Forum:PHP Forum

I was wondering, how can I get that php forum? Do I need to send a message to a administrator? It's for the Dutch RS wikia [nl.runescape.wikia.com]. - Tedjuh10
 * I'm sorry, but that type of forum install is not currently being done. --Uberfuzzy 18:31, 25 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Oh, to bad. But why do some wiki's have them? (i.e. )
 * It was something that was offered a long time ago. Many problems arose, and it was decided that it was not something we ere going to support any longer. We've began moving some wikis off of that type of forum and shutting them down. There arent many left, Runescape should be one of, if not, the last. --Uberfuzzy 18:43, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

WOW! This is amazing. Runescape is lucky to ride on the last train. There is really what should be done on wikia. One of the problems is the interaction between editors and readers, and reader feedback is a big miss on wikia. We have to admit that the current interface is still too daunting for our readers to use it. (Yes! That's the reality. Maybe it looks perfectly good for wiki freaks to use, but readers just don't feel like using it!) --MyBrute Resource Center@Ronga 02:27, 26 May 2009 (UTC)


 * One of the big part of the problem is that casual internet users dont want to learn anything. I know it because i live with one. Sometime i say to him : "It's like if you want to drive a car without learning how to do it (and how to do it safely) first". I even had some years ago in my Messenger a guy who was often asking my help, about many thing but often about Messenger. One day, i was helping him so i was telling him to go to Messenger's menu. The guy replied "What menu?", and this was before they began hiding it in a smal icon.
 * Microsoft (among many) tell ordinary people to buy computer because they can do so much greats things with it, but, it never say to them that they'll have to learn so much stuff because nobody except geek like me would buy a computer.
 * So, that is what i think to be the major part of the reasons why people dont contribute to wiki, even just in talk page. And the situation is even a lot worse when it comes to french wikis. Sometimes i wonder how the french Wikipedia got so big.
 * For people to get involve more, we dont need one type of forum over another one, we would need that every site function the same, so that people could learn how to use one site and be able to use all of them. Evidently, this is impossible.
 * But, there's still hope. We can get a few people each week to learn how to sign in talks pages... — TulipVorlax 02:58, 26 May 2009 (UTC)


 * This is something which geek of the geeks (*coughing* developing team) never understand.
 * Reality speaks for itself. Take a look at Our Admirable Wiki Forum (Total edits 0 | Total topics 0) vs Runescape PHP forum (Total posts 46332 | Total topics 3364). Even taking the factor of "new and developed wiki" into account, the result is still far too shocking. While our total page views are over ten thousand, we are collecting dust over there. No one cares to post ANYTHING since opening. No one leaves any comments in any talk page. Well we can't blame them. Telling people to return to the age of BBS to post a message?! No wonder why our readers don't wanna say a word. When things look "technical", they just don't wanna use it. Viewing that the wiki forum is going to be a failure no matter how hard you try, you should just host your forum externally even though you miss the "intergration". Other benefits offset this disadvantage.
 * Wikia or Mediawiki still looks too cold, too technical and too user *UN*friendly for the casual majority. Community involvement (user feedback, responses, post comments and so on) is a big miss in Wikia. We really need to redesign the talk page to formats similar to blogs/forums which most Internet users are familiar with. Without something like Article Comments, WordPress Comments, it is hard to know what your readers think or feel or want. --MyBrute Resource Center@Ronga 06:13, 26 May 2009 (UTC)


 * About wiki progress, don't get illusions due to the success of Wikipedia. Don't ever think wiki is some magic powerhouse - somewhere a horde of people coming to serve you once you pressed a button to create a wiki. It's actually a very lonely journey. The path is loooong. Let's try view wiki in another perspective. Treat it as a good platform to freely publish and share your contributions to everyone in the world. Wiki is actually a good platform to keep track of your work: revisions, diffs, templates, dynamic contents, tagging and multi-category systems. Readers, seeing my contributions online, will cross-examine it and correct mistakes and typos found on my work, or adding info which is otherwise incomplete. In turn I appreciate their efforts to offer small help. So far over 99% edits (contribs) are made by me. You feel happier if you think it in that way. Otherwise you will feel very disappointed. --MyBrute Resource Center@Ronga 06:31, 26 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, i know contributors wont come and edit as soon as i create a wiki on a topic that matter to me. And still, i just created a new one : Fractal Art.
 * But i think Wikia staff understand that wikis need to be easier to edit for newbs. That is why they're working on the new edit window (wich i dont think i'll ever use since i'm a coder type - that still like WYSIWYG when doing HTML but goes in to code as soon as it need something the editor can't do). — TulipVorlax 08:23, 26 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Absolutely correct, we are aiming to make Wikia/MediaWiki a much friendlier medium for new users. We don't expect to convert everyone to WYSIWYG, just as you wouldn't expect advanced HTML coders to switch to a WYSIWYG editor, however good they get - but we want to make it possible for as many people, in as many situations, as possible. 16:55, 26 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't see how WYSIWYG must be NOT suitable for coders IN ALL CASES. There are still good sides on WYSIWYG editors even for coders. It's not all-or-nothing. You can use both at the same time depending on what tasks you are doing. For example when you are working with table, it's nicer and faster to use the visual editors to fill in the blanks. If you want to add a new column in a long table, visual editor is the way to do. It can be done in a few clicks only. Editing raw wastes a lot of time.
 * I usually use both depending on what tasks I'm doing. Blogging visual editors are better than wiki editors. At least it allows us to type HTML markup directly without a switch. For wiki editors, I turned it off completely except when working with tables. Problems (1) Really buggy, often screw all the links up. (2) Too slow in inserting templates (Think about how long you need to insert { { stub } } in visual editor. This is a template even newbies will use it) (3) doesn't allow inserting HTML/wiki markup without switching. --MyBrute Resource Center@Ronga 18:19, 29 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Gaming also has the phpBB style forum, though it's not as active as RuneScape's. I'm not sure of the technical and buggy info related that has Wikia unable to support this feature, perhaps it's because of the bogged down version of the software, it's not made to function like that. FFXIclopedia has the full version hosted on Wikia, although the database is separate from Wikia's and is maintained by solely by one of our admins, it works flawlessly. I think it's just a matter of whether Wikia is willing to host the full version of the software and if it's even feasible to tie it in with the main user database without error or limitation. I'm also well versed in using, hosting, and maintaining the software and I can certainly guarantee by the way it's setup it's very well designed to fit in with the Wikia norm. It's very user friendly and with no extreme MODifications, upgrading (releases happen a couple times a year) is very fast and smooth. A perfect open source forum software for use alongside an open-source wiki software. With phpBB3, a much more stable version, 'forumadmin' would be the forum's admin group, I believe Bureaucrats have that right by default. (though access to some of the domain/load/cookie/etc settings would not be available for obvious reasons). And sysops would have the global moderator group. Both of which are default, with some minor tweaking. The bogged down version does this somewhat but much more limited. What would Wikia's approach in hosting the full version of phpBB3 for communities that request it? Providing issues with user database (separate or conjoined) and tweaking of the default groups are sorted out. -- 17:55, 26 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, I think they should at least beta-test it on some wiki's, and those wiki's tell what they think of it. Tedjuh10 - Talk 15:33, 27 May 2009 (UTC)


 * MediaWiki + Wordpress + phpBB3: All of them have related plugins to integrate and share the database. --MyBrute Resource Center@Ronga 18:38, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Apart from a full-featured forum, a better comment system is required to increase the interaction between readers and editors. Take a look at this page. Scroll to the bottom. WOW! It has a comment box like what the current blogs do. It can greatly encourage readers to post or say something in this way. Comments are automatically posted in the talk page. --MyBrute Resource Center@Ronga 18:38, 29 May 2009 (UTC)


 * In the page source we can see  wich is evidently what make that comment boxe show. It seems that it comes from a mediawiki extension. — TulipVorlax 06:48, 30 May 2009 (UTC)