HabboxWiki - Rare Values

[jasey]

[More people use HabboxWiki than the habboxlive website directly old data. We also have the lowest bounce rate of all the websites and a higher rate of returning users of all except for HabboxForum.

yes love i am very proud of your visitors but traffic is relative. when habborator which barely gets the work that habboxwiki does is still trumping the wiki in traffic by exponential amounts there is a long way to go. there is the fact that habboxwiki is still relatively new but then you must think that it has been given heavy promotion around habbox, including the most popular habbox site (the forum). then you must think that the active users of the forum are, by a majority, here for things other than habbo. more than anything, though, there is the fact that some people are just too uninterested in the whole concept of habbo history and information archives.

i did say, though, and i will say it again that i am in full support of it. i think it is a wonderful, wonderful thing and i will be using any site archiving the information about the site that defined my childhood in the future. regardless, it is clear that rare values are not a priority for habbox users whatsoever anymore. rare values used to be what brought people to habbox and kept it alive. that used to be the biggest thing. now people are here for the forum and, like i said, the majority of people posting on this forum are not posting about habbo. based on this, i applaud you a second time for taking the work to implement this but i don't think it is the most useful update.

regarding the marketplace updating every day, there are still some things that will update instantly. perhaps there is a rare that gets out in a special prize in a quantity enough to change the value of something from seventy-five credits to around forty. purely hypothetical as i am aware habbo doesn't hand out prizes in the same manner they used to pre-merge but you will notice the deflation because of the market saturation in minutes on the marketplace without using the charts and averages before you will ever get an update on habbox.

i will continue bearing in mind that this thread isn't about the rare values department but keep talking anyways. i don't mean to sound pessimistic or disrespectful but the majority of the rare values being updated on habbox are meaningless work. most of the updates posted are completely useless due to their inherent variability and low value. is it really necessary for someone to spend time updating a page that changes the value of something worth 2 credits three times in a fairly short period to vary it between being 'worth' 2 and 3 credits? wouldn't a quick search on the marketplace show you which amount you are going to get it for instantly?

if you even visit a furniture shop, do you think the owner is going to get their price guide from a guide that was updated three days ago or one that has the latest and cheapest price searchable in client? you get my point. it wouldn't be a bad idea to consider scaling the rare values department down to actual rares and stop updating these 'seasonal' or 'special collection' pages as if people are checking out the values of a vine wall on habbox to see if it finally makes that big jump from 1 credit to 2 credits on a guide not many stick to for a furni of that type. it's like a make-work project.

anyways, i totally digressed and if anything i applaud your work because this obviously took time to implement. perhaps the structure of the code can be used for something different as well one day.

[Chippiewill]

yes love i am very proud of your visitors but traffic is relative. when habborator which barely gets the work that habboxwiki does is still trumping the wiki in traffic by exponential amounts there is a long way to go.

You're joking right, you think habborator get barely any work? You couldn't be more wrong, just the very nature of the design of habborator means tons of hours go into it.

The thing you have to remember is HabboxWiki is three months old, it was only properly promoted for maybe a month, in the interlude the content design department for the most part have been working on refreshing the main site guides, I've been working on the organisational things and the stuff that needs to be done (Such as setting up page templates) so content on the wiki is actually surprisingly low, we're just now getting starting to clear out all the in-completed pages that'll draw in more users.

[Samantha]

@Chippiewill; anyway that on the Rare Values feature, when something is worth 1 Credit it can say '1 credit' not '1 credits' I think it looks odd, if not that's fine .

[Chippiewill]

@Chippiewill; anyway that on the Rare Values feature, when something is worth 1 Credit it can say '1 credit' not '1 credits' I think it looks odd, if not that's fine .

I didn't initially do this as it was defined in the template, but now credits is included in the parser function itself I can actually do this, I'll get right on it.

[Samantha]

I didn't initially do this as it was defined in the template, but now credits is included in the parser function itself I can actually do this, I'll get right on it.

Thank you, that was a stroke of luck .

[Chippiewill]

Thank you, that was a stroke of luck .

I have now implemented this into the next version, just working on some other optimisations before it goes live.

[jasey]

You're joking right, you think habborator get barely any work? You couldn't be more wrong, just the very nature of the design of habborator means tons of hours go into it.

The thing you have to remember is HabboxWiki is three months old, it was only properly promoted for maybe a month, in the interlude the content design department for the most part have been working on refreshing the main site guides, I've been working on the organisational things and the stuff that needs to be done (Such as setting up page templates) so content on the wiki is actually surprisingly low, we're just now getting starting to clear out all the in-completed pages that'll draw in more users.

No, I am not joking. Habborator obviously took a lot of work to initially design but over the years certain pages have been taken down or updated less and less frequently. What I mean is that I am almost positive there is a lot more work being put in to HxW than there is on Habborator unless the people at HR are working on secret pages that no one can see. Their stuff is great but almost none of their feature pages are even a little bit new and they aren't exactly speedy to update their archives of dynamic content. So no — you couldn't be more wrong. I think I was very fair in what I said.

Is it your favourite thing to do to take things people clearly already state in their post and then tell them they need to remember it? Is it not one of your favourite things at all and just a terrible habit? I don't need to remember that HxW is young because I said it in a post preceding yours.

there is the fact that habboxwiki is still relatively new

In any case, I was being very polite before because I understand how much volunteer work is put in to HabboxWiki. If I am frank, you are delusional if you think once you finish up any number of uncompleted articles you will see any definite, noteworthy rise in traffic. I don't expect you to be very up in this sort of thing so I will explain now that HxW is going to be looking for organic traffic — totally unprovoked people (generally using a search engine like Google) going to whichever page on HxW that they are looking for. HxW has a great advantage here because as far as any similar ideas out there about Habbo, none are as SEO friendly as the wiki is.

Of course, looking at some of the pages I assume will be most popular still leaves a lot to be desired. A lot. There are mistakes that simply shouldn't exist on pages that have been up since November of last year. I know it has been brought up to the Content Team time and time again that the writing and grammar on HxW is inconsistent and it looks like it has improved but it still isn't at the standard for an archive. There are also other errors on the popular pages like continuity faults and small mistakes in history. I'm not going to point everything out to you but I would start on the page 'Throne'.

I'll end by finishing up in closing an incomplete thought. Again, there is not going to be any noteworthy increase in traffic on the wiki in the future unless the forum props it up on a month-long crutch for everyone to go look at again. The way the wiki will get traffic is slowly and as things start to improve. The content has come a long way since a couple of months ago but it still has so far to go to come close to the professionalism and accuracy of Habborator. Really, though, you could have already understood that as you weren't clear about how quickly you think new users will come. What worries me is that you say they will come once you ...

clear out all the in-completed pages.

People who wanted the information they could have gotten on an uncompleted page are not likely to be checking every day or necessarily ever again until they need the information they ended up getting somewhere else again. The traffic will be a slow movement because of the nature of the site but the flow will widen as the reputation of the wiki as something reliable and quick increases.

[Chippiewill]

I actually wrote a really long reply responding to all your points however I don't want you to reply to them and waste my time again so I won't post those points.

If I am frank, you are delusional if you think once you finish up any number of uncompleted articles you will see any definite, noteworthy rise in traffic.

Currently 200/319 articles (Content worthy) pages are under 500 bytes, which basically means they have nothing on them. When 2/3 of the pages are essentially blank it makes for a very unhelpful resource, if we get them filled in then they're helpful. Once helpful more people will want to use it. Provide a better service and more people will us it. Simple business logic Simple logic.

Only other problem with the wiki is navigation, going from one topic to a related one is presently very uncomfortable for users which means the likelyhood they'll view more than one page is low.

There are also other errors on the popular pages like continuity faults and small mistakes in history. I'm not going to point everything out to you but I would start on the page 'Throne'.

So what you're telling me is that instead of using a wiki how it's meant to be used, aka see a problem - fix it, you thought the better idea would be to tell me in a feedback thread:

a) Something I already knew and was already obvious
b) Something that was easy for YOU to fix

So I am sat here to conclude that you're either a troll or trying to pretend that you know what's best for Habbox, if this was your first post I would assume the former but after seeing you in MANY other feedback threads I am forced to think that your *REMOVED* is the latter. And actually until you understand properly what HabboxWiki is I will only ignore your pointless feedback.

Edited by SyrupyMonkey (Assistant General Manager): Please respect all members and their opinions, and refrain from insulting them.

[jasey]

I actually wrote a really long reply responding to all your points however I don't want you to reply to them and waste my time again so I won't post those points.

Totally! People that disagree with you are not worth your time. I see you're warming up to the Habbox ideal already.

Currently 200/319 articles (Content worthy) pages are under 500 bytes, which basically means they have nothing on them. When 2/3 of the pages are essentially blank it makes for a very unhelpful resource, if we get them filled in then they're helpful. Once helpful more people will want to use it. Provide a better service and more people will us it. Simple business logic Simple logic.

I really appreciate the fact that you are using your brain to make conclusions like that. No sarcasm, that is generally good logic but it doesn't apply here. This isn't the type of site that is going to get a huge rise in traffic just because you finish a rash of articles. The traffic rise will be slow — probably one of the slowest for any of Habbox's endeavours through all time — and that is simply the nature of an online encyclopedia. You are absolutely right that it will rise after the articles are improved, increased and made better but I will say again that you are not quite totally there yet mentally if you expect something other than a trickle increase. It's also really nice to know that about two thirds of the 'content worthy' articles are at that level. How long has the wiki been out now? I understand that it is all volunteer but certainly no one should have been big upping it like they did when it is at this state. Oh my goodness!

Only other problem with the wiki is navigation, going from one topic to a related one is presently very uncomfortable for users which means the likelyhood they'll view more than one page is low.

This has been an issue from day one and if it's still an issue more than a month later then I lose more faith in the Content department.

So what you're telling me is that instead of using a wiki how it's meant to be used, aka see a problem - fix it, you thought the better idea would be to tell me in a feedback thread:

a) Something I already knew and was already obvious
b) Something that was easy for YOU to fix

Excuse me? This is a volunteer project and I am in no way obligated to go fix mistakes for the Content team. Do I have a Habbox Staff usertitle under my username? Look closely — I don't. I am not in any way obligated to spend my time fixing the broken articles on the wiki. It wouldn't be an easy job and where would I start and stop. I can go to pretty much any article with detail and see that it is spattered with mistakes. This is not how you manage a wiki. You don't tell people "if you think it is bad then fix it yourself," but rather encourage the building of a common knowledge base.

So I am sat here to conclude that you're either a troll or trying to pretend that you know what's best for Habbox, if this was your first post I would assume the former but after seeing you in MANY other feedback threads I am forced to think that your *Removed* is the latter. And actually until you understand properly what HabboxWiki is I will only ignore your pointless feedback.

I have done you nothing but favours by offering constructive criticism. I am not saying that it is terrible with no backing up. I am giving clear ideas of where to improve and if you want to have a tantrum over that then I suggest you rethink your position as someone representing the project. I don't know how you get the idea that I could possibly ever be a troll here when my posts have contained compliments and praise for the work that you have done no matter the current outcome.

It is a sad reflection on the Content team and Habbox as a whole when you are calling someone offering very detailed and constructive criticism an 'arrogant ass' and 'to be ignored'. Do you think that is how a staff member should act? I don't lionize my knowledge about Habbo or Habbox but I am definitely, after the time I have spent on both, in a position to be able to give an opinion. Really, I am embarrassed for your staff peers having to see you act like that in a public forum. I guess the preteen syntax and grammar on the wiki is not a coincidence — we have the attitude to match it on the forums!

[Chippiewill]

You seem to have come to the false conclusion that every grammar and spelling check must be carried out by the content design department and you clearly do not understand our purpose on the wiki. Our purpose is not to make up every page edit on there, we're not here to babysit everyone and do everything for them. HabboxWiki is far to large of a task for us to even attempt to do that. So what is our purpose? Ideally the content design department could have just forgotten about the wiki from day one and the community could have been excited and made it a great thing. Unfortunately on launch everyone decided that it would be a better idea to start talking about it rather than doing something about it. Now I can understand this and I know the ideal will never happen, the content design department is (at the frustration of many members of the staff by the way) having to give the wiki a running start. Now I lost my cool yesterday because frankly I shouldn't nor should any content design staff have to be informed about:

- Spelling Errors
- Grammar
- Inaccuracies

That are located on the wiki. You see it, you fix it. Don't preach to me about how the wiki is useless this that and the other. I ALREADY KNOW. What can I do about it? Other than force every member of the department to keep at 1000 page edits a month - not much.

What is the content design departments main long-term in the wiki? Preventing vandalism and assisting in the structure. Don't bother informing us about much else because it should be your own responsibility to fix problems that you see.