CN Wiki Feedback Thread

[Bobogoobo]

I suppose this topic can also be a good place to announce changes to templates that might of interest to the larger community. A parameter called "docname" has been added to the alliance infobox template which allows you to include a link to your alliance's charter at the bottom of the infobox. To use it, put in the template, for example:
[code]|docname = Charter of the New Pacific Order[/code]
to customize what is displayed for the link:
[code]|docname = Charter of the New Pacific Order{{!}}NPO Charter[/code]
Ideally you can place it in the code just below the forum and irc url parameters.

Edited May 27, 2012 by Bobogoobo

[flak attack]

It would be nice if every single front didn't get listed in the "Preceded by" and "Succeeded by" sections of the wars listing and only full wars did. It adds too much clutter and decreases the utility of that section of the articles. I'm fine with listing the subfronts in another box just below that, but they don't belong there.

These articles shouldn't be in there, since they are just part of another war:
http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/C%26G-MHA_War
http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/DH-Chestnut_War
http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Mj%C3%B6lnir_-_Superfriends_Front
http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Fark-NPO_War

This article should say the war was succeeded by the BTA-Mongols War:
http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/TOP%5CIRON-NpO_War

[Sandwich Controversy]

[quote]Sandwich Controversy: removing admins and bureaucrats would remove the abilities to block accounts, to delete pages, and to edit pages that are protected because of high usage rates. All of these are important things to have someone able to do in order to keep the wiki as clean, factual, and organized as possible. Plus, if people know that there's no one to stop them, there would definitely be even more vandalism.
[/quote]

The CN wiki doesn't get enough traffic [url=http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Special:Log/block/]where blocking accounts happens very often.[/url] Pages are almost never deleted either, since users are free to make practically unlimited amounts of pages for the [url=http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Grossgermania]minutia[/url] of their nations. At no point should be pages be "protected"; it just serves to further the elitism and push away contributions from new users. The wiki would be fine without these people. I have faith in the community to manage it itself, probably better than these admins ever have.

That last line of yours is complete speculation. Besides, the CN wiki has a reputation for being completely unreliable as it is.

Edited May 27, 2012 by Sandwich Controversy

[Sigrun Vapneir]

[quote name='Rogal Dorn' timestamp='1338047135' post='2972762']The rules on the wiki are pretty lax compared to the actual wikipedia (if you think our wiki is bad... dont ever edit the real one because they're even more elitist pricks) [/quote]

I believe you misread me a little, I am put off by unknown rules moreso than strict ones. I never found *any* rules it seemed like basically you would be at mercy of whomever has admin.

Wikipedia has a fairly full ruleset, but lacks admins who will apply it consistently, however that's reall neither here nor there.

[quote]another thing people have been clamoring about (/me points at crymson in particular) is everyone making new war pages in the middle of a war. take the TOP/IRON-NpO War for example. there's 4 subconflict wiki pages about it. Fark-NPO, MJ-SF, DH-Chestnut, C&G-MHA War(which is a subconflict of a subconflict!) despite all of this all DoW's and etc are still on the TOP/IRON-NpO War page but duplicated on the subconflict pages with more "history" on the particular subconflict.

can i get a consensus on subconflicts pro/against just for future reference?
[/quote]

I dont know about any consensus but I will tend to be in favour of the so-called subconflict pages, they often deserve their own article in my opinion.

[AAAAAAAAAAGGGG]

Subconflicts of main conflicts in the wiki showed up relatively recently (DH-NPO) and I feel that was mainly for political purposes for people who wanted to claim that it was a "separate war" to help further their cause when the fact of the matter is the "subconflict" wouldn't have happened if it weren't for the primary conflict.

I guess if you want to call it a "front" that's fine. But I fail to see why it's so important to have such a small article get it's own single page when it could be easily all put on the same main war page.

[Bernhard Klein]

I find the wiki to be useful (both by me and other gov members here) primarily in listing treaties, finding links to forums & irc channels, and knowing which international .gov members to contact in situations of need. That's all I really care about anyone getting from our wiki page: history, wars, and all that are merely bonuses.

It would be ideal if every alliance could find someone competent enough with the system (really, it takes minimal effort to learn the system through trial and error) to update those four things from time to time. I was impressed to see comments lately by Rogal and such indicating that efforts are being made to ensure that treaties are up-to-date.

[Rogal Dorn]

[quote name='flak attack' timestamp='1338095161' post='2973109']
It would be nice if every single front didn't get listed in the "Preceded by" and "Succeeded by" sections of the wars listing and only full wars did. It adds too much clutter and decreases the utility of that section of the articles. I'm fine with listing the subfronts in another box just below that, but they don't belong there.

These articles shouldn't be in there, since they are just part of another war:
http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/C%26G-MHA_War
http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/DH-Chestnut_War
http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Mj%C3%B6lnir_-_Superfriends_Front
http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Fark-NPO_War

This article should say the war was succeeded by the BTA-Mongols War:
http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/TOP%5CIRON-NpO_War
[/quote]

that's a very good point flak. i did that on the TOP/IRON-NpO War page (made TOP/IRON-NpO War succeeded by the BTA-MONGOLS War). (the bottom of the post i'll hit more about war subconflicts)

[quote name='Sandwich Controversy' timestamp='1338127393' post='2973204']
The CN wiki doesn't get enough traffic [url=http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Special:Log/block/]where blocking accounts happens very often.[/url] Pages are almost never deleted either, since users are free to make practically unlimited amounts of pages for the [url=http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Grossgermania]minutia[/url] of their nations. At no point should be pages be "protected"; it just serves to further the elitism and push away contributions from new users. The wiki would be fine without these people. I have faith in the community to manage it itself, probably better than these admins ever have.

That last line of yours is complete speculation. Besides, the CN wiki has a reputation for being completely unreliable as it is.
[/quote]

you're right, blocking doesn't happen at a high traffic rate. pages/files are deleted a bit more, mainly for housekeeping or from author requests. and to clarify by housekeeping i'm refering to duplicate files/categories (like multiple uploads of the same flag and such when one is prefered by an alliance over the other.) or a nation page where it's only a nation infobox and the nation was deleted years ago and the last time the page was updated was 2006. one example is yesterday i got in touch with TTK and R&R gov about having duplicate flags on the wiki and which they wanted to keep and they picked and i did all the tedious work of finding all pages with the other file links and fixing them then once there were no more pages linking to the flag they didnt want i deleted it, a la, housekeeping.

Protecting wiki pages isn't as often as you might think. It's often used to stop unproductive edit-wars where people go back and change stuff on the wiki then revert it then revert that etc etc and it keeps going (hence edit war) two cases in point would be the Sparta page after they surrendered in the TOP/IRON-NpO War and the RoK incident with people changing their gov back and forth. one side of RoK even tried to report the other for vandalism. So a soft protect against unregistered users is put in place usually for a 2 week auto-expiring timelimit then it auto lifts and back to anyone can edit(registered users can always edit). some pages/templates that have a high volume of traffic have protection on them as well.

@ minutia statement. people roleplay in CN, if they want to make a wiki page about their nation and expand on it then cool, more power to them, they can do that on these forums as wellm, actually theres probably more content on the forums than there is on the wiki about CNRP. if you want to make a wiki page about your nations health care system for instance then you're entitled to.

@ your post as a whole. if it's so unreliable and elitist, no one is forcing you to use it or contribute at all. I find it oddly titillating that you say that as the last line considering you've blatantly vandalized pages before. and were you perma banned? no, you got a 1 day block for blatant vandalism just like anyone else would. -> http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Arizona?diff=prev&oldid=439970

[quote name='Sigrun Vapneir' timestamp='1338137854' post='2973247']
I believe you misread me a little, I am put off by unknown rules moreso than strict ones. I never found *any* rules it seemed like basically you would be at mercy of whomever has admin.

Wikipedia has a fairly full ruleset, but lacks admins who will apply it consistently, however that's reall neither here nor there.

I dont know about any consensus but I will tend to be in favour of the so-called subconflict pages, they often deserve their own article in my opinion.
[/quote]

hmm, the only real rules i go by are for vandalizing, im unaware if people have personal rules they go by but entirely possible i spose.

wikipedia has tons of crazy rules and whatnot >.>

(the bottom of the post i'll hit more about war subconflicts)

[quote name='AAAAAAAAAAGGGG' timestamp='1338138837' post='2973251']
Subconflicts of main conflicts in the wiki showed up relatively recently (DH-NPO) and I feel that was mainly for political purposes for people who wanted to claim that it was a "separate war" to help further their cause when the fact of the matter is the "subconflict" wouldn't have happened if it weren't for the primary conflict.

I guess if you want to call it a "front" that's fine. But I fail to see why it's so important to have such a small article get it's own single page when it could be easily all put on the same main war page.
[/quote]

Here's my personal opinion about subconflicts, and no it's not gospel. As long as all the DoW's and alliances involved are reflected in the main war page and no information is missing then they're alright [i][b]within reason[/b][/i]. all the info/DoWs/alliances will still be there on the main war page for everyone to reference that one page for everything. at least they do say on the subconflict page "part of the _____ War" so thats good, otherwise i'd be less happy . it does get to be too much though, take the TOP/IRON-NpO War for instance. with there being 4 subconflict pages and all, all 4 (not too sure on SF-MJ War) but the other 3 for sure were started with pre-empts. the Fark-NPO War was the only subconflict that was remotely sizeable and the other 3 were small.

one thing might be to rename their pages to "___ Front" instead of "____ War" to make it blatantly obvious that it's a front [b][i]IN[/i][/b] a war. just throwing out an idea out there.

[quote name='BKlein' timestamp='1338139922' post='2973256']
I find the wiki to be useful (both by me and other gov members here) primarily in listing treaties, finding links to forums & irc channels, and knowing which international .gov members to contact in situations of need. That's all I really care about anyone getting from our wiki page: history, wars, and all that are merely bonuses.

It would be ideal if every alliance could find someone competent enough with the system (really, it takes minimal effort to learn the system through trial and error) to update those four things from time to time. I was impressed to see comments lately by Rogal and such indicating that efforts are being made to ensure that treaties are up-to-date.
[/quote]

i try to leave the coding on pages very simplified so that anyone can add to it without already feeling intimidated by the coding (i started off a total noob back in 2010 so i recall the feeling). sometimes an alliance will list a treaty as one thing and their partner another in which case i'll get a hold of both to figure it out. all in all i think quite a few folks know me that i contact people regarding info to update their wiki.

also, thanks

[Chief Savage Man]

Yes, please unban me.

[url=http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/User:Chief_Savage]Here's my link.[/url]

I was banned because MvP is a stupid ass clown who decided that because I criticized him around the same time somebody was vandalizing the wiki, I was the one responsible. It wasn't me, I have no idea who did it, but I got banned anyway based on flimsy circumstantial evidence because MvP would rather play at administrator than use his brain.

Either way, I'm glad to see somebody who isn't a tier nine super sperg cleaning up the wiki. Good luck with it.

Edited May 27, 2012 by Chief Savage Man

[Rogal Dorn]

IRC convo's took care of this one. for all those not involved but curious of the outcome Chief Savage Man's account is [url=http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Special:Log?type=block&page=User%3AChief+Savage]unbanned[/url].

Edited May 27, 2012 by Rogal Dorn

[Rogal Dorn]

[quote name='USMC123' timestamp='1337912669' post='2971850']
Unban Hereno from being able to edit the wiki.
[/quote]

when i talked to him and told him i was willing to talk to the other admin about it...

[quote][11:51] <Hereno> it isnt my account i gave a **** about
[11:51] <Hereno> do whatever, i dont really care
[11:51] <Hereno> its not a big deal[/quote]

[Bobogoobo]

flak attack: thanks for the suggestion, good idea. Looks like Rogal took care of it.

Soviet Canuckistan: still, without anyone to block vandals, someone could just go on a rampage and people would have to try to keep up and revert all the edits. They could miss some or the edits could be sneaky, and then the wiki would [i]really[/i] be unreliable. And yeah as Rogal said, pages are deleted when they have no value at all to add to the wiki or are duplicates, things like that. The pages I was talking about protecting are ones that are used on thousands of pages, which are prime targets for vandalism, because anything done there will go to all those pages. Still, most of those are only protected from anonymous users; any that are restricted to sysop only would pretty much never be edited by a user with regular privileges anyway, and we can always edit them at request too. And as Rogal said, pages can be protected temporarily when there is edit warring, persistent vandalism, etc.

Sigrun: are you talking about something like the [url=http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/CN:STYLE]Manual of Style[/url]? This also inherits Wikipedia's policies, but that whole thing is mostly useful for looking up parts when you're unsure of how to format or write something correctly. And we also have the [url=http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/CN:VANDAL]vandalism policy[/url].

CSM: insulting the wiki staff or active contributors while asking to be unbanned really isn't very helpful to your case.

[Hereno]

[quote name='Rogal Dorn' timestamp='1338155004' post='2973336']
when i talked to him and told him i was willing to talk to the other admin about it...
[/quote]

The SOS wiki page was vandalized back when Arrnea was still over there and we all hated each other. The wiki staff banned Pollard for doing it even though it wasn't him and they had no proof of him doing such a thing, so I went and told them I did it because I don't really give a !@#$ about my account. He, on the other hand, had actually wanted to become a wiki mod and get involved with doing things. Instead, the wiki mods decided to ban me and not overturn his ban (which I'm sure had nothing to do with the fact that the thing was being run by MvP and Locke). Of course, now he no longer plays, and so I don't care about it anymore other than having it as an example of how the wiki is garbage.

Pro tip: if you want the wiki to have a lot less vandals to take care of, you ought to allow it to be the community's wiki instead of the wiki that a few people own and anyone else can be banned at the snap of anyone's fingers without any evidence. People won't make it all !@#$%* if they feel like they have some part in it, and the community wouldn't stand for people who went and did that kind of stuff if they were actually allowed to take part and make things better without having idiot mods coming behind them making everything worse. No offense meant to you, though, as this thread shows that you guys seem to give a !@#$.

[Schattenmann]

So this one time me and Rishnokof had an edit war on the news feed and I called him a retard without realizing he was a mod or admin whatever. Good times. I didn't get banned, so everyone else that got banned must have been [i]real [/i]jerks.

Back on topic; I've noticed lately that when I put in an article name, say, Red Dawn--but any article--instead of taking me to Red Dawn's article, it takes me to a search results page. That !@#$ is annoying.

[Rogal Dorn]

[quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1338166988' post='2973391']
So this one time me and Rishnokof had an edit war on the news feed and I called him a retard without realizing he was a mod or admin whatever. Good times. I didn't get banned, so everyone else that got banned must have been [i]real [/i]jerks.

Back on topic; I've noticed lately that when I put in an article name, say, Red Dawn--but any article--instead of taking me to Red Dawn's article, it takes me to a search results page. That !@#$ is annoying.
[/quote]

who could ban you schatt? anywho, yeah the search being broken is annoying. a temporary user based fix is known [url=http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/User:RogalDorn/wikia.js]link[/url] (it only works if you're logged in) but im still contacting the [url=http://community.wikia.com/wiki/Community_Central]Wikia bosses[/url] to see if they can do anything for those users who aren't logged in and have to put up with it.

[Chief Savage Man]

[quote name='Bobogoobo' timestamp='1338162674' post='2973362']
CSM: insulting the wiki staff or active contributors while asking to be unbanned really isn't very helpful to your case.
[/quote]

i'm just telling the truth, friend

[Rogal Dorn]

[quote name='Hereno' timestamp='1338163817' post='2973366']
The SOS wiki page was vandalized back when Arrnea was still over there and we all hated each other. The wiki staff banned Pollard for doing it even though it wasn't him and they had no proof of him doing such a thing, so I went and told them I did it because I don't really give a !@#$ about my account. He, on the other hand, had actually wanted to become a wiki mod and get involved with doing things. Instead, the wiki mods decided to ban me and not overturn his ban (which I'm sure had nothing to do with the fact that the thing was being run by MvP and Locke). Of course, now he no longer plays, and so I don't care about it anymore other than having it as an example of how the wiki is garbage.

Pro tip: if you want the wiki to have a lot less vandals to take care of, you ought to allow it to be the community's wiki instead of the wiki that a few people own and anyone else can be banned at the snap of anyone's fingers without any evidence. People won't make it all !@#$%* if they feel like they have some part in it, and the community wouldn't stand for people who went and did that kind of stuff if they were actually allowed to take part and make things better without having idiot mods coming behind them making everything worse. No offense meant to you, though, as this thread shows that you guys seem to give a !@#$.
[/quote]

Yeah, again, not sure when the SOS wiki page vandalizing events between Arrnea and "we" happened or why they happened. [url=http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Special:Log?type=block&page=User%3ADarth+Pollard]Pollard has been unbanned for over a year[/url] though, he was banned February 24, 2011 and unbanned March 3, 2011.

I understand the frustration man, I do. (nerd alert) I was a mod on the ubisoft forums (end of nerd alert) and I handled a lot of stuff like this before. mods would get banned for misuse of modpower, and people get pissed and act out, in one way or another. it happens, its a part of online culture pretty much heh. I'm also incredibly fair and willing to give people the benefit of the doubt as most people know, and as you know. now i'm not claiming i'm a saint by any means or anything heh, just that i'm trying to help.

If you can't tell already we're definitely opening up to the community not only to get things resolved but primarily to get community input/feedback/ideas for the wiki, it's my firm belief that the wiki is FOR the community, not the other way around. Hence me asking what people think about the subconflicts and things like that. Judging by all the posts I'd say that people are using this just the way it's meant to be used, for questions, comments, complaints which are all feedback in one way or another in my eyes. Everyone is welcome to edit it all they want (vandalism not included ) even though soviet canuckstan vandalized a page once i didnt perma ban him for it, he got a 1 day block. Is it fun to paste the wikipedia entry for arizona tea onto the arizona bloc page? sure and in his eyes apparently yes, but the page is about the arizona bloc, not arizona tea .

[Sandwich Controversy]

-Arizona Iced Tea is an extraordinarily popular drink in Soviet Canuckistan, the iced tea is much more relevant to its citizens than the bloc.

-I never disputed that people have the right to make thousands of pages about their nations, I don't know why you think I was.

-Saying that I'm welcome not to use the wiki is dumb. I want there to be a reliable wiki, but the admins have always detracted from that possibility.

-In any case, who put you in charge?

Edited May 28, 2012 by Sandwich Controversy

[Rogal Dorn]

[quote name='Sandwich Controversy' timestamp='1338176237' post='2973427']
-Arizona Iced Tea is an extraordinarily popular drink in Soviet Canuckistan, the iced tea is much more relevant to its citizens than the bloc.

-I never disputed that people have the right to make thousands of pages about their nations, I don't know why you think I was.

-Saying that I'm welcome not to use the wiki is dumb. I want there to be a reliable wiki, but the admins have always detracted from that possibility.

-In any case, who put you in charge?
[/quote]

I too am a fan of Arizona Iced Tea however in the event that you wanted to make an arizona iced tea page for soviet canuckistan then it would probably be "Arizona Iced Tea" but the default wiki page would still be the bloc xD with a listing for "This page concerns the political bloc. For information on the popular beverage drink in soviet canuckistan, see Arizona Iced Tea" just like how on the IRON wiki page it says "This article concerns the Independent Republic of Orange Nations (IRON) alliance. For information on the iron resource, see Resources."

I thought you were referencing Grossgermania because theres tons of pages about the nation.

What am I or Bobogoobo doing in this day and age to prevent you from contributing to help make the wiki a reliable resource for the community? I know everyone gripes about how things used to be. J Andres, Locke, Dynasty are inactive for the most part. Lol pie isn't super active like myself or Bobogoobo but still comes around every now and again. Michael von Preussen doesnt have admin rights anymore since he retired.

I was "put in charge" when i applied for admin ([url=http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Cyber_Nations_Wiki:Requests_for_Adminship#RogalDorn]link[/url]) back in january, Lol pie was the only active bureaucrat left at the time since J Andres has been inactive.

Edited May 28, 2012 by Rogal Dorn

[Kochers]

[quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1338166988' post='2973391']
Back on topic; I've noticed lately that when I put in an article name, say, Red Dawn--but any article--instead of taking me to Red Dawn's article, it takes me to a search results page. That !@#$ is annoying.[/quote]
This is worth leaving Wikia for if we can't change it back, IMO.

[quote name='Sandwich Controversy' timestamp='1338176237' post='2973427']
-Arizona Iced Tea is an extraordinarily popular drink in Soviet Canuckistan, the iced tea is much more relevant to its citizens than the bloc.[/quote]
[quote name='Sandwich Controversy' timestamp='1338176237' post='2973427']
-Saying that I'm welcome not to use the wiki is dumb. [b]I want there to be a reliable wiki[/b], but the admins have always detracted from that possibility.[/quote]
That kind of @#$% is the reason the wiki isn't reliable, not because "ZOMG the admins are so horrible" I have been editing and using the wiki for four years, and the only problems I've ever had are from anonymous vandalisms. But hey, continue to vandalize on the one hand and complain about how "unreliable" the wiki is on the other.

Not everyone is unappreciative of your efforts against the anonymous vandalisms, Rogal Dorn and Bobo.

[quote name='Rogal Dorn' timestamp='1338179766' post='2973442']
What am I or Bobogoobo doing in this day and age to prevent you from contributing to help make the wiki a reliable resource for the community? I know everyone gripes about how things used to be. J Andres, Locke, Dynasty are inactive for the most part. Lol pie isn't super active like myself or Bobogoobo but still comes around every now and again. Michael von Preussen doesnt have admin rights anymore since he retired.

I was "put in charge" when i applied for admin ([url=http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Cyber_Nations_Wiki:Requests_for_Adminship#RogalDorn]link[/url]) back in january, Lol pie was the only active bureaucrat left at the time since J Andres has been inactive.[/quote]
I don't know if you're interested, but we have some old NADCers who may still be able to get in touch with J Andres, if you need to talk to him.

[Bobogoobo]

Yeah, the new search is really horrible, I have no idea what they were thinking. And I think Rogal mentioned this, but to fix the search, put the following code [url=http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Special:MyPage/wikia.js]HERE[/url]:

[code]$('#WikiaSearch').attr('action','/index.php?title=Special:Search');
$('#WikiaSearch input[name="fulltext"]').val('0');[/code]

Thank you, Kochers.

I don't think we really have any urgent need to contact J Andres right now, but that's good to know, thanks.

[Rogal Dorn]

an fyi, here's my inquiry into the search bar -> http://community.wikia.com/wiki/Admin_Forum:Search_bar_is_broken

hopefully it's fixed soon guys.

[b]edit.[/b] Well that was a quick reply. Looks like it's wikia wide and the way to get back searches the way they used to be is (steps below)

1. Log in
2. Go to "my preferences" (hover over your username in the top right and a drop down will appear and "my preferences" will be one of them.)
3. Go to the "Under the hood" tab (there's 5 tabs, it's the 4th one)
4. scroll down to the "Advanced display options" section
5. check the "[b]Enable Go-Search[/b]" box

After that the search function is back to normal for you.

Edited May 29, 2012 by Rogal Dorn

[Laslo Kenez]

CNwiki is most useful for me in identifying nobody alliances.

I can generally remember most treaties of alliances above a certain size, but cnwiki fills a valuable gap if people are simply too small to really have lodged in my memory. The big alliance pages are clunky though, and maybe some consultation with alliances would be good as to how they want their page to look?

[Rogal Dorn]

[quote name='Laslo Kenez' timestamp='1338296021' post='2974032']
CNwiki is most useful for me in identifying nobody alliances.

I can generally remember most treaties of alliances above a certain size, but cnwiki fills a valuable gap if people are simply too small to really have lodged in my memory. The big alliance pages are clunky though, and maybe some consultation with alliances would be good as to how they want their page to look?
[/quote]

I do get a hold of alliances a lot regarding their wiki page but anyone can get a hold of me regarding this/their wiki page(s) I'm more than willing to help them out in any way i can/they need me to. I'm always idling in 38 IRC channels (i leave 2 open for swapping in and out of public chans for wiki work heh.) but you can always find me in [b]#cn-wiki[/b] if people need to track me down and they dont see me in channels their channels that's where they can find me.

A general outline for [i]most[/i](not all) good alliance wiki pages is usually something like this....

1. (basic info like founding etc)
2. Charter section
3. Alliance history section
4. Government section
5. Wars section
6. Treaties/International relations section (with bloc templates)
7. See also section (where the color/misc templates go at the bottom)



If an alliance has a history written up on their forums that works well, it's very easy to Wikify it and put it up on their wiki page. However, a ton of alliances only have their charter and no history and barely anything there which isn't good heh. some don't have a charter even at that.

Edited May 29, 2012 by Rogal Dorn

[Baltus]

Why do you have MnDoAPs? I have never heard them used anywhere but there.

[Rogal Dorn]

[quote name='Baltus' timestamp='1338350510' post='2974356']
Why do you have MnDoAPs? I have never heard them used anywhere but there.
[/quote]

I got it from [url=http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=104076&st=0&p=2768063&hl=&quot;mndoap&quot;&fromsearch=1&#entry2768063]here[/url]

It just identifies mdoaps with explicit non chaining clauses.