Requests for Comment/Cutting out the Toys Reception Wikis

{{ClosedRfC|Closed as successful. The likely outcome is closure with the possibility for an interested user to adopt, which is simply an efficient version of the existing mh:meta:Dormancy Policy on the Miraheze platform. To do this you could use the existing adoption process or leave a message on a QP bureaucrat's talk page. This should be reasonable for people who really do feel strongly about keeping the wikis (since the adoption can be started for several months), and if nobody is interested then the wiki will fall out of the system and be saved to database. At that point if someone is still interested, they can pull the database and reupload it to Miraheze. Thank you for commenting. --Raidarr (talk) 11:36, 22 September 2021 (UTC)|This was first proposed by Blazikeye here. Due to the high support of removing them seen there, this RfC should not take long. There's only really one choice to make (unless you wish to keep them open), and depending how much support comes in we may complete it between a few days from now to a week. Please mark your choice on the preferred option.

To keep this clean, if you'd like to formally suggest a new path, please do so in the comments so a local admin can add the option. --Raidarr (talk) 10:46, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Support:Close
Full closure of these wikis for lack of content or community to keep them going.
 * 1)  I don't see enough for them to justify the server space, or the people change this. --Raidarr (talk) 10:46, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
 * 2)  I don't really see potential for the wikis being able to expand outside of Qualitipedia, so it would be best to close the wikis. Marxo Grouch  (talk) 19:16, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
 * 3)  Considering that I'm the one who made this proposal in the first place. --Blazikeye535 (talk) 20:04, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
 * 4)  Honestly, I don't think there are very many toys where you can think of enough points to write quality articles. --Atomicstar (talk) 22:16, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
 * 5)  I've said in comments before but to restate: I don't think a toys wiki will not work in the long run, way too little to talk about them and too niche demographic for that. Close it, not worth keeping that wiki. --Techsupport Agent 05 (talk)
 * 6)  No one really ahs a purpose for them really, and people barely use them, so there isn't much purpose in keeping them. TigerBlazer (talk) 18:07, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
 * 7)  Unlike the now reopened character wikis and website wikis, no one will actually care if they are gone. SleepParalysisDemon (talk) 14:50, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
 * 8)  I think that they’re not really used as much as the other wikis, and they make Qualitipedia users look like a bunch of neckbeard manchildren. That’s not the kind of reputation anybody deserves on the Internet if they have even a tiny little manlet-sized sliver of decency. ChessPiece21 (talk) 04:09, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Support:Cut loose
Turn over the wikis to the most interested users who aren't currently Qualitipedia bureaucrats so they can find their own way.


 * 1)  I think they should at least cut loose because of the concept not relating to media and having a very poor development. NJPet (talk) 11:38, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
 * 2)  The concept has nothing to do with media and it also has poor development. Fortdicted (talk) 23:38, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
 * 3)  I've seen some of the points above and I'm beginning to think it may be a good idea to close them down, but I'm not 100% sure, I am sure they shouldn't be in Qualitipedia though because they're not media. Musicismylife (talk) 19:22, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
 * 4)  Since this also happened with the characters wikis when they were kicked out. Perhaps Shawn the Logo Boy could take over the toys wikis, since he also said that he wants to take over the characters wikis. Blubabluba9990 (talk) 21:51, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
 * 5)  I think these wikis should be cut loose from the Qualitipedia, because it has very little to do with media and it's not developed properly. Ivan97Miraheze (talk) 17:59, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
 * 6)  I would say cut them loose. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) 12:13, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
 * 7)  I think it would be okay to cut them loose. Mr. Jay 641 (talk) 20:29, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

Oppose
Retain the wikis in Qualitipedia because you believe they have something to offer to the network still.
 * 1)  I think it has some potential
 * You say this, but the only time you show up as even connected to the wikis is today, with zero edits. Frankly speaking, do you have any intention of realizing this potential yourself? If not, closure with the option of adoption is most likely going to happen regardless. --Raidarr (talk) 00:07, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
 * 1)  There are teens and adults who are interested in toys as well [Heck, there is a community named A. F. O. L. (Adult Fan Of Lego) that I recomend checking out] not just younger kids. Plus, toys do have reception, unlike characters. Galaxy Star (talk) 12:08, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
 * This would be more compelling if the wikis had more than the incredibly limited activity they've demonstrated. I would ask you to source what sort of reception toys have that characters do not. --Raidarr (talk) 19:41, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
 * 1)  As some said before, some teens and adults like toys too and toys can defiantly differ in quality. Master Chief (talk)

Abstain
}}