(Suggestion) Wiki Submitting Bonus

This is a suggestion. I think that there should be a special bonus for submitting on Wikis. Some ideas could be to:

Offer Wiki MVP's again. Apparently they didn't work but I would want one.

Pro Wiki submitter. It could also have a 10,000 point bonus just like being a pro submitter.

Increase the chance to be promoted to staff. Many members want to be staff one day (including me) and would want to have a better chance to be accepted.

Wiki experts. If you contribute to many Wikis for a certain game, you can become a Wiki expert.

So, what are your ideas?

« Last edited by Matt77 on May 29th 2013 »

Wiki MVP - There would need to be a restriction on how many times one could compete. My idea is, if you end up in the top three then you can't enter in any more MVPs until the next year. This would keep it fair and easy for new members to come in and contribute and actually stand a chance.

Pro Wiki Submitter - With that, there should be a certain bench mark, say like 50 or 100 (maybe i'm a bit high) Wiki pages edited or added on. The 10,000 points seems like a bit much, but if everyone else agrees than I will also.

Staff Promotion - That one is a problem. There isn't enough activity to warrant more staff. As well as that, there are some people who would be active only to be on staff, not to actually help the site, and besides that there really isn't a way to apply for staff. If we could get more members here and have the place more active then that would be a good idea. But contributing to the site isn't the same as being active in a forum, or forums, so I don't really think this one would apply here.

Wiki Experts - I don't have any issues with this one. Seems like a good idea and it could be implemented just like with the video game pages.

With the staff promotion, I didn't mean you would be picked straight away. I meant that the next time SuperCheats needed more staff and they applied, they would have a slight advantage. But after thinking about that, I don't think it's a good idea either.

About the pro Wiki submitter, maybe it should only be for people that have added a lot of pages. Otherwise, anyone could just change one word on a page and still get 50 points. Maybe if you add 20+ pages you could get it. And the point bonus could go down to 5,000 if you think 10,000 is too much.

It's quite difficult to add a page. I just think the people that do should get rewarded, or at least acknowledged that they've added a page for a Wiki.

Yeah, but if we do that, like you said, people could get a 5+ by changing one word. So in my opinion, if someone changed a single word and still got 5+, how would we know who posted the word. We'd have to report vandalism like I've seen on Zeldapedia if staff could monitor who was on the Wiki. If we can't monitor who's on the Wiki, what's the point of adding points? Someone who gets what I'm saying, please back me up here. I've never posted or read the Wiki on this site, so I'm confused.But what I mean about the vandalism thing is that someone could just log in and erase everything from the page and before a staff member looked, they could change it. So we would need a staff member to keep watching wiki activity if we could get points. And we would have to put a log of which pages you made or edited and have the date next to it, thus adding a new button to your account page in order to keep track of what you did to keep the wikis from being vandalized. I forgot what that was called, though. Or just add your wiki post to your "Recent Forum Posts" thing and someone, on your public bio, could see what you posted and click the orange lettering and click on it and see it was vandalized (since your words on the little preview would say different until you clicked on it and saw the wiki. Or would that confuse the site?

That's a great point! I totally agree with you. People could get 50 points for changing one word, or even one letter! And I wouldn't want one of my pages completely erased.

Speaking of erasing pages, I had to do that to a wiki page I updated.

No offense to the author, but the page was total crap. It wasn't helping anyone out.
I didn't erase the page, just the content and then re-wrote everything on that topic.

If your page is total crap then it should be able to be erased. But the Root Admins like Rich watch the Wiki's, and if something was getting deleted for no reason, or if it was deleted but nothing significant was added in it's place, I'm sure they wouldn't let that happen. They watch everything and make sure it's fair so I don't think you need to worry about that.

But the pages would've been manually checked. If they were total crap, they wouldn't be accepted.

It had some helpful content, but nothing compared to what I removed and added afterwards. To me it was total crap because although it did have helpful information, it wasn't all the information on that topic.

The topic was "Weapons" in the Minecraft wiki, and all they talked about was swords. Not all of the swords, just one sword and how awesome it was. I decided it wasn't worth keeping so I deleted it and put all of the Weapons information on the page.

In short, it wasn't total crap, but it wasn't helping anyone either.

Ok. I agree with you know. Wikis aren't about saying how awesome swords are.

Really good ideas, thanks - we'll look into these.