Board Thread:News and Announcements/@comment-1294345-20141206104537/@comment-1294345-20141209053824

Jigger556 wrote: IAmNothing712 wrote: Jigger556 wrote: Hi!

While I am glad you are trying to make changes for the better on our wiki, I found the experimental layout was very confusing and hard to navigate. Here are my thoughts:

For me, the leaderboard did not need to be changed at all. The original one was easy to navigate. The new leaderboard does not have any pictures, team's relationship. Also, the new leaderboard's color scheme was very confusing, and I really didn't understand why you changed the colorscheme at all. Also, the dark colors make some numbers very hard to read, especially teams with the green fast-forward numbers.

Also we probably should add more information for the route and legs/episodes. Maybe we could have it so that each episode has its own in depth page. (There are some pages on specific episodes but they are a mess.) Also, I do like the Survivor Wiki-esque graph you put up on the episodes, but I feel like it should be on the bottom of the page, like the Survivor Wiki. I was a bit disappointed by the exclusion of the memorable moments and records section.

Thank you for helping our wiki! I'm sorry if you feel like I am attacking your hard work, because I'm really not. I am just trying to make the wiki as best as possible for everyone, and some of the changes just don't work. Thank you! First off, let me tell you this about the leaderboard. The leaderboard is too much of a resemblance of the Wikipedia leaderboards. The TAR wiki needs to be its own site, not a carbon copy of WIkipedia. I didn't add the "relation" on purpose because it's already given in the first section of the page. Again, instead of whining, come up with your own version of the chart, then we'll put it up for discussion. All I am saying is that the chart I made was how leaderboards were supposed to look like back in the day. Regardless, we cannot rely on Wikipedia for everything and the Wikipedia-like leaderboards shouldn't be used again. Because if you would still continue this argument, rather go to Wikipedia instead of wasting your time here.

Second, pages should be as objective as possible to avoid biases. I mean, Your "memorable moments" might be different to some others. It could be added on the teams' opening paragraph, but shouldn't be its own section. My chart I would like to put up is the original one. May we please put it up for discussion instead of pushing it away?

Second, your argument about it being similar to Wikipedia's page could be said about Survivor Wiki's pages being similar to Wikipedia. Wikipedia's Survivor seasons pages are very similar to Survivor Wiki's seasons pages, which is not a bad thing. In fact, I LOVE the way the Survivor Wiki is layed out, even if it is VERY simiar to Wikipedia's. The only differences were that Wikipedia had in depth details on the episodes, which is not needed on Survivor Wiki since it has its own pages on the Survivor Wiki, and that Wikipedia lacks trivia on the bottom and cast photos in the cast list chart. Here are the links to both Wikipedia's and Survivor Wiki's pages on Survivor: Cagayan.

http://survivor.wikia.com/wiki/Survivor%3A_Cagayan

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivor:_Cagayan

Also, I would like to thank you on your explanation for the exclusion of the memorable moments section. It made me understand why you omitted it from the pages, and now I fully agree with its exclusion. Thank you. My context about similarity is about being too alike. What I meant was, I was trying to tweak layouts from wikipedia to stand as our own site, not be a carbon copy of it. If that's the case, we don't need this wiki and just go to Wikipedia instead. No hard feelings, 'ayt?