Forum:Removing Discussions

Forums: Index → War Room → Removing Discussions

While Wikia/Fandom have stated in the past that Discussions isn't being removed and is now a mandatory addition I feel the time has come for us to discuss how much we want it. It's been a few months since we bastardised it and I would like to look at how that's worked out for us.

Firstly, and the most pragmatic thing to look at it is how many users we have gained. At this point, the answer is none. Despite being told in the forum where the feature was added that we should "give it time" and that it may well attract users, it hasn't. In fact we had one user trying to find an admin so they could get moderator rights. When they were contacted about the matter on wiki, they didn't even reply.

Secondly is the mater of moderation. As of right now, the page is not moderated. I did so for a while, however nearly every day new policy violation content was being added. And often by users that put one comment and don't come back.When we discussed bastardising it Fandom agreed to help moderate it. This has not happened. And there have been no users on Discussions that have shown themselves trustworthy enough, and active enough to be given the rights. This gadget requires constant attention which is just a major drain on resources for something that isn't even benefiting the wiki.

Thirdly, and springboarding off my last comment is that this feature does not, and has not benefited the wiki. So far, the extent of discussions of the feature have been nothing more than option questions (what's your favourite map etc.) and looking for players. Neither of these in any way benefit us. While it is granted that we bastardised it and generally don't talk about wiki stff there, on the times we did I linked those users talk pages so they could discuss the issue, they never followed though. One user even told us about pages they felt needed images twice.

From these 3 points alone, I don't think the feature has helped us and think we should have it disabled as right now it's nothing more than an unmoderated wasteland. None of us on the Wiki use it, and none of those that use the feature use the wiki. Personally, I think this should of been a wiki option like chat or article comments so each Wiki has a choice if they have it on. Instead we got it turned on without anyone talking to us and got told "tough shit, you have it now, like it". It's been several months, none of us like it, please take it round back and shoot it.

Crazy sam10 • Talk

11:32, May 17, 2017 (UTC)

Discussion

Devil's advocate: It's not a detriment. I say leave it there if it really has no effect on the wiki. I'm sure there would be at least some people somewhere that would be upset to see it go. Joe Copp 13:47, May 17, 2017 (UTC)

There is one small detriment. Checkuser rights don't work there. So it can attract sockpuppets and the only way to get confirmation is to get VSTF or Staff to do a check. Within the first month we actually had a user have about 10 socks. Also while it has our name it mean that every time someone does osmrthing against policy or negative it reflects badly on us. I mean this post gives out the impression we have users being a nuisance on other wikis, even though I doubt it was any of our users.

Crazy sam10 • Talk

13:57, May 17, 2017 (UTC)

The last I heard, Wikia was trying to get checkuser rights to be compatible with discussions. I don't know of their progress, however. This would be a good question to ask Wikia if we can.      06:45, May 18, 2017 (UTC)

Although my initial reaction is "Hell yes!", I do have question. Another benefit Wikia Fandom said was that it would draw more people to the wiki itself. Have we seen an uptick or even less of a drop off after release day since the Discussions feature was added? Conqueror of all Zombies (talk) 16:48, May 17, 2017 (UTC)

I've noticed no change to be honest. I'm not sure if the bastardisation is involved, but the wiki and discussions have been like two separate communities. That being said, as noted above, when people did mention something with pages they would never follow though with editing. Even when linked talk pages.

Crazy sam10 • Talk

16:51, May 17, 2017 (UTC)

Same here, I don't think it really affected the activity of the wiki itself. Ultimate94ninja ^{talk · contribs} 17:11, May 17, 2017 (UTC)

Alright, just making sure there wasn't anything that I had missed. Conqueror of all Zombies (talk) 20:06, May 17, 2017 (UTC)

Wikia really stepped out of line by forcing it on us without asking. However now they are rolling it out so we should be able to get rid of it, or it will be compulsory for all. Either way it will still remain bastardized, if we wanted to go meta we could have a forum mocking the best posts because some of them are brilliant. I say yes to removing it, and Wikia have lost a lot of credibility with this one. Heck, if they'd have even asked us first, I'd've actually supported it. YELLOWLUCARIO ^TALK  18:26, May 17, 2017 (UTC)

Yeah...I don't think that going "meta" and mocking the posts on Discussions is a good route to go in the slightest. Conqueror of all Zombies (talk) 20:06, May 17, 2017 (UTC)

Support — - Considering that the main thing that they did say that it would bring more editors in.. And it didn't. It's just plagued with rather stupid questions and the such, Most of them can either be answered by a Google search or checking on the main site. Twig _(Talk) 19:42, May 17, 2017 (UTC)

You should really hold off on voting until the actual voting process begins. This is for discussing the proposal and not voting on it. Conqueror of all Zombies (talk) 20:06, May 17, 2017 (UTC)

Can't be arsed. Just want that.. Stain removed. I had a more eloquent way of saying that before, Just swapping it over to that because I'm tired. Twig _(Talk) 20:12, May 17, 2017 (UTC)

As a side thought. And for the sake of "fairness", who thinks I should post this forum in Discussions itself to see if we get any users from there? I mean, if none of the users from discussions come here to state why they don't want it shut down, it somewhat proves a point. And if they do come here then maybe we can at least see some kind of benefit to leaving it on.

Crazy sam10 • Talk

21:50, May 17, 2017 (UTC)

This would be imperative, as you say for the sake of fairness. But I wouldn't conclude from a lack of participation that they want it gone.      06:48, May 18, 2017 (UTC)

Oh no. What I meant was if there was a lack of input it would strengthen mu point about how the app has yet to gain us any new wiki contributors.

Crazy sam10 • Talk

11:10, May 18, 2017 (UTC)

The problem with Discussions (and why it isn't bringing in users) is that it was made more as an extension of the mobile app then the wiki itself. While Wikia did allow it to be cross platform, there isn't actually any proper interaction between Discussions and the wiki. Hell, Discussions itself only uses the mobile skin.

This also could explain why it hasn't brought in editors; the mobile version is awful (same for Wikipedia), and people browsing the wiki on their phones and iPods are usually in that 11-15 age bracket (which is even more likely considering the sort of content posted on there).

That being said, I agree with Joe on this one. What's the point in disabling it? While the fact that Checkuser doesn't work on there is annoying, we decided to leave it alone and not moderate it. Right now they are two clear entities that don't interact, and unless issues from there actually cross onto the wiki, it won't ever affect us. Capt. Miller^Talk 02:55, May 18, 2017 (UTC)

I sort of think it falls under the same category as chat. That stopped getting used so we disabled it. While we did move to Discord the idea of disabling chat without Discord was still put on the table. Discussions is kind of the same. Like I said above, while we can just ignore it and leave it unmoderated that means we have something with our name on it going unmoderated. If we did leave it like this, I would prefer if we could at least hand it over to someone that is going to moderate it full time. Staff said they were going to do this but have not followed though, and there's been no users on the app itself that have shown themselves to be any kind of moderator.

Crazy sam10 • Talk

11:18, May 18, 2017 (UTC)

Also, after speaking with YellowLucario in Discord we've added a bunch of new guidelines. So if need be we are ready to go back to administrating it. However I still feel it's an uneeded feature, and think we need to incorporate more rules and regs that push people on to the Wiki if it's going to be of any success.

Crazy sam10 • Talk

13:54, May 18, 2017 (UTC)

Voting

Alright then, looks like we've discussed more than enough. Me and Sam have prepared Discussions for whatever happens next. There's a few options I'll leave but prepare your own if needs be.

Get rid of Dicussions

Support — I'd rather get rid of it. This isn't the place for it, with a childish outside community there is no positive to having it. It's been a trainwreck, it needs to go. YELLOWLUCARIO ^TALK  14:57, May 18, 2017 (UTC)

Support — We never wanted it. It's yet to do anything beneficial. It may not be a hindrance as some say, but it's not a benefit either. We can operate without it.

Crazy sam10 • Talk

15:01, May 18, 2017 (UTC)

Support — Bloody idiotic thing that was forced on us with a lie of getting more active editors, Which it hasn't. Twig _(Talk) 20:23, May 18, 2017 (UTC)

Support — It doesn't feel like something a wiki should have. Feels like having lunch hour in a library. We're a source of information more than anything. http://i.imgur.com/GhKJh.pngP90^Deathmanhttp://i.imgur.com/uceaHlB.png19:09, May 21, 2017 (UTC)

Bastardize it, leave it to Wikia

Support — Doesn't affect anything, see no reason in disabling it. Capt. Miller^Talk 15:42, May 18, 2017 (UTC)

Weak Support — Wikia will never enforce our local policies; this is why it seems they do nothing. They will only ever enforce the Terms of Use. Perhaps this is enough for now - we can always review it again later, like we are reviewing it now.      23:42, May 18, 2017 (UTC)

Leave it to CoD Wiki's admins and 'crats

Support — The way I see it, we have to at least accept that younger people (11-16) are a core component of the involved CoD fandom. As was previously mentioned, discussions on mobile is far more usable than any of the main site; that alone is likely one of the bigger reasons we haven't seen any influx of users. As younger people tend to browse more often on mobile devices, I don't find it all that appalling that many of the posts are lacking in content, or that post visibility is low [see Sam's discussion post about this forum].

While I certainly don't have that much faith that Wikia/Fandom will add features that create some coordination between discussions and the main wiki, the fact remains that it's a reasonably active part of our site and has potential to draw more users in. I understand that moderation is an ongoing issue but I truly don't see "it doesn't affect us" as an adequate reason to be rid of something. Discussions is just a fun little side project for younger people or those not so invested in the deep lore present on the wiki to talk about what aspects of the games they enjoy.

To be honest it's a little puzzling how upset some of you are about the content of the posts. With a few exceptions, they really aren't even that bad. And in regards to moderation, I'll do it when I can--shouldn't be too hard considering it's easy to scroll past all the posts and take out what doesn't belong. I'm quite sure there will be at least someone else that will not be opposed to helping out with this as well since it's so easy.

I think my root feeling about this is that the CoD fandom, at least from a distanced perspective, has a high degree of "in and out" users that only want to briefly participate in a conversation about a given subject. It's the nature of the fandom and franchise, not a result of discussions. I think discussions is merely a new avenue through which we can see this unfold. Those who want to get involved in the main wiki will do so with or without discussions enabled, but I think discussions may at least improve the chance that they get the opportunity to do so. Joe Copp 18:49, May 18, 2017 (UTC)

We have set up some new guidelines to deal with unbastardising it and integrating it more. But that means we need people to moderate it. But the biggest issue is how often people post something against guidelines. If people aren't coming on wiki, it stands to reason leaving them warnings on their talk page is going to get ignored.

Crazy sam10 • Talk

19:03, May 18, 2017 (UTC)

Considering the scope of content currently being posted on discussions, I don't have a problem with not leaving talk page messages for deletions. We could put at the top of the guidelines page that "your post can and will be deleted without warning if it breaks these rules." Joe Copp 19:36, May 18, 2017 (UTC)

Comments

If we leave it to option 2, I'll set up a forum on CC about asking someone to adopt it. Give them the mod rights so they can deal with it.

Crazy sam10 • Talk

15:01, May 18, 2017 (UTC) Also I posted the main forum as well as the voting section on to discussions. So far neither have had any type of reply, but 5 new comments had appeared since the first post, so at least 5 people must have seen it. While it has been a short time, the lack of response does indicate the users on Discussions do not care about the main Wiki.

Crazy sam10 • Talk

16:47, May 18, 2017 (UTC)

Discussions post has had 1 response. I told them to come to this forum to input their content and they have yet to do so.

Crazy sam10 • Talk

01:46, May 19, 2017 (UTC)

For those curious, the two posts I left on Discussions were this and this. As you can see the first got no responses. The second got a response, however despite being told to input here, have not. Honestly, Discussions has gained 732 posts since its activation in November, which does seem like a lot compared to other Wikis discussions. And many of these posts are made by users that have not returned. Not only are we not getting any new users to the wiki, we're gaining none for Discussions either. Despite assurances that this service would help revitalise us, " This could be an opportunity for you to reach new potential members and to grow the community" it has not. It was activated without our consent and simply has not done anything constructive since its activation.

Crazy sam10 • Talk

14:08, May 19, 2017 (UTC)

Is there even any indication that Wikia will allow either of the first options? Joe Copp 14:15, May 19, 2017 (UTC)

Well it is currently bastardised. So they don't seem to care if we ignore it. On another wiki a staff member replied in regards to if the feature could be turned off with "Can it be turned off? Sure, but except in extreme circumstances, we probably wouldn't as it's a main feature". So while they still ahve the ability to turn it off, and I think if the community disagrees they may do so. Especially given our circumstances that it was turned on without any communication with any of the local admins.

Crazy sam10 • Talk

14:24, May 19, 2017 (UTC)

Deadline - Because I want this forum closed properly, I'm trying something new and giving it a deadline. On Wednesday 24th May 9:00 PM BST I am closing this forum. So votes must come in now to be counted.

Crazy sam10 • Talk

16:38, May 21, 2017 (UTC)