2320ad wiki anyone?

[Beech]

Anybody be interested (or object) if I set up a 2320ad database wiki? (very similar to the Traveller one).
Would anybody else contribute?
Obviously would have to be careful over any copyright issues and I do not want to tread on Hunter's & Colin's toes but there is a lot of information out there ready to be collected together & the Traveller wikia shows it can work well.

 

[TWILIGHT]

I think it's a great idea Beech. Just check with Hunter over copyright (it'll probably need a disclaimer) and Marc Miller (Hunter should have his e-mail).
Go through Hunter first then Marc. I've dealt with Marc re: my 2300AD work and cafepress site and he's really encouraging when it comes to fans spreading the word of 2300/2320.
But definately keep it official by trying Hunter then Marc. I'd love to contribut but not sure how....

 

[Colin]

If you like, I can look in on this as well, along with making the occasional contribution of my own.

I only have a couple of concerns with this sort of thing, though I hasten to add that they can be very good things. The first concern is the revelation of setting "secrets" or copyrighted information. While I appreciate that people want to share, I also want people to purchase the book. Too much information available can forestall that.

My other concern is over the interpretation of the setting's so-called "canon". I think that any wiki entry would have to bear some sort of canon/non-canon disclaimer, just to avoid confusion. I would be happy to assist with this, at least once in a while.

 

[TWILIGHT]

I'd DEFINATELY prefer it to be GDW/QLI canon. IMHO.

 

[Beech]

Thanks for the positive posts guys.

I was thinking only GDW/QLI canon, and I would start by concentrating mainly on the old GDW stuff to give a history to the 2320 setting so as not to infringe on on the new material until it becomes well established. Also if it concentrates on only setting and not game mechanics people will still need to buy to play.

I think the canon thing is supremely important, wikis have the potential to become 'too many cooks' scenarios & ruin the hard sf purity of the setting - we do not want serenity, colonial vipers and DS9 clones creeping in but somebody will try to put them there if unchecked.

However having said that that the fan base we have produces exceptional work & I see Laurent's 'Etranger' work as almost canon just by the sheer quality. Could there be a an official vetting procedure to include suitable input into the official canon? (just as Pete Rogans excellent L-5 setting has now become 'official').

Athough having researched the technical aspects of setting this up I suppose before I do too much more about this I had better get Hunter's & Marc's approval.

Hunter, if you see this this thread I will PM you in the next day or two about this.

 

[Beech]

Hunter
Are you there...
If you read this, I emailed you a while ago about getting this off the ground, it would be good to get your approval because I'm itching to get started.

 

[Turanil]

Originally posted by Beech:
Also if it concentrates on only setting and not game mechanics people will still need to buy to play.

Not sure to understand what you mean here. Why adding game mechanics (that can only be houserules) would discourage people to buy the 2320AD and Traveller20 Handbook?

Maybe you could list some of the things you would like to see in this wiki, plus some of the typical things you don't want to see appear on it.

 

[aramis]

I'm generally opposed to wiki that are not either

1) supported by the IP owner
or
2) real-world reference information.

Mostly since EVERY gaming Wiki I've seen has violated copyrights.

the T&T wiki does, a good bit of which is at Ken's Request.

The proposal really pushes the potential for "Cut & Paste" nightmare.