>Heck, the whole reason the wiki's taken the place of the WEB site for almost everyone is because players did so much better at getting info about just about everything documented for other players then NIR ever did.as you weren't privy to the transition email chain, your assumption of "the whole reason" is incorrect.
>However, there's no reason people can't put what they've been able to determine via in game experience and/or reverse engineering in the absence of such.Actually, edits that include assumptions are not good as they spread those assumptions and people take it as fact because it is "on the wiki." After weeding through every single saved post to see what exactly was in that category, I came up with Research prefix pages for people to put undeveloped ideas on. Busying up articles with number crunching and informal prose was not helpful to teach people how things actually work.
I am available via email 24-7, and during the time since Wyrom first contacted me in November 2014 to the present, not once have I been told by staff that I am too heavy on the moderation in any specific incident, and I certainly welcomed that feedback from them. I have asked for guidelines and rules so many times, but have not been provided with them and have been told to keep doing what I'm doing, which now includes writing the rules and guidelines.
>If editors waited for official documentation or info from a NIR about every item before putting it on the WikiThe game mechanics pages are treated much differently than an item page. The game mechanics pages need to stay true to game design intention. It's a huge project to get all of the information from the website consolidated, but it's moving along. It took 5 months to get clarity on what exactly on the wiki was official game lore documentation (i.e. the cultural/world articles found here:
https://gswiki.play.net/Category:Official_Documentation). Every single suspect article I found was run through staff. That's the type of work we're doing.
