Requests for Comment/Re-adding the character wikis to Qualitipedia

{{ClosedRfC|Closed as unsuccessful by a very wide margin, I should have done this a while ago. The answer is to spin off the administration, not overturn the reasons for removing that have not changed, with reasons that (as demonstrated) provide nothing compelling. --Raidarr (talk) 08:17, 15 March 2022 (UTC)| I propose that we re-add the characters wikis back to Qualitipedia. They have existed in a state of limbo ever since they were removed without consensus. Here is why I think they should be re-added: These reasons seem to show that it makes sense to re-add the characters wikis to Qualitipedia. All of the design changes and policy updates will have to be carried over to the characters wikis, though that shouldn't take a while. Blubabluba9990 (talk) 20:43, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
 * 1) The community for the characters wikis is the same community on the Qualitipedia wikis, and they don't have a separate userbase or administration.
 * 2) Characters are a part of media, and many Qualitipedia pages link to pages on the characters wikis and vice-versa.
 * 3) Both wikis are active and have good quality.
 * 4) There was no consensus to remove them from the network and there was supposedly a discussion regarding their fate, but there have been no updates and it seems like they still have the same administration as Qualitipedia.

Support

 * 1) As proposer. Blubabluba9990 (talk) 20:43, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 1) for similar rationale I would use against the 'gameplay' and other fringe subject wikis. Too narrow a scope, too subjective in in assessment, in my opinion to contrast with yours rather awful at a content level on average, waste of network development time, and in fact split properly iirc. They are a setback to improving the bottom line in wiki quality and measurable reception on a meaningful basis, and per my vote I strongly oppose their re-addition to the point I recuse myself from closing this RfC as a conflict of interest. --Raidarr (talk) 20:51, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
 * 2) Reception for characters is more subjective than with the other media in Qualitipedia (rhymes :P) and the content on the wikis isn't on par with most of the other wikis because of this. Marxo Grouch  (talkz) 21:05, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
 * 3) No way. These wikis failed because they used to be a part of Qualitipedia, but ended up going independent, because they were previously closed because of all the flame wars, opinionated pages, and poor quality control and management. If anything, both of these wikis should stay off QP. SuperStreetKombat (talk) 20:51, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
 * 4) This is a terrible idea. For one, those wikis are much more subjective in terms of what pages can and can;t go there, as characters can be liked or hated by people for the same reasons, and most don't have much of a reception other than extremely infamous ones. In addition to that, they provided almost nothing to QP as a whole. They also don't fit with Qualitipedia's overall theme of being the reception of media. The one thing the music and book wikis have over thee character ones is they actually focus on media rather than a part of media. They also were very drama filled and despite multiple attempts to fixing them it never really helped. Giving them to their own community is the best choice and having them as part of QP was a large reason to why people criticize these wikis so often. They were cut of for good reason, and it's best to never consider bringing them back.  Wing Commander confed star.pngTigerBlazer  03:22, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
 * 5) I don't really care whether or not they are in Qualitipedia, but regardless, I am still opposing this because the reasons don't convince me otherwise:
 * 6) Not really a reason to put them back in Qualitipedia. The only way this would be a reason to keep them in Qualitipedia is if there was no good reason to do otherwise, which there is, and that is, they don't have much reception.
 * 7) Again, not really a reason. We can still link to pages on the character wikis if it is necessary, and the same applies with the character wikis linking to these wikis.
 * 8) And again, not really a reason. Much like the first reason, this would only be a reason to keep them in Qualitipedia if there was no good reason to do otherwise, which there is.
 * 9) There was also consensus on a blog post on this wiki, I'm not sure where it is, but I believe it had some consensus. FatBurn0000 (sandbox | CentralAuth) 19:49, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
 * 10) We already discussed that a lot of time ago. We were all OK of them being more like Spin-offs of the general wikis due to characters being harder to judge than other pieces of media   The King of Dice   (talk|Contributions) 21:09, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
 * When they were a part of the network, it didn't work out for two reasons. 1: There's a lack of reception for most characters unless they're a very well-known one. 2: I believe it's a lot more convenient to add an explanation as to how a character is likable or unlikeable on the page about the game/movie/etc. they come from instead of having an entire page just for that since there isn't that much to say about how a character is good or bad. Those two reasons ultimately make most pages on the wikis subjective and repetitive. --Blazikeye535 (talk) 23:42, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

Abstain
}}
 * 1) I'm a little neutral to this, but then again, wasn't it spin-off 6 months ago? --DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) 20:54, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Iirc, yes. The original idea was to close them down (which did happen before consensus could be finalized), but the backlash prompted their reopening and subsequent split from Qualitipedia. Marxo Grouch (talk) 21:07, 5 February 2022 (UTC)