Forum:Moving the Wiki to Curse Networks

I address this to all users of this Wikia, both SysOp, Registered, and Unregistered.

I know that I have not been around personally much over the recent past, however, my dedication to the fans of this great game remains unwaivered by the passage of time, and I always do all that I can to look out for not only the interests of this wiki, but the users of it, too.

I have come to propose that we move away from Wikia to Curse Networks. Curse are as passionate about games as we are about playing them, and we would make a natural partner for them.

I'm sure many of you have noticed that the skin that Wikia operates, and refuses to deactivate, has led to many Wikis seeking better hosting, Wowpedia being a notable casualty. The new skin is also driven to increase revenue for Wikia, while at the same time decreasing the quality of the content we have to offer.

The road after we've moved won't be as easy as turning on a switch. We stand to lose some things if we move.

What we Lose

 * Shared Login with Wikia. Curse would operate their own Login system independent of Wikia.
 * Monaco would be *gone*. We would instead have a much friendlier skin system that complements our card article pages.
 * Ads. Curse's goal is for every Wiki to be as add-free as possible. We might not *completely* get rid of ads, but they would be far less intrusive than they are now.
 * Avatars, Facebook Connect, MyHome and the like, all of the Wikia social features would be gone.
 * The automated welcome bot would be gone. If there is enough interest, Curse may code one for us.
 * The Rich Text Editor would be gone. CategorySelect (easy-add/remove categories) would be gone too.
 * "Following" articles would likely change to "Watching" as per the standard Wiki terminology for MediaWiki.
 * Shared help - help pages from the Wikia Help wiki - would not be available.
 * It is worth noting that Wikia would retain a copy of all content on their server at the same location.
 * We will inevitably lose some users, but I hope the vast majority of you will join us in this transition.

But we also stand to gain things.

What we would gain

 * Site speed. Far less extensive and latency-prone squid caching means faster page accesses.
 * Stability. No unannounced code changes to MediaWiki code, for example.
 * More direct control over the backend of the site means upgrades and extension additions will go much faster.
 * Account renaming would be far simpler, especially for users who wanted to pick up their old name after the Wiki move.

What we would keep the same

 * Every byte of content stays the same. Images and Articles both included, including edit histories.
 * SemanticMediaWiki would remain, and would continue to power the heart of the site.
 * All relevant extensions will be kept.
 * Any relevant JavaScript and CSS code will be kept.
 * Rules, Policies, and User Rights should all remain the same.
 * I will endeavour to ensure that a stable Mobile skin be available for use.

I will be here to answer any and all questions posed by users, and to help allay any fears that this move will ultimately present.--TwoTailedFox (My Talk Page) 19:36, November 17, 2012 (UTC)

Comments
Hmmm... I would like to see that they have to offer first. Can you give me a direct link to something Curse Networks has so that I can fiddle around on there? (The only association I have ever had with Curse before this was Minecraft, and it just seems devoted to videogames, not necessarily card games.) Also, what would happen to the wikia in the meantime? Would the site be shutdown? 1 other thing... In lieu of categories, how would we be able to arrange things in lists, like the monsters that could be searched via "Sangan" for example? --UltimateKuriboh (talk • contribs) 20:05, November 17, 2012 (UTC)
 * Categories would still exist, but the extension CategorySelect would be unavailable, which is not a major loss. The SMW searching functionality would also remain. As for something that Curse operates, Wowpedia is one of their largest acquisitions, and go a long way to proving that Curse know how to take care of Wikis under their command.
 * I can't reveal *too* much about their plans, but know this: We fit in perfectly for what they have planned next.--TwoTailedFox (My Talk Page) 20:08, November 17, 2012 (UTC)
 * Hmmmm this seems good; I think it's great that the layout for Wowpedia looks very similar (if not identical) to this wikia. What new domain name would our wikia go under? Also, would it be alright for me to suggest this idea to 1 other wikia? I don't know how feasible it would be for them, but just to put it out there... Or would you rather this remain an independent notion? --UltimateKuriboh (talk • contribs) 20:31, November 17, 2012 (UTC)
 * You are free to broker the suggestion, of course. For note, the new Skin that the Wikia would use would be very similar to Wikipedia. As for a domain name, we haven't got that far yet in discussions. Stay tuned for information later on that.--TwoTailedFox (My Talk Page) 20:35, November 17, 2012 (UTC)


 * CategorySelect was disabled from this wiki many years ago at our own request.
 * How we would be able to arrange lists like that "Sangan" one would be exactly the same on both sites. -- Deltaneos (talk) 20:39, November 17, 2012 (UTC)
 * Can you link me to it?--TwoTailedFox (My Talk Page) 21:11, November 17, 2012 (UTC)


 * Sangan: Searchable Cards or Forum:Removal of the CategorySelect tool? -- Deltaneos (talk) 21:14, November 17, 2012 (UTC)


 * Concepts would stay, as we would keep SMW. The searching functionality would remain unchanged from what it is now.--TwoTailedFox (My Talk Page) 21:21, November 17, 2012 (UTC)

The only major advantage I see to forking is that we'll have a choice of a different default skin, which is much less obstructed by ads; most likely either Monobook or Vector. Our current default skin the Wikia skin and the old skin Monaco will most likely not be options.

There are a lot of features Wikia insist on wikis using that are more social networkish than encyclopedic. On Curse we wouldn't have to use those. Most of them wouldn't even be an option. But most of them on Wikia are optional. They can be switched off with community approval. A few, such as the default skin, are not optional.

Just to point out the disadvantages. If this goes ahead, the wiki doesn't exactly move, it forks. This means that there will be two wikis, the one here on Wikia and the one on Curse. Wikia most likely will not close this wiki or allow a notice to be left pointing readers and editors to the new site. The two sites will then be in competition for readers and editors. -- Deltaneos (talk) 20:39, November 17, 2012 (UTC)
 * The site here on Wikia appears very high in search engines and is linked to from countless other sites. If we split far more people are going to find the Wikia site than the Curse one. Here's traffic stats for one wiki, WoWWiki/WoWpedia, a World of Warcraft wiki, that forked to Curse before; Wikia copy, Curse copy. Two years after the fork, the Wikia copy still gets well over twice as much traffic. Plus the Curse version of that site is endorsed by the creators of WoW and it's easier for a wiki on an MMORPG to reach out to its readers to inform them of the fork. We don't have either either of those options. I don't think we'd come close to half the traffic Wikia would still be getting after two years if we do fork.
 * People are inevitably going to continue to edit here. There will essentially be two sets of people working on two different sites. This could mean a lot less work gets done. Potential new editors are also most likely to find the Wikia site first.


 * Actually this was a concern of mine as well, but one I neglected to put down. How would we notify users that we officially moved moved to Curse? And from what TwoTailedFox mentioned, it seems that this wikia will also exist, and cannot/will not be shutdown. --UltimateKuriboh (talk • contribs) 20:48, November 17, 2012 (UTC)


 * I 100% agree with Deltaneos - Wikia copy will get more traffic that the new one. I'm an admin of Wikia-wiki too, and I was considering a fork when the Oasis was implemented as well. However, I decided to stay and bear with all Wikia's (unneeded) changes to the skin rather than compete with Google ranking and the existing copy. And Wikia will likely prohibit you for giving any pernament notice about wiki move. They done it to many wikis that decided to do so. Final Cannon   Dyskusja  20:54, November 17, 2012 (UTC)


 * If I recall correctly, WoWpedia got as many fansites as they could to inform people of the move. Aside from advertising the wiki in other places there's not an awful lot that can be done. If the Curse wiki is kept more up-to-date on new material, that material might appear higher on search engines. But there's no guarantee that people won't continue to add new material to this site. -- Deltaneos (talk) 20:57, November 17, 2012 (UTC)

One other advantage would be the search bar. Currently when you search a page, you'll be taken to a page of results rather than directly to the page even if you type the exact page name. In Special:Preferences, if you tick "Enable Go-Search", it will work the old (good) way. If we go to Curse, it will work the old way by default. I have been hoping Wikia will sometime allow us to put it back the old way by default. -- Deltaneos (talk) 20:57, November 17, 2012 (UTC)

Are those people in charge of hosting Bulbapedia ? HPZ - O.N.E. - Captain Moe FTW ! (talk • contribs) 21:00, November 17, 2012 (UTC)


 * Bulbapedia is hosted by Bulbagarden.net. Curse does have a Pokémon wiki though pokemon.marriland.com. -- Deltaneos (talk) 21:05, November 17, 2012 (UTC)


 * Sorry, wrong link; wiki.marriland.com. -- Deltaneos (talk) 21:09, November 17, 2012 (UTC)


 * Delta is quite correct. We would have no option *but* to fork. The core idea would be to keep the new Wiki as up-to-date as possible, and spread the word as much as possible to the new site. Traffic will still be an issue, with Wikia getting the lion's share, but as we can see with WoWWiki, that doesn't mean it will be a better site.
 * This will require effort, co-ordination, and persistence. At the end of day, I am 100% confident that the Curse-hosted alternative is superior than the status quo under Wikia.--TwoTailedFox (My Talk Page) 21:06, November 17, 2012 (UTC)

I'm quite suprised by this idea of splitting. I have to say that some of the wikis that moved to Curse now have little activity. The wiki I spent time with split itself, the one at the Curse now has barely 50 edits per day and around 10 active users, while the one on Wikia has much more numbers. Oh, and I have to mention that it has been since 1 year when that event happened. So please, think what you can lose. E n e r g y X ∞ 23:16, November 17, 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm kinda mixed on this. I do think that Curse will offer us a better user experience, but not having enough people that can edit and keep everything up-to-date will totally not help us. -- - Dark Ace SP ( Talk )  23:12, November 17, 2012 (UTC)
 * If every single person reading this moves with us, that will pay for itself very quickly.--TwoTailedFox (My Talk Page) 23:12, November 17, 2012 (UTC)
 * Ah, but the problem is that how many will read? And if they do, how many are going to go there? People who visit this wiki are happy to have this one, no need for another one. I feel that The Vault (the wiki that split itself I mentioned earlier) has little visitors, because it is hard to navigate and very unpractical to the viewer. E n e r g y X  ∞ 23:16, November 17, 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't think site navigation counts as a hindrance issue.--TwoTailedFox (My Talk Page) 23:18, November 17, 2012 (UTC)


 * It could be, the easier a site is to navigate and use, the more people will probably use it. -- - Dark Ace SP ( Talk )  23:23, November 17, 2012 (UTC)


 * I'm against the move for the reasons Deltaneos put forth. I don't like the new changes on Wikia, but I feel we'd lose more from forking that from staying where we are. If the wiki does fork, I will of course go with it; I love this community.
 * I think forking would be better for the editors. In my opinion, our primary concern shouldn't be those who edit, it should be those who don't. The readers. The people who use this site as a reference. I feel forking would hurt them. However, On that note, if we fork, we would do well to inform everyone we can of it. Post on any and all YGO-related forums about it. Those who use Dueling Network can stick a link in their profiles or something too. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 23:37, November 17, 2012 (UTC)
 * Just to reference an answer below to this, the readers would be the greatest benefactors from this move. We would finally have a default Wiki layout that conforms to the best possible browsing experience for new readers.--TwoTailedFox (My Talk Page) 19:23, November 18, 2012 (UTC)

Two questions: Would both sites continue to be updated, and does Curse support mobile access as much? Tarix3245 (talk • contribs) 03:04, November 18, 2012 (UTC)
 * I can't promise that this one will to the same standard, but the new one definitely will. I have raised mobile access to Curse directly.--TwoTailedFox (My Talk Page) 20:32, November 18, 2012 (UTC)

TTF, you mention that this would tie in perfectly with a planned future move of Curse. I have a direct line of communication with a Curse employee (I kinda have to, considering I'm an administrator of the Minecraft Wiki), and have actually asked her in the not-too-distant past how Curse would likely respond to a request from us to move, and she said it would be likely that Curse would turn us down, since their primary focus is video games, and ours is not. Does your statement mean that Curse has a shift or broadening of focus planned or something? (You can email me if this isn't something that can be discussed publically yet, or point me to the Curse employee I should get in touch with for more information.) I've also broached the subject with Delt in the past (around the same time I did so with my Curse contact), and his reservations largely haven't changed since then. They're valid points, and having had time to think about them, I largely have to agree with him. We do have one thing that could massively help, though; if we could manage to make the move coincide with the deployment of the new card article layout, so that the Curse fork uses the new layout but this wiki still uses CardTable2, I think that would massively help convince people to move with us. Another possibility that I also touched on in that forum discussion is a Wikimedia Wikidata-like setup: if Curse could set up a central repository for media files and for basic information (basically, just about everything we currently stuff into SMW properties), it would greatly reduce the amount of work that would have to go into setting up new language versions; Curse seems to love the idea of offering different language versions of their wikis, if my experience on the Minecraft Wiki is any indication. The only problem with that is that the original implementation of the Wikidata concept is currently still in its infancy, only handling interwikis, though infobox information (and possibly other types of data) is planned for the future. One last point: Wikia has previously shown no hesitation to strip editors' userrights on wikis that have forked. I have no data, anecdotal or otherwise, to back this up, but it's not too much of a stretch for them to jump from this to stripping userrights on other Wikia wikis or even globally, and there's also the possibility they could this as a reason to refuse future requests (such as a wiki adoption or bot flag request) from such editors. I would like to think Wikia is generally too reasonable for this to actually happen, but I still hesitate at the thought of it. 「 ディノ 奴 千？！ 」? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 06:06, November 18, 2012 (UTC)
 * The new CardTable template would be something that would help the move immensely. My curse contact is Donovan Duncan, who is the current VP of Marketing and Sale for Curse. I can have a greater depth of conversion on the Chat channel rather than here. As for Wikia stripping editor's of their rights, I can't conclusively say what they would do. Some editors from WoWWiki did get their rights revoked, however.
 * I refer to my point below, and to one of the points I raised above; the current Wiki experience we have here is not a good one, especially for new people. The default layout is ghastly, and was rolled out despite objections. It's also far too heavily invested towards social media, which is a cheap and laughable idea. The entire concept of Wikis on Wikia is to generate revenue; Curse have even acknowledged in the past that they believe Wikis are a poor choice of website to earn revenue from.--TwoTailedFox (My Talk Page) 19:22, November 18, 2012 (UTC)

Wikia hasn't been too kind to us lately, but it's not that bad. Moving everything seems like it would be a bit of a hassle. Also, would this site be deleted if we did move? Would it simply stop being updated? --DARK 07:55, November 18, 2012 (UTC)


 * The site would stay as it now and anyone who still wanted to edit it could and its more likely that this site would get new editors than the new one, since Wikia pops up much higher on Google search results than any other wikifarm would.
 * Having my userights stripped here from forking makes me very uneasy. If we did fork, I wouldn't put it past myself to edit both Wikis if I'm particularly bored. I edit other Wikia wikis on occasion and even considering putting forth an adoption request on an inactive one at one point. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 12:10, November 18, 2012 (UTC)

I rejected the "Curse" site option, as it's just pointless and waste of the time. If you wish to argue, go read Delta's comment up above, he struck the good points. -- i  F  r  e  d  C  a  t  13:21, November 18, 2012 (UTC)
 * Not if you're an unregistered user. Part of the reason for the move is to make the site look better for new people. I really don't think that's pointless.--TwoTailedFox (My Talk Page) 19:22, November 18, 2012 (UTC)


 * My point was this: How many new people would see the new site? Again, they would end up on the Wikia site first in most cases. Moving would hurt new users because they wouldn't be able to find us. Those that do would have their experience improved, yes. Let me clear: I hate the Wikia skin, I hate the social media stuff, but I consider them to be necessary evils to deal with. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 21:30, November 18, 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh, I think we will be able to spread the word to many, many people. Will lots of people still come here? Yes, that's inevitable and unavoidable. I don't consider those evils to be necessary, and the more that join in this transition, the easier it will be.--TwoTailedFox (My Talk Page) 21:33, November 18, 2012 (UTC)


 * Many people? Yes. Enough people? No. You keep talking about "this transition" as if its definitely happening. Which it isn't until this discussion is through and more people have weighed in. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 21:37, November 18, 2012 (UTC)
 * I think we would be able to get enough people to go to the new site. But I need your help to do that. Same applies to every editor here. You're the people that have helped keep this place alive, and you are the people that would help it to flourish with a new host. I'm not willing to accept a second-rate Wiki experience for convenience, and neither should anyone else. We should be striving for the best, not sticking around for the mediocre.--TwoTailedFox (My Talk Page) 21:42, November 18, 2012 (UTC)


 * I'm willing to help. As I said, if we fork, I will come along. The majority of my free time is spent on this wiki, in this community. If it forks, I'll go with it, even if I don't fully agree with the idea. You haven't convinced me yet - and I want to be convinced. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 21:50, November 18, 2012 (UTC)
 * We have a range of forums, social media, and fansites to carry the word. Reddit, Gamefaqs, Pojo, to name just a few out there. Wikia is seen as a community laughing stock at the moment, and that alone turns some people off. If we put forward the reasons above to move, I'm am very sure that they will side with us. They, like us, are passionate about the game. I understand the concerns, especially those by Delta, and I'm not saying that it will be roses overnight, but I believe that the more that would join us, the easier it would be. I know that we hate change sometimes, but sometimes, it is for the best.--TwoTailedFox (My Talk Page) 21:56, November 18, 2012 (UTC)

If the site on Wikia cannot be shut down, then it's pointless. We'd just give the current content over to other editors, and then try to compete with our own work. Plus, don't you think it would be wise to wait for that "what Curse have planned" to actually come into life before comitting? The user experience here isn't that bad. We should only take such drastic measures if Wikia forces something really bad. --Eps01 (talk • contribs) 22:06, November 18, 2012 (UTC)
 * The skin is bad enough, really. Wowpedia also did the exact same thing, and they're doing absolutely fine. Also, we would have what this Wiki does not have at the moment; official information direction from Konami (such as newsfeeds, etc), and official recognition from Konami as a fan site that is part of the Curse Network.--TwoTailedFox (My Talk Page) 22:11, November 18, 2012 (UTC)


 * Wait, wait, wait. What?! I don't know much about Curse, but that would be part of the deal? Contact with Konami and official recognition? Can you explain this further? Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 22:31, November 18, 2012 (UTC)
 * It wouldn't be immediate, but Curse seem very, very confident that can get Konami on board for the above. It would include news and events direct from Konami, and it would also mean that we would be recognised as a fan site, whereas right now, we don't even have a nod from Konami indicating we exist. It's win-win, we get the nod from Konami, and we further expand the reach of their audience.--TwoTailedFox (My Talk Page) 22:37, November 18, 2012 (UTC)


 * Hmm, very interesting, but it leaves me curious how it would affect our anime and manga stuff. I somehow can't see Konami endorsing our use of screencaps, manga scans and the like, though. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 00:48, November 19, 2012 (UTC)
 * Very easy to cover that under fair use for factual documentation.--TwoTailedFox (My Talk Page) 00:50, November 19, 2012 (UTC)
 * I was under the impression that fair use was a thing specific to wikis that wikis use to avoid copyright infringement. A quick google search reveals I was wrong. I'd honestly not heard of fair use anywhere but wikis before. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 00:58, November 19, 2012 (UTC)
 * If we were hosting, say, entire episodes, or linking to them on YouTube, or scanning entire manga pages, that wouldn't be fair use, because we'd be using more material than we needed. By only using parts of it, say, cards, or very specific scenes to highlight a character, we are only using what we need.--TwoTailedFox (My Talk Page) 01:20, November 19, 2012 (UTC)


 * I realize that and that's what we do now - we use what we need. My point was would Konami still want us to do that if we were actually affiliated with them? Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 03:27, November 19, 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't see why they'd have a problem with it.--TwoTailedFox (My Talk Page) 03:35, November 19, 2012 (UTC)
 * Attorneys will always find a problem, even if there is none :) . This is a matter of interests. I'd imagine they wouldn't be fond of spoilers for the anime and manga. --Eps01 (talk • contribs) 12:12, November 19, 2012 (UTC)
 * If there was a major problem with it, legal action would already have been taken. Not only against us, but against a range of other sites as well.--TwoTailedFox (My Talk Page) 14:49, November 19, 2012 (UTC)


 * That's not the point. Would the English branch of Konami want a site affiliated with them spoiling anime and manga information that has not been dubbed/released in English? Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 15:16, November 19, 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't think it's a significant issue at all. Otherwise we'd have to scrap to entire synopsis for GX Series 4. I really don't think that's going to be a barrier.--TwoTailedFox (My Talk Page) 15:50, November 19, 2012 (UTC)

Would we be able to keep the same account log in as we do in this wikia? EQ1 (talk • contribs) 22:57, November 18, 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes. Usernames would however, need to be claimed, as they would be saved with a prefix. The process with Wowpedia was very smooth when it came to users claiming their original names.--TwoTailedFox (My Talk Page) 22:58, November 18, 2012 (UTC)


 * How would we claim a username anyway, just post on a page somewhere in the *possible* new wiki? Also, if Konami might actually recognize us as a fansite, I'd totally be in for it. -- - Dark Ace SP ( Talk )  01:43, November 19, 2012 (UTC)
 * On the new Wiki, there would be a link to just claim your previous username. It uses the login system, and it quite seamless.--TwoTailedFox (My Talk Page) 01:51, November 19, 2012 (UTC)


 * Would we still be able to edit trivia page, making talk pages and stuff like that? -- E. G.G.  (My Contributions) 15:25, November 19, 2012 (UTC)
 * Absolutely.--TwoTailedFox (My Talk Page) 15:50, November 19, 2012 (UTC)