Suggestion RPF Wiki - Is it needed?

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

MooCriket

Master Member
Outstanding idea! But I ask....Will there be anyone who can withstand the awesomeness that will be the Wiki-RPF?!!!

*We may need to have counselors available:lol
 

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

wackychimp

Well-Known Member
I could see things getting really gnarley really quickly. Do we do only confirmed found parts or allow acceptable alternatives? Do we include measurments for original pieces or just do found parts? How do we define alternate versions of the same prop like the various Solo blasters?
I agree with Phase Pistol.

I don't think an RPF wiki should make a "ruling" on one version or part over another. On the Solo Blasters page for example, we'd list all versions. On a Luke ANH saber page, mention wiper blades and T tracks.
 

Dave Porter

Sr Member
I ag
I don't think an RPF wiki should make a "ruling" on one version or part over another. On the Solo Blasters page for example, we'd list all versions. On a Luke ANH saber page, mention wiper blades and T tracks.
That makes the most sense.

There are a lot of ways to get to the same result, and in some cases, all are valid.
 

wiccaryan

Active Member
I love the idea of an RPF wiki, it would be amazing for quick reference etc - i also think we should have a tutorial section or a "how to" section, where replica-makers can post guides etc to help people

e.g "How to make a post-bound book"
 

Qui-Gonzalez

Master Member
Now, here is a question that pertains to the tutorials. Do we make the Wiki private? I recall a whip maker who posted a tutorial of how to make whips out of paracord and then pulled it after people were selling his tutorial or something like that. The problem I see with free access is that kind of thing will likely happen.

However, on the flip side, it COULD spur the creative juices of people who want to try their hands at a bit of sculpting, molding, SS modeling and the like. It walks a fine line of stifling the creative outlet because of a few thieves or letting it run free for everyone to garner information from.

Funny...the tutorials would be much like the RPF already is. The info is here for the asking and the taking.
 

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

Art Andrews

Community Owner
Community Staff
Glad to see there is energy and excitement behind this as it is definitely something we want to implement. The biggest problems have already been brought up, namely, organization and determining what is valid and what is not. What is opinion and what is fact. This requires a good deal of thought in the beginning that will help bypass a lot of headaches later on.
 

phase pistol

Master Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
I think the purpose of the wiki would be to consolidate the knowledge already present buried in the RPF forums (but largely inaccessible except by slogging through long threads).

Probably the wiki ought to start private, RPF member access only, just to get it started. Then we can decide about showing the world. Anyway the problem is probably not "showing" so much as it is party crashers coming in and defacing it. We probably need a system of denying Wiki-editing access to unruly folks. :lol

k
 

wiccaryan

Active Member
To solve the tutorial problem of people pulling them etc -

We COULD have two tutorial sections, One for Members of the RPF forum itself with a similiar registration pattern, that are only editable by request to mods/admins?

and

A publicly editable tutorial section that can be edited by author who created it.
 

jackdoud

Sr Member
There are a lot of ways to get to the same result, and in some cases, all are valid.
So you're seeing it as a general prop building wiki, the initial suggestion was for a found parts wiki. I wouldn't want to see windshield wipers listed as an e-11 option if T-track is the correct part. I think just listing found parts will take long enough without includeing endless lists "acceptable" stuff.
 

Dave Porter

Sr Member
So you're seeing it as a general prop building wiki, the initial suggestion was for a found parts wiki. I wouldn't want to see windshield wipers listed as an e-11 option if T-track is the correct part. I think just listing found parts will take long enough without includeing endless lists "acceptable" stuff.
I was more thinking along the lines of the OP, taking a 'skill and technique' approach.
 

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

Now, here is a question that pertains to the tutorials. Do we make the Wiki private? I recall a whip maker who posted a tutorial of how to make whips out of paracord and then pulled it after people were selling his tutorial or something like that. The problem I see with free access is that kind of thing will likely happen.

However, on the flip side, it COULD spur the creative juices of people who want to try their hands at a bit of sculpting, molding, SS modeling and the like. It walks a fine line of stifling the creative outlet because of a few thieves or letting it run free for everyone to garner information from.

Funny...the tutorials would be much like the RPF already is. The info is here for the asking and the taking.


Honestly I dont think that we should get all uptight about hoarding our tutorials for fear of someone stealing and selling them. I know that we all do hard work but heck its gonna happen no matter what. to stifle knowledge is stifing everything.


Revo
 

wackychimp

Well-Known Member
I'd think that we'd want to list what was "generally accepted" as correct parts, but should also mention that some people make Luke ANH sabers with wiper blades.

No it's not screen accurate, but you can still build a prop for display.

It's intent is to consolidate the knowledge of the RPF not make a ruling on what's right.

Tutorials would be nice, but I'd submit that the wiki should link to a tutorial that someone's posted on their own site.
 

asavage

Sr Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
And I would happily post all my information on the Maltese Falcon on that wiki. I have a lot.

Sweet! A vote from Adam, our resident celebrity prop geek, master builder and all around good guy.

I saw your video on the Maltese Falcon. The amount of research that was put into that project is amazing to me.
 

asavage

Sr Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
I personally do NOT like the idea of keeping it private. I don't like the idea of hoarding information (even though I know it often has to be done for a multitude of reasons) and cast a vote for being open source. If someone wants to protect an idea, they should keep it off the wiki.



Now, here is a question that pertains to the tutorials. Do we make the Wiki private? I recall a whip maker who posted a tutorial of how to make whips out of paracord and then pulled it after people were selling his tutorial or something like that. The problem I see with free access is that kind of thing will likely happen.

However, on the flip side, it COULD spur the creative juices of people who want to try their hands at a bit of sculpting, molding, SS modeling and the like. It walks a fine line of stifling the creative outlet because of a few thieves or letting it run free for everyone to garner information from.

Funny...the tutorials would be much like the RPF already is. The info is here for the asking and the taking.
 

asavage

Sr Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
I like the idea of a canonical measurements, source and parts list for things that that applies to (like the proton pack etc, as the gb forum guys have done), and also a separate section for general techniques.

The Ghostbusters guys have also been great in their prop support material about suggestions about alternate ways of building things on the cheap, or when supplies are hard to come by.
 

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

Art Andrews

Community Owner
Community Staff
Adam,

I definitely agree with your general approach (and the approach of a number of others here). First and foremost, like the board itself, one of the purposes of this site is to share information and to be a beacon to the larger prop community. While I can understand having the wiki private long enough to establish the general layout and way we want to approach it, once we begin populating it, it needs to be public and indexable. Why? Because you never know who it might draw! I know we tend to look at the glass half empty and be suspicious of outsiders but there are a lot of industry people out there who might have info we need who don't know about us and a public wiki might be just the tool to draw them in. I am not sure I would be in favor of allowing non-members to contribute to the wiki, but it wiki should be viewable by all.
 

Gigatron

Sr Member
What there should be is a page that shows the actual found parts of the prop, correct dimensions and all that and then a link to a do-it-yourself page that shows how to build said prop, using alternate parts.

For instance, a luke Anh saber. We list the correct 3 cell graflex and t-tracks. Then we have a link that leads to a page that lists where you can get fan-made replica parts or how to build everything yourself, from scratch.


The thing with the tutorials, I don't know how you can get mad at people for selling your technique, really. Unless you were the absolute first person to try something and it's a trade secret, I don't see how you could get mad at someone. I have techniques for weathering paper props, but I didn't invent them. And the guy that pulled his tutorial for braiding a whip - he wasn' the first that's ever made a whip. All of this stuff is public knowledge if you know where to poke your nose.

I say we keep everything open to the public, but find a way to limit editing priviledges to members of the RPF.

-Fred
 

Qui-Gonzalez

Master Member
Just playing Devil's Advocate, fellers. You have to look at both sides. Some of our submitters and crafters are tight lipped with their skills. I personally love things like Frank's Jedi Remote tutorial...which I should have as an old bookmark. :p

I think being able to edit should be even more tightly controlled. Look how often bad info comes out with things like Vader or troopers. We do have crafters who can offer up hard facts, like Brian Muir or Don Bies(If they so choose).

Art, I am all for open sharing. I know you caught hell for releasing that shopping list of Fett parts on TDH, but that was what this is all about. My whole point was you will need to look at both sides, but a consolidation idea like this would really be fun.

This may also get some people who used to craft a certain part back into giving it another go. Who knows? I will say this place is still kicking ass but DOES need a little nudge at times to get the creative and sharing juices burbling.
 

Art Andrews

Community Owner
Community Staff
Qui, you nailed it. SHARING is what it is all about. To me, if I had to sum this hobby up in one word, it would be "sharing." Some are more inclined to do it than others. Some seem to think the hording and stockpiling of information equates to power, but the entire dynamic of the internet is turning away from that and more and more toward getting information out there and getting it in everyone's face. I can't tell you how exciting it is to see that slowly beginning to take hold here. Those who refuse to share and continue to horde will eventually find themselves outdated and irrelevant.
 

Art Andrews

Community Owner
Community Staff
I don't want to get too ahead of myself here but something to consider when laying this out might be to take the snopes.com approach or even (dare I be a total cheeseball and say it) the mythbusters approach in which we clearly label information as being something we KNOW to be true, something we THINK to be true, or something we know NOT to be true, but might be a viable alternative. I could see us putting up an E-11 page in which we list T track as the original item and windshield wipes as an alternative. I am sure this will upset the purists but there are a lot of people out there and everyone can't afford or track down original T-track and I think as long as the two are clearly distinguished as original and alternative, it would be beneficial to have both.
 

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

Top