Not that it's a huge deal (not to me anyway) and yes, it's understood FFXI wiki was created and edited by the player base. I am surprised though by the number of errors/misinformation. Could be just typo's or an individuals interpretation based on their personal results.
Running around levelling a mule to have some fun, I discovered that the worst errors were in Fame level requirements. For example: I received a Fame 3 quest in Bastok while still only Fame 2 and it was 6 or 7 more quests before I actually got Fame 3.
In Jeuno, The Goblin Tailor and Gobbie Bag I are shown in the Jeuno Quest availabilty as requiring Fame 2, yet when you actually click on them they show Fame 3 required.
For the Tenshodo Membership quest, minimum level is 10+ and Fame 3 (iirc). I couldn't click on the blank line even though I was level 21 (but not Fame 3), yet you can go buy an Invite, trade it to the NPC at the front desk, get your membership card and get an invite back to give to friends or sell. Nice touch really though. :)
The Bastok quest Vengeful Wrath given by Goraow in Mines is a level driven quest (obviously, if you take the time to check to see where and which mobs drop the Quadav Helm). I had forgotten about this from long ago on main, talked to the NPC on MNK 16, he asked for the helm but wouldn't take the trade, and the Quest didn't show up in my Quest log. I changed to THF 20 (minimum level for Quadav's in Pashhow Marshlands), the quest showed in my log and I traded successfully. However! the Quest doesn't actually tell you this and you HAVE to know how big of a hurry people are in these days to get things done. :) Yes, believe me, I have seen quite a few people (level 90 even) running around doing Fame quests. Top of Zegham Hill one example, a level 90 WHM doing the same Fame 2 quest I was doing. FOR DA ATMA! Yes I know. And the 300k from getting to Rank 10.
Anyway, just a fun thread really, but does anyone have other instances that have caught you by surprise or just made you GRRRRRR! :)
Random Discoveries in FFXI Wiki accuracy
Printable View
-
06-24-2011, 04:53 AMOctavianeRandom Discoveries in FFXI Wiki accuracy
-
06-24-2011, 04:56 AMJackDaniels
soo instead of writing an essay about how these wiki pages are inacurate, try editing them yourself?
-
06-24-2011, 05:04 AMGreatguardian
Ffxiclopedia's information is split into 3 categories.
Category A: Total crap misinformation that some tard was able to get away with posting because no one who knew better corrected it.
Category B: Information lifted shamelessly from NPO sites like BGWiki and BlueGartr with absolutely no citation or credit. This is illegal by the way, as the information is being moved from a site with a non-profit license to a for-profit site (Wikia) without citation.
Category C: Information posted on ffxiclopedia that is both correct and not stolen from somewhere else.
Unfortunately, categories A and B tend to eclipse category C by a great deal, especially in regards to new content.
The only real solution is to just take everything on Wiki with a massive grain of salt, and ask a question on a more respected site if you want a legit answer.
And no, you can't just edit them yourself because wiki mods like Charitwo are allergic to legit information. -
06-24-2011, 05:17 AMZyeriis
While I can't say I was surprised or even "grrr", yes, the Wikia does have tons of wrong/misleading information. One such example is claiming that you need to use the maw after defeating a zone boss in an abyssea zone for the first time to get the cutscene. This is entirely untrue, as you can just warp out (scroll or otherwise) and abyssea npc warp to the correct maw and get the cutscene.
That being said, that is a very very poor example, and I'm sure there are far worse examples of how poorly upheld the Wikia is.
So then why don't people fix it? I don't speak for everyone but I absolutely refuse to add or alter any information on anything Wikia anymore, as frankly, I want to see it burn. That, of course, is an entirely different story, involving a PoS template called Oasis that ruined hundreds upon hundreds of perfectly fine wikis on Wikia. (Which inevitably lead to a mass-exodus of wikis away from Wikia)
And, yeah, after that, then there's the ffxiclopedia staff, that most people who can correct such information, hate, for various reasons.
Why not fix things on the Wikia? It's simple: not going to waste my time just to have it destroyed, reverted back to being wrong, or stolen by Wikia (they apparently believe anything posted about anything on anything Wikia, true or false, becomes property of Wikia).
Clarification: ffxiclopedia is part of Wikia, I mostly refer to Wikia in this post, not ffxiclopedia specifically. Wikia is far broader than just ffxiclopedia. -
06-24-2011, 05:18 AMOctavianeI did..............check before you post :)Quote:
Originally Posted by JackDaniels
-
06-24-2011, 05:23 AMTamarsamar
Psst.
Guys.
If you're tired of Wikia, there's kind of this new place called "Gamer Escape" where everybody is right now.
Just putting that out there. -
06-24-2011, 05:29 AMOctavianePsst! Just having some fun, didn't you read that part? :) Ty for the info though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tamarsamar
-
06-24-2011, 05:30 AMSparthos
The wiki often has outdated information. It also has a habit of making everything sound like a deathtrap.
If you have questions about a specific NM, you'd be better off asking others about it rather than reading about it on the Wiki. The wiki's primary use is for looking up simple things like where something drops or information on synths or locations of mobs within a zone for TOTM purposes.
And yeah, the amount of information lifted from BG is astounding. The same thing happens with info originating from ZAM. -
06-24-2011, 05:44 AMJackDanielsSorry your moan fest was tl;drQuote:
Originally Posted by Octaviane
-
06-24-2011, 06:12 AMTagrinethEr... that's actually an extremely common thing. Not even remotely unique to Wikia.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zyeriis
-
06-24-2011, 06:22 AMGreatguardian
Which is fine, until Wikia profits from information stolen without citation from a non-profit licensee. Then it becomes illegal.
-
06-24-2011, 06:35 AMKhajitThat thing is complete trash. Used it for 15 minutes before it became apparent that there was just about no relevant information compared to Bgwiki. post patch bgwiki has been updated rather decently.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tamarsamar
-
06-24-2011, 06:40 AMArconIt's meant to be like that, and that's good too. It's a hub, a central place where information converges from all directions, to be easily accessible to everyone. Finding info on a forum is nearly impossible. ZAM employs a database model and would much prefer that, if it wasn't slower to edit and wasn't as complete as the wiki (or any wiki, by design). The problem with FFXIclopedia is, that it is horribly mismanaged, mainly by Charitwo.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sparthos
Is it? I'm not entirely sure, but I thought it depends on the licensing. And I didn't know that forums were usually licensed for their content (or if that's even possible, since it's input by different users and not the people who host/run the forums).Quote:
Originally Posted by Greatguardian
Either way, if that information was actually licensed and not available for free reuse, it would make those sites look even more ridiculous than they already appear. Citing content is good for verification purposes (preferably in the background, footnotes or something), like links to Kaeko's enmity testing on the Enmity page, but crediting people with providing information is just stupid. I sometimes log on just to remove lines like "(information gathered by bla of bla server)" because they reek of smugness (and are sometimes put in by that same person, can guess why).
Edit:
It's the same information as on FFXIclopedia (since it was taken over from there), plus some new information. BG wiki is still as empty as it has always been.Quote:
Originally Posted by Khajit
-
06-24-2011, 06:54 AMBumbeen
bg wiki is the only accurate one. ffxiclopedia is good for quest walkthroughs and some discussion since so many people use it. Gamerescape should not be supported due to ganiman being a thief.
-
06-24-2011, 07:03 AMAlhanelemUnless you're looking for mathiness, this is absolute nonsense. Most of the information is the same, largely because one site took it from the other and vice versa.Quote:
That thing is complete trash. Used it for 15 minutes before it became apparent that there was just about no relevant information compared to Bgwiki. post patch bgwiki has been updated rather decently.
Yes, there are inaccuracies. But the whole beauty point of a wiki is you can correct mistakes.
BGWiki has stolen just as much stuff from other resources, especially wiki markup and templates. Although the colors are a little different and certain other things were added or removed, things like the monster info tables and such all follow exactly the same format as FFXIclopedia which existed long before BGwiki. There is plenty of stuff that has been directly copied from both wikis to eachother with neither giving attribution.Quote:
Category B: Information lifted shamelessly from NPO sites like BGWiki and BlueGartr with absolutely no citation or credit. This is illegal by the way, as the information is being moved from a site with a non-profit license to a for-profit site (Wikia) without citation.
Of course, now you should be using gamerescape instead, as FFXIclopedia is no longer fully maintained and premier site status will eventually be transfered over to the new site.
As I have already in the past, I will be happy to block or warn people who plagarize; but all content is released under a free license, and as long as attribution is given posting information from elsewhere is acceptable.
Just don't go around acting like BGWiki is "better" or doesn't engage in any plagiarism either, because it does.
You're just a hater, nothing more. There's completely totally relevant information there. "No relevant information" would mean there's nothing that has anything to do with the game on it. Searching for one or two things that might be missing, does not make there be "no relevant information."Quote:
That thing is complete trash. Used it for 15 minutes before it became apparent that there was just about no relevant information compared to Bgwiki. post patch bgwiki has been updated rather decently.
Unless the only thing you want is formulas for this or that, we are not lacking in relevant information. Get off your dang high horse and make an argument based in fact, not fanboyism.
Every site gets updated more post patch. That's the biggest 'duh' i've ever heard. It did take a while to get the new items and such listed for us, but that's because we did it all by hand, lacking the DPL and other information-linking tools that we have on our newer wikis. -
06-24-2011, 07:24 AMGreatguardian
BGWiki is under a not-for-profit license, Wikia is not.
As for Gamerescape, sorry, but I'll pass. As I've mentioned in other threads, I have a very long memory.
Let's look at the cycle of ffxiclopedia, shall we?
Ganiman and others make a FFXI wiki that's actually pretty good
>
Wiki expands to the point where server maintenance becomes expensive
>
Ganiman and others hold a fundraising drive
>
Ganiman and others sell Wiki to Wikia anyways
>
Scandal ensues
>
Wiki becomes bloated and poorly maintained, partially due to the size.
>
Ganiman and others leave Wikia
>>
Ganiman and others create a FFXI wiki that's actually pretty good
Wonder where that's going to lead this time. Sorry, but I'll take my chances elsewhere. The internet doesn't forget. The internet doesn't forgive. And neither do I. -
06-24-2011, 07:57 AMGarota
I did Tenshodo Membership quest for my Lv1 mule... So don't try to gimme that Lv10+ BS... I took her out to Whitegate for a Mog Locker...
-
06-24-2011, 08:04 AMAlhanelemWrong. The content of FFXIclopedia (And GamerEscape) are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike license. No one who actually works on FFXIclopedia (again, or gamerescape) makes a profit on it.Quote:
BGWiki is under a not-for-profit license, Wikia is not.
The "scandal" was the product of falsefied emails and attacks by BlueGartr members. Take your lies and nonsense somewhere else.
It's going to lead to a successful project or a miserable failiure, but either way, they have no intention of accepting any donations or money from the community as a result of the lies and bull they were put through. The site will be paid for entirely from their own pockets and unintrusive ads as with any other internet site.Quote:
Wonder where that's going to lead this time. Sorry, but I'll take my chances elsewhere. The internet doesn't forget. The internet doesn't forgive. And neither do I.
More proof that you're the kind of person that unfavorable adjectives are used to describe, for which I will not say more other than the internet also makes up lies and hoaxes.
It's not the only accurate one, nor is it any more accurate than any other information source for the game on the internet. You are under the illusion that this is true simply because BG is the official FFXI elitist community.Quote:
bg wiki is the only accurate one.
More lies. Of course, it's human nature to believe the worst. A good lie is easier to believe than the truth. What else would you expect from a thread whose sole purpose is to defame the wiki communities that put hours and hours of hard work into providing a resource for FFXI's players?Quote:
ganiman being a thief.
Now for you'r deity's sake, stop using the official forums as a vheilce for your propoganda and go back to BG and your wiki if you love it so much. Have the maturity to just choose the resource you prefer instead of coming here to slander the other communities. -
06-24-2011, 08:18 AMJackDaniels
I can taste the drama. It tastes like blue waffle. :)
-
06-24-2011, 08:19 AMAlhanelemIt tastes like stupid.Quote:
Originally Posted by JackDaniels
-
06-24-2011, 08:24 AMJackDanielsSounds like BS that Zyuu would feed his community, too bad for you we're not all completely dense :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Alhanelem
-
06-24-2011, 08:38 AMKhajitQuote:
Originally Posted by Arcon
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alhanelem
As of last patch my experience has been the exact opposite. Huge sections were missing whenever I checked an all the relevant info I'd actually need (aka the info on new stuff) has not been on either site with completely blank pages. Bg wiki had actual information on all the new items I checked up on, dynamis changes, info on wtf voidwatch actually entailed, and synergy findings so atm the majority of relevant information I reasonably need is from BG wiki.
Everything else is something I should know already and can be found on a chart by spira for quick reference.
@Derpygalkra. You sound like you've been drinking Kool aid of some sort while wearing a tinfoil hat. -
06-24-2011, 08:49 AMByrth
I'm cool with BGwiki's niche being endgame information, hidden effects, and cited mathy stuff. I apologize in advance if we don't have a complete list of bird monsters, etc. for a while. I'm focusing on adding the first three things, as it seems to be what the BG community is most interested in. Other people are welcomed to join and add information, but please link a source or write the test you did on the discussion page when you post non-trivial information. If you click "Recent Changes" and look at some pages, you'll get an idea for how to do it.
Wikia / Gamer Escape make the assumption that all information is being added by the testers, which is not generally a valid assumption. It's good for traffic to get information regardless of how you get it, and the testers rarely go add things to the wiki themselves and care even less about policing where their information ends up. Furthermore, after enough people repeat the information it's kind of hard to determine "where it came from" unless it's directly copied text with a characteristic writing style like some of the stuff I pointed out on FFXIclopedia lately, or if it's a test for obscure information like the Hidden effects of Rancor Collar or the exact mechanism of Saber Dance.
Either way, point is that they explicitly say to cite things and end up with incredibly few citations, which is both the fault of the editors (for not citing) and the management (for creating a culture where uncited information is accepted). I've personally posted my own work uncited before, because I couldn't figure out how to cite >,>; I couldn't find any examples. I'm still learning wiki code one step at a time, lol -_-;
I don't know much about the stealing history between the two sites, but I know that there's a thread in the BGwiki subforum of people who were banned from BGwiki for stealing things from ffxiclopedia, and the bans appear to have been policed by the BGwiki mods because the whole thing is posts like, "Oh man, ____ copied a bunch of shit. Banned, and now I have to spend all night deleting it." I'm pretty sure they allowed people to repost things that they'd written for FFXIclopedia over on BG, like guides and stuff. -
06-24-2011, 08:53 AMAlhanelemThere are no "huge sections missing." The only way this could have been possible was if you checked the day of the update, in which case of course a wiki with data being entered manually by its users will be behind resources which are able to automatically input the data when fed a datamined text file.Quote:
As of last patch my experience has been the exact opposite. Huge sections were missing whenever I checked an all the relevant info I'd actually need
It was a bit slower, yes. but the information came eventually, and it was not ripped from BG (I can personally guarantee that as far as GamerEscape is concerned. Most of the initial editing was done by staff, and none of us ever visited BGwiki; I can't guarantee it for the wikia site because I don't pay much attention to it any more unless someone comes to one of us about something. ) or anywhere else. We did our own datamining to get item information, and virtually all of the textual content was done from the own experiences of us and/or our users. in cases where information was taken elsewhere, citations have been given. We have handled all of this properly.
We make no such assumption. Much of the early editing after the move was done by a handful of people including myself. I spent several hours that I could have spent playing the game just inputting item information.Quote:
Wikia / Gamer Escape make the assumption that all information is being added by the testers,
I will challenge information if there is evidence to suggest that something is being copied wholesale and taking the credit for it (often it is direct copy pasting of wiki text by someone with few edits, who isn't likely to know enough about wiki editing to make such thorough edits the first time out). In a few cases, people have come directly to me with accusations of plagarism, and I have taken action on it. Depending on the situation I may add appropriate citation, issue warnings or block users. If I don't see it myself and no one tells me about it though, I can't do anything about it. I'm just an everyday human being with a real life- I can't police the wiki all day and all night (I sure as hell don't get paid to do it).Quote:
(for creating a culture where uncited information is accepted)
-
06-24-2011, 08:57 AMByrthWhat kind of testing do you think I'm talking about? If I can look at it and see the stats, I generally don't need to test it unless I suspect SE has made an error. Think about the things I've asked you to deal with lately (Enmity testing for Atma, Enmity testing for Tranquil Heart, etc.) Those are things that require testing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alhanelem
I'm off to bake an angel food caek! -
06-24-2011, 09:02 AMAlhanelem
I know what you're talking about- and I wouldnt assume or even expect that random nobodies have all the keys to all the formulas or be the ones testing mechanics and such.
Asked me? Huh? You've never asked me anything like this, nor am I an expert on enmity and thus I wouldn't one who is most qualified to discuss that subject.Quote:
Think about the things I've asked you to deal with lately
-
06-24-2011, 09:03 AMByrth
Oh, well apparently he saw my comment and reverted his edits without intervention then. I asked you to deal with something in the Staff thread but apparently you missed it. It doesn't matter, as it got done.
-
06-24-2011, 09:32 AMKhajitThe pop item for dynamis lord STILL doesn't have a page as of this second. The dynamis xarc page still has prepatch maps indicating the old mob locations on it. Arch dynamis lord's drops other than sagasinger have no pages. If i see a shrouded bhouj and want to know what it's for i cant look it up on wiki. Nor can i find out what it drops from if i'm specifically looking to find out how to pop DL because the NM's I looked at don't have it as a drop. Not being able to find out how to pop the boss of a zone or how to get the pop items on the page of said NM is a very HUGE error and Things like these keep showing up. It's not haterism you deluded galka. It's the fact that the information just isnt there while on another site i'd see it. You wouldn't have seen me claiming this was the case 6+ months ago when everything was the opposite. Stop looking for your damned BG illuminati.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alhanelem
In conclusion.
Ich brauche mehr Bier jetzt! -
06-24-2011, 09:34 AMAlhanelemI recall being asked to punish someone for plagarism. I followed through with that.Quote:
I asked you to deal with something in the Staff thread but apparently you missed it
Anyway- As far as improving wiki accuracy. We want to start using DPL (a tool that helps link information between different pages (e.g. you can enter information on one page and DPL makes it much simpler to include that information on every other relevant page) to avoid the problem of information being added correctly on one page and incorrectly on another. But it's a massive undertaking and if we do it, it will take quite a long time to implement due to the inconsistence with which the existing templates have been used. Operating a wiki isn't as simple as people expect.
Someone must have replaced an old one then, because I personally saw to the new maps being posted, as well as much of what is on the main Dynamis page.Quote:
The dynamis xarc page still has prepatch maps indicating the old mob locations on it.
I know there are a few missing items, in particular specifically relating to dynamis. But if I don't know what an item is used for I can't put that information in. In this particular case, I do not myself know the pop items for the dynamis lord or new version of it. This is where a wiki's users come in. If information is missing, instead of complaining about it not being there, if you know it, you add it! Complaining about something that you personally know not being present when you could add that information yourself in ten seconds isn't very productive.
I fix what I can when I know about it. But I do not have the entire wiki database stored in my head, so I don't know each and every little bit of information that is or isn't there. Maybe BG wiki's supporters have no life and spend all their time editing instead of playing the game, but I'm a player as much as I am a site contributor. But for every piece of information you claim is missing, there is plenty more that is not missing. If you know something is wrong, you have the power to fix it, thus I don't feel it's fair for someone to complain about something they know is missing when they have the power to change that themselves rather than just tell someone else.
Edit: you know what, I'm going to be the better one here and not resort to personal attacks. Just don't attack us and pretend you're not hating.Quote:
You wouldn't have seen me claiming this was the case 6+ months ago when everything was the opposite. Stop looking for your damned BG illuminati.
-
06-24-2011, 09:46 AMByrth
This is the post I was talking about, and easy with the personal accusations there brah:
http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxi/th...l=1#post129568
Nanashi14 reverted all his edits, so that's fine with me. The second thing is just kind of an amusing proof that information from BG propagates through both wikis, even if the information is totally unverified. -
06-24-2011, 09:51 AMAlhanelemIt also propogates in the other direction from every other site. You ARE kidding yourself if you don't believe that most of the original information on BGwiki was pulled straight from FFXIclopedia in its earlier days. Even many of our original templates were ripped and slightly modified. That doesn't bother me, as long as you don't try to pretend that it's only happened to BGWiki.Quote:
Nanashi14 reverted all his edits, so that's fine with me. The second thing is just kind of an amusing proof that information from BG propagates through both wikis, even if the information is totally unverified.
I will give attention to cases brought to me, but I can't just ban people left and right for various reasons. Not everyone is purposely trying to rip off other sites- many do not realize that if they didn't find something themselves they should be sourcing their information. That doesn't make it okay, of course, but it also means I shouldn't just lay down the banhammer casually.
You really should be giving us/me credit for engaging with you on issues like this. I can tell you that Zam probabyl wouldn't give two farts where the information comes from. -
06-24-2011, 10:12 AMJackDaniels
Uh-oh ZAM :3 you gonna take that??
-
06-24-2011, 10:55 AMRaxiaz
You tell 'em Tahn... I'm supportin' ya from the backlines. /cheer
-
06-24-2011, 11:09 AMByrthI thanked you after you said you'd address it, and then I thanked you when you did something in the post I linked.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alhanelem
Also, I think ZAM probably would do something, because the major editor is on my server and a nice guy. However, there have been 51 wiki edits in the last month so it's probably a non-issue. -
06-24-2011, 11:22 AMAlhanelemThat was really directed at others, not you.Quote:
I thanked you after you said you'd address it, and then I thanked you when you did something in the post I linked.
-
06-24-2011, 12:09 PMDebbieGibsonWhy do you speak when you have no idea what you're talking about?Quote:
Originally Posted by Alhanelem
-
06-24-2011, 12:36 PMAlhanelemBecause I DO have an idea what I'm talking about.Quote:
Why do you speak when you have no idea what you're talking about?
-
06-24-2011, 01:24 PMRaxiazWhy do YOU speak in ignorance?Quote:
Originally Posted by DebbieGibson
-
06-24-2011, 01:30 PMOctaviane
Post is now closed. This was meant to be a FOR FUN post about the little things that you experience in-game due to lack of/incomplete/incorrect information on FFXI wiki, not a brat/hate fest against BG, GamerEscape or anyone/anything else. Post derailed fast into a childish free for all.
-
06-24-2011, 01:31 PMOctaviane
Thread closed