Fallout Wiki
Fallout Wiki
Forums: Index > Wiki proposals and applications > The Decision to Leave wikia or not

We are finally in the position to call a vote on the future of the wiki and its relatiosnhip with Wikia.

We will be presenting you with 5 options:

  1. Full move to an independent site (Exodus)
  2. Joining with UESP (the Unofficial Elder Scrolls Pages) as an independent wiki sharing their platform
  3. A merger with The Vault on Gamepedia
  4. Not moving, but establishing red lines
  5. Doing nothing.

You'll be asked to rank these options in your prefered order.

We'll be presenting the factual pros and cons of each option, and I've asked each active bureaucrat to write a section detailing which option they think we should take.

With this vote, I will ask one thing of everyone. Do not simply vote with your heart, or your anger. Voting is the easy part. It will be up to you to make which ever option wins a success.

The Case for Change

This isn't just about featured video, but featured video is certainly the catalyst for this current situation.

  • Prior to its initial introduction, we made it very clear to Wikia that this community was generally hostile to video. We offered them assistance to help them through our bureaucratic processes to let you decide if you wanted it. They decided not to go ahead with that and introduce it anyway.
  • Prior to its initial introduction, we were promised sight of scripts. This promise was not met.

  • We were told that if we felt that we had to veto a video, this would be seen by them as a "failure" (although they didn't like the word "veto". Despite this being communicated the videos were unacceptable these were only removed AFTER media involvement.
  • The Videos were eventually removed temporarily.
  • Several months after the initial videos were removed, we were given a script to give feedback on. We made it clear that nothing had changed, and the community remained hostile. We asked for permission to show the email, and provided initial feedback. Our email to Wikia got... Lost apparently.
  • On the same day that Fallout 76 was officially announced, rather than providing us with actual positive assistance, asking us what help we could use from them... Wikia decided to take that opportunity to force the feature on us again. Admittedly this was limied to trailers, but these were clearly on the page already for those who choose to look at them - those who didn't want to got forced to have it on their screen, chewing up their bandwith, scrolling down with them as they try to escape. Pushing things they don't like on us when they should know we could use help is not a sign of a healthy relationship, but an abusive one
    • When challenged on this, our obvious outrage was called a "risk".
  • Wikia has not removed the feature, despite our repeated requests to do so. The closest we've gotten is an offer to prevent autoplay - the value of this is questionable given the tendancy of Web Browsers to add features that block autoplaying video
  • Wikia has promised to "listen" to us, but they haven'ts shown any sign that they have listened to date, beyond enabling Semantic Mediawiki as a gesture of goodwill... Their "vision" of the future shows they're not actually listening to us at all.
  • Wikia's software is woefully out of date, cannot handle modern extensions, and is no longer recieving important security updates. Wikia's only possible response to security holes when found, and law updates like GDPR is to remove features, like they have with access to Javascript, or the Monobook skin. Their interest seems to be developing non-wiki content, like discussions, or their editorial section.
  • Wikia appear to be stringing us along with their inaction. It seems they either hope that you'll forget about it, or that Fallout 76's Beta will be released and thus they'll "Win" by default.
  • It is questionable whether or not Wikia is interested in being a Wiki hosting company, they want to be a video company. We point to the following report in Variety on July 2 when Wikia bought "Screen Junkies", the brand behind "Honest Trailers"
Fandom chief content officer Dorth Raphaely said the company had been interested in teaming with Screen Junkies for about a year. “We’ve been targeting potential ways to get into the YouTube business,” Raphaely said. “We debated build-versus-buy, and in the end it made more business sense to partner with someone who’s built to reach exactly the audience we are.”https://variety.com/2018/digital/news/fandom-acquires-screen-junkies-defy-media-1202863221/

This followed on from a recent investment from TPG Capital over the Spring. By Wikia's own admission they "Put everything we make back into the company" (ie - don't turn a profit, or at least a cash profit). The company only seems to exist on continued new investment, that investment is used to become something "new" - a player in the "Youtube Business".

In short - video isn't going away. We're part of Wikia's strategy to get into the movie business

  • Despite repeated assurances that they see the "communities product" (thats wikis to you and me) as core to the experience, they've not offered any positive argument to remain, and have openly said they will be putting more video on the Wiki - without your consent.
  • We asked Wikia to come up with concrete proposals making it clear who is responsbile for what on the Wiki, and that control of content belongs to you - the users. Wikia have stalled on this, wanting initially a few "months" to reveal the plan for wikis in the future. We told them a couple of weeks, and they have not delivered. Agent C proposed something, they dismissed it out of hand and refused to negociate on it... they did however share us their "vision": We've asked them to respect the community's voice, they will not.

Wikia's vision of the future

You can read it in its entirerity here, but here are some key points/quotes:

  • We have been experimenting with and studying lightweight contribution options for some time now in order to increase the ease of wiki contribution without compromising the high quality of wiki contributions.. This seems to be refering to experiments like the "Lucy" editor. The Lucy editor removed the ability to add code and presented a WYSIWYG experience. Althtough it seems to have been removed, its worth noting this was turned on on several live wikis without even warning them first.
  • Crowdsourcing is also an important goal for us in the future. We are currently building out our Community Video Program so users can participate in Featured Video script writing. Translation - Featured Video isn't going anywhere
  • Additionally, it is one of our goals to find the best way to get communities linked with creators so fans can directly engage with them. We think that’s a key part of growing FANDOM communities as the preeminent destinations for their fandoms. This is a laudable goal, but they're already well behind the curve on this.
  • We also plan to ask the global community a big question: what are some things we can work on to make your lives easier as wiki editors? - Well, on a day where we could have used some help, they chose to throw a feature on us they knew we wouldn't like.
  • Another focus this year has been unifying the content experience so wikis, discussions, and editorial feel less like three distinct sites. One of the ways we’ll be doing that begins in the next few weeks, when we’ll be alpha testing a new Feeds feature on a small number of communities. There will be a new landing page of sorts for communities that includes information about the editing community, current discussions, and relevant editorial content all on one page so fans can quickly find all information about Fallout, for example. This doesn't sound like our wiki.
  • In June, we were also excited to announce the new unified FANDOM app. This app not only is a significant improvement on the mobile experience, but also our first look at how a unified FANDOM can perform. - This sounds like a beachead in removing the individual identities and cultures of each wiki.

None of the points in the vision addressed our problems - Editorial control of content, and forcing features on us we don't want. In fact, some aggrevate the problem further.

Wikia have confirmed there is no opt out from this vision, and they will not respect a community vote not to implement something

Pros and cons


Exodus involves us running our own MediaWiki server on our own domain (called the Exodus platform). Legally the platform is owned by Nukapedia Ltd (a company registered in England/Wales), in turn owned by Sakaratte and Agent c. There is scope to increase this represetnation and ownership if required (and interested), but in all practical terms the community completely run the wiki without any real intereference beyond what is tecnically neccessary. Despite his resignation Saka is committed to helping us establish the platform, and to help us manage it.


  • Total and Absolute control. Nothing happens that we don't want to happen. That means no featured video, ever, unless you decide you want it.
  • Seen something cool on a wiki elsewhere? Chances are we can implement it. We've already got First Person Views working.
  • Limited advertising that we're in control of.
  • If the Wiki chose to find new pastures, not a problem, Nukapedia Ltd is committed to not retain any content after the move is complete
  • We can support complementary wikis on the Exodus platform tha cover related subjects or games that don't fit into the core wiki
  • There is a slender chance that one day, far in the future this might make money, which would be ploughed back into the Fallout community.


  • I hope you didn't get too excited about the profit bit. In the short to medium term, this is going to cost money, someone is going to have to pay for it. There's a chance if it never pays its way it has to close down.
  • We can't compete on Marketing. Yes, we have the social channels, but SEO and Google Adwords cost even MORE money.
  • For the short to medium term, we have no dedicated staff - part or full time. Although we'll try to fix it if it breaks, we might be disttracted by those other jobs that pay the rent, and the server costs. We have some folk who can help us sometimes, but its no the same
  • There's a real chance we're going to split the community and/or lose members, and without the marketing budget to promote the wiki, its going to be even harder to replace those members.


For those unfamiliar with the Unofficial Elder Scrolls Pages, it is one of the best resources for TES lore out there. Its a huge wiki with a huge dedicated member base, and skilled editors and server managers who have offered to help us by hosting us.


  • High level of control, including Editorial control. We don't control the server directly, but instead we have a good, one to one, relationship with those that do, so some things might be out... For those that are, we still have the Exodus platform as a second, complementary, service. No features you don't want - ever.
  • More features we DO want. At the moment UESP's Mediawiki is a little behind (but not obscenely behind like Wikia's), but that leaves more extensions and options that are available - and UESP has home brewed some pretty cool features mapping options we can piggyback off. I believe there is a plan in place to update over time.

the advertisng on UESP isn't ridiculous. UESP would use the revenue to pay for us.

  • If the Wiki chose to find new pastures, not a problem. UESP would not retain a copy of the wiki
  • We can support complementary wikis on the Exodus platform tha cover related subjects or games that don't fit into the core wiki, in addition to working with UESP. This would likely include our discussions option (Vanilla)
  • USEP have a strong community and good skilled contributor that can help us, and would be a good community to mingle and cross promote with.
  • They have a proven platform, and have managed to survive a long time.


  • There's a real chance we're going to split the community and/or lose members. But, the UESP user base can hopefully help us plug gaps.
  • UESP can't do Wikia level SEO and Marketing, but we can hopefully make an agreement to cross promote each other to lean on their visitors

The Vault

This would involve a Merger with the wiki we either spun from, or spun out from us depending on your point of view. The Vault still has a strong reputation in the Fallout Community (particularly fans of the older games) as being a solid resource, and has been continuiously updated by Tag, Ant, and other members of The Vault admin team.

Backing The Vault is Gamepedia, which is backed by Curse, which is backed by Twitch, Which is backed by Amazon (Yes, that Amazon, the one you buy everything from), which is backed by Jeff Bezos.


  • The Wiki in some form already exists today. The Vault remains a strong brand with a lot of loyalty.]
  • They are strong on referencing - something some lore fanatics fault us for being inadequae on.
  • We've met with the Gamepedia Staff. They are responsive - When we've wanted to talk to them they've come back in days, sometimes even same day. The Wiki would have a responsible staff member at GP as a sort of "Account Manager'
  • They have a strong cooperative inter-wiki admin community, using Slack (its basically just like Discord, but for companies)
  • They use up to date versions of Mediawiki. They are at this moment one minor revision behind, and plan to upgrade to the next minor revision when it is declared stable by the mediawiki development team.
  • Seen something cool on another wiki - Chances are they can implement it. Its not as fast as doing it ourselves, after a nasty experience they've stepped up their vetting processes, but in principle they seem happy to add any extension that doesn't misbehave.
  • They've told us they've never forced any particular form of content on any community, and have no plans to do so. They see themselves as enables of great content.
  • They say not aware of any community choosing to leave their service over a dispute with the service itself
  • Gamepedia have Amazon levels of money potentially for marketing and SEO, plan to increase their experese. With our support they have a plan to pull ahead of Wikia for Fallout 76, which would then filter down to taking the overall lead
  • Advertsing for signed in users is reduced, and high activity users can get an ad free experience.


  • Merging is going to be a manual process. We have tens of thousands of pages we're going to have to sort through and work out which version stands.
  • Although we have the promise of ediorial control now, companies can and do change direction. We can't guarantee this wont happen again
  • If it did, and the wiki and Gamepedia could not resolve the dispute, they indicated they would leae the wiki in situ "for another community to find".
  • Gamepedia don't have a discussions solution, and don't allow "just anyone" to start a wiki. We could still support this through Exodus.
  • We may split the userbase, but Gamepedia and other wikis in the network can help us plug gaps in skills.

Setting red lines

THis is where we do nothing today, but set a clear set of guidelines that we would effectively challenge Wikia to cross. If they did it would trigger either an immediate moving process, or an immediate vote to move again.


  • This would require no change, would present no risk of splitting the userbase.


  • There is no guarantee Wikia would listen or respect these lines
  • In Fact, Wikia have already indicated that they wouldn't respect them
  • The lack of any direct action may actually embolden them to go futher, thinking that us taking further action is just "a risk", and that we are all talk and no action.
  • Alternatively, Wikia might view this as us "making threats" and take retalitory action.
  • We're still stuck with the video thats on there.
  • Wikia's vision of the future doesn't seem to fit in with us.
  • We'd lose the opportunity that Fallout 76 would present. The Wiki that on Beta and Release gets the best, most comprehensive articles up the fastest is going to be the one that users come back to. If any move happened after that started pouring in, attracting views is going to be much much harder.


As it says, we do nothing.


  • This would require no change, would present no risk of splitting the userbase.


  • We've given in to Wikia. More and more video will happen. Not one thing you can do about it.
  • The lack of any action may actually embolden them to go futher, releasing more stuff you don't want.
  • Wikia's vision of the future doesn't seem to fit in with us.
  • We'd lose the opportunity that Fallout 76 would present. The Wiki that on Beta and Release gets the best, most comprehensive articles up the fastest is going to be the one that users come back to. If any move happened after that started pouring in, attracting views is going to be much much harder.
  • Next window of opportunity is Fallout 5, whenever that might be.

Bureaucrat Statements

Agent C

I am advocating that we "Move In" with UESP.

I honestly believe this is the solution that solves our problems best. We'll have full editorial control of the wiki, we'll have the ability to move if it doesn't work, and we'll not have any features we don't want forced on us. Advertising will be limietd, and you can see already on UESP what it is likely to look like.

Community features are resolable in this solution, we'll be able to count on UESP for technical assistance, and they'll do muuch of the boring management so we don't have to.

Exodus I believe is viable, but I am worried about how viable it is. Promotion would be on a shoestring; with UESP although outside promoion might not be much more, we would have their wiki to cross promote on and hopefully share users with. Its better to go together, than alone.

I do like the team at Gamepedia, and if this was the "first split" without the baggage and problems that the past causes, then advocating for it would be much easier. To their credit they are a LOT more responsive with Wikia - when we say we want to talk, they're there usually the next day. They're focused on enabling creators to create great content, and are willing to put in the resources to do that. The've got a great support network for editors too. However, the "merge" process will mostly be manual... and although they've never had major issues that have lead a community to want to leave, we could very well find ourselves in the same position, and they wont commit to closing the wiki on their end if the commuunity chooses to leave.

This leaves Wikia. Before Featured video I was happy to advocae for wikia, and back when I was on their christmas card list happily recieved free merchandise from them. I really do wish this whole problem wouuld go away... However the talks with them I feel have just been that - just talk. They won't commit to removing the video, or ensuring our editorial independence. When they proposed sharing their plans for the future of the platform, they did not address our concerns, and promised more changes and no respect or the community's voice.

I'm also concerned about the future of Wikia as a whole. The Wiki platform has been left to rot, and wikia can only deal with changes and technical issues by removng features. They mentioned in their meeting with us they put everything back into the company - which is a coded way to say they're not making a profit. Their existence seems to rely on continued rounds of new investment, pivots, redirections and aquisitions (like the guys behind honest trailers).... To be honest I don't believe they know what to do with us. Whilst being "The Home of Fandom" is a laudable goal, I don't think they've got any idea how to get there.

And you might want to consider what this Director posted on Glassdoor:

TGP is sucking the life out of this place.png

As such, I encourage you all to put UESP as your first option, or high on your preference list.

The Gunny

I honestly don't have full confidence in any of the proposed solutions to the problem of Fandom forcing unwanted changes on the site, specifically in the article space. While I have the least conficence in Fandom to change their obvious position of imposing these changes with little regard for the editing base, I also have serious misgivings about any of the proposed split options. And that is part of why I lack confidence: it will once again split the community. None of the split options can replicate the non-core wiki functions fully. We can possibly support some of these on the exodus community site, but that is not fully idealized and implemented. Add in the problems with SEO, a continued lack of full control over content (with the exception of full exodus) I fear that any split will marginalize the remaining community into 3 wikis, each lacking because the user base that would contribute is spread between the three.

So, because I've not personally been able to decide the best course of action, I have decided the best I can do is support what the community decides. This is where my only caveat comes in: I need to see a mandate to support any new course of action. If the community rallies around one particlar choice, and it is crystal clear the great majority wishes to move a certain direction, I will support that choice fully and in any way I can. Without a clear mandate to split, I will then support that each user chose their best option and wish them the best. I will then be forced to decide myself which of the options I dislike the least, with one option for me being that I choose none, which is also an option for everyone. I am already forced, by real life cirsumstances, to be unable to contribute much as it is, I doubt I could support contributing to more than one option.

As it stands, I can't personally support any of the options available. I wait eagerly to see if the community can come to a clear mandate that I can fully support. I do greatly appreciate the efforts of the many who have worked very hard to realize the full exodus option and those who have negotiated with the other wikis over merging or moving hosting. Simply put, I wish we had not come to this situation, but that cat is out of the bag. I do recognize the need to do something, with serious concern that none of the options will fix more problems than they create.


My view on the Video situation is different to that of the other bureaucrats. Currently, the videos are on just 16 pages, the Fallout 3, FNV and the Fallout 4 add-ons. That's less than 0,1% of all the pages. I don't see the videos as a problem. I'm scrolling through many pages a day, and just every once in a while a video pops up, already I'm used to scrolling down without thinking much of it. The community is generally against the videos, but I believe that opinion comes mostly from popular talk in Discord. If you'd pick 100 random visitors from the million that visit us a day, I would be curious to know what they'd say. They're already used to it I think or won't even have come accross one. The situation isn't that bad. Video with advertising is spread all over the internet in much "worse" ways, on news sites, youtube and many more. You can't escape it. It's true they'll probably come in more numbers in the future, but that's no reason for me to advocate drastic action yet.

Just like the last time I was against a split, I'm once again opposed to it, also because it would divide the Fallout community further, spreading the forces thinner and consequently the content. I would really regret seeing that happen. It's not worth it (yet).

I can't help having a feeling of loyalty towards Fandom, they're doing a lot to keep this place running in the background, that's no small feat with 300,000+ wikis. I want to remain at Fandom, and I'm asking you to do the same. At the same time we ask Wikia to respect some red lines. They must have understood by now they'll need to deliver good quality videos, and I have faith that will happen.

The split towards the UESP platform sounds promising with new features, but it's just not the moment, we're leaving too much what is good behind, also our many loyal visitors. Followed by joining with the Vault, I have a lot of respect for them, but I wouldn't want to make a competitor stronger. Also wouldn't want to go through with Exodus, it's just too unsure moneywise and take a lot out of the bureaucrats that control it.


Nb - Although Sakaratte has resigned his position, this was drafted before the resignation. As he is a key part of the process and involved in every level I have decided to continue to include his statmeent - C

Although I have done a lot of the leg work on Exodus, my primary choice would be UESP, followed by Exodus and finally a remain at Fandom.

It may surprise some that I would even consider a remain at Fandom, but I don't think the line has been crossed far enough for it to become unattainable to remain. The featured video situation has been used against our wishes, but in a way many users will be comfortable with.

That said, I have noticed an increase in autoplay around the site, making me in part lower my edit rate when I'm out and about, they are sucking my data and if that is the path they wish to continue on, may cost us readers and contributors.

My view on UESP is similar to that of Agent C's: they have offered us Nirvana. We get to maintain independence, potential backend access and the flexibility to do what we want, how we want. There is the offer of some additional support, modifications to their own applications (for example their interactive, Google style maps) to fit our needs and potential whistles and bells, which would be nice, but are non-essential and we can live without. Any additional revenue is pumped back into the community at UESP and they have confirmed that they turn enough profit their own senior staff have never had to pay for anything TES related since.

Discussions is still a dicey issue, but we can potentially port vanilla forums or at worst build our own.

Exodus is the second option as like with UESP We have complete control, but take on the full brunt of a back end.

I have been fairly vocal against a move to Gamepedia, not for their staff, but because of splitting the userbase between two sites. That becomes difficult to manage and we lose the centralisation we currently enjoy. That aside I have concerns about what if they are bought out again and end up in the hands of a company similar to that of Fandom. Do we want to be back here in 5 years time, or do we want security?

Voting Process

Poll finished on 9:08 pm August 22, 2018 (UTC).
Icon vote.png
  • A consensus must be reached by voting before any action is taken.
  • You can vote by placing the following line in the appropriate section of the option you support:
    • # {{yes}} ~~~
    • # {{no}} ~~~
  • Please do not edit other user's votes.

The process for this vote is a little different than usual. We are using a preferencial system. You should put your vote in your first preference. You should then list your preferences in order

The option with the lowest number of votes will be eliminated, and the preferences distributed amongst the remaining options in that order. The option that gets 50% or more of the votes is the winning option.

In the event of there being a tied vote in the first or second round, all options tieing will be eliminated. From the third onwards, all options will be modelled to see if there is a consensus outcome - the option with the most "winning" outcomes in this case would win.

Example Vote:


First preference Option A - Exodus

First preference Option B - UESP

  1. Agent c (talk) 21:32, August 8, 2018 (UTC) BACDE
  2. User:CertifiedBagel
  3. |\| () |\/| /\ |) | Talk | Discord | NMC 12:41, August 9, 2018 (UTC) BACDE
  4. I feel as though action is needed. While there is a huge risk with leaving, I feel as though the freedom to build our own wiki is far more greater than trying to negotiate with people who we have had trouble negotiating with in the past. YukiHakimoto (talk) 15:44, August 9, 2018 (UTC) BCADE
  5. Blissymaster (talk) 21:33, August 9, 2018 (UTC) BCDAE
  6. User:Legofan94 23:13, August 9, 2018 (UTC) BCADE
  7. The Dyre Wolf (talk) 23:52, August 9, 2018 (UTC) BCAED
  8. There is risk, but with great risk comes great reward. I'm not stuck so much on the videos as I am their general attitude of trying to implement a dictatorship into a democracy. I have been a fan and member of UESP for ages and I truly believe this option offers the greatest reward for the least risk. StormRider71 (talk) 07:51, August 10, 2018 (UTC)
  9. Yes I've honestly wanted the main Fallout wiki to be closer to what the UESP is for years, now seems like a good time to make it so. —Freso (talk) 10:37, August 10, 2018 (UTC) BCADE
  10. --Теодорико (talk) 10:53, August 10, 2018 (UTC) BCDEA
  11. --User:The Philosoraider (talk) While I am not quite as bummed by the videos, I see Fandom's behaviour as a worrying sign of growing mismanagement and voluntarism in imposing their will on others. What else are they going to do next, force us to advertise their forays into corporate Youtubing? In this light, UESP is by far the most attractive option to me, loath as I am to risk another community split - I don't want to see the already fragmented Fallout fan family split further. The danger of a split is why I debated with myself what would the best way be, but after some thought, I feel joining the UESP model would be the best option. I've used their wiki for TES stuff for a long while, and am fully satisfied with their standards. However, I will also present due consideration to the other options, and thus vote: BDEAC.
  12. HSNataraj (talk) 19:08, August 10, 2018 (UTC) Having spent hundreds of hours on both UESP and Fandom Fallout wikis I welcome a common platform, hence my preference B. I assume that the move to a different environment is not only possible but would be tolerated & supported by Wikia/Fandom. Otherwise the voting is more or less moot - in that case, E would be the only viable option. Red lines are only useful if there is a good plan of action in case the red lines are crossed. BEACD
  13. User:Shaka1277 As discussed with C in Discord, I feel this is a solid, stable, sustainable option, potentially more than Exodus due to the maturity of the platform.
  14. Yes Colonel Autumnn (talk)
  15. Yes User:Tlb2k4 I don't honestly believe either D or E are an option as clearly there is enough dissatisfaction with current state that it'll only get worse and we'll be right back where we started. There also doesn't appear to be any interest in working with the community on things, so I don't see "red lines" as an option either. I love the idea of Exodus, but am not sure the climate is really right for that. I don't really have a strong thing either way regarding UESP vs. Gamepedia, however, I'll give the slight edge to UESP if only because you'll likely have less administrative channels to deal with. BCEAD
  16. Yes 1857a (talk) 15:14, August 11, 2018 (UTC) BACDE
  17. Yes -Teenbat (talk ¤ contributions) BADCE
  18. Yes User:Ghostrider2539 Love this wiki and UESP. Would love to see this wiki along side UESP. Maybe we could use their Map program to chart out the Wastelands.
  19. Yes I have good experience with UESP as a reader, it is a better option than going in the dark with Exodus. Silesian (talk) 14:58, August 15, 2018 (UTC)
  20. Yes Given the good relationship we have with UESP, and the dubious shakey history with the community on Gamepedia, NOTE: Not the developers, but the users on The Vault, I'm strongly in favor of this option. I'm a little late to the punch on the voting, due to other real life issues, but frankly, this isn't the first time Wikia has chosen to ignore its userbase, and each time it's happened, its alienated us more and more. I think the time to leave Fandom for good has come. ---bleep196- (talk) 17:56, August 18, 2018 (UTC)
  21. Yes Fandom will never listen to reasonable limits. The only thing that anyone can hope for is that they concede for a little while then do whatever they want again. Everyone here is a volunteer, and Fandom is using your free labor to make a profit. The least they could do is allow you to dictate how your pages will look. Splitting won't be easy, but you will never win with Fandom. They will keep pushing whatever line you set, and backing down now will only let them know they can fuck you harder. Metal Gear Mk. II.jpg "Anything, for the family" 03:58, August 19, 2018 (UTC)
  22. From what I've seen, FANDOM is an incredibly toxic environment, and the "Let's stall for time until this whole thing blows over" attitude that they have taken when dealing with Nukapedia convinced me that there is no hope of them improving in the forseeable future. In that case, I suggest jumping ship. Ssskoopa (talk) 14:20, August 20, 2018 (UTC) BCADE
  23. banana talk/wall timestamp: 14.05 universal time | 22 august 2018 BCDAE

First preference Option C - The Vault/Gamepedia

  1. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Obamacat.ind (talkcontribs) 22:10, August 8, 2018 (UTC). Please sign your posts with ~~~~! CDBAE
  2. Consolidation of efforts, especially on a platform as good as Gamepedia's, is always a good idea. The manual check for what's different on both will be hell, yes, but ultimately people will get the definitive Fallout resource, which I believe both teams wanted to do in the first place. PW_Signature_Nod_Emblem.png Sheldonist (yell!) 20:02, August 9, 2018 (UTC) CBADE

First preference Option D - Set Red lines to Wikia

  1. We have support, numbers, and a stable platform that we can’t give up quite yet. After that UESP, Exodus, Nothing, then lastly gamepedia. Pedro Washington (talk) 21:49, August 8, 2018 (UTC) DBAEC
  2. I'd like to avoid splitting the community if possible. I've been through one of those already, I'd like to avoid going through another. Richie9999 (talk) 21:52, August 8, 2018 (UTC) DEBCA
  3. The issue with running is we simply don't have the energy any more. All the support for splitting left, and I'm sure that support among those on the fence will falter even more now that all of its proponents have resigned before the decision to split or not was even finalized. Exodus does not seem viable, mostly in terms of cost since money needs financial backing or traffic, and traffic needs SEO, something we cannot get easily. Not only would we be competing with Wikia, but also Gamepedia. UESP is second on the results if you type "tes wiki" into Google, but they don't have a Gamepedia to contend with. Also note that even if a split occurs, be it with UESP, Gamepedia, or Exodus, I am liable to stay behind and attempt to regrow Nukapedia from the ashes regardless. - DBECA - Since I stated in my reasoning paragraph that I would be staying behind for the most part regardless of what won, I figured I would change the order of my vote to portray my own ideas rather than what I think is likely or best to occur to the wiki. Thus, my new vote becomes DEBCA Sigmund Fraud Talk Contributions 16:53, August 9, 2018 (UTC)
  4. Leaving for anywhere should only be accepted as a last resort. Fandom's behavior, including their "lost emails" and their corporate speak, show that they aren't too enthusiastic about our wishes, but the SEO and 0 costs involved outweigh much of that, IMO. My "red line" would be what we have now, and nothing more than that. I have no issue with trailers - after all, they are officially produced content from Bethesda. Like I've said before, I don't think we should even have the warnings up right now. But if Fandom decides to bring back the unprofessional, editorialized videos about Cait's ass or political jokes, that's when we should support moving. Of course, this is bigger than just Video, but, to embrace my inner English teacher, I see it as a symbol for how Fandom treats the wishes of individual wikis in general. But as it is, we need to prevent any kind of unnecessary split if it's not warranted. As long as Video sticks to the trailers, we stay. If it deviates, we go. DBECA DEBCA. Buy me lunch, Pally. AllYourFavorites (talk) 18:02, August 9, 2018 (UTC)
  5. I've debated with myself whether I should vote, having more or less just joined you folks, and I've decided to toss in my few cents. While I find Fandom's behavior worrying, the videos themselves don't bother me that much, and the sheer number of people voting for D or E scares me a bit. If it is at all representative of the nonvoting part of the community and who will stay if we leave, it could be crippling. Plus, it's not just the population split that worrying, but also the burnout of contributors who just decide not to edit either one anymore. While I'm hardly a star member of the community (yet), even I have felt hesitant to spend efforts editing, not knowing if it would matter. That being said, if we do end up needing to leave, I'm all for UESP, as I've been editing there happily on and off for a while. Exodus seems great in many ways, but it would require long term reliance on the goodwill and passion for a hobby that I've seen crumble all too often. I'd bet good money the "owners" are wonderful people and mean every word they say about supporting it, but life often has a way of making people change their priorities and it sounds risky for the long term. Lastly, while I obviously wasn't around for the last split, if it's as bad as people say, then even beyond the technical issues of combining with the Vault, it sounds like there might end up being some major fights over "territory" and style control. So I say make the best of a bad situation and try to get Fandom to work. We may lose some control and leverage when Fallout 76 comes out, but it's better than losing everything. -Caraamon (talk) 19:12, August 12, 2018 (UTC) DBAEC
  6. Here's my predicament with the options: userbase splits. Our options involve splitting the userbase further to some extent, or letting Wikia run their future vision. Knowing that the videos are meant to feature more in the future, I doubt it will be that long before changes roll around that impede us to a higher degree. All the same, despite the many flaws in site-side things (outdated software and removal of good features) and an attitude on Wikia's end that I'll just describe with 'careless', despite the fact that we've been given a glimpse of this ridiculous future vision, Wikia's infrastructure is strong and it's still here. I'm going to insert a brief comment here on the video feature: it isn't the content itself, it's the method by which that is at fault here. Trailers are not harmful, but their insertion without our consent is, as a short note. Now, even if we know that Wikia is unlikely to respect anything we vote on and has shown a marked disinterest in listening to this community, they won't exactly be rolling out all these new features before Christmas, so to say. It'll take a while before they all have taken place. If we decide to split out of here now, that's that. If we set some red lines instead, we might gain at least a bit of time to further prepare for one instead. Which split that is, I can't decide properly. The Vault means Gamepedia and Amazon, another company. Gamepedia's a solid platform, but lacks some things we have here now, and we'll be merging manually. Given that we're in a lot of work regardless, I doubt that the manual aspect is likely to weigh down a split too much in the long run. UESP would be a merge with a fairly independent host - a host with fewer raw means than Wikia or Gamepedia, but not tied to a company. Personally I'd rather we stay out of company-owned infrastructure, but not by much. Lastly there's the option of splitting off on our own, which burdens us with a backend, advertising costs and server management in general. We are in the end just a bunch of fanatics piecing together a server with no consistent resources. While I was initially inclined to prefer it over doing nothing, I'd sooner stay with Wikia and at least be in the big scary's (un)care than out there alone. As such, it's DBCEA on my end. Fire InThe HoleTalk 22:47, August 12, 2018 (UTC)
  7. Jspoelstra makes a good argument for this. I don't think the issue is out of hand as it stands, but there is reason to be concerned about it getting worse. We shouldn't be afraid to take action if we need to, but I'm not sure we're there yet. Full vote: DBACE. --FFIX (talk) 21:07, August 13, 2018 (UTC)
  8. Yes I believe that FANDOM’s direction is best for the discussions board, my “home” if you will. I also believe that in light of recent layoffs at FANDOM videos may be less of an issue. While I feel no one option can represent how I feel, I do wish for this community to remain as a whole. Laat the Survivor (talk) 01:33, August 15, 2018 (UTC) DEBCA
  9. Yes I feared this would happen. With such massive userbase - visitors that read articles per day - it is bound such marketing decisions will strike. But this site also has power, in sense to negotiate, something that most sites on the network are lacking. All I am saying is that if the videos are not going to be removed, at least you can say which videos can be approved or not. Doing nothing will continue on, and will add new features that abhor long-time editors. As the image points out, the company has a lot of in-fighting, so any higher-ups simply give orders what to do, with little to no indication what could happen to the userbase (or editors, whatever). I don't like this moving to another site, since that has happened already before. But it is your freedom to do that, too. My vote, then, is DAECB. ☢ Energy X ☣ 21:49, August 19, 2018 (UTC)

First preference Option E - Do Nothing

  1. Jspoel Speech Jspoel.png 21:45, August 8, 2018 (UTC) EDBCA
  2. DisgustingWastelander (talk) 21:51, August 8, 2018 (UTC) EDBAC
  3. silentWraith_291 {♤Niner Ace of Spades♤} (talk) 21:56, August 8, 2018 (UTC) EDCBA
  4. Paladin117>>iff bored; 22:06, August 8, 2018 (UTC) EDBCA
  5. As much as I don't like Wikia, I'm afraid another split would be fatal. - FDekker talk 22:07, August 8, 2018 (UTC) EDBCA
  6. Jgrsoto (talk) 22:48, August 8, 2018 (UTC) EDBCA
  7. User:Preston Freaking Garvey
  8. Saxhleel12 (talk) 23:49, August 8, 2018 (UTC) EDBCA
  9. This entire movement lost steam a good time ago. I think it'd be best if you all just stayed put and kept up the status quo, as it's clear that there is not a unified community on this matter. Better that than splitting again, and watching users just drift away because they've lost purpose. 寧靜 Fox.png 15:31, August 9, 2018 (UTC)
  10. Yes I'mTheArchitect (talk) EDACB
  11. Yes Ulysses the G (talk)
  12. Yes 12345678abcdefg (talk)
  13. Yes User:Ianthebean EBDCA
  14. Acj1225 (talk)
  15. I was around to witness the original split when the Vault left us. I remember the bad blood it caused and how many good friends and editors we lost when it happened. I still see some of the bad blood when I talk to some of the older members. For the sake of the community I think we should hold the line and keep trying to make things work with Wikia as long as possible. Rushing off would further splinter us. Leaving should be a last resort option, reserved for the event that something more severe comes along that further impedes our growth and success. Thelonedrifter0 (talk) 03:44, August 11, 2018 (UTC) EDCBA
  16. I understand the desire to fork. I dislike many of the decisions Wikia has made in the past few years, such as refusing to update to a new version of MediaWiki, changing the brand to FANDOM, and introducing the featured videos to our articles. However, I believe it is not in the best interest of the Fallout community for Nukapedia to jump ship from the Wikia network. If you self-host or join the UESP (whom I greatly respect, don't get me wrong), there will simply be three Fallout Wikis instead of two. With an even more split userbase, none of them will be capable of reaching their full potential. The community will just be stretched too thinly. Forking to Gamepedia would avoid this particular issue, but I'm afraid that hopping to another for-profit company would just cause these same forking discussions a few years down the line. Your best bet for the time being, I believe, is to stay on Wikia. The technology is old and the videos are annoying, but a second fork would do more harm than good. —Atvelonis (talk) 06:18, August 11, 2018 (UTC)
  17. I'm not exactly against the exodus, but at this point, I'm not really sure how breaking away from Fandom will solve the video problem. Even you leave, they will still be there until further intervention takes place. It's one thing if over half of these pages had the forced videos, in which case, there's a lot more justification, at least in my eyes. But for a few? I just think it may be far too early to jump ship. I think sticking with Fandom, for now, is the best option. KaiserofTheAzure (talk) 09:00, August 11, 2018 (UTC)
  18. Yeah, we do nothing. --The Superior Courier (talk) 09:48, August 11, 2018 (UTC)
  19. A move to any other platform may prove to be the death of us, I agree with Jspoel on the fact that I rarely see videos on any page atm, would like to point out that they're not terrible, well not all of them. If we had more control over the videos and actually had our own team producing them they might not be that bad of an idea in the future. Rebel427 ~ I'll be your huckleberry 21:40, August 11, 2018 (UTC)
  20. I've been on the fence about this for a while, but I feel like doing nothing is the best option. I don't feel like fandom has done enough to warrant an exodus. The videos and management are obviously pretty shitty (like most for-profit companies), but not enough to warrant splitting the community again. An exodus will just leave another tear in the community, and splitting into three different fallout wikias isn't that way to go. Skysteam (talk) 16:07, August 14, 2018 (UTC) EDBCA
  21. Gato-libre (talk) 01:32, August 15, 2018 (UTC) ECDBA
  22. Yes We can't afford to split the the Fallout community anymore then it already is. Jacob Frye117 (talk)
  23. Yes Level3Rogue (talk) 13:30, August 17, 2018 (UTC) ED
  24. Yes --UrbanAnge1 (talk) 11:33, August 19, 2018 (UTC)
  25. Yes I agree with Jspoelstra, the move is both unnecessary and an excessive reaction. I love this community. I have been here for years. I have had so many great experiences here. We have such a great community, we can't trigger a huge move over 16 videos. Let's preserve the community that has been here for years, that we all know and love. Let's keep our beloved Nukapedia, ladies and gentlemen. --Donald J. "Greenback Wall" Trump (talk) 02:29, August 21, 2018 (UTC)
  26. Yes User:PhantomMenace87

Excluded votes

  1. Yes Dragão Carmesim Red hammer and sickle.png 21:17, August 9, 2018 (UTC) - vote changed
  2. User:FalloutEngineer000 No pre-existing edits
  3. user:therockdragon) 12:47 August 12, 2018 (UTC) I agree with this response for this community, this was how i first found out what the perks where for fallout new vegas, it helped me choose which path i wanted to choose in fallout 4, it is what got me interested in the fallout series to begin with after i had done a bit of reserach, and i will fallow this community to UESP to help you out. BACDE No pre-existing edits
  4. user:detectivevalentine123 ive read a lot of the posts but never made an account before, After coming on today and reading this and seeing how wikia has treated the this wiki I think its time we go and go to EUSP. BACDE No pre-existing edits
  5. Eddiesmp (talk) 21:55, August 12, 2018 (UTC) EDBCA No pre-existing edits
  6. Yes Timewalkerauthor (talk) CBEDA No pre-existing edits
  7. To be honest, just do nothing for now. There are actually a few more advantages to staying on FANDOM, at least in my personal opinion. No community splitting, in my personal opinion, is not the only advantage: You guys won't need to rebuild the wiki elsewhere, wasting hundreds of hours for the (temporarily) same replica. Also, since this is the biggest platform containing wikis for many topics about games, movies, TV and more, you are most likely gonna gain more attention in here, especially for the fact that Fallout is a pretty big and popular topic. Not only that, but if you guys move, most people (readers, in fact), might not be aware of your wiki move, too. I mean, I don't really have a problem for you guys moving, it's just that I don't really recommend it, but if FANDOM is really being neglective to your responses and are using your wiki as their own tool for their experiements and preferences, then go ahead. Also, since the staff have more contact with me, I could be able to contact them for your desired changes. Anyways, it's all up to you, guys. Do whatever you want, but I don't really recommend it if you want a big reading audience and a community. ~Signed JustLeafy ( ͡| ͜' ͡| ) | USER WALL | 19:10, August 17, 2018 (UTC) - No pre-existing edits
  8. (c) finnbross 01:21, August 19, 2018 (UTC) I like fandom much longer. But i want Fallout Wiki to stay. - No pre-existing edits


In light of my recent I am going to abstain from voting, that said I know many might want to know the impact on Exodus with my departure. The short answer is nothing will change from what it was prior to my decision. Dakiatte (Talk): (Sakaratte's secondary) 21:50, August 8, 2018 (UTC)

I am also going to abstain from voting, as I feel there is no true neutral option provided that I can support. While I do agree with the concept of editorial independence, I am first and foremost a discussions board user. As such, I like the way FANDOM is headed in that regard. Laat the Survivor (talk) 01:16, August 9, 2018 (UTC) - vote changed

Well after thinking the whole situation through and recent events in PT and this wiki, i decided to abstain my vote. - Dragão Carmesim Red hammer and sickle.png 16:54, August 10, 2018 (UTC)

Still not sure what this vote is about: the header says "Decision to Leave wikia or not" - which has LEAVE as the important verb. Leave, as in: you keep the house, you keep the kids, I'm moving out. That means: all the tens (or hundreds) of thousands of databse entries that make up the content of the Fallout wiki REMAIN with wikia. The Leavers start a NEW wiki somewhere else. All content has to be created from scratch.

But then, only three lines into the text, the question reads: "5 options: - Full move to an independent site (Exodus) ..." Now we are talking about a FULL MOVE. Aside from the legal issues about IP, i.e. who owns the content (I assume: the respective authors) a full move means taking quite a few gigabytes of data out of their current databases, retain all relevant links, and feed those data structures into a new system with (maybe only slightly) different layout. From my experience, such a migration cannot work without the cooperation of the source Systems Admin.

When I read about unwillingness on Wikia's part to cooperate on relatively minor issues, what are they going to do when Fallout wiki with a million (?) user interactions per day (?) unilaterally decides to leave? The goose decides to take their golden eggs somewhere else?

Sorry if this has been covered somewhere else, but I think it really affects the decision space, i.e. what kind of action is feasible. HSNataraj (talk) 21:15, August 10, 2018 (UTC)

It's probably easiest for me to address this. As the Wikia licence is CC-BY-SA, making a copy of the wiki in full is completely feasible (and complete up to 6 months ago). The bulk of the work has been completed and from a legal standpoint there is no obstructions in us using the copy, after all the content will eventualy diverge from what is here. Gamepedia was cloned from here to complete a move to there.
As for which options are feasible, all of the above are feasible. Exodus and UESP are going to be similar in how they happen (per the above) a move to Gamepedia would require more human intervention.
The last two options are the least labour intensive. There is nothing to move, but it means working with Fandom. Sakaratte - Talk to the catmin 21:43, August 10, 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for the clarification. So we're talking about MOVE. Yeah, I'd like that. HSNataraj (talk) 22:16, August 10, 2018 (UTC)

What will happen to the other Fallout Wiki's? We have a common file repository. --FunGorn (talk) 08:52, August 16, 2018 (UTC)

I am equally concerned about what will happen to the interwiki's as much of what they have comes directly from us and if we uproot and leave behind these foreign wiki's it ultimately feels like we are damning them or forcing them on to something they may not want to be a part of. If we leave them behind and they struggle, is it as simple as letting them take content from our new "home" or do we try to bring them on? Do we keep people here to keep content updated for them? New homes could say "No, you may not share your content with anyone on FANDOM." What do we do to help THEM move with us or with out us? Fo4Sword of Wonders.png That's why no one will remember your name... 00:14, August 18, 2018 (UTC)
This wiki will remain and with it the shared repository. They won't lose that and are safe. If they wanted to move with us, then I believe they can (I am out of the loop on this now, so don't take that as gospel), if they don't they don't have to. Everyone has a choice and they can do what they feel is best.
As for the "No you may not share your content with fandom" issue.... There is this little thing called CC-BY-SA that means neither a host or wiki can decide that. The licence can't be changed if the content is taken to the new domain, so in reality the only way a new domain could stop that sharing is by starting from scratch with a brand new licence. Sakaratte - Talk to the catmin 10:07, August 18, 2018 (UTC)
I see, thank you for the response. I am just wonderng what would a move with interwiki look like? Would there be multiple pages for a singular pages such as Cat in various forms of languages, or would there be a translation on the main page of said page(s)? Would they have to completely merge with us if they move with us, or would they maintain their own wiki status on the new domain, such as the Polish version "Krypta", would they retain their own...I guess we could say sub-wiki ( I say that as I do not know if they are sub-wiki's of us or their own wiki), or would they remain "Krypta" on the new site? Sorry for the intense questioning, just wondering how this would play out on this topic. Again though, Thank you for responding Sakaratte, much appreciated. Fo4Sword of Wonders.png That's why no one will remember your name... 21:03, August 18, 2018 (UTC)
I'm going to be honest here, Interwiki moving hasn't been given that much thought. Although we had one interested IW, the plans that were made were based on a move to Exodus (and UESP iirc). They would have been on separate domains as their own wikis (I'm not a fan of calling them sub- wikis, they're no lesser wikis than us). From what I remember of talks with the vault, they were a little more picky and didn't want to take on an Interwiki that was likely to become inactive quickly.
Tl; Dr; exodus and UESP would have been fine with them being their own thing in their own place, Gamepedia would have been a little more picky. Sakaratte - Talk to the catmin 11:25, August 19, 2018 (UTC)

Long time lurker and new member talking, for what it's worth. UESP has always been amazing and seems to have what it takes to run a decent and independent wikia. I'd be happy to know that this community has moved in with them. --Xevidroid (talk) 15:35, August 22, 2018 (UTC)

Vote results

Option Total votes
Option A: Exodus 0
Option B: UESP 23
Option C: The Vault 2
Option D: Red lines 9
Option E: Do nothing 26

As per the vote rules, Option A: Exodus is eliminated as a result. With 0 votes, there are no preferences to distribute among the remaining options. No option gained a simple majority. This results in moving to the second round.

There being no tied vote, we move directly to the modeling detailed on the tables below.

For shits and giggles, I wanted to see what a distribution among the 4 remaining options looked like modeling them all against each other. This is in the table below.

User Vote Option B Option C Option D Option E
Agent c BACDE 4 3 2 1
CertifiedBagel B 4
NomadMC BACDE 4 3 2 1
YukiHakimoto BCADE 4 3 2 1
Blissymaster BCDAE 4 3 2 1
Legofan94 BCADE 4 3 2 1
The Dyre Wolf BCAED 4 3 1 2
StormRider71 B 4
Freso BCADE 4 3 2 1
Теодорико BCDEA 4 3 2 1
The Philosoraider BDEAC 4 1 3 2
HSNataraj BEACD 4 2 1 3
Shaka1277 B 4
Colonel Autumnn B 4
Tlb2k4 BCEAD 4 3 1 2
1857a BACDE 4 3 2 l
Teenbat BADCE 4 2 3 1
Ghostrider2539 B 4
Silesian B 4
bleep196 B 4
Denis517 B 4
Ssskoopa BCADE 4 3 2 1
Banarama BCDAE 4 3 2 1
Obamacat.ind CDBAE 2 4 3 1
Sheldonist CBADE 3 4 2 1
Pedro Washington DBAEC 3 1 4 2
Richie9999 DEBCA 2 1 4 3
Sigmund Fraud DEBCA 2 1 4 3
AllYourFavorites DEBCA 2 1 4 3
Caraamon DBAEC 3 1 4 2
Fire InThe Hole DBCEA 3 2 4 1
FFIX DBACE 3 2 4 1
Laat the Survivor DEBCA 2 1 4 3
Energy X DAECB 1 2 4 3
Jspoelstra EDBCA 2 1 3 4
DistustingWastelander EDBAC 2 1 3 4
SilentWraith 291 EDCBA 1 2 3 4
Paladin117 EDBCA 2 1 3 4
FDekker EDBCA 2 1 3 4
Jgrsoto EDBCA 2 1 3 4
Preston Freaking Garvey E 4
Saxhleel12 EDBCA 2 1 3 4
Janaschi E 4
I'mTheArchitect EDACB 1 2 3 4
Ulysses the G E 4
12345678abcdefg E 4
Ianthebean EBDCA 3 1 2 4
Acj1225 E 4
Thelonedrifter0 EDCBA 1 2 3 4
Atvelonis E 4
KaiserofTheAzure E 4
The Courier NCR for life E 4
Rebel427 E 4
Skysteam EDBCA 2 1 3 4
Gato-libre ECDBA 1 3 2 4
Jacob Frye117 E 4
Level3Rogue ED 3 4
UrbanAnge1 E 4
Donald J. "Greenback Wall" Trump E 4
PhantomMenace87 E 4
139 78 107 147

If we continue to remove options and distribute the votes among the remaining options, the 3rd round looks like this:

Option Distributed Total Votes
Option B: UESP 24
Option D: Red Lines 10
Option E: Nothing 26

If We then distribute Option D vote among Option B and Option E, we have:

Option Distributed Total Votes
Option B: UESP 29
Option E: Nothing 31

And one final way to look at this:

Option Distributed Total Votes
Those voting for an option to leave now 25
Those voting for an option to stay now 35

I'm going to ask the other Bureaucrats to certify the vote totals to make sure I didn't make a mistake before we discuss this between ourselves. After the bureaucrats discuss the results, we will post what we have decided the results mean, either as a group, individually, or both. I may then open this back up for other interested parties to dispute the results or the finding. The Gunny  UserGunny chevrons.png 00:34, August 23, 2018 (UTC)

The final word

After discussions with the other Bureaucrats (sorry it took so long) we have decided to take the poll results as they stand. The majority of users have voted to do nothing regarding the forced videos. We will be taking down the forced video apology template on all pages. We will form the video advisory board and attempt to work with Fandom on preapproving videos if possible.

A final word on the issue from me

I stated at the beginning of the vote that I would look at the results and see if there was a clear mandate to do anything. There was no clear mandate. While those opposing leaving outnumber those supporting a move, I can't personally advise anyone on a single path. You are all free to do as you please, which was always the case. If some of you desire to edit elsewhere, you reserve that right. If some of you desire to open a fork at UESP, you have that right. Those who wish to stay will do so, so this wiki will continue to be supported by the admin team that remains. I have clearly heard all side of this issue and will take everything into consideration in our dealings with Fandom on the issue of video and anything else that comes up. For now, I consider the matter closed from an official standpoint, each of you are free to do as you desire. I will open this back up for anyone who wishes to comment on this vote, but any new business relating to this issue should be done in a new forum, please. The Gunny  UserGunny chevrons.png 23:45, August 28, 2018 (UTC)

My two cents

Folks, I went through one split already back when this place was still the Vault. That time around I didn't feel like the userbase had a whole lotta say (I could be wrong, coulda missed it), but one thing I liked about this time around was that we discussed it as a community, there was an openness to how we were going to do things and what options were on the table. That being said, unless there was a very clear majority in favor of leaving Fandom, I wasn't a fan of the idea of leaving. Without the community -editors and visitors- a wiki stagnates, and the only real way a fork could succeed here is if the community had supported it, but that support wasn't really there. Richie9999 (talk) 01:01, August 29, 2018 (UTC)