Avatar image for dungbootle
#1 Edited by dungbootle (2502 posts) -

This may not even be a bug, but I remember it being said that the new wiki would reward small contributions, like typos more generously than before. I'm not even getting much from typing whole paragraphs at a time and it's worse than the last site. If this is intentional, then nevermind, that's your decision, but it seems weird at the moment.

Avatar image for bourbon_warrior
#2 Edited by Bourbon_Warrior (4569 posts) -

GET THEM POINTS!

Avatar image for big_jon
#3 Posted by big_jon (6438 posts) -

I think it's awarding more than it used to.

Avatar image for ltsquigs
#4 Posted by LtSquigs (296 posts) -

The formula for text edits is:

((New Length - Old Length) / 100) * 8

With a minimum of 1 point. The other point totals were all hashed out with the moderators.

Avatar image for ltsquigs
#5 Posted by LtSquigs (296 posts) -

I should clarify, thats the formula for guides and bodies. Decks, titles, etc are static

Avatar image for _k1_
#6 Posted by _k1_ (255 posts) -
Avatar image for tobbrobb
#7 Edited by TobbRobb (6115 posts) -

If the rewards are based on added text, do you get nothing or very little for fixing grammatical errors and typoes?

Avatar image for lordandrew
#8 Posted by LordAndrew (14601 posts) -
@tobbrobb said:

If the rewards are based on added text, do you get nothing or very little for fixing grammatical errors and typoes?

If the formula works out to anything less than 2, you will get one point.

@ltsquigs: Is HTML markup counted in the formula?

Avatar image for ltsquigs
#9 Edited by LtSquigs (296 posts) -
Avatar image for lordandrew
#10 Posted by LordAndrew (14601 posts) -

@ltsquigs: So all the tags are stripped before doing the equation? That's good. On the old site, simply formatting text would net an unexpectedly large amount of points because the HTML was adding to the total size.

Avatar image for ltsquigs
#11 Posted by LtSquigs (296 posts) -
Avatar image for noremnants
#12 Edited by NoRemnants (434 posts) -

I fixed some seriously broken formatting from the old site. Spent about 25 minutes on it and got a measly 3 points out of it.

I've been a member since day 1 of the GB launch and have 474 wiki points. I don't do a lot of writing because frankly, I'm not a very good writer. I do like going through and attaching characters/concepts and formatting pages. I don't really care about the points, I'd just like to be able to bypass the mod queue but at the rate points are being given out, It will take me years to get there.

Avatar image for subjugation
#13 Posted by Subjugation (4963 posts) -

I'm much more of an editor than a content creator. I'm the guy who proof-reads your stuff and makes corrections rather than write the body of text. I would love to do that on wiki entries, but I've never felt like those kind of contributions were well recognized. Is it any better with the new wiki system?

Avatar image for starfoxa
#14 Posted by StarFoxA (5261 posts) -

Editing releases seem to give an exorbitant amount of points, while creating a release doesn't give an equivalent amount compared to the former. For example, if I edit a release and add data to two or three fields, it's giving me 15-20 points, whereas creating a new release with every field complete awards seven points.

Avatar image for snide
#15 Posted by snide (2672 posts) -

We'll continue to tweak the scoring after we get passed our overall stability problems.

Points in general though are a bit of a bunk science. It's very hard to figure out automated ways to calculate the worth of an edit.