Rimworld Wiki! (old thread)

[Semmy]

I was talking about the graphics of the wiki...

Ow my dear apologies i misunderstood...

[Tynan]

Hmm based on some of your comments and looking at it I'm less confident in MediaWiki now. Which I didn't expect, considering it runs Wikipedia and DFWiki.

I'm looking into other solutions, does anyone have any recommendations?

[British]

MediaWiki is most likely potent, it has the advantage that you can host it on your site, but it's indeed a pain to get into.

We might as well keep Wikia for the time being (use AdBlock, people !), and try some others in parallel (MediaWiki as well).

[JugglerX]

I rekon mediawiki is a reasonable choice. I guess the decision is between mediawiki (ownership/full-control/no-ads/more difficult for fans to edit) and wikia (more familiar/easier for communities?/ad's/less control over design)

I've themed a media wiki before but I'm no expert. I just read up on the themeing documentation. It runs off a sub-theme folder. So in theory I can develop a Rimworld mediawiki locally on my own computer and then just zip the files, you copy them into the live mediawiki theme folder and enable.

I'd be interested in giving this a crack, maybe late next week I can have a themed Rimworld media-wiki to show.

So maybe keep both running for now.

[British]

Agreed.

I'd like to discuss it with you, JugglerX, possibly with Tynan and Hypolite in the loop.
Tynan, because he's the boss (don't get cocky, though !).
Hypolite, because he wrote 98% of what's on the wiki.
Me, because I have the "proper" graphical assets of the game (the zillion images Tynan gave me, that I modified to be usable, and that I uploaded and put into context in the wiki).

[Tynan]

Agreed.

I'd like to discuss it with you, JugglerX, possibly with Tynan and Hypolite in the loop.
Tynan, because he's the boss (don't get cocky, though !).
Hypolite, because he wrote 98% of what's on the wiki.
Me, because I have the "proper" graphical assets of the game (the zillion images Tynan gave me, that I modified to be usable, and that I uploaded and put into context in the wiki).

Sounds good. I'll will just note that there are other wiki packages I could install. DocuWiki, PmWiki, and WikkaWiki are all available to me free without too much effort. So if you guys would rather work with one of those than MediaWiki it's cool. Let me know what you decide.

I really would prefer not to use Wikia... the ads are ridiculous.

Thanks for the help guys, I really appreciate it.

[Hypolite]

Thanks for the suggestion, JugglerX, but what would you do to the local MediaWiki copy? The main problem with vanilla MediaWiki is the lack of WYSIWYG editor that can deter potential contributors. The theming is not as important as usability.

[British]

Look at it this way: there's quite a number of people that want to play RimWorld the hardcore way... Well then, they'll be happy to know than even the wiki is hardcore

[Hypolite]

The Weapons and Character sections are complete as far as I know

Thanks again British for the illustrations/corrections/layout work!

[British]

No problemo !
I'm sad about not having a picture for the shotgun, though... unless you can confirm the shotgun is using the same graphics as the rifles'.

[Tynan]

No problemo !
I'm sad about not having a picture for the shotgun, though... unless you can confirm the shotgun is using the same graphics as the rifles'.

Yep they're the same.

[British]

Back on the topic of Wikia vs MediaWiki, I have to say the lazy dude in me, besides taking so much space, well... he likes that Wikia has built-in templates, documentations and such ready to use from the get-go.

I tried a bit to add stuff to MediaWiki, but I can confirm it's a pain.

Haven't heard about JugglerX either.

[Tynan]

Has anyone looked into these other free wikis? DocuWiki, PmWiki, and WikkaWiki?

[Ferigad]

Hmm, personaly i had good experience with mediawiki. Had the same issue, i simply didn´t liked the AD´s but wikia is very costumer friendly. On the other hand, mediawiki has a high learning curve. If you got the basics and if you want to create a new wikipage, it doesn´t take mutch effort. But anything else... i mostly looked for other mediawiki pages, checked the source out and copyed what i needed to create a similiar textstyle.

In the end it´s always 4-5 people that care for a wiki of a game, from my experience. It may sound a little bit hard, but i wouldn´t count that really mutch people will contribute to a wiki, even if you take a easy one with a WYSIWYG editorstyle. You really should look for a wiki that is comfortable for the people that does care now. (British, Hypolite, etc.)

So even if mediawiki is a bit harder to use, you can get very mutch source material from other mediawikis and use it for your own style, modify it a bit and just get what you want.

But just to mention it, DokuWiki is a simple one too (used it myself 3-4 times for work related projects), without adds and a easy to handle editor in a style like a forum editor tool. You can get pictures, spreadsheets and pages very simple, but it hasn´t mutch features like mediawiki. You can, still, install some plugins to get new functions with DokuWiki.

If you want a wiki with many options from the start , mediawiki is the one. If you just want a solid wiki with text, some pictures, spreadsheets, easy to manage and contribute, DokuWiki is a good choice.

For WikkaWiki you need some decent PHP Skills. It´s more about to create a secure wiki. And i never used PmWiki (but from a quick look it doesn´t look that userfriendly, even if it states otherwise on it´s homepage.)

Hope it helped a bit.

[xTAMERx]

i dont like wikia,

it is confusing, most time you cant find what youre looking for and there are a lot of ads, so my old laptop on work cant handle it 

better is mediawiki, better navigation and presentation