What can be done to change this? Some simple page moves, moving of content, and other similar traits to this. Will it take some time? Yes, probably so. Though, at the current state of the wiki, I think there is so much more that can be provided. As we are talking about granularity though, there seems to be little of it. If we need an admins page, plop it in the content area, sure. A user written guide, whatever! Now, this doesn't look clean for a viewer's stand point, but can be fun and interesting for the wiki editors. So we need to sit down and decide what can be on the main namespace.
From my viewpoint, there are a few things we could do when it comes to what information is allowed on the main namespace/content pages.
- Allow anything and everything, regardless of it's notability and how it is acquired. For example, allow clan pages, any user written guides, etc. in the main namespace. It will only be removed if it's obsolete or spam/offensive.
- Restrict what can be added into the main namespace. If it's relevant to the game (ie. Town hall, Archers Tower) then it's fine, if it's a guide, it must meet certain guidelines to be notable, otherwise it'll be modified or removed.
- (Preferred by Hairr) Stiffen policies and restrictions to where content is located. If it's a project page, it goes in the project namespace. If it's a clan page, it goes in a clan namespace (can be requested from Wikia, with a maximum of 2 custom namespaces) or in a correct location. If there is a player made guide, it can be refurbished to be written in a neutral point of view, whilst not showing ownership to one specific person (ie. [[Hairr's awesome guide rofl!]]) but rather the whole wiki, and placed in an appropriate subpage. Also, if a page on the same subject exists (with certain exceptions), then it'll be deleted or merged into the original article.
To me, it'd be only logical to set up one of the above restrictions. Allowing anything willy-nilly is hazardous to page views and visitors as the content could be viewed as "unreliable". This would be a bad thing to allow. Either way, an above approach is going to be met. As the game becomes more popular, more users will be arriving, and set standards will be set among the users (without actually being typed). This brings up another thought to the pages.
How minor of a page can a page be? For example, can we have an article for every level of Archers Tower (ie. Archer Tower Level 2). There are benefits with this.. and disadvantages.
- How will it benefit us? - SEO (Search Engine Optimization). SEO is a great thing when it comes to visitors and page views. As google searches (Oh, and Bing searches for you special few!) give better results for more exact searches (ie. how much does it cost to upgrade my level 4 archer tower? first google result: Archer Tower Level 4). It gives the viewer what they want, so they will continue to visit the wiki. Simple as that.
- Now.. how will it be a disadvantage? - Well, there are two things that come to mind. More work and small pages. Now, it's easily known that it will cause more work, but there will be small pages. It all depends on whether or not we want them to sound the same, if they are on the same subject. If they all look exactly the same, it'll bring more attention to the page views, but can be bland if they go to other pages. The raw information will be there, but content is important too.
How will this affect images? Images will be the same way. If there are two+ images already shown and presented in similar ways, the histories can be merged or one can be deleted. If an image doesn't properly display it's material, it can be retaken. Images are, of course, easier to be maintained when it comes to an IOS game (as the angles will be the same, it's all about the subject and the size). Though personal images could be seen differently. Either some personal images could be allowed per user, or the MediaWiki:External image whitelist should be changed to allow imgur/photobucket links (which is what I suggest doing, to keep the file namespace easier to maintain).
Now, this above is not supposed to be followed blindly. Use common sense when evaluating a page. Hopefully, the above can be implemented into the wiki. It'd be much easier for editing as well as creating pages and knowing what the standard is. It's something that I'd happily take a part in helping with. If you read through all of this, thanks, and happy editing.