as well. Takes almost as long to write a good and legnthy review as it does to write a description for a game. In sometime cases it takes even more work if you ask me since there's such a thing as actually having to play the game to its fullest if one wants to write a good review."
Personally, I don't think reviews deserve points, unless it is a whole separate point system for them. Reviews are to get other people's opinions about a game, wikis are to inform people. I'm sure you'd see many people abuse the review system (by not writing "real" reviews) and just using it to get points if that happened."
I agree, you should write reviews because you want to do it and let others read about your thoughts on the game. It shouldn't be for points.
+1 support for separating image (and moderation) points from wiki/database points idea.
Don't know if a wiki article should give points based on size. Would be better if it gave points based on actual content, which I realize is a hard task as what a good article is is very subjective.
I feel 250 points is enough for a ~2 000 word wiki as in the case of the first post. As long as you separate the image and wiki points... Makes getting "editor status" at 1000 points much more meaningfull. Images could have a sepparate cap, so that we image whores can keep uploading images without moderation - but not let us edit wiki pages freely.
On second thought, after reading everyone's reasonings, I would have to say that at least a 400 point minimum, probably closer to 500. I know getting images and uploading them takes time as well, but it just doesn't compare to the time and effor it takes to write a good wiki entry, unless maybe the person uploading the images went as far as using a capture device to capture each image him/herself.
"+1 support for separating image (and moderation) points from wiki/database points idea.
Don't know if a wiki article should give points based on size. Would be better if it gave points based on actual content, which I realize is a hard task as what a good article is is very subjective.
I feel 250 points is enough for a ~2 000 word wiki as in the case of the first post. As long as you separate the image and wiki points... Makes getting "editor status" at 1000 points much more meaningfull. Images could have a sepparate cap, so that we image whores can keep uploading images without moderation - but not let us edit wiki pages freely.
"
dumb. That is a dumb idea. I mean the wiki points based on content and seperating points. Both are pointless additions which seem like they would take much more work than they are worth. For that Article Id say 143-202 points. Seperating points doesent make 1000 points more meaningful, it still can take some time to get images accepted. Why prevent "image whores"(its part of the system, they are making additions which are just as important as text, I say that as someone who has primarily written articles but used to upload images) from being allowed to edit. If they reach the 1000 mark like that then that is how they contributed to the site.
I'll tell you why, because uploading images and reaching 1000 doesn't show someones writing ability. By having them seperate they can be properly moderated by the mods first to make sure they rightfully gain the means to make text edits and submissions on their own.
A user gets 1000 image points, they gain the right to upload images right onto the site. That user gets 1000 wiki points then they have also shown they can write quality articles and have shown they don't need to have wiki submissions moderated anymore.
I agree about points based on content though, although it would be great if we could have that, I can't see a way of actually implementing something that can heck how "good" the submission is. Although I'm sure a grammar/spell checker could be built into the editing system to help get rid of mistakes.
"I'll tell you why, because uploading images and reaching 1000 doesn't show someones writing ability. By having them seperate they can be properly moderated by the mods first to make sure they rightfully gain the means to make text edits and submissions on their own.
A user gets 1000 image points, they gain the right to upload images right onto the site. That user gets 1000 wiki points then they have also shown they can write quality articles and have shown they don't need to have wiki submissions moderated anymore.
I agree about points based on content though, although it would be great if we could have that, I can't see a way of actually implementing something that can heck how "good" the submission is. Although I'm sure a grammar/spell checker could be built into the editing system to help get rid of mistakes."
Again it doesn't make sense, why separate them? Who cares about writing ability(even though it helps my case more, foreign languages people) Who cares how someone gets their points? The site isn't about someones writing ability its about contributing to the site. No need for people to be separated. Its just so people like you can weed out people who upload a lot of images so you can discriminate against them. No one should care about someone elses "writing ability" its about more content, the only reason someone would want it is to separate image people from text people.
id say yeh about 150-200pts for that page but also the image system should be reduced but not by much because i mean if u look at say the bionic commando page or the gears 2 page ive had to snap these myself in a way an angle that no other sites has so ive earned my spot
if anything make like 2 separate columns for a page top editors and top image uploaders for a page
Dude, based on all that info on the Gears page, I'd say that deserves like 300-400 points. That's quite a substantial amount of info and clearly would require quite a time investment to write all that. It's well written, nicely structured, contains lots of information, I'd say it deserves quite a lot of points. Sometimes articles may not look like much, but they do require some time and effort to make them good.
"Again it doesn't make sense, why separate them? Who cares about writing ability(even though it helps my case more, foreign languages people) Who cares how someone gets their points? The site isn't about someones writing ability its about contributing to the site. No need for people to be separated. Its just so people like you can weed out people who upload a lot of images so you can discriminate against them. No one should care about someone elses "writing ability" its about more content, the only reason someone would want it is to separate image people from text people."
So you're saying it's ok for people to get submissions with poor grammar and writing and a horrible layout automatically accepted? Sure, the site's all about the contributions, however, these contributions need to be legible and presented clearly.
I'm not trying to separate the users here, but if you plan on writing an article in English, you'll need a good amount of knowledge of the English language to do so (hell, this includes a large number of people whose first language is English).
"Again it doesn't make sense, why separate them? Who cares about writing ability(even though it helps my case more, foreign languages people) Who cares how someone gets their points? The site isn't about someones writing ability its about contributing to the site. No need for people to be separated. Its just so people like you can weed out people who upload a lot of images so you can discriminate against them. No one should care about someone elses "writing ability" its about more content, the only reason someone would want it is to separate image people from text people."
So you're saying it's ok for people to get submissions with poor grammar and writing and a horrible layout automatically accepted? Sure, the site's all about the contributions, however, these contributions need to be legible and presented clearly.
I'm not trying to separate the users here, but if you plan on writing an article in English, you'll need a good amount of knowledge of the English language to do so (hell, this includes a large number of people whose first language is English)."
Yeah, it's not about "seperating the users" it's about people earning the write to make live edits to GiantBomb. If someone is constantly making mistakes then they need to learn from them and improve, if they upload images and get to 1000 points, nobody is going to be able to show them what's wrong with their articles, and GiantBomb will end up with more and more mistakes on the pages.
And for the record, I'm not a "text person", I have uploaded hundreds of images too.
Again, who cares about minor mistakes on pages? thats what this site is for. If someone did get to the 1000 point mark they could easily fix errors. But getting points from text doesn't mean someone has great grammar either.
"Again, who cares about minor mistakes on pages? thats what this site is for. If someone did get to the 1000 point mark they could easily fix errors. But getting points from text doesn't mean someone has great grammar either."
Ugh... alright, forget about little mistakes and grammar errors. Imagine a 12 year old who got to 1000 points on images and decides he wants to write an entire article by himself. They could end up writing tons of stuff that they think is true but isn't, and end up with a page full of total bullshit. Or even worse, they could totally delete a perfectly fine page and replace it with total bullshit, you see what I'm getting at?
Oh and by the way, getting 1000 points on text kinda does mean someone has good grammar, because if they didn't their articles wouldn't have been accepted.
Oh by the way MasturbatingBear, how the hell did you get OVER 6,000 points on the smash bros melee page? The entire melee wiki isn't worth that much even if you had done the entire thing yourself! I was just on the melee page and saw you on there and though wtf???
And I just looked at your profile, how come you have a little over 8,000 points, but when I scroll down to your top contributions and add them up, it should be much more, what's going on?
"Oh by the way MasturbatingBear, how the hell did you get OVER 6,000 points on the smash bros melee page? The entire melee wiki isn't worth that much even if you had done the entire thing yourself! I was just on the melee page and saw you on there and though wtf???
And I just looked at your profile, how come you have a little over 8,000 points, but when I scroll down to your top contributions and add them up, it should be much more, what's going on?"
you do know people can delete stuff from pages write? I had to reformat lots of shit and rewrite shit. At the same time some shit I wrote and someone deleted it but I didn't bother to rewrite it. Also whats wrong with a 12 year old writing a page by himself? I knew just as much about the games I wrote about now at the age of 15 as when I did at 12.
"Oh by the way MasturbatingBear, how the hell did you get OVER 6,000 points on the smash bros melee page? The entire melee wiki isn't worth that much even if you had done the entire thing yourself! I was just on the melee page and saw you on there and though wtf???
And I just looked at your profile, how come you have a little over 8,000 points, but when I scroll down to your top contributions and add them up, it should be much more, what's going on?"
By my calculations, he has a total of 20,570 points worth of contributions. When compared with the number showing on his profile, he's missing 12,008 points. What happened? Were you stripped of 12,000 points for wiki abuse? It sure looks that way.
Log in to comment