On Hold Mining Guild Education

[Charaa]

Submission WIP URL

https://wiki.stararmy.com/doku.php?id=wip:corp:mining_guild:education#collaboration_with_other_guild_divisions

Submission RP Example

https://stararmy.com/roleplay-forum/threads/in-the-business-of-the-mining-guild.70913/page-4#post-449599

Submission URL

https://wiki.stararmy.com/doku.php?id=corp:mining_guild:education#collaboration_with_other_guild_divisions

Submission Template URL

https://wiki.stararmy.com/doku.php?id=templates:business

Submission Faction(s)

1. Outlaws (Independent)

Submission Terms

1. I agree

A page that talks about the beginning for new Mining Guild Employees.

 

[Andrew]

Hello Charaa, Let's go over what needs to be done to get this article approved.

Checklist

** This almost echos in all your submissions! The same errors over and over.

[ ] 1. The destination URL should be a page in the appropriate namespace and titled lower_case_with_underscores

• It should be wip:corp:mining_guild:education_division
• [ ] 2. The article is in the appropriate format and the article template. Is all the information for struct present?
  • Echoing your other review - Many sections of the article, much like Wes mentioned in an earlier comment on a submission read like advertising or marketing articles vs a factual encyclopedia, a lot of phrases like state-of-the-art, and cutting-edge give this impression. (there are more words than this used over and over not just these specifically!)
• [] 3. The article follows our wiki-style guidelines, including No forced line breaks, text after each section header, etc.
  • Bolding neeeds to be fixed.
  • The spaces between heading and tables should have a sentence before the tables.
• [] 5. Links to other wiki articles are present as appropriate and are not broken
  • There are many opportunities missed here for linking words in, things like Mining Guild, etc. The more an article is linked to others in the wiki the more cohesive to the universe that it is. more (there is a lot more of this other than what I am posting.)
• [] 7. Images in the article are hosted on Star Army's wiki and credited in the OOC section.
  • No art credits at the bottom of the article.
• [ ] 8. The article is original and doesn't contain copy-pasted content from other articles.
• [ ] 9. The article complies with Star Army's rules in terms of damage ratings, speed limits, etc.
• [ ] 10. The Faction Manager(s), if applicable, have posted approval for this article in this thread.

Other Reviewer Tasks​

• Nomenclature not neeeded for this article type
• Pricing not needed for this article type

General Comments​

• See previous comments on your submissions. You also seem to be making the same mistakes over and over most of which is because of the high percentage of AI use.

Good things about this article​

• Article is marked as a green smile at the bottom meaning it follows our standards.
• Very informative.
• The AI Art is nice and reflects what is explained on the pages.
• The article has everything needed for struct to be filled out.

 

[Charaa]

I made the required edits as much as i could, though i dont know what you meant by (there are more words than this used over and over not just these specifically!) I've mostly tried to look for state of the art and cutting edge.

 

[Andrew]

I will make another pass at these submissions shortly.

 

[Andrew]

I made the required edits as much as i could, though i dont know what you meant by (there are more words than this used over and over not just these specifically!) I've mostly tried to look for state of the art and cutting edge.

If you read the article the diction is more like a marketing campaign than telling us the facts. So much of this is fluff rather than factual encyclopedia-like information that should be presented on the wiki. Longer articles can be just as bad as stubs and short articles. I can honestly say, I miss the days of you writing your own pages, you have become so reliant on AI and unfortunately the quality is suffering in result. Honestly I feel as if I am repeating myself in my analysis of these articles. I strongly suggest you consider slowing down, submitting one article at a time, and focus your energy into that one submission until it is approved.

Same issues as the other articles

• Use of bolding.
• Article has too much fluff, rather than factual information. Save the fluff for roleplaying stories.
• The wiki is for players to read to understand concepts, honestly your articles have become overwhelming as I stated above.

 

[Charaa]

i've removed the last of the bolding, which was mainly in the npc name

Mining Guild Education Division on Star Army Space Roleplay

wiki.stararmy.com

 

[Andrew]

For this article

• The About section needs to be more concise and to the point, it has a lot of fluff.
• The history section needs its dates linked in, Also I'd think reasonably this would have more dates referencing more recent developments in this divisions history.

Correct these few things and we can get this approved.

 

[Charaa]

I've attempted to edit the about section to be more concise, not sure if i did it well. I've also added links to the dates, and i've added a section for YE 46 too, though its small.

 

[Andrew]

• The year link at the top of the article (first section under the main header) is not linked in right
• This also has to remain on hold until @Wes makes a determination about the Aether since you mention it in this article too.