Forums: Index > Wiki proposals and applications > Video module plebiscite

Wikia has asked us for our views on the addition of a "Related Videos module" that would appear in the right side rail of all pages on the wiki. You may find more information in this forum. Take a moment to familiarize yourself with the new feature, and the forum responses made by many of our editors. Please voice either your support or opposition to the addition of the new feature in the following poll.

Poll finished on 2:02 am October 6, 2012 (UTC).
  • A consensus must be reached by voting before any action is taken.
  • You can vote by placing one of the following lines in the appropriate section:
    • Use # {{yes}} ~~~ if you support the proposal.
    • Use # {{no}} ~~~ if you are against the proposal.
    • Use # {{neutral}} ~~~ if you wish to abstain.
  • Please do not edit other people's votes.

Do you support the addition of the "Related Videos module"?


  • Icon check Think it through. Some of the editors here have not played Fallout 1/2/Tactics, so it would be a nice addition to have those videos. Second, it might increase the traffic around here. Third, if we are based only on "usefulness", why do we have a chat feature? Energy X 09:29, September 29, 2012 (UTC)
  • Icon check This may be be useful. Rushed walkthroughs and examples would be great for people who have trouble with the game and can have a simple and easy solution with easy access. Sometimes worded explanations don't really get to most people and can resort to this.--The7thCourier (talk) 13:12, September 29, 2012 (UTC)


  • Icon cross To me, I see this as another step Wikia is taking for making the sites more hip and modern so to speak. I feel the module wouldn't be necessary. Besides, would it possible that it would link to unreliable walkthroughs or contradicting info? I love Wikia, but I don't feel the same about this move.--Bunny2Bubble 02:08, September 29, 2012 (UTC)
  • Icon cross For the potential benefits that this may bring, we must consider that videos of any kind (besides official content) corrupt the strict objectivity of the wiki's content and dilute our inveterate "no strategy" policy, even if it is not the main point of a video. I believe right now we are perfectly fine without it. --Skire (talk) 02:25, September 29, 2012 (UTC)
  • Icon cross The Video Module is on Megami Tensei wiki and it is a huge pain in the butt to manage, and there's really no way to control it until after someone had uploaded somehting undesirable. The YouTube extension is easier to manage anyway. UserGreatMaraMessage 02:29, September 29, 2012 (UTC)
  • Icon cross I hate ads, it doesn't matter what kind. I hate any and all ads, and they do not belong here. Pigeon Approved "Hail to the Pigeon!" 02:38, September 29, 2012 (UTC)
  • Icon cross Pointless. ~ Toci ~ Go ahead, make my day. 02:43, September 29, 2012 (UTC)
  • Icon cross I can see it being potentially useful on some wikis, but I agree with the others, I can't see this being useful on this wiki. Paladin117>>iff bored; 02:46, September 29, 2012 (UTC)
  • Icon cross There're many good points brought up here that further supports my opinion of no. KnowledgeProspector (talk) 02:54, September 29, 2012 (UTC)
  • Icon cross I don't like the idea of having it, but I could deal with it. However, I can't handle Wikia making a feature like this mandatory when it is a fact they could make it optional. It starts with message boards and video sidebars, and where does it stop? - CC 4 Star Dragon Ball Edit 03:26, September 29, 2012 (UTC)
  • Icon cross I have to deal with it on other wikis and it's all bullshit videos that are beyond pointless and make them seem relevant. Detroit lions Hawk da Barber 2012 - BSHU Graduate 03:38, September 29, 2012 (UTC)
  • Icon cross My reasoning is simple, we can already have videos in articles if we want. Or if not in articles, then we could create a page listing all the videos we want. The important thing is, we have a choice about whether or not we are going to display those videos, control over their quality, and users have a choice about whether or not they are going to be shown those videos. None of that will be had with a compulsory module. Limmiegirl Lildeneb Talk! ♪ 15:38, September 29, 2012 (UTC)
  • Icon cross I don't see it as necessary at all, our current system for videos is fine as is, of which we rarely make use of videos in articles anyway. Not to mention we would require more dedicated staff members to watch the video uploads for poor quality or irrelevance, draining resources away from articles themselves. This just seems like a bad idea, from any stance, if we so wanted more videos there are thousands of articles with none, we simply do not need a special module to do so. Neko-signature Gothic NekoNeko's Haunt 17:16, September 29, 2012 (UTC)
  • Icon cross As per Ryan, I think this is something we don't need. It's not necessary. RamboRob196 (talk) 23:43, September 29, 2012 (UTC)
  • Icon cross While I think this has some merit in principle I don't think it provides a good enough service to the wiki at present. Conflicting guides and occasional unrelated content would be disadvantageous, as we have no control over the content being presented. From a business perspective I understand the need for ads to provide wikia as a free service, but we already function with numerous ads and I think they are sufficient enough. FollowersApocalypseLogo Apocalypse Now! 03:54, October 1, 2012 (UTC)
  • Icon cross As it stands, as far as my understanding of how this will work goes, I have two reservations: Being forced to have the module on a wiki that by our own rules limits the use of video to a few specific things; the access of uploading videos by anyone. While having some videos could be OK, as long as they meet our guidelines, having no control over the uploaded videos, other than having to constantly watch for and delete videos that do not meet our guidelines, is what's problematic for me. As the video policy currently stands, there are very few videos that could be uploaded that meet those guidelines. Unrestricted uploading of low quality and non-compliant videos may flood us with tons of {{delete}} tags, especially when the next game comes out. The Gunny  380px-USMC-E7 svg 20:35, October 5, 2012 (UTC)
  • Icon cross Why has I not seen this before? In any-case, I think that the inclusion of Videos will only bring forth extra work for all our admins and other users wishing to with stand our current guidelines in place against videos, images, and strategy. More work then it would be worth. --3 of Clubs "This is my road, you'll walk it as I say" 20:40, October 5, 2012 (UTC)
  • Icon cross Kingclyde (talk) 21:57, October 5, 2012 (UTC) I oppose this because it removes our ability to control what kid of videos get uploaded here. We have a policy against uploading strategey videos or adding strategy in general to articles. If this module is active anyone can bypass that policy and there is nothing we can do about it. Not to mention someone can upload offensive content and we will have to rely on wikia to find and delete it. I vote no on this.


  • Icon neutral I'm inclined to be against this until or unless we can have a level of video content we can be confident enough in to display good results. I do not believe this is the case, and I am not sure if this ever could be achieved. Agent c (talk) 13:33, September 29, 2012 (UTC)
  • Icon neutral I'm not entirely against or in favor of it. I've some experience on it on the XCOM wiki and sort of think that as long as quality is garanteed and it's not flooded with videos just anyone can put on there, it could be an improvement. We would need good control over it, like admins being the only one adding a video, after a request from a user of adding it themselves. I do hope they don't make it mandatory though. Jspoel Speech Jspoel 20:15, October 5, 2012 (UTC)