Forum:Wikia's new skin

In case you don't know, Wikia has created a new skin for all wikis, called Wikia, which changes dramatically the viewing experience. For now, it can be activated in each users's preferences page, but from November it will be mandatory for every wiki in Wikia.

This new skin has some nice changes, and some very controversial changes (such as defining a fixed width for every article, which can really mess up the flow). The changes are so significant that several wikis, including the Dragon Ball Wiki and the World of Warcraft Wiki are seriously considering moving out of Wikia and into new web hosts (in fact, there is already an Anti-Wikia (skin) Alliance).

Given these facts, I encourage you to turn on the skin and try to find out if it does affect our wiki as much as it affects others (a lot of pages in the Dragon Ball Wiki are seriously messed up by this skin, for example). So far, even though I do not like several of the most prominent features of the skin, I haven't noticed a significant impact in the contents of the Editable Codex, though some articles do look a little worse.

So, if everyone could start checking this out, it would be a great way to prepare for when the change comes, and to see if we have to rework the articles in order to fit the new skin (or maybe even leave Wikia if we see the need to, in the worst case).--Sega381 04:10, October 7, 2010 (UTC)

How we feel about this
Sign your name under the appropriate heading.

I would prefer to continue our wiki elsewhere, but I will yield to the community's decision

 * Sega381
 * Tribun 17:47, October 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * Dungy 17:20, October 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * Sergorn 17:42, October 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * -- Fenyx4 19:18, October 7, 2010 (UTC)

I would prefer to stay here and work through the changes, but I will yield to the community's decision

 * Warder Dragon 20:14, October 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * --Browncoat Jayson 15:51, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * Terilem 04:48, October 9, 2010 (UTC)

codex.ultimaaeira.com

 * -- Fenyx4 20:29, October 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * --Tribun 20:33, October 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * --Sergorn 20:36, October 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * Dungy 22:11, October 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * --Sega381 02:18, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * --Browncoat Jayson 15:51, October 8, 2010 (UTC)

Discussion

 * Well, my initial reaction is "Bleh". I'll try it for awhile and see if it grows on me. -- Fenyx4 05:07, October 7, 2010 (UTC)


 * Wow, it's certainly going to take some getting used to. It looks "nice," if a little cramped. It appears they want to get away from resembling Wikipedia as much as possible. I guess like any big change I'll eventually acclimatise to it, and as long as it doesn't seriously mess up our content, I think it would be going a little overboard to shift locations because of a cosmetic change. --Terilem 05:36, October 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh my, that is indeed terrible. It completely destroys our sidebars, and jams them horizontally onto the top. That means we'll completely have to get rid of out nav bar. Also, now they're putting big blank spaces on each side that serve no other purpose than to reduce viewing space. Worst of all, on the right I'm stuck with all my stuff like "Pages you're currently working on" and "contributions" that takes up half the space. All of the information is now jammed into a horizontal area less than half the width of my screen. Geesh, and if you accidently mouse over one of their advertisements on the top of the screen, the advertisement that pops up is a third of the screen. Ech. Dungy 11:25, October 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * Yep, it certainly is cramped. After being used to the current layout spread luxuriously over the width of a widescreen monitor, it's a hell of a space constraint. --Terilem 11:30, October 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * I find changes like this by a web-host are always a slippery slope. I remember Geocities. Their advertisements got larger and more offensive until the point where nobody could deal with it any longer, and then the company went out of business. Dungy 12:01, October 7, 2010 (UTC)


 * I tested it, and it looks horrible. I wonder who the moron is who hatched this POS. I'm seriously think of retiring from working on the Codex, since this new skin makes it next to impossible for me to work and it's a püain to read things.--Tribun 11:03, October 7, 2010 (UTC)

Just a preview of what to expect: Dungy 12:01, October 7, 2010 (UTC)

This does it. The two biggest fuck-ups are the fat sidebar, and putting it on the wrong side of the screen. If they enforce it, I take my leave since it then would be a chore for me to read anything here.--Tribun 12:05, October 7, 2010 (UTC)

Hrm I see what you mean, Dungy. The left-right reversal I could certainly live with since it's rather inconsequential, but the fixed page width and enlarged sidebar combined are really doing a number on that article layout. I fear this skin is a result of what's currently fashionable in website design at large. It's more suited for blogs than it is for a wiki. --Terilem 12:24, October 7, 2010 (UTC)

We should ask Fenyx4 to make a mirror at ShoutWiki. If this really happens, it would save us the hassle of having our content being bombed to kingdom come.--Tribun 12:30, October 7, 2010 (UTC)


 * I agree with the fact that the narrow fixed area and the fat sidebar are the worst changes. Almost all the other changes are just that, changes, and we could eventually find them useful, or at least live with them (although I said ALMOST all the other changes). But the waste of space purpotedly to allow Wikia be seen the same way in all screen sizes... it's a major mistake.
 * And btw, the worst part is that, even with dozens of wikis considering leaving, and hundreds of users protesting, the staff has insisted that they will not change their minds, ever.--Sega381 13:00, October 7, 2010 (UTC)

I've got to agree with Tribun here. Now, I don't know or understand the intricacies of moving a wiki, but if it is possible without substantial work, then I'd think about it. This new change shrinks the useable space to less than 50% the width of the page, from the current maybe 80%. Even if we could get rid of the giant sidebar, I'd be willing to think about it, since that sidebar uses up nearly half of the available room and supplies absolutely nothing useful. Who cares what was most recently added to our page? Surely our users don't need to know that I added a new image 23 seconds ago. Why would they care? This is a wiki, an information source, it is NOT a social site. Dungy 13:02, October 7, 2010 (UTC)


 * Moving it seems to be not much of a problem, according to this:


 * Q: How do I move my Wiki to a new host?


 * A: You will have to download a database dump from Special:Statistics on your wiki (towards the bottom.) Then, contact the new host and they will tell you what way they want you to upload to them (you can usually use Special:Import). If moving to ShoutWiki, you will have to either email them at technical@shoutwiki.com with the link to your wiki and the link to the new wiki or file a bug report at BugZilla.shoutwiki under imports with the same links.


 * --Tribun 13:08, October 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, but what about all the templates and everything. If they all needed to be revamped, that could be a lot of work, and I'm not the one who could do it. Dungy 13:09, October 7, 2010 (UTC)


 * Ug, totally agree with everything people are saying. The fixed width is just terrible by itself. Then they cram nigh useless information on the right taking up a large portion of that space. But even worse if you do shrink the window below the fixed width you don't get a scroll bar.
 * The above I doubt if we could manually fix. Other issues we might be able to fix are the pencil edit images the have on the sections which are on the left now. Images in an article having editor's names under them for some strange reason... Ug.
 * If this goes through we could certainly look into moving to another wiki host. I've glanced at Shoutwiki and it seems to have all the extensions we'd need. Another option would be just getting a domain name and running a wiki server of our own or asking if, say, Ultima Aiera would like to host it. -- Fenyx4 13:44, October 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * Exactly, WHO CARES who uploaded that individual image? I KNOW the casual visitor doesn't care if Dungy, or Tribun, or Fenyx, or whoever else uploaded that particular image, heck, the only person who SHOULD care are the editors, and I don't care a lick who it was as long as it's good. Dungy 15:16, October 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * I briefly looked at shoutwiki. It's clean, neat, and its advertisement space is inoffensive. Just one bar on the right hand side, and that's no more than 100 pixels wide. I would be happy to move there. As for talking to Ultima Aiera, I would be interested in that option too. As it currently stands, if the proposed changes get pushed through, I'm 100% behind moving. Dungy 13:58, October 7, 2010 (UTC)


 * I agree as well. We however should first try to keep it in the fandom by asking Aiera. If they can't help, we should go to ShoutWiki. I think this maybe could also give us the freedom to make the page look more Codex-like.--Tribun 14:06, October 7, 2010 (UTC)


 * I'll drop Ultima Aiera a note telling him of our consideration and seeing what he thinks.
 * With ShoutWiki we would have the same problems we have now of me constantly saying "Sorry, I can't do that with Wikia." for things like adding new extensions or modifying "$wg-" variables.
 * Referata and Wikkii have advanced hosting features which would appear to provide just as much freedom as self-hosting or using Ultima Aiera would.
 * It won't be all peaches and cream though. I still won't be able to fix the ifexists redlink concerns. And facing me saying "I don't have time" instead of "Wikia won't let me." :) -- Fenyx4 14:31, October 7, 2010 (UTC)


 * BTW, I encourage everyone to look at the Anti-Wikia alliance (link above) and to browse discussions on moving on other wikis. Some interesting ideas, possible new web hosts, or moving wiki-buddies may be found.--Sega381 16:17, October 7, 2010 (UTC)


 * The cool part about Aiera would be we could link to direct downloads of fan patches and stuff. Still, that would be a big commitment for WTF, and I could certainly see why he would not be interested in that. Dungy 16:21, October 7, 2010 (UTC)


 * Knowing WTF_Dragon, I'm pretty sure he would actually be very excited to host the Wiki at Aiera. I do feel this is a great idea actually and could help really create a central place for the fan community --77.192.70.3 17:30, October 7, 2010 (UTC) <= that was me --Sergorn 20:36, October 7, 2010 (UTC)


 * I have added a section at the beginning of the forum in order to use a voting scheme that other wikis have been using so far in order to decide what to do. I think we should decide as a whole what to do, and though the discussion goes in that way, the best way to see the final decisions is the voting section above. So, if you agree with that, I think it would be best if each of us signed in the section according to our positions. We may end up all signing in the same section (according to how the discussion has been going), but at least we will let other users, who may have not joined the discussion yet, clearly state their position.--Sega381 16:31, October 7, 2010 (UTC)


 * I have other Wikis that I maintain and contribute to, so I will still be on Wikia regardless. However, I think consolidating the codex with Aeria is a good idea, and don't fault anyone for leaving. I'll keep contributing, regardless! --Browncoat Jayson 15:51, October 8, 2010 (UTC)


 * If anyone wants to see it, there is a blog post here trying to explain the rationale behind the most dramatic changes. It does explain some of the reasons of why they are doing these changes, but it's not very convincing (for me at least, though they are logical), and it does not address the main problems (such as wasted space), it only points out the benefits. It also ignores the subtler motives, such as better ad placement, and more inter-wiki traffic. But I guess that is the best response we'll have. I--Sega381 18:44, October 7, 2010 (UTC)


 * WTF_Dragon of Ultima Aiera's response to my message would be best described as ecstatic. He'd love to host the wiki even going so far to say he'd start setting it up today. As 77.192.70.3 said he feels it would be a great to help centralize the Ultima community. His only question is do we want it installed as a subdomain or sub-folder (? ?)
 * I've added another voter thingy at the top for where we want to go if we decided to go. (A vote in either of the Aeira subsections is a cote for Aeira as a while). This does not mean a decision has been made yet! Please keep voting on how you feel about leaving! Things are just moving quick and I'd like to plan ahead to make the transition as smooth as possible. -- Fenyx4 20:29, October 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, so if we do decide to move, what should be done with this current site? How would we direct people to our new location, and how would we prevent competing Wikis? I mean, would we go straight up vandalism and have Fenyxbot mark every page with a link to our new location? Also, if we moved to Aiera, what differences would we notice from our current site? and what about the stability issues Aiera has had? I mean, I can't access it right now. Dungy 21:28, October 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * Any high-traffic site not running on a dedicated server will have stability issues occasionally. Aiera has been getting a lot of traffic of late; I may at this moment be suffering a spike in traffic from Reddit (not 100% sure). At any rate, if the wiki did make the jump, I'd probably look at expanding my hosting package with my current provider to give me something a little more robust and traffic-tolerant. There are five or six sites that I am running concurrently, so I could either move to more robust hosting or else move the other sites to a second hosting account and leave Aiera on an account dedicated solely to it. - WtFD


 * I'm also worried what this will cost you, since I know hosting like this is not free. I'll admit, I have no idea how much bandwidth and what not this wiki uses, but I imagine our cost amounts are orders of magnitude less than the numbers I've seen thrown around on the Wowwiki. I'm looking to move, I just want to know a few more facts before I throw my hat in a new home ring. Dungy 21:46, October 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * I won't lie: Aiera isn't free to run, and it's not particularly cheap to maintain. I am hosted with Mediatemple, which costs about $200/year (plus the domain name, of course). Adding the wiki as a subdomain would be free, of course, so no worries there, and I pay the $200/year hosting cost myself. (Although, because of a couple of other sites I host, I get a tax receipt for some of it.)
 * Technically, my costs don't have to go up. I'd be inclined to move Aiera to a distinct server if the wiki came on board, but I don't have to (strictly speaking). If I did, that's another $200/year, although the domain name costs remain the same. Not like I'd ever charge the community directly; there are donation links on Aiera's articles, and those would remain in place, and I would welcome any support donations the community did make. But if you're worried what the cost to you would be, in the sense of what I'd charge you...the answer is "nothing, unless you feel like chipping in of your own free will."
 * Hence my italicizing of "to run" at the outset of this reply; it isn't free to run, but it is free to use.
 * Oh, and this outage has been...I see from my host's support page that the server has been under "high load" all day. So I'm not the sole cause of the problem (yay), although my posting of sixteen pictures of maps from the original Serpent Isle concept's development probably didn't do anything to keep traffic levels DOWN.
 * I think you slightly misinterpreted my last post. I'm honestly concerned about the negative impact this would have on your wallet, but if that's not an issue with you, I'm all for moving in, since I've found in the conversations I've had with you, that you're a level-headed, mature individual who is genuinely enthusiastic about supporting the Ultima community. Dungy 22:11, October 7, 2010 (UTC)


 * Just to warn people moving does have some other problems. Not all the extensions will come with. Wikia's Rich Text Editor won't be able to come. This doesn't bother me because I don't use it but I know some people do. There are others out there so we should be able to find something though. (In fact I think Wikia's is based in fckeditor.) -- Fenyx4


 * Total crap imo. New design offers too much stuff which makes it not pleasing to watch. Reduced viewing space is the worst part. All that which isn't needed to see any bigger have been done just that. Like said earlier, space of Widescreen monitor goes to waste. It feels like more a step backwards, rather than forward. I'd rather have it simple and functional like it's now, instead of being forced to use system which is 'fashionable'. What works for social sites won't work with stuff like this. Rodimus 07:53, October 10, 2010 (UTC)

What Happens Here?
Dungy brought up an excellent point. What would we do with this wiki after moving? I think I'm happiest with leaving a message on the top of each page letting people know the community had moved with a link to the new wiki but leave the content. But I certainly could also protect all the pages or even delete everything. I don't view it as vandalism if everyone is leaving. If someone decides to remain though it is completely up to them. The wiki will be in their hands. I really hope that isn't the case though. If we move I hope no one will be left behind. -- Fenyx4 03:13, October 8, 2010 (UTC)


 * I've been researching that topic. It seems when previous wikis have left, they have left links to their new site, and Wikia has subsequently come along and erased them. So what you suggested may not be an option, but we're a small wiki, and they might not notice us as quickly. Personally, I would vouch for changing every page to a link to our new wiki, and then locking them all. If someone does choose to stay behind, I suppose that is their right, and we should then leave the information intact. I REALLY do not want to have competing wikis, though. Dungy 03:31, October 8, 2010 (UTC)


 * The main problem is that, even though we're a small wiki, the traffic and ease of access will decrease. I guess the two main ways to reach this wiki is through search engines (which will need time to update in order to have our new site, and the links left in this site poiting to the new one would be all we have until then), and through searching in Wikia (I think that is how I found it). Unless every link stays forever, the Wikia-generated traffic will decrease. And if the links get deleted quickly, and another group of people (new people) start working on this wiki at Wikia, it will be even harder for people to reach our site, both because of the competing wiki reachable through Wikia, and because of the search engines pointing at both sites.--Sega381 12:54, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * Very True. It is going to be quite a bit more difficult to get new contributors in the future, when we're no longer a member of a larger wiki alliance. I know there have been some contributors who have stumbled in here from other wikis, or from the wikia in general. Dungy 17:00, October 8, 2010 (UTC)


 * If this site leaves for Aeria, I would vote to add a banner to the top of each page, noting that the site has moved, then lock all of the pages. Updates should only be made on the new site. Is there a way to disable creation of new pages; I don't believe so, but it would be nice. And we can always check back for "new contributors" on the activity page, and send them messages directly, at least until Wikia kills the codex. --Browncoat Jayson 15:55, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * Also, if we try and reduce every page here to nothing more than a link to another site, it wouldn't surprise me if this is against Wikia's TOS, and would be deleted. AngusM 18:24, October 8, 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm hoping that being an a devoted Ultima site vs. one more wiki amongst the mass of Wikia wikis will increase the number of contributors. But I might just be an optimist. -- Fenyx4 20:39, October 8, 2010 (UTC)


 * If we do move, no matter where it is to I want to be absolutely sure that the Codex is run in the 100% exact same manner; as in, no one and everyone is in charge. I don't foresee this as a problem with WtF, but it still bears mention. --Warder Dragon 22:37, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * That is also my sincerest hope, and regardless of what happens, I hope we all still continue to work together. Dungy 22:45, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * And, BTW, Fenyx, can you confirm that nothing that Codex editors did will be lost ('sept stuff you've already deleted, of course)? When you look at all the different kinds of pages and media there are, what with (main), forums, images, categories, templates, user pages, "project pages", "editable codex" pages, etc. and all of their accompanying talk pages, can we be sure that none of this will be lost? What about user accounts? Would this also be a good opportunity to reverse my amazingly unnerdy, and pedestrian mistake of using my own name when registering? AngusM 02:01, October 9, 2010 (UTC)


 * Maybe. If I can get a db dump (a more complete one than the one in Special:Statistics) then it would be everything sans any changes people snuck in between the dump being made, me getting the dumping and warning everyone to halt changes. I made a move like that before (on a smaller personal wiki) and it was pretty straight forward. Although like I said above not all extensions would make it. Things get more difficult if that isn't possible. Special:Statistics only has articles and article history. No media. So that I'd have to figure out how to dump out and import media using FenyxBot. Which may mean a loss of history on them.
 * Ultima Aeira (which looks like would be the one we move to) would give direct access to the db. Which would let me or WtfD go in and change your username. I could even follow up with FenyxBot to change all signatures on the talk pages. (Although the history would remain). -- Fenyx4 04:29, October 9, 2010 (UTC)

While I can't help with the technical stuff, once we did move and everything is up, I can notify numerous pages of the move so that they change their links. We also should then put a notification up on the front page. I don't exactly know if we can turn off this one, but at least we can notify all contributors of then change once it is done.--Tribun 12:33, October 9, 2010 (UTC)

From Wikia
Hi all, just to say I hope you won't decide to move... we'd love you to stay at Wikia. The new skin is a big change, but in the long-term it should be a skin that really improves every wiki. I know there are doubts about the fixed width, the changes to navigation, and other aspects, but I know that my personal experience is that the skin has really grown on me as I've used it... now it's rather a jar for me to go back to Monaco :)

One other thing I'd like to say, is that the new look is still a work in progress, and will be for a long time to come. We are using various click-tracking and other methods to see how it's used once released fully, so we can continue to develop an interface that really works for you all.

On the suggestions to vandalize the wiki if you were to move - we don't allow that. Everyone has the right to edit elsewhere, of course, but the wiki should remain for anyone who prefers to edit here and for any future visitors and editors. But I very much hope that it won't come to that anyway. -- Sannse (help forum | blog) 00:14, October 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * The problem, as I see it, is with these new changes you will be offering a service inferior to that offered elsewhere. Personally, and I think this applies to most of us, I am interested creating the best possible resource for Ultima-related information. To do that, we need a resource that showcases all of the content we have worked hard to create. The problems is your new website design does not allow us to showcase out hard work, but instead jams all of our hard work into a small bar that fills up less half the screen, while the remainder is advertisements. I see no reason why our wiki should be forced to look like everyone else's, and you are no longer allowing us to create the Wiki Ultima fans want to have. I care nothing about personal recognition for my hard work, so why is my name being splayed across every one of the over 1,000 photos I have uploaded?
 * I'm here solely for the Ultima. You have to understand. We have 50,000 edits on this site. The people who have commented on this thread make up far more than 70% of the content of this website, and a number of us have decided change is necessary. Is it difficult to accept that we wish to take our information with us and destroy what remains? We feel like you are profiting from our hard work while reducing the ability to do what we wish. That is an insult towards us. Dungy 00:47, October 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * Whoa! Who said anything about vandalism? If anyone was to so much as suggest such a pointless, spiteful act I think the rest of us would have reacted. AngusM 03:56, October 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * My issue is it seems pointless and confusing to have two competing sites. What I mean by vandalism is adding a link on most of the pages to our new home and removing a lot of the old information so people don't get confused by what is our new home and what is our old home. I think maybe our definition on vandalism was different. I have no intention of creating false, misleading, or profane information, but if we do move, I do not want to leave any confusion about what has happened. It's unfair to readers a year from now, if there has been no edits to this place, letting them think this is the current state of the Ultima wiki. That's my major issue. Dungy 09:42, October 12, 2010 (UTC)


 * I find it insulting that they only react when we are about to leave, while before they have ignored all protest against their plans. And then to actually say we are about to vandalize this place only strengthens by belief that we should leave as soon as Aiera is running.


 * Btw., how is that going along?--Tribun 09:46, October 12, 2010 (UTC)


 * Having two competing wiki would be terrible. The Ultima fan community is dwidling and is already spread out way too much non two many site, having two competing wiki would hurt the community even more. The fan community has created this wiki and made it grow - if the fan community decides to move this wiki elswhere, then wikia should have no say in it. So if the content move elsewhere, it has no purpose in staying here. I can understand if wikia wouldn't want direct linking to the new wiki (altough I would say this is not vandalizing, just redirecting to our new homes) - but it's not up to them to decide what is to happen with the content of the ultima wiki here once we move. --Sergorn 09:53, October 12, 2010 (UTC)


 * I guess in the worst cases, we'll have to mantain a presence in both wikis, as to ensure that the efforts stay focused.--Sega381 12:47, October 12, 2010 (UTC)


 * In the case they don't let us "close" the wiki (but I say we should try anyway - shouldn't it be possible by the wiki's admin or something?) I'd actually say the opposite: ditch the old wiki and don't update it anymore. This way it'll die eventually and people will move naturally to the new Aiera wiki.


 * In any case if this message was a way to try to get us to stay here, I have to say that personally it makes me even more intent on moving to Aiera and forget about wikia because that feels insulting and annoying. (Never mind the attitude of enforcing a look for every wiki, but that doesn't even need to be commented upon) --Sergorn 17:10, October 12, 2010 (UTC)


 * If I understand correctly, Wikia staff are uber-admins, way higher than a particular wiki's admins. So whatever a wiki's admin does, Wikia staff can undo.
 * But I actually refered to the same thing you mentioned. I didn't mean we should try to update both wikis, of course this one would have to be left behind, in order to focus on only one of them, the new one. What I meant was that someone should come regularly to this wiki, not to update it, but to see if there are any users left behind, or new contributors, who can be persuaded to use the new and current version of the wiki, not the old and no-longer-updated version that will be left here. As any links, warnings, and whatnots may be eventually deteled by Wikia staff, that is the only way to ensure this abandoned wiki won't start growing again in the future by other contributors, and thus splitting our efforts. --Sega381 17:36, October 12, 2010 (UTC)


 * Oh, all righty - I tought you were saying we should update both wikis. My bad.
 * And it makes sense that Wikia's staff are uber admin, especially to prevent vandalism. However if the community behind a wiki hosted by wikia decide to close its wiki and/or move it elsewhere - they should NOT have a say about it and should certainly have no right preventing it. They've been hosting it and this is great but it's not their wiki, it's ours. So if we want to move it elswere and close it on wikia we should be able to do it. Or else, well... it brings words to my mind that I'll refrain to use in order to reach a godwin point. --Sergorn 17:49, October 12, 2010 (UTC)


 * I agree with you in theory, but it is at this point where my lack of the details regarding Wikia's policies start to show. I do not know what rules or fine print Wikia has regarding its wikis. Maybe by creating a wiki here, Wikia owns it. Maybe it doesn't, but there is no possibility of destroying/moving a wiki after it is created, according to their policies. (Keep in mind I'm just speculating; I don't know enough about this). And, ok, it is our wiki... but who is "us"? The users that created this wiki? The users that have been more active in the last few months? The users that have contributed the most? The admins? By definition, the property of content in a wiki is shared, so it is difficult to define who "owns" the wiki, unless you define the host as its owner. We may know more by researching Wikia's policies, but my guess is that any wiki being hosted here loses its right to be "removed" later, as its ownership is beyond what its "current" active users may define.--Sega381 02:22, October 13, 2010 (UTC)


 * @Sansse: thanks for dropping by, even though it may be late and all. Anyway, just in case you drop by again, just one simple question: is there any chance that the value of the fixed width area could be increased? The fixed width thingy is not the worst part, the worst is that it is toooo narrow (maybe ok for the lowest resolutions, but not for the majority of the current used resolutions). Might this value be changed?--Sega381 12:47, October 12, 2010 (UTC)