Say I have a large number of characters that belong to a specific Sci fi species. Wold it be against the ruless to set up a wiki paget for the tage used for that specis so its ea silly defined for people? I haven't checked yet but species like the avaliable could use wiki entries so that people have a reason to tag them as a valid and have a readable recognised description for them so they don't just tag them as raptors or something like that.

I added some tag descriptions in full with proper formatting to the wiki once but they were wiped (I guess an admin didn't like even having the entries as an option but I digress.)

So Anyway. I'm a little wary of starting/filling in wiki entries for tags that don't have one yet.

Well, before I say anything, I'll point this out. I don't know what happened, but it doesn't look like an admin wiped it. You are supposed to have at most 5 pages (you changed Kangaroo 3 times), so whatever happened should be brought up to an admin like Parasprite .

As for making wiki pages, it depends on what it is and how you put it. I don't know what species you're talking about on this sci-fi species, so I can't help you there. However, so long as you are precise on how the tag is to be tagged, and anything that can prompt mistags, it's acceptable; its usefulness can be argued, though. My url page is a good example of a misc. that should have been defined, albiet the tag is underused because it's not "needed". Obviously, this is nowhere near a species, but linking to the actual wiki page off-site and listing what they are and aren't (or for species, what they are and defining features) would be a good way to format the on-site wiki page.

If you have more details, try to bring it up.

Siral_Eurgh-xan said:
You are supposed to have at most 5 pages (you changed Kangaroo 3 times), so whatever happened should be brought up to an admin like Parasprite .

Only the latest edit is listed, and only for the user who was last to edit the page.

For instance, if you edit the same article thrice, it only gets listed once. And if someone else edits it afterwards, it's no longer listed among your edit history.

It pretty much only keeps track of edits that are 'live', that is, currently on the wiki.

Genjar said:
Only the latest edit is listed, and only for the user who was last to edit the page.

For instance, if you edit the same article thrice, it only gets listed once. And if someone else edits it afterwards, it's no longer listed among your edit history.

It pretty much only keeps track of edits that are 'live', that is, currently on the wiki.

Well, that's really inconsistent. We keep histories for tag edits, why not keep the history of wiki edits on a user's page as well? How can you tell if a person contributed to the wiki page, if the person's history gets removed at, say, the use of an additional space by another?

It is kind of odd, yes. I don't know why it works like that. The only upside that I can think of is that it makes it easier to see who's making valid edits, and who's just messing around (since bad ones tend to get quickly replaced).

At least it doesn't affect the actual 'Wiki Edit'-count on the profiles.

...and, of course, if you spot someone just adding spaces to articles or otherwise trying to inflate their stats, report them.

@GDelscribe: If you don't want to post it directly to the wiki, then how about posting it here first, for feedback...?

Hey smart! I'll make a dummy example post and then you guys can give me input on if aim doing it right. Then I'll add it to the wiki