I've been getting back into wiki editing the past week or so, and one thing that I've really noticed is how discombobulated the system is. Even looking at the top games for each decade, several of these pages contain opinionated writing, poor grammar/sentence structure, run-on sentences, second person, poor formatting, etc. I mean, we have lots of great information, but it's not really contained very well. Is there some way that we could start... I don't know... initiatives? The wiki task feature is great, but it's only for staff/mod implemented pages that need work. I mean, I've found dozens more pages that need work that don't require specific knowledge of that game.
Right now, my initiative has been browsing the games attached to the SNES page, and adding information for any page that's missing a main image or a developer, as well as cross checking with lists of every SNES/SFC game released on Wikipedia and Moby Games. That needs to be done for literally every platform on Giant Bomb, because we're still missing tons of games.
I've started keeping a list of games here that I feel need work in some way, giving a brief description as to why they need touching up. I'm just going to continue adding pages to this list that need work as I run across them in my wiki travels. Would anyone be interested in helping out? It's a lot of work for one person. Here's what I have so far, perusing the 1990s section of the top games for each decade:
These Need Work
These pages have poor grammar, formatting, need updated information, are poorly written, contain second person, opinionated, etc.
|1. Super Mario Kart|
Reads like a fan gushing over it in several parts, poorly written. Also written in past tense, for some reason.
|2. Sonic the Hedgehog|
|3. Super Mario World|
Formatting, misguided information (e.g. information about Super Mario Advance)
Could use some images in the wiki article
|6. The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past|
|7. Streets of Rage 2|
|8. Star Fox|
|9. Sonic CD|
"Time Attack Mode" section completely missing
Maybe we also need some more rules that help out the constancy? I mean, I've run into a ton of pages that are really well done, and uniquely written, and I don't want to ruin that, but little stuff like differences between saying "Plot," "Story," "Storyline," "Plot Summary," etc. I think we could outline what is expected of a wiki page a little better. Most new users have little to no direction as to what is expected in a page, in terms of formatting.