Talk:Fandom (website): Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 22:09, 4 October 2016

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Fandom (website) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

This article was nominated for deletion on 11 March 2007. The result of the discussion was speedy keep.

Computing C‑class Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Websites: Computing C‑class Mid‑importance

	This article is part of WikiProject Websites, an attempt to create and link together articles about the major websites on the web. To participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.WebsitesWikipedia:WikiProject WebsitesTemplate:WikiProject WebsitesWebsites articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computing (assessed as Low-importance).

Wikipedia C‑class Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Wikipedia, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's encyclopedic coverage of itself. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page. Please remember to avoid self-references and maintain a neutral point of view, even on topics relating to Wikipedia.WikipediaWikipedia:WikiProject WikipediaTemplate:WikiProject WikipediaWikipedia articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

Archive 1	Archive 2	Archive 3
Archive 4	Archive 5

The following Wikipedia contributors may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.

Yogi Beara (talk · contribs) This user has declared a connection.
Philippe (talk · contribs) This user has declared a connection.
Gmartin1122 (talk · contribs) This user has declared a connection.

Connection with Wired

Two of the images associate Wikia with Wired (magazine). What's the connection? If there isn't one, we shouldn't imply that there is. But if there is, we should spell it out. yoyo (talk) 04:32, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Adding to the Wikimedia Family

Looking at it, this would be suited better if it were a Wikimedia project. It would serve as 'A collection of Wikis' or something like that. Analyi|(talk) 21:58, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Updating the Wikia article

It is requested that an edit be made to the semi-protected article at Fandom (website). (edit · history · last · links · protection log)

This template must be followed by a complete and specific description of the request, that is, specify what text should be removed and a verbatim copy of the text that should replace it. "Please change X" is not acceptable and will be rejected; the request must be of the form "please change X to Y".

The edit may be made by any autoconfirmed user. Remember to change the |answered=no parameter to "yes" when the request has been accepted, rejected or on hold awaiting user input. This is so that inactive or completed requests don't needlessly fill up the edit requests category. You may also wish to use the {{ESp}} template in the response. To request that a page be protected or unprotected, make a protection request.

‹ The template Edit fully-protected is being considered for merging. ›

Hi there. My name is Greta, and I am disclosing up front that I have a COI around this article - I am currently working at Wikia. I was asked, along with my colleague Philippe (an employee of Wikia, who is also disclosing a COI related to this article) to work with the Wikipedia editor community to see if we could get the article on Wikia updated. There are several things on it that are quite outdated, and we believe that there is a strong "coatrack” effect. A number of details could potentially be cleaned up because they are no longer relevant.

We thought it might be easiest if we started with our edited version of the "ideal" article from our perspective, presented it, and then worked with anyone willing to reconcile the differences between the two. Philippe has put together our draft, and we welcome any comments or suggestions. We want to emphasize that we've made no attempt to "whitewash" anything - we haven't rewritten much, we've just trimmed and edited. Any additions are minor. We have the utmost respect for the Wikipedia process (as you all know, I'm sure, Philippe was on staff at the WMF for 6 and a half years) and want to work within the rules, and our management shares our commitment to this.

Please let us know if you have any feedback. In the meantime, what is the best way for us to proceed?

Gmartin1122 (talk) 22:06, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Since there's been no response here, I'm going to try {{Edit request}}. -Philippe (talk) 14:54, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Gmartin1122 and Philippe: I'm willing to work with you two to update this article. -- MorbidEntree - _{(Talk to me! (っ◕‿◕)っ♥)}(please reply using {{ping}}) 03:38, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@MorbidEntree: Thanks so much for your offer! My name is Nikki and I work at Wikia as well. I'd love to work with you on this if you're open to it (Greta has moved on from Wikia). As Greta mentioned, we have the utmost respect for the Wikipedia process. We have some upcoming fact-based updates that I think would make sense to include in the article. I want to be respectful of your time. Does it make sense to work together once we have that information? Thanks again!

Thanks, @MorbidEntree:, but I have also moved on from Wikia. While I continue to declare a COI as they were my previous employer, I am no longer working on that article. :) -Philippe (talk) 05:56, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Rebranding

The Wikia platform (the part with the wikis on it) is rebranding to "Fandom powered by Wikia" on October 4th. It's for corporate branding reasons more than anything else, but judging from their blog it also has a bit to do with internal organization.

In case anyone was considering it, I don't think that's enough to warrant a rename of this article. The rebranding received an extremely negative response from users on Wikia, so I find it very unlikely that anyone (on Wikia or elsewhere) will deign to call it "Fandom." The word Fandom also has existing (and often negative) meaning among the general public, so renaming this article would be confusing to the vast majority of readers - the word will never become truly associated with Wikia. Furthermore, Wikia is not changing their URL or the names of individual wikis.

Even if you ignore all that, the corporate name is going to remain "Wikia, Inc." So essentially, almost everything is staying the same - the page shouldn't be renamed, and Wikia should still always be referred to as Wikia because doing anything else is and will always be confusing to readers. —Atvelonis (talk) 14:55, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

My two cents

I don't like the change to fandom myself. However, looking at the article it seems the article is more about the platform Wikia itself, rather than Wikia, Inc. There are several places where they are used interchangeably. Due to Wikia, Inc officially renaming the wiki platform to "Fandom powered by Wikia" I think it is fitting to call it such if the article is meant to be about the platform itself. If this is the case the non-wiki news magazine, hosted under Wikia's umbrella that is also called Fandom would likely need to be differentiated or included in the article. I am not sure about the naming policy, this is just my feedback to state that since they are officially renaming the article (if about the platform not the company) may need to reflect the change. In Christ, Superdadsuper, Wikipedia Editor; Bible Wiki Administrator & Bureaucrat — Preceding unsigned comment added by Superdadsuper (talk • contribs) 23:11, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In my personal opinion, Fandom content in the company history should be moved to a new section with headings - considering that the rebranding is a symbolic diversification to the wiki hosting service that Wikia offers. I think the move should happen sometime from a neutral perspective, but the article needs more content to be split into "Fandom" and "Wikia". The reaction was rather mixed on the Fandom rebranding to be fair.

A suggestion for history sections:

===2004–2006: Wikicities===
===2007–2009: Wikia rebranding and Monaco===
===2010–2014: Wikia's expansion and Oasis===
===2015–present: Fandom project and rebranding===

The article's history section also needs limited objective information about the skin implementation - they weren't objectively absolute in controversy and there's no information on Oasis in the article at all. Including Discussions would be good, but more detail on products seems unfair.

Speeditor talk 23:33, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that's a possibility. Having a more detailed history section with the headings you gave, but not renaming the actual article, would have the most positive effect on readers' understanding of the topic. —Atvelonis (talk) 03:01, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think that a redirect to this page, from ~~Fandumb~~ Fandom Powered by Wikia or whatever, would be a good idea. Scientific Alan 2 ^{(What have I said?)}^{(What have I done?)} 22:08, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Revision as of 16:56, 4 October 2016 edit Alexiaya (talk \| contribs) Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Template editors 12,178 edits Archived to Talk:Wikia/Archive 5 ← Previous edit		Revision as of 22:09, 4 October 2016 edit undo Scientific Alan 2 (talk \| contribs) Extended confirmed users 597 edits →‎My two cents Next edit →
Line 65:		Line 65:

	:Yeah, that's a possibility. Having a more detailed history section with the headings you gave, but '''not''' renaming the actual article, would have the most positive effect on readers' understanding of the topic. —[[User:Atvelonis\|Atvelonis]] ([[User talk:Atvelonis\|talk]]) 03:01, 28 September 2016 (UTC)		:Yeah, that's a possibility. Having a more detailed history section with the headings you gave, but '''not''' renaming the actual article, would have the most positive effect on readers' understanding of the topic. —[[User:Atvelonis\|Atvelonis]] ([[User talk:Atvelonis\|talk]]) 03:01, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

			::I think that a redirect to this page, from <s>Fandumb</s> Fandom Powered by Wikia or whatever, would be a good idea. [[User:Scientific_Alan_2\|<span style="color:#bf3f00; background:#00ffff; font-family:Courier">Scientific Alan 2</span>]][[User talk:Scientific_Alan_2\|<span style="color:#0000ff"><sup>(What have I said?)</sup></span>]][[Special:Contributions/Scientific_Alan_2\|<span style="color:#0000ff"><sup>(What have I done?)</sup></span>]] 22:08, 4 October 2016 (UTC)