Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-233706-20150624014033/@comment-3417079-20150702093405

If Wikia is a multimillion dollar company, I think they could probably afford to assist more with issues like this. Perhaps I'm wrong, and that would cost more than I expect it would, but I would question that.

If cost really is an issue, there's always volunteers. Volunteers can do a very, very good job if you select and train them well enough.

Yes, it's not easy to address issues like those being discussed in this thread, but it is doable. I've done similar things in other contexts.

The key is to help empower the community to move forward by itself by making subtle corrections (and as neccessary, less subtle ones) as needed. In that sense, Wikia could probably do more on the design side of things to help circumvent issues such as these by having the neccesary tools and such in place by default.

In general, much more could be in place by default to help Wikis and their users better find their way through the journey of creating and managing a community. Maybe that's not standard practice for wikis, but I don't think one should use "standard practice" as a benchmark. You use "what's good."

This doesn't neccessarily have to mean being overly prescriptive; it's about making best practice, and tools that help one create and encourage that, more accessible. The help pages try to do it, but I think more could be done.

Good design can take care a lot of issues before they even begin, and make addressing issues that do begin much easier. E.g. Rather than blog posts on how to submit stuff to staff, have a contact page that guides the user through that process. Etc.