We cannot agree on even the most basic thing on these forums.I was about to make a case but then that just confirms what you just said. I read over the forum every now and then, but rarely make a post. People will argue that's life, but it just a game and we're all here to have fun (or should be at least).
How objective can such an undertaking be?Very?
How misleading could things be written as?Things could be written misleadingly. That's why you'd need people to moderate what gets submitted.
What is to stop absolute and tailored revisionism?Trusted people from the Stargate Wars Community that would moderate as they see fit. If anyone has a problem with a moderator that can easily be fixed.
How long until people take the political war there and use it as another battleground? Not long I would presume. With adequate moderation things could be controlled. A political war isn't really something that I see getting out of hand on a wiki page. Its pretty much the fact or views of the writer. It can easily be verified by other parties.
Who does this community trust enough to write 'a truth'Current Mods? What 'truth' would that be. Its more a resource than anything else. Information relating to the game in general, players, alliances, etc. These things cannot really compromise a truth.
What is the likely hood one party will complain about the decided facts written?Its is very likely. Humans will always see things in a different light to one another. I don't see why there would be something worth complaining about. The only thing say a war; how the war began, any official talks between the two alliances, the amount of damage done to either side, and ramifications, and the conclusion. These things can't really be made incorrect unless one party it trying to make it that way.
What is the likely hood the other party will complain and argue otherwise?As stated above. Once the facts have been sorted from fiction they can be put up and protected. If there is any information that is incorrect or unverified it can be removed.
What is the likelihood of complete falsehoods being written as another perspective in an article which people will then accept as 1 of 2 truths in a given event? It is possible. Any falsehoods could easily be overturned by knowledgeable people. Wikis are not made for people's views and opinions, they were made as a resource for facts and information.
There are more issues stopping it from going ahead then just a lack of interest...I'm sure there are a lot of reasons why it hasn't yet been successful. Mainly due to, what it seems, no one putting in any effort or time. Its there if anyone wants to use it whether their interested or not.
I myself haven't been keeping myself up to date with all the wars and conflicts of late. I'm sure there are a lot of people who spend a lot of time on this forum and contributing to such topics. It would not be hard for them to document such events. No one says they should or have to, but no one says they don't.
I think it's great having the wiki available for this game, its always (or more so was) a good resource for information. I still use it every now and then.
