Rating: Meaning 1 Attention worthy page, but there might be a better page elsewhere. 14 Nice page, probably best in some way. 29 Good page, unique in some way 49 Very good page, clearly the best page of its kind. 79 Great page, so good that even people not interested in the subject will like it. 99 Excellent page >99 More than excellent page
2006-07-05 [Channah]: lol a hearty arguement. i think sunrose holds the upper hand. the karma'll always getcha!
2006-07-06 [Lady Chaos]: How do I lure crew members to my page to get them to rate it? Just ask here, right, or do I have to be friends with them?
2006-07-06 [iippo]: Just drop the link in front of them somewhere (I think it's fair to link here since this wiki is about ratings so it's not the horrible kind of spammage.)
2006-07-06 [Lady Chaos]: Ooooh okay, that's awesome! Much easier than I'd thought! Thanks... here goes... The Chaos Collection, Recipes, I'm An Artist. They're not all mine either, but I thought those 3 were great pages.
2006-07-07 [Sunrose]: It has an illegal banner: http://s3.amaz
2006-07-07 [iippo]: And it's more like an index page too.
2006-07-07 [Sunrose]: Yepp..
2006-07-07 [Lady Chaos]: Have you guys looked at the pages I recommended?
2006-07-07 [Sunrose]: The first one is a wiki with your own art and the last one with art done by [Nebsy]. I understand it is artistic, but if I may be blunt I don't think either of them ought to be rated. Recipes could be interesting though :)
2006-07-07 [Lady Chaos]: You don't think that people's personal art pages should be rated eh? How come artofasrun, the brokenmoon: art by trav, Sawy's Art, Art by Silver Wind (and lots more) are in the "most artistic wiki pages" list? I smell hypocrisy. Eh, I'll just con a friend of a friend into rating them.
2006-07-08 [Kyrinn]: O.o' Nice...
2006-07-08 [Sunrose]: I didn't say own artpages can't be rated, you just assumed I implied that. You brought your wiki here to be looked at, I'm not going to rate it because you might get offended otherwise. It means you subjected your wikis to criticism and I don't think they are good enough. I tried to be subtle about it, but it seems you really want it spelled out. If I must be the bad guy, then I will be. If another Councilmember disagrees with me and wants to rate it, that's fine by me.
2006-07-08 [Lady Chaos]: Oh, that's okay, no worries. I don't mind criticism... heck, I'm happy if someone looks at the page! And everyone has different opinions about what makes good art... some of us don't have graphics tablets, scanners or money for art school, so it's not exactly a level playing field, so I'm not offended. But hey, it made it onto the "most artistic wiki pages" after all.
2006-07-08 [Lady Chaos]: Hmmm... I have just had a look at the "most artistic wiki pages" list again and changed my opinion... Surely 71 low quality photomanips and paint drawings has more artistic value than "Playgans"... I mean, it may be a great wiki but whoever rated it as a "10" in terms of "artistic" needs their head read. I would be offended that anyone votes a page with 7 mainly black and plain banners and a picture as more artistic than my page. But that is the problem with these ratings, they are just personal opinions... not that I have a better idea. If they were polls, everyone'd just get their friends to vote. So I don't know, I guess what I'm saying is the wiki ratings isn't the best idea ET has seen.
2006-07-08 [iippo]: Note that artistic includes written art as well. Now please stop with the offensiveness, the attitude and the judging, thank you.
2006-07-08 [Lady Chaos]: But seriously... "Playgans" more artistic than an art wiki? Sure Playgans may be good, but there's no poetry, stories, and very little art. Yes, the text is well written and convincing. Yes, the name is catchy and it's a pretty good concept. But more artistic than a freakin' art wiki?! With art of various styles? I'm not saying my page is the best, of course it's not... just put things in perspective here, seriously.
2006-07-08 [Sunrose]: The levels of rating aren't that clear yet as the feature is new and there are only a few pages rated, so let's not start a big fuss about it already. Also, a rating of 10 in terms of artistic is still pretty low considering the scale goes from 1 to 100+.
2006-07-08 [Delladreing]: I find it funny at the level of bitterness present. I read your diary also and there’s many points I would like to make, but I'm not going to cause a fight. its not worth it, after all this is just the internet. I will however say I am extremely happy and grateful that I got such a high rating, I have dedicated nearly two years of my life to Playgans, and am now working on it being made in to a book with publishers already interested. It is not as you seemed to think just a "hate" wiki.
2006-07-08 [Delladreing]: The aim of Playgans was that of education, the sarcasm used is just my style; I like to make people laugh. Playgans is not loved because its "popular" with the cool kids who gang up on people. It’s well liked because it is well written and full of history and factual information on the pagan world and is constantly being developed.
2006-07-08 [Delladreing]: As for the artistic rating *shrugs* my wiki pages contain graphics and photographs, and now fan art also. If I had recieved nothing for the Art, I would not have batted an eye lid. But I most certainly would not made a public display of myself in a wiki slandering someone else’s hard work.