Forum:Less-knowledgable Contributors

A while ago I made a topic here called "stubborn contributors". There, I learned from wikia staff that I don't have anything more to say about 'my' wiki than the contributors. Whether they've been contributing for 1 month or 1 minute doesn't matter. We're all equal. Taking this in mind, I'm a bit stuck and have a question...

First some small info about my wiki; it's about the historical aspect Three Kingdoms period of China in 184 A.D. to 280 A.D. However, the fictional aspect is much more popular and often used for movies, series and games. Many people only know of the fictional aspect, but, as said before, my wiki is about the historical aspect.

I have a contributor and he simply doesn't know anything about the historical aspect of the Three Kingdoms. He is quite active though and usually creates new articles everyday. Problem is, they're all error-filled. Not just a small error here and there, but really error-filled. Furthermore, in the rules of the Wiki, it is stated that sources must be listed for every article that's written, but he told me he doesn't have any sources! Can't blame him, they're usually quite expensive (latest book I bought was 200 euro's), but that means he can't back-up anything he writes.

Anyway, since I was told everything has to be done through consensus, and me and him are usually the only contributors on the wiki, I don't know what to do about this. I can't forbid him to stop writing historical biographies. I can ask him, and I've done that a couple of times, but he insists on writing historical articles. He just continues, meaning I have to read through all his articles and check them on errors and add sources. This takes a truckload of time and I don't wanna do this anymore. His articles are error-filled and he simply CAN'T write articles that aren't error-filled. I just wanna delete his articles, but this has to b done through consensus with him so he disagrees.

How can I deal with this situation? 04:38, April 21, 2010

Create a policy stating that there must be sources and such and that continued adding of fictional TTK information will result into a ban? p.s. You could scan or type out that book of yours so everyone has a source... Of course only for private use, assuming copyright laws and all. -- Light Daxter |  Talk  14:26, April 21, 2010 (UTC)


 * good idea but it has over 1300 pages :P -- Zantam03 14:32, April 21, 2010 (UTC)


 * An alternative would be to add a 'Fiction' section & renmane (move) all the fiction pages to the new section with a title xyz - Fiction or similar. you could also add a template note to the pages that makes it clear They are FICTION and not Historically accurate articles. The interlinking could be an issue of a lot of links exist in the pages.


 * Another alternative is create a Three Kingdoms Fiction wiki and copy the pages across from your non historically accurate contributor to the new site & then delete them as unsuitable material on your site.


 * When i started on wikia I created a load of pages on a wiki that fitted the wikis title & intro description and they were deleted without any discussion and when i objected about the lack of discussion or consultation i was basically ignored, with just a vauge comment about it was not within the wikis remit but the sites description clearly covered what I added, just the founder had a different vision. So i left and started my own on a different subject. I did consider complaining to wikia staff as the actions were in breach of wikia rules on editing policy in my view. But I then took the view if the admin wishes to act like a dictator and cannot enter into a civil discussion on the matter then its not the site to be on any way (I already knew the admin from a Forum we both participated in, so the lack of discussion was very rude in my opinion). I would have saved the pages to use elsewere, if given the chance, as some could have gon to wikipedia but other stuff was not suitable.


 * So in my view a clearly worded statement of what a wiki is about and what is acceptable (relevant) content (or not) is essential to avoid content disputes & bad feeling with editors. I've taken the view (on 'my' wiki) that as long as content has a reasonable connection and possible interest to the sites visitors its OK. Blatant adverts and spam are covered by the rules & a quick cull of the advertising text and a warning of breach of the wikis policy covers it, with the next instance resulting in a short ban. - BulldozerD11 17:18, April 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks Bulldozer, for the long reply. There already is a category called Fiction though and he's not really making any use of it. The thing is... his articles contain a lot of fiction but also historical stuff. It's just completely mixed up and can't really go anywhere.. that's why they're erroneous. -- Zantam03 18:42, April 21, 2010 (UTC)