Jump to content
TrinityCore
Gregarious

[Wiki] Split sections, or all on one page?

Recommended Posts

I revisited the Wiki today after some time being away and noticed something strange.

 

It seems that the user "E.R." (Ascathor here on the forum) has split the How-To: Windows section into separate pages (his edit on Sep. 17th). The second half of the instruction is now on "How-To First step into Trinity Core". The result is that the entire instruction to setup TC on Windows is now on 3 pages (in order of steps needed to complete):

  1. How-To: Windows
  2. Installation of TDB (3.3.5a)
  3. How-To First step into Trinity Core

The problem is, there's no continuation of #1 to #2. Meaning, at the end of How-To: Windows, there's a link to How-To: First step into Trinity Core. Furthermore, there's no link in the "How-To" sidebar section regarding TDB installation. It's only located on the main splash page of the Wiki. Users will inevitably get lost.

 

The above needs to be fixed, and I intend to fix it myself. What I'd like to know is, is there a general consensus on what is preferred? Do we all want the instructions on a single page like it used to be, or do you prefer the sections split up between several different pages?

 

Personally, I believe everything should be combined into a single page. One page equals one edit when things need to be updated or changed. 

 

Thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, the wiki seems to be sometimes outdated or not regularly updated.

I also don't know how to edit the sidebar. There are some invalid links. And other strange things like redundant information.

 

But regarding to your question:

I don't think that it's a good idea to present the whole installation process in 1 big wall of text. My experiences with people are that most of them unfortunately don't like reading. Especially not long text.

 

That's why I have splited the guide in 3 parts on the main page:

- Compilation (for different OS)

- Installing DB stuff

- Configuration

 

These are 3 very different steps. A user should be aware that he needs different knowledge:

- Using a compiler on his platform

- Installing a mySQL server and databases

- Doing some Trinity specific configuration

 

If may one of these 3 steps fails a user can re-read this section easier and don't get lost in a very big page. Additionally it prevents redundant text that results in easier maintaining.

 

IMHO, I think it's now more clean and more clear.

 

However you may add some links to grant more continuation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason why I split it up is that we had 3 different instructions about how to proceed after the compilation part. Having 3 different parts each saying essential the same that we would have to edit for one thing is a bit bad and I think this would make it more efficient, if only a bit more... easier on the longer run. Probably misjudged about the other instructions though, as you pointed out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see, so all of the OS-specific information is contained within each OS page, but shared information that is similar for all OSs was combined into one page, rather than having the same "Final Steps" or "Database Install" information in all 3 pages - Windows, Linux, and Mac.

 

Fair enough, that makes sense. 

 

Still, it feels half-finished. My anal retentive brain is calling out 2 things:

  1. No offense meant, but the name "How-to_First_step_into_Trinity_Core" doesn't feel like it fits its purpose. It feels like it should be something more simple and direct, such as "How-To_Final Configuration", or "How-To_Configuration", or even "How-To_Final_Steps". With it having "First" in the name, many users may think it is the first thing that should be done.
  2. If new users are supposed to follow steps that are split between 3 pages, then this needs to be perfectly clear in every possible way they can be shown: At the end of each OS page - Win, Mac, Linux, at the end of the "Install the Database" pages, and on the main page of the Wiki. The "Installation Guide" section on the main page feels like it might be unclear for a new user on how to proceed. 

What are your thoughts on this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. I already have seen the problem with page names. But I couldn't find a rename function. And by manual rename I was afraid of broken links. Anyway editing with this wiki software is much more difficult comparing wikimedia. Wikimedia is using a simple tagged syntax and here you have this interactive sh.t.

 

2. There are a lot of things that could be improved. Normally a Wiki is user contributed. However it seems that the TC wiki editing is blocked now (at least for me).

 

The idea on the main page was that you read from left to right and top to down. So you start in the installation guide step by step. The only thing I would change is to separate 3.x and 4.x content in different boxes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2. There are a lot of things that could be improved. Normally a Wiki is user contributed. However it seems that the TC wiki editing is blocked now (at least for me).

 

It's not without its perks. However, I personally noticed that you took it upon yourself to "remove" certain things, like the RSS feeds. Deletions like this should only be done with communal support, not based on personal opinion. Editing by the community can be a good thing, but I agree with Kingpin's decision to limit editing to certain groups (at least on certain pages), as before anyone could make changes which may or may not be accurate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Every wiki has an easy to use revert function which normally every user can correct changes may he dislike or are not accurate. And that's why I have removed the RSS feeds in a single step and have commented it.

What this wiki lacks is a discussion page like wikimedia has. The blog like commenting function is not a really good replacement for that because it stays forever visible on the wiki page itselfs.

 

I have done in a lot of wikis thousands of edits (and also in other wow emulator wikis btw) and follow some rules of wikipedia or some marketing rules.

- Less words / Same information (prevent unnecessary text or graphical gimmiks)

- Use predefined formats instead using self defined

- Prevent redundant information

- Structure the wiki well

- Define your content (a wiki has statical information, a forum is dynamic)

 

Dynamic content like RSS feeds shouldn't be IMHO in a wiki. A link to this content is enough. A beginner to TC shouldn't be overwhelmed with to much information he may not need at this point.

That was my reason to delete it. And also for the fact that you should subscribe RSS feeds in your browser and not in the wiki. If you disagree with this points please feel free to revert this change.

 

Why I never discuss edits I made in a lot wikis over the years ? Simply. I do not have time for that and mostly the discussion doesn't end in a solution. Like this post here starting by Gregarious: He has some good ideas. He should have just done it better than asking here. At the end he didn't got a simple answer like Yes, do it or no that's wrong. So lost of time.

 

Of course it's the wiki owners decision if he want to manage the wiki alone or to take the risk that one of these very rare contributors may make a false but easy to revert change.

 

I just hope the responsible persons have time and will update further the wiki regularly because there are so a lot of things that could be improved (by the community). Good luck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I think the instructions should be on a single page, including all OS and common instructions. A table of contents should be at the top with links to the appropriate section on the same page. Similar to how wikipedia does it.
 
So, for example (note: using underline to denote clickable links)
 

 

Contents


Installing On Windows

Installing On Mac

Installing On Linux

Required Tasks For All OS

 

Installing on Windows

 

blah, blah, blah, blah

 

Continue to Required Tasks For All OS

Return to Table of Contents

 

Installing on Mac

 

blah, blah, blah, blah

 

Continue to Required Tasks For All OS

Return to Table of Contents

 

Installing on Linux

 

blah, blah, blah, blah

 

Continue to Required Tasks For All OS

Return to Table of Contents

 

Required Tasks For All OS

 

blah, blah, blah, blah

 

Return to Table of Contents

 
Having the guide on a single page makes it much easier for users to follow, makes editing less error prone and generally provides a sense of completeness. Having to jump around from page to page is annoying at best.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Imho the best thing can be

1 compile page for core for each OS

one common page for database thing, using mysql cli

another common page for extracting dbc/maps/vmaps/mmaps

another common page for configuration

a common page for updating core and db.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Imho the best thing can be
1 compile page for core for each OS
one common page for database thing, using mysql cli
another common page for extracting dbc/maps/vmaps/mmaps
another common page for configuration
a common page for updating core and db.

 

 

That's more or less what I have started in the past with my several edits.

 

The only thing I may would try is to split the 3.x and the 4.x installation guide into 2 separate boxes on the main page.

 

Installation guide 3.x

- Compiling

-- win

-- linux

-- os

- database stuff

- configuration

 

Installation guide 4.x

- Compiling

-- win

- database stuff

- configuration

 

Repeating text parts can be done as a template page and can be included in the appropriate page after.

 

Having the guide on a single page makes it much easier for users to follow,

 

I disagree with that for the following reason:

 

Users who want to come into Trinity should learn these 3 steps: Compiling the binaries, Installing databases, Configuring the server

Users that follows only stupid line by line on a enormous big text may (or may not) be successful at the end but hasn't learned anything.

 

When I have come to Trinity wiki for first time I had always to scroll up and down in the page because I lost the focus.

 

And another hint:

Remove that "The wiki is undergoing major changes. Please alert us (in the comment section of each page) about pages that need to be fixed." box.

You will gain 20mm valuable space on the screen. Users will not be irritated if this wiki is may outdated. All wikis I know are always undergoing major changes :P . That's the nature of a wiki. And if the wiki wouldn't be closed for public editing the community could do this as well.

 

And a last hint:

Are you aware that you have on one page up to 4 (!) menu structures ?

- The sidebar

- The breadcrumb menu on the top  (that's cool)

- The xx Child pages in the lower part (complete senseless IMHO)

- The page with links itself (of course)

 

That's what I call redundant information. May it's possible to remove and/or cleanup this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I think the instructions should be on a single page, including all OS and common instructions. A table of contents should be at the top with links to the appropriate section on the same page. Similar to how wikipedia does it.

I like this idea, but Magnificator reminded me of something - 3.3.5 AND 4.x installation requirements are needed. Though they're not much different from each other, I'm curious how you would go about adding in the additional instruction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In what the requirements differ ?

 

Edit:

The requirements also could go to each page:

- mySQL version to the database page

- other requirements to the compilation pages

 

In that way you also could split requirements for different OS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In what the requirements differ ?

The core process will need to be cloned from two different branches. The database update locations will differ. Extracting the maps/DBCs will be slightly different, or use a different program. Nothing major, like I said, but still a few variations. Possibly a few more I haven't thought of yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ahh, ok. That are not requirements for me. That are different instructions.

 

But such things are for me exactly a reason NOT to use one single page. Because it's more difficult to handle and to maintain.

 

Wiki pages are a little bit like programming. But instead of using functions you are using text blocks or text modules.

 

That's why they should be split.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ahh, ok. That are not requirements for me. That are different instructions.

 

But such things are for me exactly a reason NOT to use one single page. Because it's more difficult to handle and to maintain.

 

Wiki pages are a little bit like programming. But instead of using functions you are using text blocks or text modules.

 

That's why they should be split.

I believe both options have advantages and disadvantages, but I think we're putting too much stress on an issue that isn't really an issue. As long as it's done properly, both options are viable. I'm fine with keeping it similar to the way it is now - 3 pages for each OS, and 1 common page for Database/Core/Updating/Configuration. This means that if you're only dealing with a Linux install, you only need to read 2 pages - the Linux install page, and the common page.

 

Since the WoW 4.x,x instruction isn't much different than 3.3.5, it could easily be added in beside the 3.3.5 instructions, like this:

  • For 4.x.x, do blah blah blah.

Thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I have come to Trinity wiki for first time I had always to scroll up and down in the page because I lost the focus.

This sounds more like a personal issue. Do you honestly think Wikipedia would be so successful if having a table of contents followed by all the content was confusing for people to read?

 

I disagree with that for the following reason:

 

Users who want to come into Trinity should learn these 3 steps: Compiling the binaries, Installing databases, Configuring the server

Users that follows only stupid line by line on a enormous big text may (or may not) be successful at the end but hasn't learned anything.

 

I don't really understand what you're getting at. When you write a set of instructions, the goal isn't to make readers work to understand what they're reading. You almost sound as if your suggesting that the wiki should purposely be hard.

 

This sentiment is actually a fundamental shortcoming of TrinityCore. You can't tell people "Trinity is a learning project" but then tell them "but we're not going to teach you, figure it out yourself". Making new users work to figure out a guide is counterintuitive to what a guide is supposed to do.

 

 

PS:

 

Some people learn through audio, some people learn through pictures and still others learn through trial and error. What they all have in common is they're learning. It shouldn't matter if the material they learn by is considered "easy", what matters is they learn enough that they don't have to spend days in Help & Support.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This sounds more like a personal issue. Do you honestly think Wikipedia would be so successful if having a table of contents followed by all the content was confusing for people to read?

 

I don't really understand what you're getting at. When you write a set of instructions, the goal isn't to make readers work to understand what they're reading. You almost sound as if your suggesting that the wiki should purposely be hard.

 

You make some excellent points, and I tend to agree with you 100%.

 

I'm curious if you have an opinion of my suggestion, or do you still believe all instruction for all OS's, including Core/Database/Configuration/Updating should all go on a single page?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You make some excellent points, and I tend to agree with you 100%.

 

I'm curious if you have an opinion of my suggestion, or do you still believe all instruction for all OS's, including Core/Database/Configuration/Updating should all go on a single page?

 

I think a single page is beneficial for (but not limited to) the following reasons:

  1. It is easier to maintain
    • If the process changes for one OS, chances are it will change for others. Having them all together will allow people to easily notice and fix discrepancies
    • If links change you don't have to chase them down across 4 different pages
  2. It reduces reader stress
    • Readers don't have to worry wether they missed a page
    • What if the reader's internet goes down and they can't open another page
      • Reader could potentially be stuck with a cloned repo but not able to proceed because they only have half the instructions
  3. It looks better
    • Yes, this is my personal opinion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This sounds more like a personal issue. Do you honestly think Wikipedia would be so successful if having a table of contents followed by all the content was confusing for people to read?

 

Everything what I'm doing or talking about is based on my personal experience. What else could it be ?

Wikipedia is the best example to split pages. You also can't read 'all european countries' in one page or everything about 'modern computing' in one page. Vice versa they split every topic into a different page. The table of content is to separate and index different articles for a common topic.

For example: on the compiling page you may have a TOC like this: getting the source, getting necessary software, preparing, compiling and so on.

 

You can't tell people "Trinity is a learning project" but then tell them "but we're not going to teach you, figure it out yourself".

 

Who tells such things ? I think you misinterpret my statements 100% vice versa.

A well structured wiki is the best thing how people can learn stuff.

 

It shouldn't matter if the material they learn by is considered "easy", what matters is they learn enough that they don't have to spend days in Help & Support.

 

Another votum for well structured wikis.

 

It is easier to maintain

  • If the process changes for one OS, chances are it will change for others. Having them all together will allow people to easily notice and fix discrepancies
  • If links change you don't have to chase them down across 4 different pages

 

But that's not a statement NOT to split into these 3 pages I suggested (compiling, database, configuration). If something changes in the compiling process I think it's seldom that it's interfering the database stuff ode the configuring part. Links that changes often could be included as a macro (a text modul).

 

It reduces reader stress

  • Readers don't have to worry wether they missed a page
  • What if the reader's internet goes down and they can't open another page
    • Reader could potentially be stuck with a cloned repo but not able to proceed because they only have half the instructions

 

Readers have stress if the project is not working because they missed an important line in a too big context. And how can they miss a page if you write at the end of the page: After you have done the compiling successful please check the next page for installing the databases /  After you have installed the databases please do the last step and configure your sever with the instructions on THIS page ?

Readers with regular Internet problems may are in the wrong business.

 

It looks better

  • Yes, this is my personal opinion

 

It doesn't look better. Yes, this is my personal opinion ;)

 

People studying on the university also don't take a 8000 pages book at the beginning of the semester because they are afraid 'to miss' something. I think TC users are clever enough to recognize that TC can be installed in only 3 steps: compiling, database, configuration.

 

And something else: Wikipedia is may not exactly the right example to compare with TC wiki. A better comparison is WikiBook. And the main page of TC wiki is the index.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everything what I'm doing or talking about is based on my personal experience. What else could it be ?

Wikipedia is the best example to split pages. You also can't read 'all european countries' in one page or everything about 'modern computing' in one page.

Your sample topics are too broad which is why you can't read them all on one page. You can however read material about a specific topic on the same page. Within the body of that topic are other related items but those are also standalone topics.

For example, look at the writeup about Tom Clancy. Notice how all relevant information is on one page while related topics are linked to their own pages (ie: specific books, games).

 

I don't have to go to separate pages entitled "Tom Clancy: Early Life", "Tom Clancy: Literary Career", "Tom Clancy: Personal Life", etc. it's all on the same page because it's all relevant to the topic: Tom Clancy.

Setting up TrinityCore is the topic and the pertinent information is "On Windows", "On Linux", "On Mac" which should be on the same page. Within that information you would have links to installing the software used such as Git and CMake which would be standalone pages.

 

Who tells such things ? I think you misinterpret my statements 100% vice versa.

I didn't misinterpret anything. Your tone suggests the same that has been around these boards forever: this is a learning project but you have to figure it out on your own.

 

Readers have stress if the project is not working because they missed an important line in a too big context.

Why do you assume readers have reading and comprehension problems? I'm talking about ease of use, not contextual elements.

 

And how can they miss a page if you write at the end of the page: After you have done the compiling successful please check the next page for installing the databases /  After you have installed the databases please do the last step and configure your sever with the instructions on THIS page ?

Well, following your own assertion above (re: missing a sentence), the readers could miss this just as easily I suppose.

 

Readers with regular Internet problems may are in the wrong business.

Technically TrinityCore isn't a business. Also I didn't say "regular internet problems". You know as well as I do that not everyone's internet is the same. Hell, mine sometimes drops when it rains.

 

People studying on the university also don't take a 8000 pages book at the beginning of the semester because they are afraid 'to miss' something.

I don't understand the relevance. An 8000 page book required by a paid-for course is far different than a single wiki page on a volunteer, learning project.

 

Furthermore, the closest type of book to a multi-page wiki guide is a "Choose Your Own Adventure" and I don't know of any college textbooks that are written in that fashion.

 

Although, that may not be an accurate comparison since Choose Your Own Adventure books are fun and multi-page wiki guides are not.

 

I think TC users are clever enough to recognize that TC can be installed in only 3 steps: compiling, database, configuration.

Of course they are which is why they'll enjoy reading a single wiki page to learn how.

 

And something else: Wikipedia is may not exactly the right example to compare with TC wiki. A better comparison is WikiBook. And the main page of TC wiki is the index.

Wikipedia is a perfect example because it shows what the TC wiki should be. It would be pointless for me to compare it to something that looks like its current format when my whole suggestion has been to not look like it.

 

Also, according to Wikipedia's statistics they have over 19 million users. Their format must not be that bad.

 

 

PS:

 

At any rate, I think I've made my opinion clear so I'll leave it up to those that actually edit the thing. Regardless of what format is chosen, it does need an overhaul.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On Tom Clancy's page you will not find any information about Mozart. Both are artists. But as different as compiling vs. database is.
 

Setting up TrinityCore is the topic and the pertinent information is "On Windows", "On Linux", "On Mac" which should be on the same page. Within that information you would have links to installing the software used such as Git and CMake which would be standalone pages.

I'm not against that. I have just split compiling, database and configuration. If you have enough in common that you can make 1 compiling page for all 3 OS, why not.
 

Why do you assume readers have reading and comprehension problems? I'm talking about ease of use, not contextual elements.

Me too. (And looking to some beginner questions it's not seldom that people have reading problems. That's why I have seen people asking a YouTube video for installing a MMO core ;) After that the admin asked him if he need a video of somebody is reading loud the wiki.)
 
But in my opinion it's easier if you can always see on the main page the sections. The main page is a kind of TOC. Another advantage is if you want to re-read something guess about database, just open the main page and click to the database link.
 

Technically TrinityCore isn't a business. Also I didn't say "regular internet problems". You know as well as I do that not everyone's internet is the same. Hell, mine sometimes drops when it rains.

The whole life is a business. I got the impression on your previous post that defining the content should be depending of the users internet connection. If a lot of users have problems with internet while raining, may they should wait till the sun is coming again :D
 

Also, according to Wikipedia's statistics they have over 19 million users. Their format must not be that bad.

I worked a lot in Wikipedia and with MediaWiki and haven't told anything against Wikipedia. But Wikipedia is a lexicographical information system. While WikiBook is for books, f.ex like guides. I think that fits better to Trinity Installation Guide.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about making 2 Github trinity repo's 

1 Public ( Public share ) = ( trinity) core & data ( auth /characters/world ) sync ... so users/ testers/... would not have the problems like , core is up to date wile data is not or visa versa.

1 Devo private  (shared  under the Devo's ) = ( trinity) core & data ( auth /characters/world ) is the same way its now "Feq update's that only dev can inject ( slight updates ).


 spams like , " hey i have a problem i followed the wiki but it seems my core is not sync" or errors like unknow colum permission " and lots of other problems because  core data Non sync .

save's some time and explanation 


btw Thnx for the WIKI's , 3.3.5 go's flawless..... 4.3.4 non sync situations i think i need to fix it with hash <---

grts 
 

Edited by swubu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's really no reason to dismantle the whole of wiki and reorganize it according to the tastes of one or two people. We can argue what "looks better" or is "better for the user" all day, but the wiki already does a pretty good job of doing what it's intended to do.

 

As far as the instructional guides go, the only thing that really needs to happen is revision to ensure the steps are up to date. As of now, that's already being done, although not as consistently as it probably needs to be.

 

Splitting up the instructional guides would only really be fruitful if the guides were redone in such a way that, for example,  things that are the same across operating systems (like dealing with the database and importing updates -- TC should take the stance that mySQL CLI is the one and only way to correctly do this) can be lumped together. You don't need a separate page for windows and linux when the process is virtually the same (or should be). GUI should be taboo in this portion of the installation guide because it does nothing but cause problems and should be beyong the scope of the guide.

 

Long story short: let's not reinvent the wheel. Instead, let's spend more time revising and cleaning up what is already there. It's obvious there are ten different opinions on how the guides *should* be done, but let's approach it from the standpoint that the way it was done originally is the way it should stay, save improving what's there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we could all agree on a cross-platform Git and MySQL application, we could combine all of the source pulling/updating into one page, alongside the database install and server configuration. In essence, each OS page would only contain instructions on how to get needed programs, such as Visual C++ for Windows and GCC for Linux. The only other difference I can think of is the vmaps/dbcs extraction would have to come from Windows and neither of the other OSs (unless that changed recently).

 

Here's how I'm visualizing the finished product:

 

Windows

  • Required Programs
  • <Link to common page>

Linux

  • Required Programs
  • Creating a user
  • Anything else Linux-specific
  • <Link to common page>

Mac

  • Required Programs
  • Anything else Mac-specific
  • <Link to common page>

Common Page

  • Pulling/Compiling the Source (using Git BASH instead of Git Extensions so that it's cross-platform)
  • Installing the databases (using MySQL Workbench perhaps? It's cross-platform, and v6.0 was just released. )
  • Extracting the maps/DBCs (Instruction will need to mention that this step is Windows-only)
  • Configuring the server (Only a text editor is needed for the server configs, so this will be fairly easy)
  • Keeping things Updated

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


The only other difference I can think of is the vmaps/dbcs extraction would have to come from Windows and neither of the other OSs (unless that changed recently).

 

recently? the extractors have been cross platform for well over a year now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By Yehonal
      Hi!
      Few weeks ago has been created a project: www.wowgaming.org
      It's a WoW resource pool (Db search, wiki, addons etc) subdivided by expansion that currently support wotlk 3.3.5a
      All information inside are stored  with original data from that specific game version.
      It's totally Free and Open Source alternative to (dead?) OpenWoW site!
      Please read this page to understand why and how we can do it.
      This project can be helpful for:
      - Wiki and Database search engine for educational Open Source application server projects, such as TrinityCore
      - Keeping an historical archive of World of Warcraft original data
      - Discussing and Blogging about newest and oldest WoW Facts 

      wotlk portal (index of all subsite below): http://www.wowgaming.org/wotlk.html
      database: https://wowgaming.altervista.org/aowow/
      addon list: http://www.wowgaming.org/addons-335a-collection/
      wiki: https://wowgaming.altervista.org/wp/wotlk-home/
       
      Our repositories: https://github.com/wowgame
       
      If you want to help us or maintaining another version using our free tools
      Please, Contact us on Discord
    • By Saben
      The wiki is currently directing you to https://www.trinitycore.org/f when you click the "TC Forums" link in the left nav box instead of https://community.trinitycore.org/
×
×
  • Create New...