Forum:Moving

Pros

 * We will be rid of Wikia Staff.
 * We will be rid of useless Wikia features such as the Blogs.
 * We will be able to have much more control over what we do.
 * We won't have the Oasis skin and the new suckish Terms of Use.
 * We will keep all of our articles and depending on the new host we have, all of our edits and the like.
 * Did I mention no Wikia Staff or useless features?
 * No advertising of other wikis, that not only have nothing to do with ZP but also take up space.

Cons

 * As Joe said, we will lose traffic.
 * Wikia will keep all of our articles and data, we can only copy it, not delete the whole thing.
 * We won't be able to use zelda.wikia.com, but that won't matter anways simply stating it.
 * We might have to use ads depending on our new host.
 * We won't have Monaco either way.
 * Connection with Wikia will stop, we'll be on our own.
 * The new servers might be unreliable.
 * We might also lose users in the move, either because they don't want to re-register or they like the new skin too much.
 * If you like the useless Wikia features then you'll be out luck.

Options

 * Stay on Wikia. Learn the Oasis skin, and redo our articles so they can better fit the fixed width and such.(Ehh, as I've said, this really hasn't been working out for us. Plus even if the active users use Monobook, most of our viewers will see it in Oasis.)
 * There are several other Wikia Farms, but Shout Wiki seams to be the most reliable that I've noticed.
 * We could have one of us put this on a server and run it. It would allow direct control of ZP, but we'd probably end up with a super laggy server like ZW.
 * Merge with ZW.(Not that I want to, but it is an option)
 * Suggestions?

Comments
Any suggestions for what we might do? Also, what other Pros and Cons are there?-- C  2  / C C  01:06, October 11, 2010 (UTC)


 * If there is a way to do a 100% full transfer of all the articles and files then I wouldn't have a problem with it. --Birdman5589 (talk) 04:17, September 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * I think there would be, but it may take a lot of work. - Is drak  thül  04:18, September 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * We'd have to carefully weigh the pros and cons of remaining Wikia affiliates. Which, of course means that due to there being few to no pros (except myself) it might be a good move if the transition process isn't too bothersome. Of course, whoever had the original idea does not seem to have a realistic grasp on the situation. --Auron  Kaizer !  18:57, September 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm all for it. I think at this point, getting a dump of the Wiki and moving it elsewhere seems a hella lot easier than reformatting articles. However, ZW may prove troublesome if there ends up two independent zelda wikis. -Stars talk  http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y27/pyroac/Starssprite.gif 18:26, October 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * I want to switch. But like Stars said, ZW probably wouldn't be happy. --Jazzi BassJapas Japas Artwork.png 21:03, October 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * The new skin looks terrible and there is no way we could possibly run with it. That being said, another pro would be getting rid of that stupid wikia ad that says look at whats hot in gaming... worst ad ever --Hydropanda (talk) 02:56, October 11, 2010 (UTC)

I have located a Wiki farm for us to move to, it uses wiki coding and transfers everything, including edit count and files. All that is required is a data dump and its can be handed over to the shoutwiki staff and they will move everything.Echo 1125 (talk) 22:36, October 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * You know what? Screw Wikia, I'm tired of having to depend on little ol' undependable them for everything, all the while having to put up with their hypocrisy and forced "innovations". I'm all for it at this point. --Auron  Kaizer !  22:39, October 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * I be in agreement with AK -Minish  Link  22:40, October 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * I, for one (and maybe only one), don't have much of a problem with the new look; it mixes things up and makes it seem fresh and, maybe even, easier (be aware, though, that I haven't used the new look that much yet; this is basically my initial response). Moving away may make things too different and attract fewer new users. T h e Midna Laughing.png ™ 23:27, October 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * Definitely not easier. There is no way to have a customized navigational thingy like the sidebar that I am aware of, and the navigation system that is there is horrible. Freshness is all well and good, but do you think it will be fresh a year from now? Supporting the skin based solely upon freshness is illogical. Also, do you think that the skin is good enough to justify a complete replacement of Monaco? - Is  drak  thül  01:11, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, TM, you're entitled to your own opinion, of course, but I'll have to disagree on all counts. Everything that the current look does right, the new one does wrong. As for the moving notion itself, assuming what Echo found is all (s)he says it is, I fully support. Actually, I support anyway, but complete tranfer just makes things much easier. Wikia's never helped us much, ever. And with all this recent IRC crap... I can't really think of any reason to stay affiliated with Wikia other than that it could bring more traffic to the wiki, but meh. Having a half-decent wiki skin and not being associated with them is way too good to not agree with. By the way, is there some sort of regulation on stuff we'll have to get rid of (like MyHome since Wikia sort of "invented" that... not that anybody'd miss it, but you know)? Or is there no copyright on that sort of thing?  Xykeb   Yvolix   Zraliv  04:37, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * The look is horid. I have bad eyes as it is, and, although I've never tested it with my glasses, how do I know. I get headaches easily. I can't find anything and it isn't fair. The editing is harder to do. I'll test it on my computer when I get back from school, but as of now. It's just, bad. --Jazzi BassJapas Japas Artwork.png 13:25, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not buying this whole move thing at all. Moving and operating your own wiki is much harder than it seems (not even ZW does that. They are operated by ZU). So unless this wiki farm is literally a wikia-esque wiki farm where mostly everything is set up from the get-go, we have a problem. And if that is the case, we are just putting ourselves in the same position as we are in already, so there's may be no real point to do so at all with the risk. Second, this will kill our traffic. A lot of people use this over the others simply because it is part of wikia. So in that sense, we will lose that traffic. In another sense, we will lose traffic by potentially dropping to the bottom of Google search when we start a new wiki. Third, this would leave room for another wiki to sprout up using wikia in our place. And though they will likely never catch up to us, it is possible to gain a lot of info in a short amount of time as seen with our expansion alone. There is a lot more I have to say dealing with wikia itself, but not a lot of time. But bottom line, this is not a good idea to just jump on without a lot more discussion first. --EveryDayJoe45 (talk) 15:17, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * Joe brings up a good point. Also, if we do move, we should first have a clear consensus (or really close to one) about moving. I'm not for or against moving; but, if I had to pick, I would choose against at this point. I am against the lack of Shout Box in the new look, though. T <font color="#996600">h <font color="#CC6600">e Midna Laughing.png ™ 22:09, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * Every point that Joe mentions are the reasons I'm not fully behind a move. At the same time, I've tried using the new skin and navigation is horrible. The articles are so crammed by the fixed 4x3 aspect ratio. Along with the aspect ratio, The space for the article is even narrower as about a third of that space is used for the side bar. It makes that articles look as if you were reading them off of a mobile device. Maybe there is a way to make the new skin not so bad to work with but as it is now it makes it difficult. There is good reasons of each decision so that's why I'll move if we move and I'll stay if we stay. --Birdman5589 (talk) 22:25, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * It's not just the new look, to be perfectly honest... Wikia's been pissing me off for months. Their ideas are getting progressively worse and more mandatory. They've never been supportive of us when we actually need them, either; they freaking sided with SHADE LINK over us. Yes, Joe brings up good points, but I for one value a decent-looking, crappy-innovation-less, possible-to-navigate-without-having-a-seizure wiki over a popular, high-traffic one. Of course, it's all a matter of perspective anyway.  Xykeb   Yvolix   Zraliv  22:47, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeesh, I need to check the forums more often...but since the notion of moving came up, I've been in favor of it. I really haven't said much on the subject, but Wikia is doing precisely the kinds of things I hate seeing in administrative powers in general: forcing change on people without any real consent, emphasizing accommodation for n00bs who do nothing productive anyway, and forgetting the importance--heck, the meaning--of efficiency, to name a few. First decent opportunity we get, I am completely, totally in favor of moving.


 * To comment on Joe's points, based on what I have seen on ShoutWiki, there isn't much we would have to set up on our own. While we would definitely lose a lot of traffic, this may be recovered over time. Personally, I'm fine with using advertising to achieve this (isn't that the main purpose of the YouTube pages?), but others may feel differently. Lastly, it looks like most of us are willing to move, which would leave this site largely unoccupied. Without an active base of regular users, it would take a long time for anything serious to get going again here. Jedimasterlink (talk) 07:30, October 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * I am not experienced enough to know the right thing here, but I would support a move if we could somehow keep our accounts. Phantom  ' Zelda
 * While I would personally like to try out the new Oasis coding to see if it is any good, the feedback doesn't seem like it. Either way, I'm all for a move. To be quite honest, I'm all for any wiki farm that doesn't incorporate blogs and social networking site stuff. - McGillivray  227  23:01, October 8, 2010 (UTC)

I really hate the new skin. The navigation is piss poor, and it crams all the articles into a very small and narrow and lenghty page. It looks horrible as well. Another thing about this "New Look" is that admins won't be able to make custom changes to the layout of the page due to the new Terms of Use. So not only will it look bad, but we won't be able to customize it. And the way things look now, we will be loosing Monaco :( for sure. But I'd prefer to have Monobook and the admins have complete options to customize the wiki, than this new skin. Also, we will loose this domain name, so we would have to figure out a new URL too. Ohhhh, and another thing, Wikia will keep all of our articles. ALL OF THEM, so there is no cut and run, just a copy of the entire data we have and redirect zelda.wikia to our new URL. What Joe said is also true, we will lose traffic, and we might have to start using ads to pay for the cost.

Now if you go to your Preferences and go to Skin and switch on the new look, it will show you exactly what Oasis entails and how awful it is. I'm using it right now and it really is the crapshoot. So we gotta make up our minds, is the new skin + less control really worth the extra views? -- C  2  / C C  18:14, October 10, 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, the new URL will be dependent on the wiki farm we move to. For instance, the URL would be something like www.zelda.shoutwiki.com if we moved to Shoutwiki (which seems like the most likely option). - Is drak  thül  18:24, October 10, 2010 (UTC)
 * Shoutwiki looks like a viable option to me, from what I've seen. I'm all for it if we can reach a consensus. Jedimasterlink (talk) 20:36, October 10, 2010 (UTC)

In response to Joe, we won't have to worry about another Zelda wiki cropping up here if we move. As long as an admin continues to post here occasionally directing people to the new site, Wikia cannot touch ZP -<font color ="#68E0D0">Stars <font color ="#187868">talk  http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y27/pyroac/Starssprite.gif 20:15, October 10, 2010 (UTC)
 * Good point stars. It might be hard to keep up with it and directing everyone, but it technically could work. --EveryDayJoe45 (talk) 20:40, October 11, 2010 (UTC)

<!--

NIWA
Although I do not edit this wiki as most of my knowledge of the Zelda universe comes from here as I only have two games, I do still consider myself a Zelda fan and an observing member of this wiki (I have plans to become more involved). As such I give this idea, which I do not see already on this page, to you. That is, to join NIWA (Nintendo Independant Wiki Alliance). It has eight members including Super Mario Wiki and another Zelda wiki, Zelda Wiki.org, which I am suggesting a merger with. There are also plans to move Smash Wikia to SmashWiki as a NIWA wiki for the same reasons as this wiki (see here).  AM666999 <font style="color:#f9f9f9;background:#000000;">talk 23:13, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * ...Us? Merge with ZW? ............Yeah, I can tell you haven't been around long. There's a reason that idea wasn't already on this page. The two wikis are not exactly on the best of terms... besides which, we're not looking to merge with another wiki, just to move our own content somewhere else.  Xykeb   Yvolix   Zraliv  23:23, October 8, 2010 (UTC)


 * I don't mean to sound rude but that just seems totally against the entire idea of a wiki... Personal disagreement/conflict should not get in the way of wiki-type encyclopedias.--  AM666999 <font style="color:#f9f9f9;background:#000000;">talk 23:31, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * Which it would if we merged with them. We're at a very good neutral point with them right now where they don't have to take our crap and we don't have to take theirs. Besides of which, there's the matter of formatting to consider. Perceived quality aside, the two wikis are just too different in how the articles are written. Merging would be more bothersome than staying apart. The merge itself would get in the way of wiki-type encyclopedias, in other words.  Xykeb   Yvolix   Zraliv  23:45, October 8, 2010 (UTC)


 * Ah, I see what you're getting at here. However a more general approach to merging may not be so bothersome. If you joined the NIWA partnership and had a sort of friendly alliance with Zelda Wiki within NIWA then a direct wiki merger would not be nessecary. Without meaning to sound "hippy" a friendly standing with someone is better than a neutral one. Please consider these ideas un-biasedly.--  AM666999 <font style="color:#f9f9f9;background:#000000;">talk 23:50, October 8, 2010 (UTC)

Also you haven't really given me any real reason for knowing why there is a disagreement anyway, other than the format of pages so I do not see why two good Zelda wikis could not be joined in some kind of partnership. Zelda is the only subject for which I have two links to wikis on my Google toolbar lol.--  AM666999 <font style="color:#f9f9f9;background:#000000;">talk 00:07, October 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * While I personally don't have a whole lot of opinion on the matter there are many people here that would greatly object to any sort of affiliation with ZW. I think there's been way too much conflict between the wikis for people to just let it go and cooperate. Say what you will about unproductivity, but I just don't see that as a viable option for us. And as for the part you just added, the format of the pages is the least of the problems. The two wikis have had a lot of conflict over the years over something or another. It's not a logical thing, we just frankly don't like each other a whole lot. Also many Zeldapedians think that the quality of ZW articles is subpar and vice versa.  Xykeb   Yvolix   Zraliv  00:13, October 9, 2010 (UTC)

I'd still like to see what others on this wiki have to say and please remember that there are several of options regarding NIWA with differing levels of association with ZW. The option which has the largest association with ZW (and the least likely) is of course a direct merger. Then there is direct association with ZW, becoming a member of NIWA, or becoming an affiliate with NIWA. Also remember that if the wiki joined NIWA it would not only join the wiki with ZW, but also Super Mario Wiki, Bulbapedia, Smash Wikia (moving to SmashWiki as a member of NIWA), and all the other members and affiliates of NIWA.--  AM666999 <font style="color:#f9f9f9;background:#000000;">talk 12:55, October 9, 2010 (UTC)


 * Actually I don't think becoming a member without direct association is possible (as NIWA only has one wiki per subject) but by direct association I do not mean merger and affiliation is also possible. A direct association with long-run (no rush) plans for a merger into one compromised wiki would be possible and not too difficult. By suggesting these possibilities I am trying to expand options, not limit them.--  AM666999 <font style="color:#f9f9f9;background:#000000;">talk 13:10, October 9, 2010 (UTC)


 * Look, we ain't joining. Get over it. --<font color="#00BFF3">Jazzi <font color="#35077D">BassJapas Japas Artwork.png 13:14, October 9, 2010 (UTC)


 * Now that does limit them. Please try to give a reason rather than just say "shan't". No offence. --  AM666999 <font style="color:#f9f9f9;background:#000000;">talk 13:31, October 9, 2010 (UTC)


 * And in no way am I saying that NIWA is the only option. You will probably all come up with some amazing idea for the wiki, but to do that you should get all the possibilities in first, then whittle them down.--  AM666999 <font style="color:#f9f9f9;background:#000000;">talk 13:34, October 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * Nobody wants to join ZW. There's bad blood. There's no way in hell that we're joining them. --<font color="#00BFF3">Jazzi <font color="#35077D">BassJapas Japas Artwork.png 13:34, October 9, 2010 (UTC)


 * Bad blood? Whose blood? You're all just Zelda fans wishing the same thing: to have a comprehensive Zelda encyclopedia, with nothing but an ongoing seies of petty disagreements keeping you from a united goal. Disagreements like that exist not because of some underlying "bad blood" but simply because you believe there to be "bad blood". You may try to aviod it by avoiding them, but as long as negative feeling exists between you, then the argumets will exist.--  AM666999 <font style="color:#f9f9f9;background:#000000;">talk 13:45, October 9, 2010 (UTC)


 * And anyway, why should negative feeling exist? It's not like you know one another...--  AM666999 <font style="color:#f9f9f9;background:#000000;">talk 13:50, October 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * Bad blood as in there have been complete copying incidents. And I don't have the time to deal with your constant shoving of us joining ZW. So you should just leave. And do you mind making your freaking edits all at once. --<font color="#00BFF3">Jazzi <font color="#35077D">BassJapas Japas Artwork.png 13:51, October 9, 2010 (UTC)


 * So what? Wikia copies from wikipedia all the time. All it shows is that you had good info they needed. All the more reason to work together. I'm not even going to bother arguing against leaving, wikis evolve because people have ideas, and rows happen because they disagree over them. As for making my edits all at once, well I can't help being online at the same time as you.--  AM666999 <font style="color:#f9f9f9;background:#000000;">talk 13:56, October 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't have the energy to deal with you. You're just a stupid person trying to convince us to join ZW, the last time this was suggested. It didn't work. It ain't gonna work this time. --<font color="#00BFF3">Jazzi <font color="#35077D">BassJapas Japas Artwork.png 13:58, October 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * So you're fine with plagiarism? - Is drak  thül  14:00, October 9, 2010 (UTC)


 * No, but it's not like any one person made the work in the first place. It's pretty much free information. Not that I'm saying that mabye they shouldn't have asked for permission first, put a template at the top of the page giving recognition, or put the work "in their own words", but still, it's not worth not realising that their goal isn't the credit of the work, it's the complete-as-possible zelda encyclopedia.--  AM666999 <font style="color:#f9f9f9;background:#000000;">talk 14:06, October 9, 2010 (UTC)


 * You're all getting worked up about not joining ZW when the original idea was really just NIWA, and just an idea. Seriously, this is how many wars start. No one can bear to hear an idea that doesn't match their own, myself included. But I try to bear them.--  AM666999 <font style="color:#f9f9f9;background:#000000;">talk 14:14, October 9, 2010 (UTC)


 * If you extend a friendly hand to someone, you would be surprised how willing they'd take it. And BTW, I'm not preaching. I'm athiest.--  AM666999 <font style="color:#f9f9f9;background:#000000;">talk 14:18, October 9, 2010 (UTC)


 * Frith be damned! Look, if we're moving, we're going to ShoutWiki. Not NIWA. Not ZW. They tried to merge us and ZW before. Drop the idea boy. -<font color ="#68E0D0">Stars <font color ="#187868">talk  http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y27/pyroac/Starssprite.gif 14:33, October 9, 2010 (UTC)


 * "Zeldapedia is a collaborative encyclopedia for everything related to the Legend of Zelda series. There are 4,095 articles and growing since this wiki was founded in June 2005. The wiki format allows anyone to create or edit any article, so we can all work together to create a comprehensive database for the Legend of Zelda series."


 * So much for that. I'm dissapointed. Not really, just annoyed. And don't speak as a superior to someone who wants people to work together. In fact, don't speak as a superior to anyone if you can't work collaboritively with people.--  AM666999 <font style="color:#f9f9f9;background:#000000;">talk 14:55, October 9, 2010 (UTC)

No merge, no affiliation. I haven't been around here long and even I know some of the jerk moves that ZW has pulled. We wouldn't like to associate ourselves with people who directly COPY information from other sources and pass it off as their own work.--Hylianhero777 (talk) 14:45, October 9, 2010 (UTC)


 * Copying is not so bad, and as I have already stated passing work off as their own was probably not the intention of the wiki, however it may have been the intention of individuals.


 * And I'm kind of amazed at how many people can get mad at someone for suggesting peace.--  AM666999 <font style="color:#f9f9f9;background:#000000;">talk 14:57, October 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * Suggesting it? No. Obsessively pushing it despite the fact that the merger is unwanted and would just bring more conflict anyway? Yes. Please refer to my talk page for a detailed psychological analysis of why you can't realize that this is a bad idea. - Is drak  thül  15:01, October 9, 2010 (UTC)


 * Yes, suggesting it. I am simply the only representative available to argue for it. I rather doubt saying "hey, wanna be friends" is going to bring large amounts of conflict. I have left the rest of my reply on your talk page.--  AM666999 <font style="color:#f9f9f9;background:#000000;">talk 15:24, October 9, 2010 (UTC)

Read the bloody thing from the top and you will see my ideas become progressively more extreme. The reason for this is simply to counter your extremes. My actual ideas are much more unfixed and fluid, but you force me to argue a steady case and try to diminish me because of it. Read it from the top.--  AM666999 <font style="color:#f9f9f9;background:#000000;">talk 15:29, October 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * Leave. Now. Nobody freaking cares what you have to say. Naida Te. --<font color="#00BFF3">Jazzi <font color="#35077D">BassJapas Japas Artwork.png 15:30, October 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * Since we are going for extreme idea.... How about ZeldaWiki no longer is a part of the NIWA and Zeldapedia takes over the Zelda slot. There is no merger and ZW just becomes an independent wiki. ZP also doesn't need to recognize being part of the NIWA and just operates as they currently are. --Birdman5589 (talk) 15:40, October 9, 2010 (UTC)


 * Right. So force Zeldawiki out of their slot for no reason. Everybody wins.--  AM666999 <font style="color:#f9f9f9;background:#000000;">talk 15:47, October 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * Well I did say it was an extreme idea. (That means it isn't practical.) --Birdman5589 (talk) 15:48, October 9, 2010 (UTC)


 * I know. I was being sarcastic on top of your sarcasm :]

-->

I vote for staying, but we should sign that petition and threaten to leave. all and all, if that new skin goes through then I wouldn't mind leaving, but it will make us lose a lot of traffic and I'm worried about lagging also. Half the time I go on bulbapedia it just DOESN'T WORK staight out. I don't want that to happen here.--Hylianhero777 (talk) 13:41, October 11, 2010 (UTC)

Zelda Wiki
Hello to all you people from Zeldapedia, I'm Xizor. I'm one of the Owners of Legendofzelda.com and one of the Bureaucrat Masterminds at Zelda Wiki. I've made a new section because it seems that some people have (semi-)seriously talked about a potential merge or something with Zelda Wiki. I have created this section to make that discussion a bit more focused and centralized, while leaving other, non-ZW-Merger options separate. We at Zelda Wiki have had (very) brief internal discussions, and we were actually open to the idea. Obviously, if it were something you guys were interested in, more detailed talks would be had. However, I am simply opening the door to say that we are not averse to the notion. I am reachable on Skype, LoZ.com, Zelda Wiki, and even here (though contacting me here is probably the least efficient method). To be clear, even if a merge is not the ultimate result, there are other options to our relationship that don't have to involve bitter resentment. Obviously we are competitors, but that doesn't mean we can't be friendly. Just as well, if you guys decided to go independent, and not merge with ZW, NIWA can still offer assistance, even if they won't be offering you a spot as a Member (NIWA has a "One Wiki per Franchise" policy). I look forward to hearing something from somebody soon. I will also be checking this page frequently. Thank you. --Xizor159 (talk) 19:47, October 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't want to be mean, but your articles are a few hundred notches down from subpar. And if we merged, that would mean bumping ZW's articles up to our standard, or dropping ours down to match your standard, which just won't happen. --<font color="#00BFF3">Jazzi <font color="#35077D">BassJapas Japas Artwork.png 19:52, October 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * Obviously in a merge situation, as an open-to-edit-by-all Wiki, I'm sure a lot of Zelda Wiki's articles would be effected. That's not really the point here, as that's an obvious change that would come about anyway if, say, we managed to gain 50 new excited editors who wanted to change things. That's not something that depends on a merge, but simply on editor enthusiasm. Also, just be clear, I didn't come here to discuss merits of our content which is open to all. I came here to discuss interpersonal things, because those are the things you can't change by hitting "Edit" whenever you want. Some things to consider when discussing a merger: Differences in policies; Bureaucrat/Mastermind situation; relationships with Zelda Fan community; etc. I'll continue to read this page and respond as necessary. ^_^ Also, I don't think you're mean at all: you're just demonstrating the same pride in your work I'd expect from someone from Zelda Wiki. Thank God most of them aren't here. =P --Xizor159 (talk) 19:57, October 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * People here don't really want to merge. And would we be keeping our stats? B'crat/admin/rollback? Edit count? We wouldn't be treated the same, we'd be treated lesser than the ZW community. --<font color="#00BFF3">Jazzi <font color="#35077D">BassJapas Japas Artwork.png 20:11, October 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually, the quality of good is only what we percieve it to be. ZP claims our articles are better, ZW claims the same, so really that arguement is somewhat moot. What is an issue is how differently ZWs and ZPs articles are, and it would mean a lotta work. Another factor is that there is a rivalry, albeit not as hostile as it once was, but the years of competion have created an atmosphere of competion and trying to break that in ZP users will be hard(there are several users on ZP who also downright dislike ZW). There is other lagistics as well such as: How will this effect ZW's server, what will happen to all the hard work ZP has put into the content, what will happen to users editcounts/contribs/edits/user pages/etc, how will ZW's users react, will this create a rivalry within ZW maybe even forcing a split? Now with all that, I'm really drawing a blank on how to do it properly. If anybody has any ideas, then I'll be willing to listen, but it has to be better than simply switching Wiki Farms and go to ShoutWiki. On a side note, the "One Wiki per Franchise" policy sounds like a really dumb policy. If a wiki is willing to help the Ninetendo Independant Wiki Alliance, why not let them, regardless if the membership of that Franchise is already taken(if they anwser turns out to be something illogical, then maybe it might be best to reconsider how a member is chosen).-- C  2  / C C  20:13, October 11, 2010 (UTC)

Just to clarify on NIWA first: You can affiliate and all that jazz with them, that's not limited by franchise. The front page hub listing you as a FULL MEMBER would be limited. Obviously, things change, and NIWA is one of those things that has changed, and can change again. Nothing is impossible.

On the subject of unfair and abusive treatment to imported members: It would simply not be tolerated. It's that simple, really.

On the subject of hard work/importing: No, your edits would not be saved, I imagine. Most of the articles you would bring in are already in existence at Zelda Wiki, and thus would be better edited and revised as people see fit than completely stripped and rewritten with some cockeyed "compromise" wording. The Wiki would need to flow normally. Would you guys lose some things? Yes. Would you also gain some things? Yes. Would we lose and gain things? Yes. To put this metaphor simply: You can come to our house, you can live with us, you can bring all your toys and play with us, but it's our house. That's not to say that the House Rules aren't up for discussion at some point, but it's still our house. We aren't building a new one. --Xizor159 (talk) 20:17, October 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * So it's you're house. What we do has no effect? Why would we want to lose our edit counts when we've worked hard to get them. And you haven't answered, would we keep our status as b'crat/admin/rollback? --<font color="#00BFF3">Jazzi <font color="#35077D">BassJapas Japas Artwork.png 20:35, October 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * No, what you do and did has effects, it just isn't represented by an inconsequential number that in the end means nothing other than how many times you clicked "Save Page" here. I could have 100 edits on one page and do relatively little. It is a pretty frivolous thing that would be silly to allow to get in the way of a situation that could help us both. Obviously, you could include on your new User Pages what your OLD edit counts were? I'm not stating any final actions here. Just thoughts. But yes, it would be "our house" that we allow you you to also call "our house" with us. --Xizor159 (talk) 20:41, October 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * Jazzi, please don't get hostile here. Perhaps I just read it wrong and you weren't meaning to be aggressive, but that's sort of how it seemed. Everything seems to be a possibility at this point. And as I am one who doesn't really like the idea of a move to begin with, I don't really have an opinion here. --EveryDayJoe45 (talk) 20:45, October 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry Joe. I guess I am starting to get slightly hostile. But, I'd just like to keep my edit count and stats. I worked hard to get where I am at this point. I had to pull a complete 180, heck, I might've made the world reverse it's spin. I'd just like to keep what I had and not start over. If we do move, I'd like to move to a place we can keep our stats and edit counts. --<font color="#00BFF3">Jazzi <font color="#35077D">BassJapas Japas Artwork.png 20:50, October 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * I understand your love of your hard work. Whatever your ranks here (Admin to Admin, Rollback to Patroller) could be moved over. I'm not sure if there's a way to import users with edit counts to articles that really won't exist at ZW. That's all. I think that'd be something to work out if you guys wanted to merge. --Xizor159 (talk) 20:55, October 11, 2010 (UTC)

I am not in favour of a merge between ZP and ZW. There would be a lot of work involved, both wikis think that they have better articles and policies, there would probably be a great deal of friction between members of the two sites, and we don't stand to gain much. - Is drak  thül  22:22, October 11, 2010 (UTC)

Like I said on Skype, I just don't see it happening at all. Apart from what's been said, it's a totally different atmosphere. Say what you will about conforming and whatnot, but in the end it quite simply would not be the same. It just feels wrong, you know what I'm saying? ...No? Well, whatever. We can debate the statistical likelihood of total opinion changes and the power of friendship or whatever, but that does not change the fact that, from where I'm standing, the chances of people agreeing to this is way too low to realistically consider. Possible, sure, but it's just not happening given any course of action that would in any way conform to what I know of anybody here. I don't mean to sound rude (even though I know this will come off that way anyway), but we went very back-and-forth on Skype in a pointless cycle of logical probability countered with abstract possibility, so that's really all I have to say on the manner, whether you respond or not (unless you bring up a good point not previously noted). I know the situation here at ZP better than you do, and what you say does not change the fact that this simply is not realistic. And well, like I said, I'm not really for the idea myself.  Xykeb   Yvolix   Zraliv  22:24, October 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * "To be clear, even if a merge is not the ultimate result, there are other options to our relationship that don't have to involve bitter resentment." I said this from the outset, and it's still true. We are very willing to be friendly with you guys. --Xizor159 (talk) 22:55, October 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * You may be, but I doubt the other users will be. I mean, there are people here, that if we got some ZW members, would be quite hostile toward them. Now, there are users that try their best to be as friendly as possible to new users. --<font color="#00BFF3">Jazzi <font color="#35077D">BassJapas Japas Artwork.png 23:07, October 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * I guarantee that if you came to ZW right now and said, "Hey I'm from ZP, i'd love to help here too!" then everyone'd say "Great!" and let you be. So it's your guys' issue to work out, sounds like. =P My Skype name is xizor159, for anyone who wanted it, btw. --Xizor159 (talk) 23:22, October 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, mine is JazKaiz if you want to get a hold of me at 3:30 eastern time anytime this week if you want to continue this discussion. --<font color="#00BFF3">Jazzi <font color="#35077D">BassJapas Japas Artwork.png 23:40, October 11, 2010 (UTC)


 * Hey, tis Nate, another crat/rep from Zelda Wiki. I've sorted out a few things between our companies in the past so I figured I would speak up. For starters: Anything that involves moving off Wikia means losing your edit count. End of story. In fact, I'm not sure you guys are even aware, but none of you "own" this content. Say you wanted to have ZP leave Wikia (as is one of the proposed deals) - all of hhe present content stays here. WIKIA owns it. It can't come with. You wont be able to easily transfer it without a lot of copy pasting. Moving this wiki at all means you need to rebuild it all over again, and convince your userbase to come with. Now, this has successfully happened with other wiki's in the past that got completely fed up with Wikia and more specifically, Angela Beasely (may have spelled the name wrong).


 * It wasn't easy for those wiki's to move, and if you do move, it wont be easy for you either. This is why talks of a merge even arise at all, because instead of starting from scratch, you get a base of content that you can start editing your work into. While it's true you have users that would completely destroy a ZW member if they came here and talked and edited a little (specifically if they said they liked ZW more), I would think that attitude and behavior (attacking another user) isn't tolerated at this wiki. It sure as hell is no longer tolerated at ZW. We have users who "hate" ZP, but if that hate turns into berrading and verbal attacks, said user is no longer welcome at Zelda Wiki.org. It's a code of ethics, and I would think all large, good quality, wiki's conform to the same sort of member expected standards. It's clear our staffs ended the fued a long time ago.


 * As for things with NIWA - it's always evolving and policies can still change, but as I stated previously, if you leave Wikia it is, indeed, starting over. The biggest downfall of being part of wikia, outside of their own BS, is the fact that they OWN this place, you don't. It sucks. The community can have little say on what sort of layout you use (in terms of navigation), you can't change base policies that have to conform to wikia's standard, you don't control the advertising that the guests see (which is a majority of the viewers)... really you just have a major lack of control over anything, along with wikia making things all ugly for the main viewers.


 * I wont go any further into why I dislike wikia - there is plenty of documentation for that on the net already. Just know that I am sure we can at least lend you guys a hand no matter why you choose to do if it does involve, in any sense of the word, leaving wikia.Nathanial Rumphol-Janc (talk) 00:42, October 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually Nathanial there is a point your wrong on. We can keep all of our articles and edit counts. How? Well with ShoutWiki you can e-mail them a link to your new Wiki and the old one, and also include a link to the database dump of a Wiki using Special:Statistics. So the option is there to keep all of our articles and hopefully our edit counts as well(which I'm 90% positive that ShoutWiki supports that feature). So that is why mergeing with ZW would have to somehow be a better option then copying the database of ZP and going to ShoutWiki. The one bennefit of having us merge with you is that, you will lose your biggest competitor, and the editors that come with will give you even more people who know how to edit and run a wiki. If we go to ShoutWiki you know we will only be taking one or two steps back, and we will lose a lotta trafic, but we will have all of our articles and be rid of Wikia. Wikia will keep all of our content and the URL, but who's to say we can't have a copy of years of work?-- C  2  / C C  01:08, October 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * Well then good luck doing that. I, and Zelda Wiki, hope it works out for you. Our offer of friendship still stands. =] --Xizor159 (talk) 01:16, October 12, 2010 (UTC)

(Ninjas Into the Forum) Haha! Never thought you'd see from me again, did you?! Anywhoo, Xizor, thanks for edit conflicting with me :P. Nathanial, thanks for offering help, it means a lot to (at very least,) me. CC, you make a good point, and I would want to know: Would Wikia let us still run under the Zeldapedia monkier? And also, most of you know that I am pro-unification of both ZP and ZW, but there's been too much bad blood to make it work easily. I still think that the idea needs some serious consideration. It would be a struggle, and I'd be willing to help out wherever needed. Mr kmil 01:24, October 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * Things would not be terribly hard if everybody could just let go of the past and say, "Let's make it work." It's a lot easier than it sounds, even. We can make it work at Zelda Wiki. You have to let us. It's that simple, really. --Xizor159 (talk) 01:47, October 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * For me it isn't an issue of bad blood but fundamental deference between the two wikis. Articles are formated entirely different. To be honest one of the key reasons why I started editing here verses ZW was because I preferred the article style here better (I was actually going to join ZW before I stumbled upon ZP). The problem with merging with ZW would not being able to decide on an article style and formatting rules that everybody agrees with. That is the one huge issue to overcome a possible merger. I for one would hate to change the article style to match ZW and I'm sure there are users on ZW who would hate our style here. --Birdman5589 (talk) 01:58, October 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * Xizor, not to be rude but please drop the issue. We will discuss it amongst ourselves. Thank you.  Xykeb   Yvolix   Zraliv  02:00, October 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * "Not to be rude" doesn't make what you say after that phrase automatically not rude. I responded to something someone said, as I said I would be doing here. I'll continue to respond to things as I feel is necessary. --Xizor159 (talk) 02:12, October 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * This discussion is over. It's time for you and your croonies editors to leave. We'll discuss it on our own. --<font color="#00BFF3">Jazzi <font color="#35077D">BassJapas Japas Artwork.png 02:19, October 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * Also to add on, any discussion of a merger does have a direct effect on us, and how we move forward, and if we need to reopen any of our current policies for discussion and the like. When discussion of a merger with another site is underway, even if it's the slightest possibility, you can't simply "ignore" the other party. It's a big decision. We also have a new layout in the works too, and I am sure some of our formatting is going to change along with the layout as it stands. I'm not trying to start anything, but whats the harm in the present discussion? We're just going over some scenarios. This has a potential direct affect on us, and really, we're not some big evil business as those here may think. If you choose to leave wikia, even without a merger, we are will to extend a hand in offering to help - be it in finding a new host, being supported by NIWA, etc. We can also help provide/find reliable and efficient hosting should you want to be independent, which is also a requirement for NIWA (not part of a big network like shout wiki, etc). Nathanial Rumphol-Janc (talk) 02:21, October 12, 2010 (UTC)


 * Honestly, I have to agree with Nathaniel on this point. It's not like we can have a discussion amongst ourselves and force that decision on the other party. I doubt we will actually merge with ZW, seeing how unpopular the idea is (I am personally neutral/skeptical), but still...it's only fair that ZW has at least a say in what would happen should we decide to merge. Jedimasterlink (talk) 02:38, October 12, 2010 (UTC)

I've noticed some of you guys talking about losing your edits in a move. In all actuality, it's not impossible to regain your edits. I know how to manipulate a database to restore your edit count. It's just a simple code. However, I can't help you if you move to someplace where you lack FTP access to your database. If you decide to move to your own independent wiki or you decide to merge with Zelda Wiki, come pester me and I'll write it up for you. Anyway...ta-ta! --Justin 02:30, October 12, 2010 (UTC)

-
 * If you prefer, consider this the "fan site" community trying to extend you a hand. Presently, almost every fan site out there, sites that are as popular if not more popular than either of the two wikis, fully support ZW. Xizor and I, however, also represent two prominent fan sites, and we're looking to extend a hand to you regardless. We're not just some ZW lackies, we actually are pretty well in touch with the mood and ideals instilled in the overarching fan community, comprised, from our little mastermind collaboration, of over 70,000 daily unique viewers.Nathanial Rumphol-Janc (talk) 02:33, October 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * There is not reason to tell them to shut up, we will decide if we want to merge at all on our own, but it might be worth-while to at least have an understanding of what the other side thinks of it, because it does involve a pretty big change for their site. On as side note, we would have a lot of our content already over there, so even doing a database transfer wouldn't be nessisary. And if what Justin said is true we could get our edits back at ZW.-- C  2  / C C  02:42, October 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * We have an understanding of what the other side thinks of it. There is no need for Xizor to repeat himself over and over. There is no regulation that states that he cannot post comments here anymore. He is free to. I was simply requesting that he stop because he is not contributing anything to the conversation that we do not already know. If there is a new topic of interest pertaining to this issue, he is free to mention it.  Xykeb   Yvolix   Zraliv  02:50, October 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * Even if what Justin said is true, I'm still inclined to think the cons (namely, the two wikis' very different writing styles and the possible resulting hostilities) complicate things too much for the pros to be worth a merge. Jedimasterlink (talk) 03:02, October 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * This is possibly true, but policies and styles can be adjusted pretty easily. If you guys decided it was worth a shot, things like that would be discussed and compromises could be reached. Nothing's impossible. --Xizor159 (talk) 03:07, October 12, 2010 (UTC)

I so want to move but where will we move to? and theres this one thing I ttally hate abourt wikia. you know when your editing something, you type,and you dont get to see what you made until a little after your done! It takes a pause. screw you wikia. --AttackJojo33 (talk) 17:55, October 12, 2010 (UTC)AttackJojo33

I'm okay with moving to Zelda Wiki. It would be different, but I think I could get used to it. I wouldn't be hostile with anybody there. Also, before I joined ZP, I read a lot of articles on ZW. Both Wikis have different writing styles, but I'm sure that I could get used to it, if we were to move to ZW. Like I said; if we moved there, I wouldn't be hostile with anyone. So, like I said, I'm okay with it. Black  Dragon   Laguz  16:13, October 13, 2010 (UTC)

Well at this point, I'm fed up enough with wikia that if we do leave, I don't see a merger as entirely unrealistic. There'd have to be a lot of give and take on both sides, I think we can all agree, but it could potentially work as well as our other options. The only thing I wouldn't be particularly fond of, however, would be having to work with HoT87 again (I think his username over there is christopher or something).— Triforce   14 Triforce4.png 21:29, October 13, 2010 (UTC)


 * Another reason why I would want to merge with Zelda Wiki is because it would take a lot of work, to move somewhere else, instead of just merging. Black   Dragon   Laguz  21:50, October 13, 2010 (UTC)
 * I just want to clarify that HoT87/Link87/Chris/Christopher is no longer an active editor at Zelda Wiki, as he was recently banned for misconduct. So that's one thing not to worry about. =P --Xizor159 (talk) 23:58, October 13, 2010 (UTC)
 * Seriously? Even you guys couldn't work with him? Kudos to you guys for not putting up with his shenanigans. That in itself would make the process about ten times easier...— Triforce   14 Triforce4.png 01:23, October 14, 2010 (UTC)
 * The biggest issue is the article layout, and general codding. The personal issues, will have to be made know, but as of now I'm not assueming that anybody will hostile(on either site).--  C  2  / C C  01:41, October 14, 2010 (UTC)
 * Hot87 or not, I don't think we should merge. It's too much work for too little benefit. - Is drak  thül  01:44, October 14, 2010 (UTC)
 * Do you mean move in general or just merge with ZW?-- C  2  / C C  02:05, October 14, 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm pretty sure he said somewhere that he supported the move and if not he has implied through this forum that he at the very least heavily dislikes the new look, so I think he's talking about ZW but worded it badly. Which by the way, I do agree with, but as I said, if the general consensus is to merge I will not actively oppose it.  Xykeb   Yvolix   Zraliv  02:19, October 14, 2010 (UTC)

I for one like blogs, but i'll have to see the new skin to see if it's really as crappy as y'all say it is. for now, i would prefer to stay.--Hylian potato (talk) 21:46, October 19, 2010 (UTC)hylian potato

A note from Wikia
Hello, I just wanted to leave a note here to see if you have any further questions. I noticed that none of the local admins had designed a theme yet, so I took the liberty to choose one of the themes and added a wordmark. The theme can take on a lot of different customizations, so I recommend jumping in and trying it. If you need help, please let me know. Also, I wanted to add, that no matter what your decision is as a contributor here, to stay (which we hope you do!), leave or participate both here or somewhere else, we respect that. The wiki will remain open for the community that does decide to stay. Best, --Sarah (Help Forum) (blog) 23:37, October 13, 2010 (UTC)

Where do we stand now?
At this point, it seems most of the discussion is about whether we should merge with Zelda Wiki or move to ShoutWiki. Is this what it has come down to? Does anyone feel we still need to consider staying at Wikia? In either case, how do we move the discussion forward from here? Jedimasterlink (talk) 22:32, October 14, 2010 (UTC)
 * I think we should at least see how we can make Oasis work before a move. Give Wikia a change but if it still doesn't work well, then I would vote to move. The extreme differences in the formatting between us and ZW ensure that I most likely wouldn't vote for the merge unless the majority wanted to. --Birdman5589 (talk) 23:30, October 14, 2010 (UTC)

Looking at Sarah's comment above, why doesn't one of the admins make a theme not to different from our original?/\/\r.6r33&#124;\&#124; &#124;-&#124;@T (talk) 23:41, October 14, 2010 (UTC)
 * The theme isn't the issue. - Is drak  thül  00:08, October 15, 2010 (UTC)

I refuse to stay, whether the new look issue is fixed or not. As I said, Wikia has been getting progressively worse and whatever we do here, they will just come up with an equally horrible and mandatory idea later on. As for a move versus a merge, I don't want to merge, for the same reasons as Drakky. Like I said before, though, I won't make a fuss at all if the majority decides to merge.  Xykeb   Yvolix   Zraliv  01:40, October 15, 2010 (UTC)

I think we should at least wait until oasis is actually forced upon us. The chance is very small but still, it's possible wikia might change they're mind <font color="#66FFFF">Oni <font color="#7F007F">Dark <font color="#007A00">Link 19:21, October 15, 2010 (UTC)

As of now, staying at Wikia is not an option for me (which I think I've already established). With as much backlash as Wikia has already received for Oasis, I don't think there is any chance they will repeal it, so waiting until then to see if it will happen would be futile. Moving to ShoutWiki is my first choice; while is doesn't use Monaco, it doesn't look or feel too different. Merging with Zelda Wiki is certainly better than staying here, but...the possible complications are discussed above, so I don't need to repeat them. If the community agrees on a merge, though, I won't oppose it. As for reaching a decision as a community, I'm ready whenever everyone else is. Jedimasterlink (talk) 22:02, October 16, 2010 (UTC)

When everyone is happy they have enough info I think we should have a vote. --User:Zeldafan777 08:36, October 17, 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi Guys, Adam from ZW here. Just a reminder that the "deadline" (as it were) is November 3rd, and you'll ideally want to have reached a consensus decision before then. After that date, Oasis will have been forcibly applied, and the current skin won't be available any longer. Adam (talk) 11:16, October 19, 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually, the current skin will be a viewing option until November 10th. - Is drak  thül  13:41, October 19, 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi All, just to be clear, the option to switch your personal preference to Monaco will be removed on November 3rd. Non-english wikis will have Monaco available until the 10th to allow for translation of the new look. You can see the full schedule here. Thanks, --Sarah (Help Forum) (blog) 16:07, October 19, 2010 (UTC)

from now on we are a non-english wiki <font color="#66FFFF">Oni <font color="#7F007F">Dark <font color="#007A00">Link 17:14, October 19, 2010 (UTC)
 * Hahahaha. Seems like I've missed a LOT in my absence. That new skin looks...pretty horrible, to be honest. It just doesn't seem like wiki material, but it looks like the perfect blog skin. In any case...I'm all for the leaving of Wikia. I've never really liked the idea that some big corporation owns the stuff I write and work on, y'know? As for merging with Zelda Wiki, well...I'm not sure. It does seem like a better alternative to ShoutWiki. I mean, Zelda Wiki is part of NIWA, and I'm sure they get interwiki traffic from the other members. That could really benefit us. I've never had much interaction with any Zelda Wiki people, though, so I honestly can't say I know about them. All I've heard is "THEY'RE SO EVIL!" but I tend to ignore those who say that because I prefer to form my own opinions. Xizor's posts here don't seem to be overly evil to me, although they do seem to be a little too aggressive for my tastes. I would enjoy knowing that we'd have greater control over the wiki, though. ShoutWiki likely won't give us a control panel or FTP access.
 * Of course, while I'd love to stay for the move, I cannot, sadly. I have too much going on in my life to continue to edit. I have been passively reading for awhile, though, so you can bet that one of those guests you see on the new place will be me ;)
 * Whatever the majority decides, I wish you all the best of luck, and if you merge with Zelda Wiki, I hope you can resolve your differences and work together to make the best Zelda encyclopedia on the net of all time! :)Draconicus (talk) 17:28, October 19, 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm still not convinced to leave. Also, will there be a Shout Box in any of the possible sites to which we might move? I don't see why we can't wait for the switch to happen before deciding. If we can, I think that we should decide once every new thing has been implemented. <font color="#663300">T <font color="#996600">h <font color="#CC6600">e Midna Laughing.png ™ 20:05, October 19, 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, not that it makes that much a difference given my recent activity level, and this isn't like a threat or anything, but I would almost certainly leave Zeldapedia completely if we stayed. And I, uhhh, guess we could wait until it's all been implemented, but if we reached a consensus before then I don't see why we wouldn't go with that right then... I mean, what's the point in waiting for the sake of it? It's not like the idea will grow on anybody (and if you think it will you obiviously don't have a realistic grasp on the situation).  Xykeb   Yvolix   Zraliv  20:12, October 19, 2010 (UTC)
 * TM, it looks like none of our options include a Shout Box. Jedimasterlink (talk) 17:20, October 20, 2010 (UTC)

This is a very sad time (i want to keep my edit count) I will gladly move if everyone else does, but i don't think ZW will ever be the same again. (sigh) I miss the old days.(a few months ago) Wherever it moves, I will always stay with this community.--Hylian potato (talk) 22:28, October 19, 2010 (UTC)hylian potato

Call me a heretic, but I'm not really opposed to merging with Zeldawiki, so long as they're willing to participate in the "give-and-take", if you will, of policies, markup, etc. And just as a side note, to all y'alls sitting on the fence saying, "it does't matter to me. I'll be content with whatever the community chooses," you're going have to make some kind of choice or opinion in the matter at some point, or the decision is going to come down to two or three people who voiced their opinion. Having no opinion doesn't help the consensus. — Triforce   14 Triforce4.png 00:20, October 20, 2010 (UTC)

I know I'm a relatively new user here, but I would honestly like to move to Shoutwiki (though I'll probably be okay with the merge if we must). It just seems as if merging will cause unneccesary friction, whereas the proposed move doesn't appear to have serious downsides.... If someone thinks I'm missing something, please tell me and I'll reconsider. Naxios10 (talk) 08:13, October 20, 2010 (UTC)


 * I've just seen the new skin, and it isn't too terrible. It's bad, mind you, but it isn't terrible.Did we lose color choice, or do we need to just reset the color scheme? After this, though, I'm for moving to a different Wiki, whether it be ZW or Shoutwiki.

Mr kmil 12:24, October 20, 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi Mr, the admins here have the ability to change the theme at Special:themedesigner and the Wikia.css. I added a basic theme, but there is a lot of other cool customizations you can do. Let me know if you want me to post a couple of examples, and if you have any other questions. Best, --Sarah (Help Forum) (blog) 16:06, October 20, 2010 (UTC)
 * With the exception of your homepage for logged out users, if some advertiser decides to pay wikia $$ . Welcome to Narutopedia: The wikia about Vanquish.
 * Also, side note, from what I hear Shoutwiki's server is already crashing/failing with the couple wikias it picked up. A big wikia like this, is not gonna do well on that server. S im A nt 18:41, October 20, 2010 (UTC)
 * Can you tell us how you know that information about ShoutWiki's server? I'd just like to be sure that the server would struggle to support us before taking it into consideration. Jedimasterlink (talk) 22:45, October 20, 2010 (UTC)
 * Mostly from reading different wikia forums, Narutopedia (search for shoutwiki; Dantman posted a nifty link here) S im A nt 00:54, October 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * Hmmmm. What I have found is inconclusive. There seems to be no concrete evidence that the server crash was directly related to the influx of new wikis (though the fact that they use only one server is troubling, to say the least). I don't think Zeldapedia's size should be consequential since wikis larger than ours (namely Jedipedia) already exist, but I'm not exactly an authority on that kind of thing. Jedimasterlink (talk) 01:34, October 21, 2010 (UTC)

I'm with TM here. The fact that all the content is going to stay here makes me not feel comfortable with a move. That and with a move/merge, you can't force anyone to come with you and by staying you'll greatly reduce any split that may occur in the community (just people who decide to quit). The new look is bad, but it seems like a lot less of a hassle than the other options. --EveryDayJoe45 (talk) 14:22, October 23, 2010 (UTC)
 * Just to understand your perspective a bit better, is there anything else about a move/merge (specifically a move) that seems like a hassle? To me, staying here would be a huge hassle compared to moving since all of the articles would have to be reconfigured to "fit" the new skin and just using the skin is a hassle in and of itself. Then there are the health issues Oasis causes some people -- although I've never had an Oasis-induced headache, that's likely only because I've never used the new skin for more than 10 minutes at a time (in turn because my eyes start aching after about that long). I for one absolutely will not stay at Wikia no matter what the community does as a whole for that reason more than anything else; even if I tried to stay, I'd only be here for maybe 10 minutes a day, perhaps a little more at a time until I completely lose my patience. The fact that this site will still be here if we leave bothers me too, but the way I see it, something has to be sacrificed no matter what path we take, and leaving a shell behind, so to speak, seems better to me than adapting to an extremely radical change. Jedimasterlink (talk) 09:46, October 24, 2010 (UTC)

Images in the new skin
I was playing around with the new skin and I found another thing that really bothered me about it. On any image that is a "thumb" it automatically includes who uploaded the image. That to me just makes the pages look worse than they already do in the new skin. Is there anyway to change it where that won't show up or is it just another deal breaker with the new skin? --Birdman5589 (talk) 22:26, October 20, 2010 (UTC)

Umm I think I actually know a way around this. Okay go to the page /wikia.css and copy this: /* Hide "Image added by" on articles */ div.picture-attribution { display:none !important; } — Triforce   14 Triforce4.png 13:59, October 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, you can work around it with user-specific CSS. But do remember that the majority of people viewing the wiki will see the default settings, so you'd need to figure out if this is something which you're permitted to change globally or not. Adam (talk) 13:21, October 22, 2010 (UTC)

Extensions
What extensions would be available with each of the options?--  AM666999 <font style="color:#f9f9f9;background:#000000;">talk 10:36, October 21, 2010 (UTC)


 * ShoutWiki (or other wiki farm) - I believe you'd be reliant upon the host to install additional extensions (see Contacting the technical staff).
 * Own server - Zeldapedia's staff would have free reign to install and configure any aspect of MediaWiki as they chose.
 * ZW - We generally install anything deemed useful, barring any valid objections in terms of functionality or security.
 * That basically sums it up for the moving options under consideration. Adam (talk) 13:21, October 22, 2010 (UTC)

What's this about our own server? Wouldn't that cost money and someone who knew how to program mediawiki...— Triforce   14 Triforce4.png 21:34, October 22, 2010 (UTC)


 * I only mentioned that for the sake of completeness, since it was one of the options suggested in the original post. Yes, someone would need to pay some money for hosting, and they'd also need sufficient experience with MediaWiki to be able to install, configure and manage it. Adam (talk) 10:35, October 23, 2010 (UTC)

Monobook
Hey I've heard that Monobook is still going to be around. Does anyone know anything about it, and would we be able to set that as the default when Wikia destroys monaco? I'm guessing we'd be able to customize it to some extent that we have for monaco, but I wouldn't know where to start.— Triforce   14 Triforce4.png 19:40, October 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * If it's still going to be around then that's not a bad idea. I dont like it as much as mono but it's pretty much the same as anywhere else we'll move to <font color="#66FFFF">Oni <font color="#7F007F">Dark <font color="#007A00">Link 21:00, October 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't think it would have near the sidebar options Monaco does (or the shoutbox), but it's a heck of a lot better than oasis.— Triforce   14 Triforce4.png 21:38, October 21, 2010 (UTC)

Hi, just want to clarify, monobook will be available as a personal choice, but not as the wiki's default. Let me know if you have any further questions. Best, --Sarah (Help Forum) (blog) 22:55, October 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * As Sarah pointed out, Zeldapedia's default skin will now always be set to Oasis, and it won't be possible to change this. Although logged in users can change the skin to any one of their choice, the majority of viewers of the wiki will not be logged in so will see only the default skin. Adam (talk) 13:21, October 22, 2010 (UTC)
 * Now hang on a minute Sarah, if monobook is being left as an option, why in the world can we not choose it as our default setting? Is that just some sort of way to force this new skin on us? If our community decides that we like that option better, why shouldn't we be given the opportunity to use it?— Triforce   14 Triforce4.png 21:38, October 22, 2010 (UTC)


 * Almost certainly. The proportions of the articles would be different, so image/template positions would differ as well. We've already seen that in Oasis, the Unofficial Name template is on top of the infoboxes on pages that have both, for example. Jedimasterlink (talk) 20:18, October 22, 2010 (UTC)
 * @ T14 - This explains Wikia's stance on making the new Oasis skin the mandatory default. Basically, although they've left Monaco and Monobook as user-selectable options for the moment, these will be unsupported and the option to use them will be removed completely at some point in the future. Basically, if the Zeldapedia community decides to stay here at Wikia, the only option is for everyone to start using the new skin and adapt all of the wiki's current content to fit into it. Otherwise, elements of the wiki will appear broken in the new skin while they still look OK in the obsolete Monaco (which most viewers can't see). Adam (talk) 10:35, October 23, 2010 (UTC)

Making a Decision
Okay, I don't know about the rest of you. But I'm getting sick of this forum. It's been inactive lately. And we need to make a decision. It's 4:17 pm October 30th. we have four days till wikia forces Oasis on us. We have options, merge with Zeldawiki.org, stay with wikia and use Oasis while losing users, or move to shoutwiki with a data dump.

If we merge with Zeldawiki.org we'd keep traffic, but we might not have as much. We'd have a larger number of active rollbackers/patrollers. We'd combine the editing skills of both wikis and get better articles. Only problem would be past users that have left Zeldapedia and have joined Zeldawiki.org. We'd be able to join NIWA and would possibly get help with the wiki from other members of other NIWA wikis. We'd possibly be able to keep our stats and our edits counts. But we wouldn't be known as Zeldapedia anymore.

If we stick with Wikia we'd lose members. Navigation would get harder. We'd look like a blog. We'd have less edit space, and we'd just look bad. We'd have to deal with Wikia's antics, such as the datacenter going down (which it does almost once a month), and well, if you've been around long, you know how bad wikia can get.

If we move to Shoutwiki we'd have an option of different skins, we'd be able to keep our CSS skin. We could have the domain as Zeldapedia so we wouldn't really lose so much traffic. We could keep the ToC and not have it look squished. We'd have to use a data dump, but all revisions of the page history will be keep, and requesting a data dump is quite simple if wikia listens to us.

We don't have that long, so I think that we should get to voting or whatever we plan on doing so that we can decide on what to do. --<font color="#00BFF3">Jazzi <font color="#35077D">BassJapas  20:34, October 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * I completely second that notion. Unless somebody has something important to say, I propose we start the voting right now.  Xykeb   Yvolix   Zraliv  20:47, October 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * I completely, uh, third that notion. I suggest we vote too very soon if not immediately. -<font color="#B0E0E6">Minish  <font color="#003366">Link  20:52, October 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * Let's start voting now. - Is drak  thül  20:57, October 30, 2010 (UTC)

Good luck, you guys! =] --Xizor159 (talk) 22:30, October 30, 2010 (UTC)

Just wanted to say this, be SURE you know that the place you move can support your traffic, and has a proper server setup. Also, it might be better to vote and have a pending status on the outcome so that you can talk with other wiki's in the same general topic field and get their opinions and move choices. S im A nt 15:56, November 1, 2010 (UTC)

Rules

 * Read the rules before voting.
 * Vote for one option and one option only.
 * Use the Support template to vote. Do not use oppose or neutral templates.
 * Do not argue your point more than you need to. We've already discussed this whole issue for a while; now we're just deciding what needs to be done.
 * If you have something important to say that has not already been said in some fashion, please note it in the comments section. However, as per the previous rule, do not expect it to be discussed at length.
 * If you have an option other than the three specified, note it in the Other section. Please list pros and cons, and why you think it is a good option.

Stay with Wikia

 * While I'm on the fence here, considering everything this is the best option. Do I love this option? Not really but it is the best overall. --Birdman5589 (talk) 23:22, October 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * ^ --EveryDayJoe45 (talk) 23:46, October 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * Phantom   Zelda   ?!  
 * I don't see any real reason to leave (other than the new skin and all, but we could adjust). I realize that "Wikia has been doing things like this too often" or whatever, but I still don't think that there's any real reason to leave. <font color="#663300">T <font color="#996600">h <font color="#CC6600">e Midna Laughing.png ™ 19:20, October 31, 2010 (UTC)
 * ^ --Fillfrog
 * This is a lose lose situation in every respect as far as I can see but staying here for the meantime is the only thing I see myself supporting <font color="#66FFFF">Oni <font color="#7F007F">Dark <font color="#007A00">Link 16:14, November 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * I've done some thinking, considered our options more thoroughly and have some inklings of a bad feeling about moving, especially when technical ramifications are brought into it. We can always move at a later point in time if staying around won't work, but I feel this is much too rushed. This feels like a lesser of potential evils. --<font color="#3ba0c5">Auron  Kaizer <font color="#3ba0c5">!  17:51, November 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree with AuronKaizer that it is much too rushed and that it needs time to decide: for example are there unearthed problems with the known propositions (mine included)? I do think that we should move eventually, though, as Wikia seems very fixed on its Oasis idea.--  AM666999 <font style="color:#f9f9f9;background:#000000;">talk 21:15, November 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * I really don't see what is wrong with having this site remain on Wikia. I don't think the new skin is that bad and I think moving would only add a lot of unneeded instability to Zeldapedia.--ShutUpNavi (talk) 17:28, November 2, 2010 (UTC)

Move to ShoutWiki

 *  Xykeb   Yvolix   Zraliv  21:11, October 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * : Seems to be the best of options. Even if there may or may not be some transitional trouble. --<font color="#3ba0c5">Auron  Kaizer <font color="#3ba0c5">!  21:14, October 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * After talking to them, they seem way nicer than wikia. And it may take a bit to adjust, but I think it's the best option. --<font color="#00BFF3">Jazzi <font color="#35077D">BassJapas Japas Artwork.png 21:17, October 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * What, AK, said, I guess? :P Obiviously the best option. -<font color="#B0E0E6">Minish  <font color="#003366">Link  21:19, October 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * Not that I have much say in the matter, but I like the current setup, and feel this is the best option.  ~''' RavensMill '
 * I would say I could care either way, but the atrocity that is Oasis and the less-than-dependable staff is making me lean towards moving. - McGillivray  227  21:48, October 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * We shouldn't stay with Wikia because they're being stupid and merging with ZW would be a lot of trouble without very much benefit. - Is drak  thül  22:12, October 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * Things are only going to get worse if we stay at Wikia. There's no way I can bring myself to like ZW's articles. This will take adjustment, but at least there is some hope for improvement if we move to ShoutWiki. Jedimasterlink (talk) 00:09, October 31, 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't like Oasis, and I don't want to use ZW style... so... anyway, this vote is for the cause. TO SHOUTWIKI! Naxios10 (talk) 11:59, October 31, 2010 (UTC)
 * Oasis is unbearable and will totally ruin our articles. -<font color ="#68E0D0">Stars <font color ="#187868">talk  http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y27/pyroac/Starssprite.gif 18:30, October 31, 2010 (UTC)
 * I've already even put my own wiki there, and trust me, Shoutwiki is excellent as a wikifarm. Full-hearted support.--RedeadhunterRedead.pngContributions Edits 18:36, October 31, 2010 (UTC)
 * As long as someone tells me how to get to the new ZP, I vote for this. I hope not much changes.--Hylian potato (talk) 18:49, October 31, 2010 (UTC)hylian potato
 * I'm going to run with the pack on this one. If Shoutwikia is a good as you say they are, then let's get going. I'll be home most of the week, so call on me if anything monotonous is needed. Mr kmil [[File:Spin Attack (A Link to the Past).gif]] 03:15, November 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * I think this is probably our best bet as of now, followed by a merger with zw.— Triforce   14 Triforce4.png 03:37, November 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * this seems that it is the decision that will keep most of the wiki intact and lose us the least members and traffic. But once a desision is reached (this seems to be the option most likely to get chosen) we should not just start right away. we should come up with a timely plan for leaving that is organizzed, above all other things.--Hylianhero777 (talk) 17:17, November 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * Alright, I've given it a lot of thought, and...*deep breath*...count me in. I'm tired of this Water Temple of a wiki host. I'm hopping on the Spirit Train to a better place. Sir Real (talk) 00:42, November 3, 2010 (UTC)

Merge with Zelda Wiki

 * It looks like ShoutWiki is going to win, but I think that merging with Zelda Wiki is the best option. --<font color=#E0115F>The <font color=#082567>Ultimate <font color=#50C878>Hokage <font color=#50C878>88 [[Image:Arwing.png|link=User:TheUltimateHokage88/Cameo|30px|]]
 * : I personally agree with TheUltimateHokage88. See below.--  AM666999 <font style="color:#f9f9f9;background:#000000;">talk 18:02, October 31, 2010 (UTC)

Join NIWA independant of ZW temporarily
Pros: All the ZW pros with as much time needed to work out a merger & could always move to Shoutwiki if it doesn't work out. The wiki would be controlled mainly by ZP Admins.

Cons: Possibly laggy server and NIWA might not change their "One wiki per franchise" policy, even for a temporary situation.


 * : If this doesn't gain sufficient support then I will move my vote back to ZW.--  AM666999 <font style="color:#f9f9f9;background:#000000;">talk 18:20, October 31, 2010 (UTC)
 * The above strike has nothing to do with Xizors comment below as I do not think anybody suggested being in Wikia or ShoutWiki at the same time as NIWA and do not think that ZW would be likely to reject the wiki seeing as, in my view, the entire idea of joining NIWA would be to EVENTUALLY merge, to give time to figure out how best to merge, and leave things a little more open to change. I will explain my second vote move above. Also, I would like to say that, in general I am opposed to the "One wiki per franchise" policy. However I do not think it has an especially large influence against what I am proposing.--  AM666999 <font style="color:#f9f9f9;background:#000000;">talk 21:01, November 1, 2010 (UTC)

Comments
This page is getting quite big maybe we should move the voting to a separate page <font color="#66FFFF">Oni <font color="#7F007F">Dark <font color="#007A00">Link 17:11, October 31, 2010 (UTC)

Here is just an idea for thought on those that want to move. You can set it so you edit in Monobook, that way you don't have to deal with the new look and also don't have to worry about the move. --Birdman5589 (talk) 23:16, October 31, 2010 (UTC)
 * Most viewers will still see the site in Oasis, so pages will still have to formatted as such, meaning we'll still have to look use it. There is also a good chance Wikia will pull Monobook eventually. Seems like a moot point to me. Jedimasterlink (talk) 23:43, October 31, 2010 (UTC)

Hey if we decide to move, can we place something on the front page notifying users that this site is no longer active and linking to our new site? better yet... we couldn't like you know... delete all the pages here after the move could we? — Triforce   14 Triforce4.png 03:41, November 1, 2010 (UTC)


 * Triforce, Wikia will never let you delete pages since this is their content. Also like I said before, you can't force anyone to leave so really this wiki won't necessarily be inactive at all. We'll just have two carbon copy sites running separately. I'm also still concerned with all the links that currently link to wikia and such on other sites. In my opinion there is no way moving the content outweighs having to use oasis as a default and monobook as a preference. --EveryDayJoe45 (talk) 13:10, November 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * Joe, I partly agree with you. But part of me says, this is such a downgrade and we have been treated poorly by Wikia before it just doesn't seem like it is worth all the hassle anymore. Also, look at WoWWiki, they had nearly 90, 000 articles and had a huge ammount of traffic, but they left anyways. If we push ourselves we can probably get back all of our views it is just a matter of wanting it. However what I propose is that we give this Oasis skin from November 3rd - to November 4th, 1 Day, and see if it is worth staying over. If we find that Oasis is too unbearable then we move to whatever desicion the community comes up with. Sound okay?-- C  2  / C C  15:52, November 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * I just feel like this whole thing is being rushed way too much. It's not like we need to decide before the changes. So in a way I agree with you, but I really don't know at all about this issue. One of, if not the, biggest decisions on the wiki ever. --EveryDayJoe45 (talk) 21:11, November 1, 2010 (UTC)

Joining NIWA
Hey guys, just wanted to clarify something as far as NIWA goes: First of all, to ever be a MEMBER of NIWA and not just an affiliate, you cannot be hosted by either Wikia or Shoutwiki, or any other Wiki farm. Secondly, the decision to allow a new Wiki in is made by the majority of NIWA staff (which includes staff from each wiki), but the decision to break the "One Wiki per franchise" rule rests with the current wiki of that franchise - in your case, Zelda Wiki. This means that even if all of NIWA wanted to add you, and Zelda Wiki disagreed, you would not be added. That's the current state of things. This is not, however, a threat from Zelda Wiki to block you. I personally can't speak for the entire Wiki in this case; however, I am here telling you this as the NIWA Coordinator, as I felt it was my responsibility to make sure that you didn't allow this idea of joining NIWA to take hold without knowing what you were actually discussing. --Xizor159 (talk) 23:59, October 31, 2010 (UTC)

Decision Outcome
How are we going to make a decision based on the votes? How much of a majority should there be for a decision to get a dump and move to ShoutWiki? Should there be at least a 3/4 majority to move to shout wiki before anything is moved there since the content will stay here no matter what? I guess what I'm trying to say is this is an interesting situation were if there isn't a unanimous decision both sides will just be hurting each other. --Birdman5589 (talk) 02:09, November 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * As I said to Joe, we should consider waiting from November 3rd to November 4th and see if Oasis really is that unbearble, and if we agree to move, to move somewhere around November 5th. Thoughts?-- C  2  / C C  15:52, November 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * Fine by me. We can take a couple more days than that if we must. Jedimasterlink (talk) 20:38, November 1, 2010 (UTC)

Who will we lose?
Is there anyone who will ABSOLUTELY NOT stay with us if we move or leave if we stay? because I was about to cast my vote but I was thinking "do we really want to lose {insert name here} person?" If anyone will absolutely leve if we don't or won't move to another wiki with us, please tell us here.--Hylianhero777 (talk) 19:36, November 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * We don't want to lose Admins/B'crats/rollbackers. Now, on who would leave, some have voiced, some haven't. I'm sticking here. --<font color="#00BFF3">Jazzi <font color="#35077D">BassJapas Japas Artwork.png 19:39, November 1, 2010 (UTC)

so just to clarify, you are sticking with the rest of the wiki whereever we go? is there anyone you know who will stay with wikia no matter what or stop editing if we stay with wikia?--Hylianhero777 (talk) 19:44, November 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * Not positive on anyone else. And yes, I'm staying no matter where we go. --<font color="#00BFF3">Jazzi <font color="#35077D">BassJapas Japas Artwork.png 19:47, November 1, 2010 (UTC)

It's likely I'll stay here and move. <font color="#66FFFF">Oni <font color="#7F007F">Dark <font color="#007A00">Link 19:48, November 1, 2010 (UTC)

I've already said it, but if we stay with Wikia, I'm gone. If I can't even look at the site without any physical symptoms, there's no point in trying. Jedimasterlink (talk) 20:38, November 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * Monobook gives you headaches too? Anyway, I don't know what will happen to me if we move because I guess it comes down to what happens afterward. But I think we should avoid this topic anyway. It might be important to some, but all I see it doing is creating a 'whose more valuable' debate which is obviously unneeded right now. --EveryDayJoe45 (talk) 21:08, November 1, 2010 (UTC)

I suppose you are right joe. however, I did think I heard somewhere that XYZ would leave if we stayed with wikia (might just be making stuff up but I thought I heard it somewhere) and if he left we would be losing an admin. So I would like to know if it is a high ranking member like that.--Hylianhero777 (talk) 21:22, November 1, 2010 (UTC)


 * I think that we should stay with Wikia just so we have enough time to make more decisions, although if we were staying forever I would never edit after they phase out Monobook (which I think they are going to do eventully after Monacco). EveryDayJoe, you experience headaches with Monobook? Because I know I certainly do with Oasis, but if Monobook, which would be the only real way to continue to discuss this on this site without people actually AVOIDING it as far as I can see, gives people headaches, then that makes me wonder if staying with wikia to give time is a bad idea. Also, Monobook is the most likely skin option if we are to move ANYWHERE, as far as I can see, with a slight possibility of Vector.--  AM666999 <font style="color:#f9f9f9;background:#000000;">talk 21:26, November 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * No, jedi gets headaches with Oasis he says. I was more implying that monobook will remain an option as far as I am aware. --EveryDayJoe45 (talk) 21:29, November 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh, its just above you said "monobook gives you headaches too" Did you mean Oasis?--  AM666999 <font style="color:#f9f9f9;background:#000000;">talk 21:31, November 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * No. I was asking Jedi if Monobook gives him headaches as well as Oasis. --EveryDayJoe45 (talk) 21:34, November 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh, I see.--  AM666999 <font style="color:#f9f9f9;background:#000000;">talk 21:35, November 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * Hmmm. Monobook is at least bearable. As I said on the Shoutbox earlier, though, Oasis itself isn't the biggest reason I want to leave, it's just the one I decided to state here. I never like using my biggest arguments/reasons unless I really need to make a point. Jedimasterlink (talk) 22:05, November 1, 2010 (UTC)

I will stay no matter where this wiki goes-- Phantom   Zelda   ?!  

Hylianhero is correct in that I am going to leave if we stay with Wikia permanently (or with no foreseeable plans to move). And I know that I've been editing at a pretty much void activity level and therefore would not be a great loss, but I have definitely been considering becoming a regular contributor again. Err, not that it really matters as this isn't meant to be a "vote ShoutWiki or you lose a valuabe contributor" sort of thing. I'm simply saying I don't want to edit anymore if I have to deal with Wikia's BS any longer and if you choose to let that influence your vote that's your decision.  Xykeb   Yvolix   Zraliv  22:11, November 1, 2010 (UTC)

Shoutwiki legal
There are a number of concerns I have about wiki farms in general after wiki, and a number of questions. Mainly: will Shoutwiki own the content that is written, and would content remain there if the wiki was to move again? I have a number of other questions, but that is the main one on my mind at the moment.--  AM666999 <font style="color:#f9f9f9;background:#000000;">talk 21:45, November 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * The whole time I was assuming Wikia and Shoutwiki use the same content licensing, but I never personally looked into it. --EveryDayJoe45 (talk) 21:47, November 1, 2010 (UTC)

what about our own site?
I don't see why we can't just make our own website like DK wiki? Do we really have to join a "wiki farm?" We could just make our own website, apply to be an "affiliate" of NIWA (not a true member as I'm pretty sure not very many people want a merge) and then we can still use a monaco-like setup, right? even if we can't do something like monaco we can do somthing similar to monobook still I think. I actually would support this option over going to any wiki farm. Can anyone tell me the drawbacks of this and why it was not suggested in the first place?--Hylianhero777 (talk) 21:06, November 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * Because someone would need to host an incredible server, be completely trustworthy, have an understanding of programming (along with Monaco/Monobook coding if it were to implemented) and a whole other list of technical programming issues. It isn't the simplest thing in the world. We would also have to pay it for it, and I doubt one person wants to pay the cost and will continually pay the costs, even if they leave, for the server. - McGillivray  227  21:21, November 2, 2010 (UTC)