FANDOM


  • Jeremiah Garland
    Jeremiah Garland closed this thread because:
    Vote ended in support
    16:19, July 22, 2014

    Friends, I come to you all with an idea that I'm certain others have tried to impose in the past; a shift in this wiki's direction. It's been just over ten months since our beloved Pirates of the Caribbean Online was closed down for good. Even in the time preceding that, this wiki's new POTCO-based content was lacking significantly in comparison to our peak of activity in 2011.

    In recent times, all this wiki's activity has been a sea of turbulence and argumentation. Promotion requests, demotion requests, unban requests, and so on. A small fraction of the wiki's activity has been to pages, save small grammar/spelling edits. Most of the new users that come here only stay for a few days, maybe even a few weeks or a month, but then they're on their way once more. The users that do stay, or have been staying for some time now, haven't really been doing much editing in relation to PotCO or the PotC franchise; which is why I propose that we shift direction in order to be more inclusive to other games.

    We can have one of the admins create a blog asking for user opinion on what games to include and keep a tally on the blog itself. Whichever ones have the most support behind them can be included into the wiki, since the users will probably be more apt to create fanon pages about them. We could create a POTCO category and have a bot put all of the current pages into it before we allow new game editing as well, that way less confusion occurs.

    I know that there will be people who oppose for reasons like "it wouldn't be the potc fanon/potco players wiki anymore" or "it won't feel the same to me anymore." The community would stay relatively the same and maybe even be more inclusive to outsiders since new games are being added to our spectrum, the only difference would be that we'd all be editing about things we have ideas about; we'd be editing about things that still hold quite a bit of relevance to us and to the rest of the gaming communities out there.

    I implore you all, admins and mods as well as users, to consider this as a way to keep the wiki going and perhaps even usher in a new golden age. At this point in the wiki's life opportunity for success won't break down our door, it will only lightly tap on the window; we have to take it whenever we can. Thank you.

    Temp
      Loading editor
    • While I await further administration and user input, several users have brought up this idea in the past. I must say however, this by far is the greatest/most inclusive yet.

      I've thought long and hard about this topic. It's quite sensitive and we know what happened last time when just  a change from "POTCO players' to "Potco Fanon" caused a bomb to go off. yet again, that decision wasn't made with communinty input.

      After all of my pondering, I am in complete Support

      Support - of this. I acknowledge the fact that our community, while very strong and family-like, is much smaller than our golden ages and the fact is POTCO closed. We can easily keep that POTCO identity while still incoporating other games. Heck, I have a lot I could write for another game like minecraft, for instance.

      I think this will spur activity hugely within the current community we have AND open up the universe for others....

      Granted, community in put is placed ABOVE ALL.

      Thanks,


      Mallace @ROLLBACKSSIGNATURETHING

        Loading editor
    • Neutral - While I'm all for increasing this wiki's activity, there's already the United Gamer's Wiki which allows pages pertaining to ALL games. This is, after all, a POTC fanon wiki. I do see where you're coming from, though. For now, I'm neutral leaning towards Support.

        Loading editor
    • Yes, but UGW is retarded. @Lithium 

      It's a place for undesireables and social outcasts... and parax (not in those categories).

        Loading editor
    • Hmm, Even tho im new here, bc i've stayed in Wiki's like Joesph's (which focuses more on other games like MC.) I hardly doubt that I will be staying less than a week, Its always had my interest on Wiki's like this. I however, do believe this is based on POTCO, I claim to be Neutral, but leaning towards support like Lithium.

        Loading editor
    • Support - We were discussing this in public chat, and many people brought up different ways this could help the wiki. You can count me in.

        Loading editor
    • Support

      Support - There are many great ideas we can do with this, especially Minecraft; we can get a server set up and continue our characters' adventures from there and stuff.
        Loading editor
    • Ultimately, despite my lack of ability to actually vote, my stance is Support for above reasons. However, I in NO WAY condone or agree with Sir Joseph Grey's above comments about UGW being "retarded." If you actually took the time to go over there, spend a minute on chat and read a few of the great stories there, I'm sure you'd see that the wiki is not retarded.

        Loading editor
    • LíthìumŒ wrote:
      Ultimately, despite my lack of ability to actually vote, my stance is Support for above reasons. However, I in NO WAY condone or agree with Sir Joseph Grey's above comments about UGW being "retarded." If you actually took the time to go over there, spend a minute on chat and read a few of the great stories there, I'm sure you'd see that the wiki is not retarded.


      Coming from someone a former User who voted on every single SCC vote, trust me

      A template means nothing.

      Everyone has a voice.

        Loading editor
    • Thank you, Mallace. I agree everyone's opinion should be valued.

        Loading editor
    • I have. I went into chat to see crappy conversations and stupid inside jokes. Then I read a couple of stories like "Darth Goldvanius" which I can assure you is most certainly NOT great.

        Loading editor
    • Parax.
      Parax. removed this reply because:
      no
      22:44, July 20, 2014
      This reply has been removed
    • WaglingtonŒ
      WaglingtonΠremoved this reply because:
      comment deleted
      22:44, July 20, 2014
      This reply has been removed
    • Joe

      Please don't start anything unnecessary.

      Also, i liked the Shadow Origins series ._.

        Loading editor
    • I'd like to see you do better, Joe.

        Loading editor
    • Oppose - I will watch this Wikia burn before I endorse further centralization

        Loading editor
    • shore

        Loading editor
    • Skeptical of this proposal to be honest. If we were to change into this direction then I wonder how would we be structured in terms of pages for other games. "But Al it is all rather simple, we just start typing up a page about X for game Y, end of story c:" Yes but what you may not have taken into consideration is how the wiki in its current state is structured for a E-10 + game, not even for the franchise of POTC we currently stand for, that being said some games we may find to be somewhat objectionable and to further elaborate on this point I will use The Elder Scrolls ("You have not even played this game you asshat") franchise as an example. Seeing as some of it's more recent games are rated for those above the (Al pls) mature age of 17  (TESO & TES V: Skyrim) anything allowed within the Wikia ToU is fine from these games but based off the way we are currently structured (geared toward E-10+) we can't possibly be serious in allowing this content. One of the following things would have to be in place in order to determine how we are going to go about this...

      • A - Game Approval Council/System - Essentially we would, before allowing a user to add x fictitious content about y game to make page z we would run the game through a voting system or a council of selected "concerned" and "devoted" members or the Administration itself.
      • B - Reforms - Simple and to the point. If we are going to allow any given game then.... just make it to where various things not allowed by our current rules be allowed (swearing or thing within Wikia ToU). The end.

      If this were completely approved , Admins & Community passed then we would also want to take into consideration the following as well:

      • Will we redo the theme of this place (to the extent that we don't lose our original identity?)
      • If we are being more inclusive and to stay relevant, will we be changing the name for a second time?
      • Do some of the current policies need to be thrown out in order to incorporate more games into the site instead of limiting it to the point to where this is not even worth it?
      • Do some policies need to be put into place in order to incorporate more games into the site so that there is not extreme chaos that may occuer due to the lack of policies or extreme vagueness in our policy?

      Based off the current dedication of this administration with the exception of a select few, this has to be done right, or there will be mass chaos! It is a large reason that makes me skeptical and I would like to see assurance that the following can be done, and not in a sloppy matter, done by dedicated beings who would like to see this place not sink to the depths but rise above possibly back to the olden days. There are various concerns to take into account that aren't ones that we can just go "oh no big deal Al, this is nothing" because I will put my own money on it that if it is not taken care of correctly, people will start finding loopholes that aren't really loopholes because of the precautions that were not taken. This has to to be handled delicately or else we are bound to failed. We have to add on reforms and new policies before we go all "OMG Support

      Support - Support Support - Support Support - Support Support - TOTES MCGOTES MY BOATS BEST IDEA OF THE CENTURY #YUS #NOTHETITANICANYMORE ". I find myself neutral for the time being.  (And the templates are being used in a sense of not voting but what might be said on the Community Vote pls no h8 c:)
        Loading editor
    • I've decided that I support this, as long as the games we will write fanon about only are Pirates of the Caribbean related content. I don't want to see a huge player page about their Minecraft account, or someone's account in Toontown, or anything out of place.

        Loading editor
    • Haras wrote:
      I've decided that I support this, as long as the games we will write fanon about only are Pirates of the Caribbean related content. I don't want to see a huge player page about their Minecraft account, or someone's account in Toontown, or anything out of place.


      That's more of an oppose vote, the point is to include things not POTC related.

        Loading editor
    • I am Neutral to this idea, for the exact reason Nults stated above. For me, this will always be the POTCO Players Wiki, but I am not opposed for shifting direction away from POTCO/POTC. I'm just not for it, either. 

        Loading editor
    • We mustn't let our imaginations go wild now. We need to see what types of games should be allowed to be on the wikia. I Support

      Support -, but regulation must be considered.
        Loading editor
    • Johnny Goldtimbers wrote:
      We mustn't let our imaginations go wild now. We need to see what types of games should be allowed to be on the wikia. I Support Support -, but regulation must be considered.

      I'd say that we start by having an admin make a blog and tallying what games have the most support, and then allowing people to request game additions in the future.

        Loading editor
    • Im neutral, because this wiki isnt PotcoPlayerswikia anymore, we are the potcfannonwikia. This isnt technically about the game anymore. 

        Loading editor
    • Oppose

      Oppose - I think it's too much of a change for now. At least when we switched to the PotC Fanon Wiki we still were relevant to what we were before. We'd essentially become another UGW. Sure, they had a surge of activity, but they eventually burned themselves out. Our activity level has kept us going for years.
        Loading editor
    • I agree that we need to expand our realm of topics if we want to preserve page editing here. However, I don't want us to forget our roots. We were all brought together by Pirates of the Caribbean Online, and without that game, none of us would be friends/frenemies today. If we were to go ahead with this idea, we would most likely have to change our name again to account for additional topics being added.(Other games don't have anything to do with the Potc franchise.) Nonetheless, I feel that we should return to being the "POTCO Players Wiki." Users rarely refer to this place as the PFW anyway, and it would remind us from where we came all those years ago. Furthermore, we would need to have a committee or voting system to decide which other games would be allowed and which would not. These issues definitely need to be sorted out if this proposal is to pass, (and I would REALLLY like the name to go back), but I Support

      Support - because I feel that expansion is necessary for the survival of editing here. Bawb out.
        Loading editor
    • I fully support, especially if we were willing to add all games to further our community. Games such as TF2, Minecraft, hell, maybe even toontown. However, we will need to make sure that this place will always be based off of the PPW Principles.

        Loading editor
    • I agree with you G in that our activity level has been kept up for years. May i point out though the  UGW make a completely new Wiki. The main reason we've stayed together is that we've stayed in one place. Nults idea keeps us in this one place.. but by also allowing more things to come. 

        Loading editor
    • I support as per everyones reasoning and I think it would be cool. Just don't want it to turn into a UGW (at all).

        Loading editor
    • Support

      Support - what they said
        Loading editor
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.