User:Brandingopportunity/User blog/Tag-team wikifying
Since my "King of Absalom" idea hasn't gone very far (see previous blog post), I have another idea: tag teaming.
I've found that having someone else working on the same topic really helps motivate me. Topics can sometimes be confusing, or there can be contradictions in the timeline, and having someone else to bounce ideas and problems off of really can help. Edits are also made easier, as you know that the other person knows a particular topic just as well.
So would anyone like to tag team? I'd let you pick the topic. I'm happy to work on anything, as I have pretty much everything Paizo has published. Favorite topics of mine include: the Darklands, the Great Beyond, and monsters.
- I'd be willing to team up with someone to tag team a couple of other area. —AJCarrington (talk) Tue, 01 Jun 2010 13:01:19 +0000
- Pretty flexible to be honest - where it would do the most good. —AJCarrington (talk) Tue, 01 Jun 2010 15:39:24 +0000
- Point taken - will do some more browsing and post later on. —AJCarrington (talk) Wed, 02 Jun 2010 14:13:06 +0000
- Couple of ideas: monsters and accessories. I love pouring over the monster sections and was thinking of updating the various entries for some of the card accessories like the critical decks.
Thoughts? —AJCarrington (talk) Fri, 04 Jun 2010 21:31:18 +0000
- Fair enough. As far as the cards go, figured that anything tied to the Pathfinder system was fair game - really thinking of the critical decks, but no issues.
As far as "crunch" goes, how much is too much? I did a linnorm entry the other day and mentioned the length/weight provided in the publication - is that too much crunch? —AJCarrington (talk) Sat, 05 Jun 2010 16:24:19 +0000
- Thanks for the tips - very much appreciated. —AJCarrington (talk) Sat, 05 Jun 2010 16:55:10 +0000
- That sounds like a good idea, LD. I'll focus on the information on Brevoy and the River Kingdoms presented in the Guide and Campaign Setting. —Brandingopportunity (talk) Fri, 14 May 2010 17:18:15 +0000
- Which areas might you be interested in, AJ? —Brandingopportunity (talk) Tue, 01 Jun 2010 15:38:24 +0000
- Being flexible is good, but having a topic that excites you and inspires you to write and edit is even better. I'd say, take a look around, and find one that is interesting and developed enough to work on for an extended time. —Brandingopportunity (talk) Wed, 02 Jun 2010 14:01:53 +0000
- basically, I look at the wiki as an in-game encyclopedia. If it's something that an Encyclopedia of Golorian would not have, I don't include it (obviously there are certain exceptions such as the product pages, infoboxes, and categories).
As to your specific question: I'm guessing you mean Ice linnorm. As the length and weight are known in - world, this would be fine.
When writing creature pages, and I'm not sure if I should include something (or where to include it) I look at the wikipedia page for the Great White Shark or one of the dinosaurs and imagine/look at all of the rules elements that were left out of the real world page versus the stats, how their abilities are described in a article vs in a stat block, and how to incorporate that into the article I'm writing. —Cpt kirstov (talk) Sat, 05 Jun 2010 16:48:46 +0000
- Cards, with the exception of in-world/canon items like the Harrow aren't really covered within the Scope of the project, but we could always use more thorough entries for the 5+ monsters a month that come out in the various publications, including elimination of crunch from existing entries. —Yoda8myhead (talk) Fri, 04 Jun 2010 21:57:44 +0000
- If you are willing to do work on Brevoy and the River Kingdoms and things relevant to the current AP, I would be glad to tag team a bit. I only have the AP (which has a wealth of information on Brevoy), so I can add the information there and you could add the information from the CS and finally get the CSI done for Brevoy, as well you could as the Guide to the River Kingdoms set up. How about that? —~LD~ (talk) Fri, 14 May 2010 16:31:59 +0000