Topic on Talk:Requests for Comment/Close the Websites Wikis

@Raidarr So, what can we actually do the prevent the websites wikis from deletion? If we cannot even edit the wiki, “cleaning up” or “setting new rules” cannot be done.

Additionally, I think that merging these 2 wikis into 1 called “Websites Wiki” will be a good proposal. It’s rather subjective when deciding whether a page should be fresh or rotten, and some disputes are ongoing because of this (e.g. [[:mh:freshwebsites:DuckDuckGo]]). By merging it, it solves.

I'd abstain on that

It will likely cause the addition of subjects that are too average, and make the scope of the wikis too broad.

But then again, there are sites that are disputed which wiki they belong on, such as Reddit. Since websites don't really have critic scores like video games and motion pictures do, it might be a good idea to merge the wikis.

As for your example of DuckDuckGo, the deletion tag is rather invalid, see this discussion.

@Atomicstar: The wikis are not having too much pages and being not really active, so merging them will be a good option, cuz everything is in 1 wiki for convenience in cleaning up.

For interested parties to clean up the wikis and save it from deletion please comment here (both for the supports and opposes in the vote).

So now the websites wikis are kicked from QP, and so QP cannot interfere its management anymore and the decision is now at the bureaucrats’ hands there.

A possible solution is that the wikis can be non-editable/private for all users except the interested and experienced users at first for cleaning up and rules development. It can then be reopened later. (and being part of the satellite wikis of QP later if agreed)

Not a bad idea actually. It makes sense since most new anonymous users don't visit that side often

The trick here is that people who are interested need to agree on the course of action they want and the type of wiki to create, then proceed on that path.

I disagree that 'one wiki' would be too broad - that's what making a proper scope is for, setting boundaries and distinguishing pages. You can also treat contested sites with the nuance they deserve, addressing the problems and the benefits of Reddit in a more balanced way. I'd like to see case in point examples.

The wikis are not necessarily kicked out in a way that they aren't accountable to coming up with a clear idea and structure. That is the primary objective of any recovery effort. Simply trying to restore them with tiny flavor tweaks will fail.

Also, another thing about the "one wiki" idea - what is it with this idea that two reception wikis merged together = removing the synonym from the title and leaving it as [insert media name here] Wiki? Websites Wiki is the kind of title you'd give to a regular encyclopedia about websites, not two reception wikis about the same topic (one positive, one negative) merged into one. If anything, it would be Reception Websites Wiki or something like that.

I was never an advocate of just using "The [whatever media] Wiki" and if the angle is reception then sure, it should be what you suggest with Reception as a prefix. In this case a slightly more nuanced take might help. But it depends on exactly what you're trying to accomplish especially since reception + websites has always been a critical argument in the first place.

Qualitiwebia

But that won't work well if we decide to separate the website wikis from Qualitipedia

If the Websites Wikis do get re-opened, we can just make them not part of Qualitipedia anymore and be their own indipendent wikis like we did the Characters Wikis.

A proposal organizing all the comments above are at User:Matttest/Websites Wikis proposal. I will be adding the details of how we are going to clean up the wikis soon. As for now that’s it.

some pages like ign could be on the crappy games wiki

Actually IGN would fit better on TSEW since it has a YouTube channel. It's only related to CGW in terms of the fact that it reviews games, the piece of media itself is website-related.

Well lets compare the relevance here.

- Gaming company that is well known to anyone in the gaming industry and reviews games.
- Put it on an entertainment wiki about TV shows because it has a youtube channel which reviews games.

Aside from the fact I'm going to executive veto this idea because it is outside of the intended scope of the wiki and you're raising a rabbit hole by trying to introduce the idea of any entity with a youtube channel being classified as a show, I hope at least some of the comparative issues are inherently clear.

I think IGN is still better related to gaming than episodes, only that it has a YouTube channel.

I would also consider the same for Common Sense Media

Well, I guess something is getting off-topic now. We should now be discussing the reopening of the Websites Wikis. These comments should be placed in a new section.

Slightly, though the tangent of where to distribute website media is still somewhat relevant especially if it happens and the content is scattered across other wikis, further diminishing the function of a website-dedicated wiki. Either way we're not going to shoehorn pages into wikis they obviously were never designed to fit into.

Yeah I just realized this was getting off topic as well. If we do reopen the website wikis I'd be in favor of keeping both of those there.

Still, the problem is that we lack volunteers to help and clean up the Websites Wikis.

As Raidarr clearly said, it can only be reopened if there we have enough users who would like to help out, the clean up process is decided and we will proceed on that particular path. I am currently trying to do this with a new proposal User:Matttest/Websites Wikis proposal, but it seems that, still, no one are interested in or just not aware of it. If you are interested in being part of the “participants”, helping out the wikis or have comments to the new rules and guidelines of the proposals, please go there.

I have added the rules and guidelines in the proposal, please check it out

i kinda want to make an unoffical successor to these wikis independent from qualitipedia, as the FWW II and RWW II.

The wikis don't actually need to be titled RWW and FWW II, we can just go by their original name.

That’s directly what we are doing currently at User:Matttest/Websites Wikis proposal.