• Welcome to the Speedsolving.com, home of the web's largest puzzle community!
    You are currently viewing our forum as a guest which gives you limited access to join discussions and access our other features.

    Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community of 40,000+ people from around the world today!

    If you are already a member, simply login to hide this message and begin participating in the community!

Wiki Discussion Thread

CubeRed said:
What was it like before? I didn't know ss wiki for a long time but it was like that for a few months.
Click to expand...
Used to look reasonable, if a bit lacking in color

1634968024171.png




The nonsense appeared to start with @ArbishAli for unknown reasons and at the very least no community input in Discussion

User contributions for ArbishAli - Speedsolving.com Wiki

www.speedsolving.com www.speedsolving.com

Difference between revisions of "Template:OCLL" - Speedsolving.com Wiki

www.speedsolving.com www.speedsolving.com

Revision history of "OLL" - Speedsolving.com Wiki

www.speedsolving.com www.speedsolving.com

OLL Algorithms - CFOP Speedcubing Cases - Speedsolving.com Wiki

Orientation of the last layer algorithms for the CFOP speedsolving method.
www.speedsolving.com www.speedsolving.com


As bad as it sounds I think certain pages need to be protected or semi-protected on wikipedia because over the years the alg pages have become an indiscriminate dumping ground of algs (not even good ones).
 
Last edited:
Well some day ago CFOP page content is completely changed to "CFOPwasStolen" and moved to a page that have long name, well all of it already reverted and the user did it is banned
Well yesterday the same person make new account and did the same to CFOP page again which replace the content that reveal that user is the same person and move the page to "You cant catch me now !" and other new account that the creation time is is 1 hour before the user that did replace CFOP page for 2nd time move ZZ page to "Bad than Roux and CFOP"
And recently there new account that replace 4Z4 page content to "Remember,ZZ44 is better than this method." and move the page to "ZZ44 is best for ZZer -JamUKHacker-" page"

There 2 new account named "4z4destroyer" and "Ukhacker" that maybe is alt account of those user
 
Last edited:
Reirto-RRNF said:
Well some day ago CFOP page content is completely changed to "CFOPwasStolen" and moved to a page that have long name, well all of it already reverted and the user did it is banned
Well yesterday the same person make new account and did the same to CFOP page again which replace the content that reveal that user is the same person and move the page to "You cant catch me now !" and other new account that the creation time is is 1 hour before the user that did replace CFOP page for 2nd time move ZZ page to "Bad than Roux and CFOP"
And recently there new account that replace 4Z4 page content to "Remember,ZZ44 is better than this method." and move the page to "ZZ44 is best for ZZer -JamUKHacker-" page"

There 2 new account named "4z4destroyer" and "Ukhacker" that maybe is alt account of those user
Click to expand...
Thanks for noticing that so quickly and taking care of it! Everything should hopefully be back to its original state now. In case I overlooked anything, don't refrain from pointing it out.
 
h bisogno di aiuto per aggiungere dei casi nella wiki. Con il metodo che propongo posso creare i casi line e in seguito risolverli e vorrei aggiungere nella wiki i casi che creano i casi line.
MEtto in allegato un documento sia in italiano che in inglese.

Può aiutarmi a creare una nuova pagina wiki di un metodo? Il mio metodo crea il blocco 1x1x3 e nel prossimo blocco di risoluzione.
Contact me on priviate for create Page wiki.

ioreate this Page in Speedsolving Wiki

Platform - Speedsolving.com Wiki

www.speedsolving.com www.speedsolving.com
 

Attachments

cool, can you pls post an example solve? and im not sure the guide at the bottom works
 
Probably because of the webp format. And yes, I don't think anyone is really maintaining it. You could ask pjk about it.
 
qwr said:
I tried to upload some new images for the Alpha / type A article and the thumbnailer is very broken
Click to expand...
I sadly can't do anything against that, so I could only recommend you, as @1973486 has already done, to contact pjk as he has control over the whole software side of the wiki.

qwr said:
I have also made a bunch of suggestions for the wiki above that have pretty much all been ignored. Is the wiki not being maintained any more?
Click to expand...
I have to admit that as of now, @Billabob is more or less the only active admin when it comes to actual wiki content. I've personally only been checking the wiki for vandalism in recent times due to a lack of time and frankly also interest.
Especially currently, the wiki is mainly used as a dumping ground for methods and unofficial records which, after a lot of discussions and incidents, have proven difficult to moderate (e.g. the wiki is supposed to be a collection of cubing knowledge by the community, but some also insist that this means that it needs to cover virtually everything, including the smallest and most insignificant methods, which I ultimately have to agree with but which also messes with the wiki's quality).
The wiki either needs a reform in some areas (which could definitely be done if enough motivated people came together to create sufficient discussion like back in 2020) or the minor moderation we're currently at.
As I've probably said countless times, the wiki is a community effort and if a project (as long as it's not something the admins have to disapprove of) receives enough traction within the community (like the new OLL images which, despite every normal user being able to, no one has touched presumably because there haven't been enough opinions on what the community would prefer), it can be realized and will likely receive help from moderators as well (if they are even required for it, that is.)
So, if there's anything that needs changing, here's the place to discuss it, hold votes etc. I'd be glad to help, and don't refrain from pinging me if there's a problem, but really it's the whole user base who maintains the wiki and not only the admins.
I see that I should've started a discussion about issues like the OLL images and I will try to show some more engagement on my side in the future, but on the contrary I'm also not going to perform a full revamp without at least having talked to some people about it beforehand.
 
Wholeheartedly agree with RedstoneTim. He's been holding the fort for a few years but the Wiki doesn't get much vandalism these days, at worst we get pages/edits of questionable enough quality that I feel the need to revert/rewrite them.

Checking the wiki's recent changes every day or so is my only connection to the speedcubing community at this point, unfortunately I cannot dedicate any more time than that. Apologies for the lofty claims earlier in this thread. As it stands, my moderation for the UWR page is restricted to removing obviously fake records (0.02 second times) and removing certain records such as 3x3 single and the shorter 2x2 averages. The wiki inherently runs on trust and with the current implicit standard of absolutely 0 proof required (nobody who practices enough to get a sub-3 single is recording every single solve), it seems infeasible for our Wiki skeleton crew to enforce a more complex policy.
 
Billabob said:
Wholeheartedly agree with RedstoneTim. He's been holding the fort for a few years but the Wiki doesn't get much vandalism these days, at worst we get pages/edits of questionable enough quality that I feel the need to revert/rewrite them.

Checking the wiki's recent changes every day or so is my only connection to the speedcubing community at this point, unfortunately I cannot dedicate any more time than that. Apologies for the lofty claims earlier in this thread. As it stands, my moderation for the UWR page is restricted to removing obviously fake records (0.02 second times) and removing certain records such as 3x3 single and the shorter 2x2 averages. The wiki inherently runs on trust and with the current implicit standard of absolutely 0 proof required (nobody who practices enough to get a sub-3 single is recording every single solve), it seems infeasible for our Wiki skeleton crew to enforce a more complex policy.
Click to expand...
My issue has never been with outright vandalism, but with the gradual degradation of the quality of articles like the OLL and F2L pages, which have become dumping grounds of questionable algorithms. In fact when I first used the wiki in 2010 it already wasn't clear which algorithms were the best, so I ended up learning suboptimal OLLs lol. Also the unnecessary and ugly replacement of OLL images by @ArbishAli still is there.

For example there are only two or three good algorithms for these OLLs, and I don't believe the wiki should become an every algorithm database.

1662575665525.png
 
It would take a bit, but we could pair down to 5-ish algorithms (I believe 2 -3 are too few) by holding polls for each case, then instead of just providing one giant list, the first few could be numbered based on their ranking.

One thing to consider is the different value that some of the algorithms may hold to different people. I might only need 2 algorithms for the above case (1 and 2 handed), while others may want 4 extra algorithms to account for each mirrored case.
 
ender9994 said:
It would take a bit, but we could pair down to 5-ish algorithms (I believe 2 -3 are too few) by holding polls for each case, then instead of just providing one giant list, the first few could be numbered based on their ranking.

One thing to consider is the different value that some of the algorithms may hold to different people. I might only need 2 algorithms for the above case (1 and 2 handed), while others may want 4 extra algorithms to account for each mirrored case.
Click to expand...
We can simply take the top algorithms of speedcubedb, including special cases for OH, big cubes, FMC if needed
 
Yeah I agree the algorithm pages need redoing. I've had to rearrange them before when overzealous editors add their own algorithms to the top of the list, so the top algorithms should (?) be the most viable. A cull would greatly improve the quality of the page. I remember the 4x4 OLL parity page being incredibly confusing when I was starting out so that should be sorted out too...

Aside from the concerns about seeking permission/popular support, I don't see an issue with the new OLL images. They read well and the colour brings life to the older designs.
 
qwr said:
My issue has never been with outright vandalism, but with the gradual degradation of the quality of articles like the OLL and F2L pages, which have become dumping grounds of questionable algorithms. In fact when I first used the wiki in 2010 it already wasn't clear which algorithms were the best, so I ended up learning suboptimal OLLs lol.
Click to expand...
I definitely agree with this. The algorithms on the wiki are very outdated and - if inexperienced beginners are excluded - likely more often added to than actually used. The main issue here, at least in my opinion, is that the effort to update them using the current system is just not worth it considering the better alternatives which exist nowadays.

qwr said:
Also the unnecessary and ugly replacement of OLL images by @ArbishAli still is there.
Click to expand...
Do most people want them removed? Because if so, we can definitely do that since it's really not much.

qwr said:
For example there are only two or three good algorithms for these OLLs, and I don't believe the wiki should become an every algorithm database.
Click to expand...
In fact, we already do have an algorithm database which, while less frequented, is the perfect place for storing all algorithms one could possibly find.
The wiki pages are definitely not the right place for that.

qwr said:
We can simply take the top algorithms of speedcubedb, including special cases for OH, big cubes, FMC if needed
Click to expand...
This is definitely better than having an extra sorting mechanism and ending up like AlgDb.net after a while.
One idea I had quite some time ago (ironically with AlgDb.net back then) was that the algorithm lists should be completely under the responsibility of some other website that could keep them updated, now SpeedCubeDB as you mentioned, which would mean that the wiki would just show an automatically updated list with the top algs, but could forward you to the website with all of the algorithms. I'm still not really sure about the programming that would be required for this though.

Billabob said:
Aside from the concerns about seeking permission/popular support, I don't see an issue with the new OLL images. They read well and the colour brings life to the older designs.
Click to expand...
That's also the problem I'm facing since it appears that, as of now, the majority of users don't seem to care or actually do agree with the new images, at least judging from the fact that nothing has been undertaken against it on the page itself.
 
Billabob said:
I remember the 4x4 OLL parity page being incredibly confusing when I was starting out so that should be sorted out too...
Click to expand...
Out of curiosity, did you view the page since I added the Quick Navigation section at the beginning? And if so, how do you propose it be changed? (BTW, I have heard several people say that it is one of the best pages in the wiki. So I'm surpised to hear the other extreme.)
 
Christopher Mowla said:
Out of curiosity, did you view the page since I added the Quick Navigation section at the beginning? And if so, how do you propose it be changed? (BTW, I have heard several people say that it is one of the best pages in the wiki. So I'm surpised to hear the other extreme.)
Click to expand...
Hi Chris - I hadn't and I appreciate the introduction. I agree it's one of the best, most comprehensive pages on the Wiki but as a new cuber the sheer amount of information was overwhelming and it was unclear where to find a general-purpose OLL parity algorithm. The quick navigation section is a major improvement and lead me right to the information I was after. I retract my original complaint, thanks!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

C
Advanced F2L - Wiki Discussion
Replies
6
Views
2,295
RyanReese09
RyanReese09
S
What is MOCE
Replies
0
Views
137
Silky
S
S
Method Proposal Standardization
Replies
5
Views
511
Silky
S
Platform
Wiki List of methods
Replies
7
Views
519
Platform
Platform
UMichSpeedCubist
Wiki Acct Email Confirmation
Replies
1
Views
280
pjk
pjk
Back
Top