From GPWiki
Introduction
I just want to say first off that I don't mean to offend anyone. These are merely my own observations of the pages listed here, meant as constructive criticism. If anyone wants to debate these issues, feel free to use the talk page. These pages are done in no specific order. The pages listed here are just a fraction of all of the pages. In the future, I hope to go over all of the pages so that they can be improved too. --Dial-Up 03:02, 21 Aug 2005 (EDT)
GPWiki Criticism
General
- The page content should never take up a smaller vertical portion of the screen than the side bar.
- Why are we using the Google search thing? The original MediaWiki search feature is nicer and preserves continuity.
- Tables of contents are a good thing!
- Get rid of "Welcome"
- Paragraph at top - Too long. Replace with a slogon. Put a link to "What is a Wiki?" in introduction box.
- Emphasize Introduction box more - Bold links, change colour, get more exciting icon
- Move forums links closer to the top.
- Put link to GPWiki:About in introduction box.
- Put link to Help:Contents in introduction box.
- Replace HTML table code with Wiki code, maybe.
- Too little information. Split it into sections, introduce Ryan Clark, admin, prominent posters, brag about standings in Google, etc.
- Use more formatting. This page is very boring!
-
Put filenames underneath respective images so that those copying the HTML can find them easier.
- Somewhat hard to find. Perhaps a link in the footer?
- Perhaps some information about how to inform about/correct invalid data?
- Consideration should be made to reviewing this page since it's been over a year since it's been touched.
- Not much to this page, maybe it should be merged with another introduction page.
- Annoyingly useless. The page is, that is. No the question.
- A few languages have very short descriptions.
- Pretty much a useless page - Most of the tools are specific to one language so why not just list them on the language's page? Some sections, like software protection should be a page in itself.
- Get rid of external links - Why send our audience somewhere else for the same content?
- Sort tools into commercial, free, open source, etc. sections
- Put most popular/best tools at the top and highlight them.
- Very incomplete
-
Give examples from each genre
- Added Examples --Snoolas 10:26, 21 Aug 2005 (EDT)
- Lots of unnecessary information. (FPS Games Online)
- More attention should be given to technologies, techniques, etc.
- Lots of links to pages that will probably never be made. (John Carmack, Id Software, Quake, etc.) Links should go to Wikipedia or other pages offsite.
- Links in text should only come up once per topic, at the time it is more important to know what it means, or the first time it comes up.
- Useless pages made for individual games, contain only a few lines each.
- Issues should be included on the same page, not seperate ones.
- Pretty much useless offsite link.
- Connection Types section needs to be rewritten.
- Very short, needs more information.
- Link to roleplaying game page rather than give a mediocre description.
- Again, short.
- Why not include sections like, "How to I make a command parser?"
- Descriptions for each site would be nice.
- Compilers are mostly for C++, so why not move them to C++?
- What about art-related links?
- Obviously neglected.
- This is probably the hardest page to keep updated since we have no one dedicated to searching for contests.
- Incomplete - That doesn't look good for a link from the "How do I get Started?" page!
- Get rid of the individal pages. They should just all go onto one page.
- Why isn't there a table of contents?
- Book reviews are all rather short, which isn't too much of a problem, but why couldn't they all go on the same page?
- At the very least, the rankings could go beside the books' titles.
- Why aren't these on the links page?
- A description of each page would be nice.
- Redirects to Category:Fileformat, why?
- Why do we want this to be categorized? The alphabetic order at the bottom is useless.
- Nondescript external link names
- Links to missing pages. They've been there for a long time too. Why bother making the links if you didn't intend to fill them in?
- Map formats and Application-specific formats sections empty.
- If you are just going to make a 2 line description and then link to Wikipedia, save us all the trouble and just link directly to Wikipedia.
- More source code for loading these files would be nice
- ...I don't understand it...
- Each term should have a link, either to its own IN DEPTH description, or to a Wikipedia page.
- Not all terms are defined.
- Why do we bother with a glossary if we're going to rely on GameDev to fill in our gaps?
-
Why no table of contents?
- Fixed, Table of contents is enabled -The Hunter 00:21, 24 Aug 2005 (EDT)
- "We currently have game programming information for the following libraries / APIs:" False. We have many offsite links.
- Nothing is described on this page. How do people know which to choose?
- Some libraries have languages written beside them. Are we to assume that all of the others can be used by any language?
- Many of the pages linked here are very short, 3 line descriptions and then a link to the official website. Why bother?
- A tag to say whether each library is free for use or the associated cost would be useful.
- The engines are sorted by language. Why bother with this page? If you want a C++ engine, you should go to the C++ to find it.
- Few engines are well-described.
- Why would anyone want to start out with a discontinued engine?
- Giving an external link to another list of engines seems rather pointless.
- Do any of these engines with local pages actually have any information not copied from the official website or local source code?
- A tag to say whether each engine is free or the cost would be useful.
Strange spacings...
- Some techniques could use more explaination/source code.
- I don't even know why this pages exists, since each language should have its own tutorials and source code linked from its own pages. VB users generally aren't interested in C++ tutorials.
- Awful, awful page. Some of these languages are so obscure, there isn't even a 2 line description for them!
- Most of these languages with pages are only 2 line descriptions with links to their own official pages and communities.
- What is up with the Virtual Machines section?
- Languages should be sorted by popularity, and have short descriptions beside their names on this page.
- Link to "Lisp vs. C++ in games", meanwhile, there is no link to Lisp in the lists.
- VBNET should be moved into a general DOTNET category, makes more sense since the languages are practically the same
- C++ page is useless, all the content is under the general C section
- Incomplete, there are obvious things not mentioned here, like IRC.
- Each new thing should be dated and signed. I realize it's probably too late to do this for the current things.
Someone ought to go through and see if any of the wanted pages have actually been made...
- Fixed, I don't think any of these have been made... --Snoolas 10:08, 21 Aug 2005 (EDT)
|
|
The Game Programming Wiki has moved! 
