Battlestar Wiki talk:Think Tank/Ticket System

Off topic...

What happened to mantis? :D LOL! (Inside joke for those who don't get it.) Why not move to the frakmedia.net domain? :o Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 13:09, 23 February 2008 (CST)

Mantis and our Mediawiki setup didn't get along. Oh well. Anyway, we can do a ticket system for the entire FM! network. The link on the proposal page is merely an example. -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate - Battlestar Pegasus}

On topic...

I really don't know how this is going to work. It just become a new place for us have to check. Yes, we get emails when something new posted, but submitting corrections over this type of system might be to cumbersome. They say "mention that x, y, z happened instead of a, b, c." Ok...BW:CJ. A ticket system for system related stuff to vistors to all FrakMedia sites lets say might be more practical than for wiki contributions. I really don't see how this is any different than opening up to non-registered users. Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 13:20, 23 February 2008 (CST)

Well, four things come to mind:

Opening up the Wiki to unregistered users would create a poisonous "RC patrol"/whack-a-mole culture that's prevalent at Wikipedia. We don't want that here.
Through the ticket system, anonymous users would be unable to influence the articles directly, and would be an effective buffer/filter against changes. (Again, avoiding the RC "whack-a-mole" Wackopedia culture.)
People have commented that MediaWiki's interface is difficult to understand/use. With a ticket system, users would be able to know what information they can provide.
It would be easier to keep track of the status of the tickets, allow multiple users (with the proper privileges), as well as allow others to comment on them.

I do agree that a general ticket system would likely be in order, that encompasses all our FM! productions. -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate - Battlestar Pegasus} 14:29, 23 February 2008 (CST)

Joe also mentioned opening up a separate suggestions namespace to anons. What ever happened to that idea? --Catrope^{(Talk to me or e-mail me)} 14:04, 23 February 2008 (CST)

That could work as well. For instance, Battlestar Pegasus has the "Proving Ground" namespace, which isn't used yet. But the same idea applies and its doable. Also, using the Submissions forms, we'd be able to generate our own ticket-based system... after a fashion. I'll add that to the Ticket System proposal when I get the chance. -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate - Battlestar Pegasus} 14:29, 23 February 2008 (CST)

To be honest, I don't see what's so difficult in editing articles the normal way, though getting used to all the syntax linking, pictures, citing, etc. isn't that easy. Depends on what you want to do, I guess. As for the ticket system: it depends on what it's used for. If people create tickets for typos or tiny additions, that would just create unnecessary work too. But it could be useful for significant changes and suggestions. -- Serenity 14:54, 23 February 2008 (CST)

I'm concerned with context and complexity. Say a person wants to make a "minor" correction. If its a typo, that's OK. But what about contextual errors where a contributor in this manner wants to add something. Not only do they need to explain what to add, but where and why. In all of that explaining it would've been faster to write the edit in an account themselves. There's also the matter of placing the edit in the correct location. We the editor-in-place may not be able to understand where and why the edit is required, especially if the user can't explain it. I'm open to the notion as an alternative editing option, but MediaWiki is self-correcting (even if others consider it complicated and restricting). You have to know how to write and edit with the right tools to use any wiki. There is an intelligence and competency barrier that I don't want to try to make "better" because someone can't understand the tool. There are many people who, in my opinion, have no need for computers because they really have no competency in using them and likely don't really need one. Generally speaking, in the pre-computer days, if you couldn't write or type, you couldn't make a book. After a fashion, the notion of editing a wiki requires a certain competency as well. I'd like for things to be as open and available. But we all have our specific abilities. Creating a user account shows that a user can work with the wiki without damaging it and its content. Using the tools shows the precision necessary for an article to become and stay a quality page. To me, this seems a bit like putting training wheels on a pencil, since anon edits are primarily not to exclude but to prevent quick "whack-a-hole" vandalism. This system would allow edits from people who are, frankly, too inexperienced or too lazy to create an account and edit themselves. Hopefully I don't sound too elitist in this and got my point across. --Spencerian 15:09, 23 February 2008 (CST)