Forum:The Decision to Leave wikia or not

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

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.

Advantages

• 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.

Disadvantages

• 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.

UESP

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.

Advantages

• 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.

Disadvantages

• 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.

Advantages

• 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.

Disadvantages

• 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.

Advantages

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

Disadvantages

• 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.

Nothing

As it says, we do nothing.

Advantages

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

Disadvantages

• We've given in to Wikia. More and more video will happen. Not thing one 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:

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.

Jspoelstra

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.

Sakaratte

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).

• 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:

• Agent c (talk) 21:08, August 8, 2018 (UTC) BACDE

Votes

First preference Option B - UESP

1. Agent c (talk) 21:32, August 8, 2018 (UTC) BACDE

First preference Option C - The Vault/Gamepedia

1. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Obamacat.ind (talk • contribs) 22:10, August 8, 2018 (UTC). Please sign your posts with ~~~~! CDBAE

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) DBAEC

First preference Option E - Do Nothing

1. Jspoel 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

Comments

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)