Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Leaving

TFWiki.info/TFWiki.net
I'm just going to restate my objection, that the new layout with the ads looks like complete dribbling shit, and the time and money I spent for classes on layout and design are commanding me to do terrible things to people with a fork. Shoving down content so large animated Pop-Tarts ads can be hurled at us. Hoo-fucking-ray. --M Sipher 04:16, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Frankly, I'm inclined to download the content of our wiki and move it to my own server, where we can not have giant ads pushing our content down. If the promised layout happens, I really see no point in staying at Wikia.  --ItsWalky 04:40, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't mind that idea on one hand, but on the other, let's face it, the whole "TF WIKI IS JUST WALKY AND HIS FRIENDS PRIVATE PLAYGROUND AND YOU SHOULDN'T GIVE ANY CREDENCE TO ANYTHING THAT GOES ON THERE" thing is basically going to blow the fuck up. Then again, if it pisses those people off, I guess I'm in favor of it.  The codebase here is open-source, right?  There's no real legal recompense they could take against us for packing up and moving (and, theoretically, doing a total slash-and-burn when we go - I call for replacing the front page with thetouch.gif).  -hx 13:07, 12 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Wikis on Wikia operate under GFDL, a free license that allows people to reuse the content in any way, as long as it's under the same license and links back to the original source. Wikia provides complete database dumps for anybody who wants them, so it's easy for people to move the content somewhere else if they want to. The moved content should link back to the original wiki, using a template like this. If anybody wants a database dump, let me know, and I can hook you up with the people who can help you with it. You can read more about the GFDL license on Transformers Wiki:Copyrights, and here's a link to the text of the GFDL. -- Danny (talk ) 14:58, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * So when you 'hook us up' with a database dump, wjat does that mean? Because, you know, it looks like some of the wikia db dumps on the general page haven't been updated in months.  (And I can't even find ours listed.)  Also, the image dump is currently 670 megabytes.  It was 630 megabytes 11 months ago.  I fear this is not up to date.  So if we did, at some future date, take it into mind to depart, who do we talk to about getting current versions of these things? -Derik 22:03, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Wait, so if a Wiki decides to leave Wikia and go to private hosting, it's technically not really considered the same wiki, and has to put annoying notices on all its pages saying that it's based on the Wikia wiki's content? Because that's gonna get old fast. Combine that with the notion of Wikia's habit of pre-emptively registering domain names that match up to its popular wikis and this could screw us over royally.--RosicrucianTalk 17:47, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't think that'd be terrible. His example is prominent and obtrusive, but in reality, it could just be a little note in the footer. You know, in the copyright section that nobody reads anyway? And we could work on the phrasing so it's not confusing to the two people who do. --Suki Brits 17:56, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Hey, if you guys think you can manage it, more power to ya. I'm a-going wherever this Wiki does. I do think Wikia manages to direct a fair bit of traffic to us, but I also agree that the new adblock format is a bit beyond the pale. Real mixed feelings here, because I was just getting to like Monaco and then the new version takes a poop in my happy place.--RosicrucianTalk 18:10, 12 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I don't really have any new complaints to add here-- everything about how incredibly offensive both the layout and the dishonesty involved has already been said repeatedly. I just want to say that I am definitely all for moving. Wikia has been absolutely the worst web host I have ever had the misfortune of dealing with, and I just wish you'd thought of the idea of moving sooner, before we became so prominent under this URL. --Suki Brits 17:37, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I bought tfwiki.info and tfwiki.net this morning. (.com was taken)  --ItsWalky 18:05, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

My big concern with a move is... well, we're known here. Unless we scorched-Earth this wiki at this address and put up a redirect, which it doesn't seem like we can, this will stay, and likely get taken over by -and let's be entirely fair- the kind of anon morons we've been reverting and blocking for years, and basically turn to (more) shit, with people taking our years of hard work and basically ruining it. Unless we police it, which defeats the purpose of moving. And how will this affect Google searching? Will the new site show up at the top of any Google search, or the old site we left behind? --M Sipher 18:21, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * *sigh* And do you have someone to install the software, configure it, and install the plugins and make it so they don't conflict with one another? (things like are not part of a out-of-the-box wiki install.)
 * I happen to like wikia because it means someone else is dealing with that logistical burden. Someone who is not me.
 * Besides, at the rate they're backpedaling the ads may not be that obtrusive. (And if you have adblock, they won't be there at all.) As I said on the 'boycott wikia' forum- wait until it's rolled out to see how bad it actually is.  50% of what we're responding to is their incredibly offensive attitude towards users in how they presented this.  -Derik 18:23, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Seems like a sensible attitude. There's still time for them to try to address the community concerns.--RosicrucianTalk 18:27, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I just hit 'random' !40 times and kept a tally. ~55% of the pages that came up would not have the in-page ads, they'd have banners on top.  (Our messagebox template squeezes them out.  Not even anything we did-- that's just how it behaves.)   And a significant chunk of the other 45% were either small articles (which below a certain size will lack ads, I'm not sure what that size is) or lacked main images to be pushed down. (mean if they had the ad-blocks, they wouldn't be as annoying.) -Derik 18:43, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

I understand the impulse to leave Wikia, but it seems like there could be a significant downside to that, if moving isn't so much "moving" as it is replicating the existing content and continuing from there on another site, while the original remains behind. This site is so established as the TF wiki by now, with oodles of links to articles spread all over the place, could the new site ever really hope to overtake it as the "main" Wiki people find in searches and whatnot, or would most of the traffic just continue to flow here anyway? --KilMichaelMcC 19:17, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh, and I don't mean to suggest that we have to stick with Wikia no matter what, forever and always. Just that there are pros and cons to be weighed, and I think the potential for a situation where we end up with two "competing" wikis, possibly with the less useful resource having the competitive advantage, is something to be considered. --KilMichaelMcC 20:15, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I find it frankly terrifying that I am regarded as the voice of reason in this, or any, matter.
 * That said especially since Walky bought the domain, may I suggest directing tfwiki.info to this place? We could rebrand this site, emphasizing that as our main 'point at' URL (which Wikia does not control,) so if we ever decided to leave we could just direct the domain name to another server, and hopefully a lot of the external links would follow.  -Derik 20:44, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * TFwiki.net
 * TFwiki.info
 * Try it! --ItsWalky 22:28, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Framing's not the best of solutions - it means you can't get a URL for any given page (unless you regress to the wikia address anyway).
 * I think Derik's right here, and the first line of attack is branding - change every reference to "Teletraan-1: The Transformers Wiki" to "TFWiki.net - The Transformers Wiki" (or the .info domain, if you prefer), including but not limited to the Main Page, Image:Wiki.png & Image:Wiki wide.png, MediaWiki:Pagetitle, MediaWiki:Monaco-sidebar and MediaWiki:Blog snippet. Then, if you can, point the DNS to transformers.wikia.com for now, with the understanding that that can be changed within 24 hours or so. - SanityOrMadness 22:43, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Right- it's all about creating options, so if you decide to move, it's less of a big deal. (Which also means that since it's easier, we're less 'tied' to Wikia if they pull shit.  We do have a clear and viable option that's not jumping the community off a cliff, and if we have the Transformers community thinking of us as 'the domain,' then it's less of a big deal the actual site domain changes.
 * I'm gonna work on a .htaccess file for Walky so you can link to http://www.tfwiki.info/wiki/Neil_Kaplan and it'll still work. That lets people start setting up direct link that are functional. -Derik 23:04, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * It appears to be working (certainly, that link works in the sense of showing Neil Kaplan), but the resulting page still shows a transformers.wikia address in the address bar rather than a tfwiki.info address - which, if we want it to be potential replacement branding, isn't ideal. - SanityOrMadness 23:21, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

To answer Derik's question above: If you want information on how to get the database dump, you can ask Sannse -- she's helped folks with that before. You can contact her on her talk page, or I can ask her to stop by here if you want. -- Danny (talk ) 00:50, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Why thank you, that's very helpful! -Derik 02:46, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

I don't actually own any of this stuff, but I would love it if it could return to the old fashion. please don't close down!Nightscream the adorable 07:34, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

+light bulb appears over head+ if you want to move off wikia and on to a new server/hoster/what ever and THIS WIKI STAYS BEHIND then you could move to the new wiki and this will STAY HERE BUT ALL THE PAGES COULD BE WIPED, LOCKED AND THEN AN AOUTOMATIC REDIRECT COULD BE PUT ON EACH PAGE TO THE CORRESPONDING PAGE AT THE NEW SITE! IT WOULD MEEN THAT PEOPLE COULD STILL GET TO THE NEW SITE THROUGH WKIA AND ON GOOGLE EVEN IF THIS WIKI SHOWS UP AT THE TOP THEN IT WOULD LINK TO THE NEW ONE!!!!!!! PROBLEM SOLVED :) 81.108.233.59 16:05, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Outta here
So... we're leaving, yes? Because really, fuck this. And PLEASE let's slash-and-burn the old site. --M Sipher 14:13, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Yyeeeeeeahh. This is intolerable.  Let me talk to my tech host guy.  --ItsWalky 14:33, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * So who is the .com owned by? Because I'm betting Wikia.--RosicrucianTalk 14:39, 17 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Time to strap the megaphone to the top of the Bluesmobile and start making some noise, then. Who's crafting the "press release" for all the major TF fan-sites? --M Sipher 14:41, 17 June 2008 (UTC)


 * So am I alone in thinking that we might be able to find a way to adjust to the ads, and that leaving might not be necessary? --KilMichaelMcC 14:48, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Do you really think any way we try to make the ads not suck shit won't be reverted away by Wikia? It's pretty clear what their intentions are. --M Sipher 14:54, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Maybe anything we did would be undone by Wikia. Hell, it probably would be. But still, I, personally, would be inclined towards giving it a shot first before packing and moving elsewhere, as I think that has a considerable downside. --KilMichaelMcC 15:11, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * There's also a considerable downside to staying. The downside to going is less offensive to me, and if we make a big enough noise and with due diligence, can be mitigated. Staying here and taking their shit will only continue the shit. --M Sipher 15:14, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * *tries posting for a THIRD time. Damn edit conflicts...*
 * Indeed, MS. Personally, I can knock out the ads with AdBlock/NoScript - and the stuff on the bottom of my monaco.css file for when I can't use Firefox for whatever reason - but we're officially *NOT ALLOWED* to do that globally.
 * And, Rosicrucian, Shockingly enough, it's not Wikia who own http://www.tfwiki.com . It's, well, I think it's an English-language Chinese site, but a glance doesn't show precisely beyond the fact that it's newsy; while http://www.transformerswiki.com/ appears to be owned by some sort of competitor of Wikia's called "TWiki" - SanityOrMadness 15:16, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I would strongly suggest AGAINST using any copyrighted Hasbro terminology in our potential URL. That's the kind of shit that gets you C&D'd.  -hx 02:46, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Can they really sue over "transformers" in the url? I mean, it does have a meaning beyond " Transforming Converting robot toys sold by Hasbro". Or is it sufficient enough in the context that we're talking about their copyrighted material? —Interrobang 03:37, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Eh, I tried to make a silk purse out of the sow's ear with the skinning work, but if the Walky says we're going that's probably the final word.--RosicrucianTalk 14:51, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, I think at least some more time for discussion is warranted. For example, if we started using Derik's Template:forcebanner, we can take of the ads that are pushing down main images and screwing up formatting. They would still be banner ads in those articles, but they're not nearly so bad. There may be ways to adjust here, and we should probably at least consider them. --KilMichaelMcC 14:55, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Can we run a bot to put Derik's ad-killing template on every page? - Jackpot 00:01, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * It's not an "ad-killing" template, really, as the articles would still have the new ads. Just not the upper-right corner, main image shoving-down, format-screwing ads. Just the banner ads that while still within the body of the article sit above the text. Which are certainly annoying, too, but less so I think than the other type. Looking around, it seems that because of the templates we already use, a lot of our articles already have the banner ads rather than the upper-right corner ones. --KilMichaelMcC 02:01, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I know, but it kills the most offensive ads. And I've been able to find enough fucked-up articles via "Random Page" that I think blanketing the site with that template would be worthwhile. - Jackpot 02:46, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I'd prefer a more tactical approach. Marvel Comics continuity has its meaning destroyed- you lose the map that puts context to all the text.  But on an article like Larry Hama I really dont' think the ads hurt the article at all.
 * Through a quirk of our existing templates- we get banners instead of adblocks on all the episode and comic-issue pages (I was surprised, I didn't anticipate that one, it's something involving the navboxes...) and on lots of the character pages. (If it's disambig'd, it gets a banner.)
 * I dunno, putting it on all the pages just seems like... cheating somehow. -Derik 02:56, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Of course it's cheating, but if we're talking about leaving entirely and possibly destroying what we leave behind, I don't see why we should pussyfoot around an action of such relative inoffensiveness and genuine utility. What's the downside that I'm not seeing? - Jackpot 03:18, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

The attitude on the new skin discussion page on Wikia Central has been "yes we care about the thousands of users that are providing the free content that brings the traffic to our ads, but our advertisers have said they want ever more pervasive ads in the content area itself so we're going full speed ahead on that." And that doesn't seem to have budged. In fact, they've stated that they're not certain if the uproar is genuine and will be relying on stat counters to see if there's any real impact. Which... after ToughPigs' reliance on the stats server to try to convince us... I'm once bitten and twice shy. Who's to say the stats won't be creatively interpreted again?

Truth told, if Wikia gave me the ability to pay $10-20 a year to cut out ads across the board, I'd pay it. If they gave an option for a given wiki to pay for ad-free hosting, I'd chip in. They do not seem interested in either of these, though. It's depressing.--RosicrucianTalk 15:27, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * It's not the EXISTENCE of ads that is pissing me off (well, beyond my nominal level of loathing of having stuff I'm not interested in flashed in my face, but I accept ads as a neccessary evil). I was okay with the "tower" ads in Monobook (except when they fucking talked, and at this rate I don't give it long before we're once again assaulted audially), I was fine with the banner ads at the very top-bar in the old Monoco. Having ads crammed into our CONTENT, completely fucking up page layouts? We're better off someplace where WE set the rules for where ads can be placed, and who we accept ads from. I'm sure we can get the major TF-selling online stores to pitch in (BBTS, EE, those other ones I can't think of right now), plus I'm sure Project Wodnerful could bring in every fan-comic that wants to advertise to TF fans. This is something we can turn to our advantage with some real planning. --M Sipher 15:36, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm mostly saying the "no ads" bit above because, like you, I have no reason to trust Wikia's advertising department in the slightest. It got better for a short while, but it seems to be getting much, much worse with no real relief in sight.--RosicrucianTalk 15:42, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

I for one will follow whatever's decided. Meanwhile, a question and a comment:
 * If we move the site to wherever else, does page history remain intact? Some of the talk here sounds like it would be lost, and that's a major problem.
 * If we DO move, yes, by all means, scorched earth on the old site. There's too much energy and effort invested in it to leave it to the anon wolves. -- Repowers 15:44, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I have thought about that... and I have a few ideas if we can't bring flaming death. I mean, even if we move and must leave this intact, this is still OUR wiki... and while we don't have to UPDATE it, we don't have to leave it to the wolves to crap all over, either. Extra work? Actually, not really, since it's the same shit we're doing now anyway... --M Sipher 15:50, 17 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Repowers - you can take a database dump of just the current version, or of the whole page histories. - SanityOrMadness 15:51, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

An important thing, I think, is finding out how annoying Wikia is going to be to us after we leave. Will they honor our intentions, or are we looking at some sort of "shadow wiki" springing up with all our old content and new Wikia-friendly admins?--RosicrucianTalk 16:00, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * One little point - pages can be undeleted fairly simply. IMAGES, on the other hand... - SanityOrMadness 16:17, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Even pages cannot be fully deleted to the point that someone with Admin access can't recover them.--RosicrucianTalk 16:19, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Ummm... is that not what I said ("pages can be undeleted fairly simply") - you can undelete pages via Special:Undelete. When images are deleted, however, they stay gone last time I checked. Which is my point for any scorched-earth scenario (to clarify - the text on an Image: page can be recovered, but the image file itself is actually deleted rather than moved to a Recycle Bin-type scenario). - SanityOrMadness 16:22, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Ah. I missed the "un" in that. Anyway, point is that Wikia can undo nearly any and all attempts to salt the earth if we try this, so it's important to know if we can count on them to respect our wishes. I'll live with the ads before I see them appoint Kremzeek and Assaulthead admins, y'know?--RosicrucianTalk 16:26, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * "so it's important to know if we can count on them to respect our wishes."
 * HAHAHAHAHHAAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA --M Sipher 16:32, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Rosicrucian - if you go, you can't keep one foot in the door. If the threat of them "appoint[ing] Kremzeek and Assaulthead admins" is enough for people to stay, then they've won, because they will be able to statistically show the ads make no difference. - SanityOrMadness 17:28, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Is that a threat to us, or a threat to Wikia? Because really, if this place gets taken over by the dull refuse who either won't work with the rest of us or can't be allowed to, that works out perfectly for the new site.  People will know right off which one is superior. Chip 04:27, 18 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Uh, guys, I've been pretty much an observer on this whole thing, and I'm sorry if you guys thought this out but...you know that you can set your skin to whatever you want on preferences, right? I have mine set on Wikipedia skin, and I see no adds at the top of the articles. -- SFH 16:50, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't expect that option to last long at all, and that's beside the point anyway. The default is New Coke - I mean, this new Monaco with the ad-shit in the middle of the page. It's what all of the unregistered people new to this are going to see - fucked-up, ad-crapped pages. You might as well be saying "well if you use a lot of lube the rolling pin doesn't hurt so bad when you shove it up the ass!" Our pages should BY DEFAULT not be ruined, no extra steps and digging in "preferences" or outside browser ad-ins neccessary. --M Sipher 16:55, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Not to inject a dose of healthy sanity in the skin-the-bastards discussion here, but may I humbly I suggest we get our mirror up and 100% working before we rain flaming death down on this wiki? I know the flaming death is fun, (I've got some great ideas for it myself!) but I'd really rather we not flee to our island sanctuary until it actually exists, because that just leads to a lot of awkward standing around. -Derik 17:05, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I am wondering what people are meaning by all this "slash burn" and "scorched earth" and "flaming death" stuff. If there was a way to move everything to a new site and simply erase the existing Wiki, I'd say yes, do it, in a heartbeat. But, that's not what's going to happen, right? If we move somewhere else, this site will still be here in some form, yes? This is what I think the biggest potential downside of moving is, the specter of two competing Transformers wikis, and all the potential for stupid internets drama and "wiki wars" and all sorts of crap that could come up. What if there are users/contributors who don't want to leave Wikia? Is content that they want to remain here going to be "slashed and burned" by the rest of us on the way out the door? --KilMichaelMcC 19:21, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * This is pretty much the only valid argument against Operation: DELETE FUCKING EVERYTHING that I can find; the idea that some unfunny crew of autists and Zobovors (not that the two are mutually exclusive) would move in here, declare this the TROO WIKEY and turn it into a fagstravaganza of Gurren Lagann references, TRUKKS, and wikipedia-style 'This is a picture of Megatron' captions. If we leave, we gotta leave behind something that not even Matthew Ignash would touch with a ten foot pole.  -hx 21:08, 17 June 2008 (UTC) (wtf, wikia?  attempting to link to encyclopedia dramatica is automatic grounds for spamtrapping?  lame.


 * SFH: Monorail guy's said that Monobook will have the same ads as Monaco will. So, even notwithstanding M Sipher's entirely correct point, your suggestion is moot. - SanityOrMadness 17:07, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Walky, I've looked into the DB backup like you asked (well, like Suki relayed you asked) and the page content backup is live (there's a link on my userpage,) but we need to bug 'em to cough up an updated image archive. (The one they have up seems to be 9 months out of date.) It looks like getting one when we ask wont' actually be a problem though. (Also we might be getting a visit from a Wiki person who's not Monorail Guy. She asked where this debate was taking place...) -Derik 18:30, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Okey doke. I've asked my tech/hoster dude, and he's willing to work with us.  I'm gonna put him in contact with our peeps so he can determine what we need.  --ItsWalky 19:32, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * So should we still continue to edit while this move is going on? --MistaTee 19:18, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * That's up to your personal conscience - Wikia get to keep, at least in theory, everything written here.
 * I'm not going to make any significant contributions to the articles here from now on, however - SanityOrMadness 19:23, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Well info is info, regardless of the medium. I'll continue until the official move date is announced.  I do agree the ads suck, by the way, and am glad that we're taking a stand. --MistaTee 19:29, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I recommend (and plan to) keep making additions to the wiki. There's no point in "stopping" until another server is set up.  It's not like "Okay, we have the backup, now no one add anything until we get the 6-15 backup working because you'll just have to re-do it on the other server."  We'll just dump a NEW backup once we get the server working. (And by 'we' I mean Walky's server-person, because I fervently want to not be involved.) -Derik 20:18, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * So, is anybody going to get a bot up and running to do the forcebanner template on all articles? We still have to deal with the ads at the moment, and the banner ad is less of a problem than the block ad. --FFN 04:28, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Having given New Monaco a bit of a chance now..... yeah, it still looks like shit. This stuff is all over the place, and the only ways I see to adapt are to 1) make up disambigs for every page like that one (since blanketing the site with adkiller-templates will result in the hack being negated entirely), 2) change our basic layout schema (either moving the main image to the right or maybe putting the whole INTRO into a table), or 3) migrate to Walky's server. Options 1 and 2 feel like complete futility, since who knows what the NEXT skin-change is going to bring, and altering hundreds of pages (or at least scouring them, for option 1) to accomodate Wikia's caprice is maddening.  Option 3 has been discussed quite a bit already, but I have one major reservation that hasn't been brought up yet:  Is Walky's server sufficiently reliable?  Will the site stay up, will the data be safe and backed up, will ordinary technical issues be dealt with regularly, will it be reasonably fast and able to handle massive amounts of traffic, hell, how is it even being paid for, etc.? I assume that we're not talking about a computer in Walky's bedroom, but beyond that, I don't know what we're proposing here. Wikia, though they may fuck with our layouts, at least is in the business of hosting wikis, so I feel I can put the basic trust in them that Teletraan I will function and my work won't vanish, barring major catastrophe or bankruptcy. I'd like to know more about the Walky Contingency before I say it's a good alternative. - Jackpot 01:13, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
 * These are all very good questions Jackpot raises. Would be good to get some answers, and maybe a general update as to where things stand on the possibility of moving. --KilMichaelMcC 13:41, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree with Jackpot. I hate the new changes as well, but at the end of the day, I trust that Wikia will keep Teletraan I around so long as their business remains profitable, while Walky and the Wiigii's gung-ho, "Fuck the MAN, let's leave plan" is vague at best. To be honest, I simply cannot see how we would be able to afford the costs even with half the visitors we get here unless we advertise the living fuck out of the place, just like the major TF sites do, and ironically, just like how Wikia operates. --FFN 14:09, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I refute the notion that we're going to need to put giant flash-antimated ads right in the middle of our content. Once a-fucking-gain, the existence of advertising is not the issue. That's a neccessity, and will be for the moved wiki. It's the form that advertising takes and where it is on the page. I don't give it long before Wikia selects a larger, spikier advertising dildo to shove up the collective usebase's sphincter. We can do better than this. (Also, thanks for trotting out that old tired "it's only Wiigii who ______".)
 * Walky is in the middle of moving to a house, and as he's the person who is coordinating most of the tehcnical issues with the move, the ongoing "admin" discussions about moving that are not going on here (server location, ads, saber-rattling) are on hold until he's got that settled. --M Sipher 14:32, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, I sorta tl;dr'ed this, but what giant ads? I just have a few on the right-hand side of the screen and they're not really that annoying... --Detour 01:22, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Siph: Seriously, no offense intended, but as far as I can tell, the main members proposing the move are in your group. And there you go, the rest of us are not privy to whatever decisions have already been made, so we are rightly confused over what has been said do far. We're all in this together, I hope. --FFN 05:44, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * The only decisions that have been made are to test out the viability of a new site, backup/data-transfer-from-Wikia issues, template coding that might need redoing, to look into what advertising options work best to pay for bandwidth et al (which, by the way, is FAR lower than Wikia's needs, what with not having a hundred different wikis to host, some FAR larger than us, plus we can get a better focus on WHO will advertise), etc. Not WE MOVE TUESDAY. Most of what's being looked at right now is boring-ass backend stuff most editors and readers wouldn't have anything to do with ANYWAY. No, plans are not concrete yet. But that is no reason whatsoever to just give up, bend over and take it from the ads. Plans don't start fully-formed and ready to go out of the box. --M Sipher 07:06, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Most major TF sites don't use the same quantity of advertising that Wikia does. As it stands now, they're putting advertisements inside our content. Soon, they'll be plastering them all over the main page. And when those fail to make enough money... then what? Staying here, it's not going to get any better.


 * The simple fact of the matter is, we can do a far better job keep ourselves afloat than Wikia can. Wikia has to sell ads that can run on our wiki, but can also run on a hundred others. And because those aren't worth very much, they have to stick them inside the content. And then they have to MAKE MONEY off those-- not just break even, but pull in a profit. None of these apply.


 * If we move and deal with running it ourselves, we can choose who advertises here. Being able to support ourselves via advertisements would be phenomenally easier for us than Wikia: we don't need to find advertisers to support a hundred different wikis... it's just us. That means we can get advertisers that are actually relevant to Transformers; not ads for pop-tarts and talking emoticons. Relevant ads are worth far more money than the sort that Wikia is forced to use, so we won't have to bombard the user with them. On top of that, we're not a business. We don't need to pull a profit. All we have to do is pull in enough ad revenue to pay the server bills every month.


 * That sure sounds a hell of a lot more stable that just crossing our fingers and trusting that Wikia won't fuck us over any more than they already are, despite the fact that it keeps getting worse and worse to host our content here.


 * As for what we've been "secretly plotting": Siph is absolutely right on the matter. Right now, what we've done so far is talk to Walky's host about getting us a server, test migrating the content to make sure it works (it does!), and discuss what our advertisement options are going to be. If we do move-- and I'd unquestionably like to-- it will most certainly not be the decision of the super secret wiigii! cabal. We've just been making sure it's even something we can pull off before we start advocating it.


 * And... well, we can. The actual decision to go through is obviously in the hands of the community. --Suki Brits 07:50, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

I'd just like to note that Wikia is now accepting those goddamn talking ads. I didn't see/hear what it was for, as I naturally clicked away immediately. Oh God we're so leaving. Chip 10:50, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Ah, got it again. Western Governors University.  I'm reasonably sure Wikia told us these kinds of ads would NOT be accepted, right?  I fully expect explicit hardcore porn ads within the month.  Chip 10:55, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

You all seem so afraid of mr walky. FOR PITY'S SAKE! Even if we are talking about hasbro's copyrighted material, it's hardly like we are making knockoffs! SAVE THE WIKI!

+light bulb appears over head+ if you want to move off wikia and on to a new server/hoster/what ever and THIS WIKI STAYS BEHIND then you could move to the new wiki and this will STAY HERE BUT ALL THE PAGES COULD BE WIPED, LOCKED AND THEN AN AOUTOMATIC REDIRECT COULD BE PUT ON EACH PAGE TO THE CORRESPONDING PAGE AT THE NEW SITE! IT WOULD MEEN THAT PEOPLE COULD STILL GET TO THE NEW SITE THROUGH WKIA AND ON GOOGLE EVEN IF THIS WIKI SHOWS UP AT THE TOP THEN IT WOULD LINK TO THE NEW ONE!!!!!!! PROBLEM SOLVED :) 81.108.233.59 16:13, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
 * You, uh, don't think Wikia could undo that really easy? Like, in minutes?  --ItsWalky 18:08, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I fully agree with your anger at wikia, and I agree that it would be valid to move to another host - but...the whole "slash and burn" thing is a bit shit-headed. If you want to leave, fine, but don't ruin a site you supposedly don't care about anymore for people who don't feel like being your groupies. Again, I'm not saying I would be one of those people (I'd be perfectly happy to be one of the people who rely on walky's sites for tf info, if it's more informative), but don't let yourself become the caricatures your critics make of you.KrytenKoro 18:47, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Another Wikia person
Hi All, I've not been around here for some time... it's quite a while now since I made ItsWalky and Suki Brits Wiki admins, it's great to see how the wiki has grown since then! And now it's going through a rough patch. Which is totally Wikia's fault, this was a massive change and there were confusions and changes of plan and misunderstandings... messy.

So, I apologise for that. It has made us look bad, and I understand you are angry. The situation has been fluid, and that's made it hard for us to give good, solid information - even when we thought we were doing so :-/

So, where now? You have the right to edit wherever you want. You have the right to copy the content to a new wiki and, because we believe you should have this right, we provide a copy of the database for you. Images are currently being provided on request, to save resources, so you just need to ask for that (I suggest you have your hosting ready for the download before you do so).

But, of course, I'd much rather see you stay. I'd like to suggest that you edit for a while with the new skin. I have found it very comfortable to use, once I got used to it, and I honestly believe it is the right compromise between our need for ad space that we can sell, and users' need for a workable editing and reading space. Please give it a little time.

One practical request: the trick to force a banner was put in to help keep pages with wide tables looking right. If it's over-used in a way that means we don't have the box ads that we need, then we won't be able to leave it on. That would be a big shame, and it's not something we want to do. Please use this work-around fairly.

I think that's all I need to say: yes, we made mistakes in how we made this switch. But yes, this switch is needed and I hope you will see in time that it's a manageable change. Thanks for listening all -- sannse (talk) 18:38, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm getting that damned block-ad when I'm previewing changes made to a small section, and it's pushing down EVERYTHING, text and all. I don't call that "manageable". I'm trying to see if my links are functional, I'm not interested in being the millionth veiwer so I get a free PC*! (* with purchase of a $60000 system some states do not apply tax tags and registrations and basically you ain't getting anything).
 * I fully understand the need for advertising on wikia. But everything I ever learned about layout is screaming "NO NO NO NO NO WRONG" at this new ad placement. It is only slightly less obnoxious than those flash-pop-ups that obscure your window and talk at you and won't go away until you click on the microscopic "x" in one corner, and frankly I see little reason to not expect those to show up in short order, and you'll forgive us if we're skeptical of any forthcoming "oh that will never happen" "assurances". I don't doubt that advertisers want their ads as annoying and inescapable as possible. They've spent decades perfecting the art of ruining things in order to caterwaul at you to beg "buy shit you don't want or need! LOOK AT US!!!!". That doesn't mean you have to capitulate and then steamroller your contributors' work.
 * As far as most of us are concerned, and pardon the bluntness here, having advertizers drop trou and take a large steaming shit right in the middle of our content, which we've tried to arrange in order to present information as conceicely and as well-organized as possible, is a complete dealbreaker. If they don't go, sorry, we do. --M Sipher 19:13, 18 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Can you tell me what browser you use? The problem of text being pushed down on occasion is being looked at, and also section editing - we need the ad to only show if it's the top section being edited.  I think the push-down is just with IE7?  But more info would be helpful.  Thanks -- sannse (talk) 20:30, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I can tell you that in Firefox, the page Beast Wars (toyline) gets screwed up somethin' FIERCE. Have a look. -- Repowers 15:37, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Can somebody ask Sipher to answer sannse's question if he hasn't already done so elsewhere? It seems rude for him to leave the question unanswered. --FFN 11:49, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

So it's feasible?
We have a server, we have enough space, we have enough bandwidth, we have the right MediaWiki extensions installed? Does the advocacy begin now?--RosicrucianTalk 14:27, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Isn't Walky out of town? --FFN 15:04, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm mainly referring to Suki above saying "it works!"--RosicrucianTalk 15:22, 27 June 2008 (UTC)


 * As I gather it, it's looking good. There is still the issue of lining up advertizers, and of course figuring out how we'd go about the kind of saber-rattling that needs to be done to make sure everyone out there knows we're moving. "Press release", fan-board posts, personal sites, etc etc. There's also site feature issues I'd like to talk about before a move happens that would be good to look at right from the beginning before we make the exodus so we can make a big splash when it happens... it'd look better for us to lead them to a NEW site that looks nice once we cut the methaphorical ribbon. What features we want to keep, what we'd want to install, what stuff we want to keep but have to redo because Wikia's proprietary whatever was taking care of that for us and our non-Wikia site won't, etc. I don't think we're at "move now!" yet, but it's in sight, and I do think that we all should think about what we can do with a new, non-Wikia-forced-tempalte TF wiki.
 * (On that note, I've redone the "random page" boxes in a new style and added a whole lot more to the mix, seen http://skyjammer.com/wiigii/SB-MixmasterAni.jpg here and http://skyjammer.com/wiigii/SB-RoadblockGIJoe.jpg here. I really like these and think they're a great way to get people to go "hey, what's that?" and clock and learn.) --M Sipher 15:47, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Siph's nailed it. --Suki Brits 23:45, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

I think there should be something big and bold on the Main Page pointing to this page to make everyone aware of, and able to participate in, this discussion. Many users probably don't monitor the Community Portal or even the Recent Changes page, and so many people may not even yet know that moving is under consideration. --KilMichaelMcC 16:06, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I am still concerned with the fact we are well-known here, and that I've put alot of effort into promoting this site as much as I can (hell I've even thrown in goofy Animated-styled art with toys I've sold, recommending people visit the TF Wiki). I think even with press releases or whatever, it will take a long time, if ever, for most people to associate 'TF Wiki' with the new non-Wikia site, and I suspect that they will still refer to the Wikia TF Wiki. And then there's people who are outside the TF fandom who have come to know this Wiki. They probably won't know much about the move, even if we advertise it*. We know that Hasbro people have (and probably continue to) visted Teletraan I, and I would think its possible that people involved with the movie have too, given they seem to hang around the major TF boards.
 * Even if we should somehow delete all the content here after the dump and transfer, will we have to keep an eye on this place so *idiots don't harm our reputation or remove the redirect/news of move? --FFN 17:12, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Here is something else I thought of: Unless our admin staff decide to be jerks to the rest of the fandom and forbid anybody from ever editing on this Wikia wiki again, we WILL have a competing TF Wiki. There are plenty of talented, hard-working fans in the TF wiki who can do as good a job of writing articles as we can, but just in a different style and manner to ours. What we could end up with is a serious, 'professional' style wiki in the mould of Memory Alpha, the Wookiepeedia and, well, just about every other major franchise wikia, and to be honest, given the choice the majority of fans WILL refer to such a site for reference. At the same time we'll have Walky's TF Wiki, a privately run (though open for editing) site clung onto by a few die-hard fans of the old-style, funny TF Wikia.
 * We have to seriously consider this. We are not the only people in the fandom who could do a good TF Wiki, and we would be the losers from any such competition. --FFN 17:22, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * If that were REALLY an issue, there'd be a competing TF wiki already (besides the publically-known joke that is wikipedia's TF articles). You severely overestimate both the fandom's willingness to do work and their resistence to humor. Your insistence that the fandom-at-large hates this wiki and wants a serious one and that oh noes only twelve people in the universe will bla bla bla is frankly idiotic and apalling. --M Sipher 17:31, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for being the usual Captain Sunshine, Siph. You're currently scoring quite well on the Bingo game of yours.--Nevermore 17:38, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Forgetting for the moment that you just insulted me for little reason, one would assume the reason why there isn't a competing TF Wiki already is because people have not been given the chance to do so in an easy to use, wikipedia style software with which they are familiar with, and the ability to do so for free, for we had already claimed the job.* Once we're gone, there's every chance people who do not agree with our style will move right in and begin editing.
 * -*I am aware of other free wiki-styled services, but last I checked, their software wasn't anywhere near as versatile or user-friendly as what we would use on the Wikipedia and Wikia. --FFN 17:50, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, snarkiness aside, a good software base does not a thriving wiki make, even with as big a fanbase as Transformers has. As often as not you end up with... well... JoePedia.--RosicrucianTalk 17:57, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * All I'm saying is, we shouldn't presume we are the only people who can do this. But if differing opinion will only get me insults from M Sipher, I guess I'll keep my mouth shut for now. --FFN 18:15, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Gee Ward, I think you were a little hard on the Beaver. With that said, the whole "invisible silent majority" fallacy is just that.  Will there be people who want to take over once the real community leaves?  Sure.  The Bodycounts, the Assaultheads, the outright illiterates... they can have it.  They won't produce anything that will retain readers.  The Allspark had to give up their old URL too, but that worked out okay. Chip 02:40, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Oh believe me, I'm definitely worried about a shadow wiki springing up here if we leave, as I stated above. I'm just not entirely convinced it would be a good one, given that in my mind it's far more likely all the idiots we blocked will figure out we're not policing it anymore and come out of the woodwork.--RosicrucianTalk 18:20, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * This, of course, assumes that there won't be policing for lies and misinformation. We do that now anyway, what's a little extra vigilence that will help us in the end? Given how many of the idiots were blocked for contributions that were not, you know, remotely useful content... a wiki full of one-sentence, no-links, no-category pages of the Kremzeek variety? I can't say I'm worried about that sort of competition, so let them turn their new playroom into a garbage house. (Plus, oh, don't worry... the offifial TF parties WILL know about the move. Yes indeed, they will.) --M Sipher 18:27, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

If you want the take of someone who's still a relative newbie to TF fandom...

The majority of folks I've personally seen opinions from who've read the wiki like the humor. I think it's great myself... all the editors here have done a good job of balancing providing useful info with making the info fun to read. (I've never found the humor to get in the way of the information, even when I was a total newbie.)

And I don't envision many folks desiring to create a more serious wiki when there's plenty of TF sites that already have comprehensive databases with lots of pure, straight information. Why reinvent the wheel? The TF wiki's main uniqueness for me is that it puts a lot of creative fun in the information. Otherwise I may as well just remain with reading nothing but Seibertron/TF Archive/etc. I doubt I'd personally bother with a purely serious TF wiki if anyone made one. Jeysie 18:32, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Feature set
Alright, to get the ball rolling here a little discussion on features that are not part of the standard MediaWiki/Monobook codebase. One thing I'd love for us to keep is some variation on the customizable flyout menu Monaco introduced. I think if we can do that in a similar fashion (with the independently editable include file for it) we could make it work for us.--RosicrucianTalk 17:45, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Frankly, I don't really care for the content-obscuring flyouts. Though that's largley because if your cursor gets within five yards of it, it throws up a menu. If it can be worked out to where you have to CLICK on an option to expand the menu, then fine.
 * Frankly, I'd like to see a more visually interesting site. Monobook is functional but very very plain. --M Sipher 17:49, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Could always change the location, too. It doesn't have to be a sidebar, per se. It could be a dropdown rather than a flyout. Like maybe a little Vector Sigma icon on the top bar that drops down into featured articles, characters, franchises, etc.--RosicrucianTalk 17:52, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't think a radical reorganization of page layouts is a good idea. The left-sidebar is logical and functional, nice and separate from the content. Putting non-page-specific stuff in the content field, which includes the bar of edit/history/discussion links above the article proper... isn't that why we're looking at leaving? --M Sipher 17:57, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Not in the content field per se. In the space above, where MediaWiki also puts stuff like your username, talkpage, contributions, etc. There is a bar up there, and there is space on it that is entirely unused.--RosicrucianTalk 17:59, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * And the main reason I suggest it as an alternative is that Wikia itself seems to have had moderate success in putting a dropdown there for the other prominent wikis in a category (Entertainment, Gaming, etc.) So it doesn't seem too intrusive or out of place.--RosicrucianTalk 18:02, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Ehn. I still think that's really counterintuitive. This will still be a wiki, and people are used to wikis being laid out in a rather conventional way. What would even go there? The "Wikia entertainment" dropdown to other wikis is okay there because it's barely there and frankly has little to nothing to do with our pages. Plus, there's really not enough real estate there to put enough useful material in the top sliver without breaking up "groups". One would want most of the ways to find other articles to be all in one space rather than scattered around the page. And we can't assume everyone is running a 19" monitor at superhigh resolution. Yeah, we could throw things in there, but I don't see what functional benefits we'd get from it. The topbar is kind of a "not part of the wiki" part of the wiki. --M Sipher 18:09, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

You know what the new wiki really, REALLY, REALLY needs? An easy-to-find index page of our wide variety of templates, sorted by purpose. Like, two-clicks-tops accessible from the sidebar. We have a lot of them, and spelling is sometimes an issue. Stubs, storylinks, notes, anchors, "needed" messageboxes and image-replacers, etc. Actually, a centralized, better-organized help hub in general would be great. We really need to map that shit out. --M Sipher 18:52, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * If at all possible, I'd even support somehow integrating that into the edit page. Easy insertion.--RosicrucianTalk 18:56, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, Wikia does have that list of "common" thingies under the edit section, but I think we could definitely craft one more suitable to our site's needs. We could even get a little fancy, with thumbnail images of the templates. --M Sipher 19:07, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

I personally don't mind any features. But I would prefer that the new site load more quickly than the current wiki. I've noticed that ever since we switched the Monaco, the menu takes a bit longer to load than on Monobook. Oh, and off-topic question: Will continued edits or uploads cause any complications for the move? Will we have to slow down or stop altogether at some point to better facilitate the move? --FFN 05:41, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
 * At some point, yes. However all the talk I've seen so far is "not yet" and "we can grab a new database dump if we need to."--RosicrucianTalk 11:54, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

If and when we move, I'd really like a template that informs people who make crap, effortless edits that they Suck At Wiki. --FFN 06:52, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Sayonara Wikia!
If we do end up leaving, in what condition should we leave this site (namely, the main page)? We do want to make it blatant why we are leaving i assume. i propose a huge obnoxious picture. something like this perhaps:

Thoughts?--Skyglide 21:51, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
 * For the love of God, no no no no no no no no no. Despite evidence to the contrary, we are not all nine-year-olds. --ItsWalky 01:11, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I think if leaving in any way involves us behaving like juvenile, petty jackasses, I'm going to have to be against it. --KilMichaelMcC 22:59, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually, I think everyone here falls into at least one of those descriptions. -- SFH 23:03, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Kil, if we aren't going to be here, we might as well make it painfully blatant why we left wikia. Sometimes petty works. Beside, That was merely a rough draft suggestion, i though it was clear that others should make suggestions too.
 * And unfortunately SFH is probably right. Your comment is proof of it for one. After all isn't needlessly insulting someone being juvenile, petty, and a jackass? i am just going to leave it at that. I do not wish to create an(other) argument. Lets not tread down that path any further, ok. --Skyglide 23:16, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I apologize for any insult given. I did not intend my comment as such. My point was that if, in leaving, we engage in any sort of vandalism this site, such as putting a huge obnoxious picture on the Main Page, then we -- collectively -- would look like jackasses. We don't have to literally give Wikia the finger; the act of packing up and leaving symbolically does that for us. --KilMichaelMcC 00:32, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Ah ok. i see. My thinking was though, that 1. it would give wikia a visual which outright says why we left, and 2. anyone who comes here would be like, oh i guess they were pissed. which would then lead to them figuring out we packed up and left as you say. and although i do like symbolism, some times being blatant works too. you know, in conjunction.--Skyglide 00:41, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
 * And i don think it would collectively make us all look like jackasses, i think it would make it clear that we, collectively, are fed up with wikia. but i can plainly see how that could go either way.--Skyglide 00:43, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Could you at least use a toy that can actually give the finger? —Interrobang 01:49, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
 * That and movie leader prime are the only ones that have actual possibility in the fingers (that i own). well, and leader movie megatron, but he only has three fingers on each hand, so it kinda ruins the effect.... I am sure someoen with skill could photoshop that so it looks fully extended right? I have no abilities in photoshop. like at all.--Skyglide 02:49, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
 * There a picture of Unicron that's been floating around the net. --FortMax 02:53, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

I personally think this is childish and somewhat uncalled for. --FFN 05:16, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree. I don't like how we've been jerked around and misled during this process, but there are certainly people at Wikia who've tried.  I want to leave wit some class.  I do think we certainly need to leave a message explaining hte move and the reasons for it.  And maybe we should just unban everyone on the way out. Chip 05:34, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree. Also, why don't users just set their skin to the old Monobook one? It doesn't really have ads. Just wikia spotlights on the right side of the page. --Detour 05:36, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
 * How many times does it have to be explained that this will not last? Wikia has said repeatedly that Monobook will have the exact same ad content Monoco has. (Also, the image thing is really a bad idea, and I'm the guy who has repeatedly said "dribbling shit" about the new adstuff.) --M Sipher 05:53, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I dunno how many times you have to say it. Damn discussion was tl;dr by the time I got to it. Didn't feel like clearing an entire afternoon off my schedule just to read through it.
 * When we move, though, is there any chance we can go back to a Monobook-style layout? I personally prefer it to the "prettier but more impractical" Monaco skin. (again, if this was discussed anywhere, keep in mind tl;dr) --Detour 06:30, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm assuming that once we've left this place to the wolves, somebody else is going to eventually go to Wikia Administration In-Charge People and ask for top-admin status or whatever they use, and take over from there, 'cause we've abandoned it, like we did when we found the place. But in the meantime, while we're working on the "hey everybody, we've moved here now" portion immediately post-move, I'd like a bit of time to advertise that before the new "A picture of Bumblebee's G1 toy robot mode"/infobox explosion/"this is my guy, he's named kilotron he's megatron's son"/"Beast Machines doesn't belong here"/whatever regime pops up. Could anon editing be turned off, as a stop-gap "don't let the barbarians trash the place 'immediately' while we set up somewhere else and notify everybody" precaution? Does Wikia support that Captcha crap? Do we keep a remnant admin team for a while, or protect all pages until the new "owner" turns it off? Omnibus 06:34, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I worry about that too. I would recommend we keep at least some staff here to see that our reputations aren't tarnished or something isn't fucked over in the move. Even if we tell all TF sites, people will come here by accident or by familiarity. Or they just never heard our move news. --FFN 17:20, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

I like the image, so long as we also give a short, more respectful and collected statement on our reasons to leave. I currently want to stay and give Wikia a chance, but at the same time I can't stand anymore of this infuriating crap. (Undecided) 22:43, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
 * We could be jerks, declare this place a mirror of TFwiki.net (by consensus) and set tfwiki's code up to post any edits to pages on this wiki to- with absolute disregard for any edits people have made here in the interim. ;) -Derik 01:27, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Why the hell is optimus fliking us off?!?And I would hate to leave but you guys hate me overall.I did not do it Honest.But that is funney sheit Fast lane 10:24, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * What (Undecided) said is kind of what i expected to be the case. that pic and then an actual explanation. And Walky, I take that kind of offensively, (although humorous, because the evidence is plentiful...such as this whole wiki being about toys and kids cartoons) ;D.--Skyglide 01:29, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Simply stating "We have shut down this site and moved to protest Wiki's decision to have mandatory ads that interferes with the site's set-up" or something to that effect should suffice. No need to be childish or vulgar about it. Zadok Rox 00:01, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

AARGH!
And now the ads talk. Walky, hurry up and finish moving so we can move. --FortMax 17:25, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Supposedly there aren't supposed to be those. It's like when the talkies slipped into the sidebar ads. You can report them. Otherwise I agree, it's getting ridiculous.--RosicrucianTalk 18:13, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Just a minor comment from an observer. As much as I really do love this site and all, its always felt to me as though it's run by a select few people and for the most part any contributions attempted to be made get run over. Not as bad as some wikipedia articles necessarily, but still. Ragingtsunami726 18:22, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * *shrug* Run over in what sense? Reverting edits is particularly bad now because we're trying to keep the spoilers on the wiki at least partially contained, which has some more subtle considerations to it that a lot of new contributors miss. -Derik 19:57, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Talking ads?! No, you should not be seeing those. Please can somone get me a URL? There are instructions on this here. I'll get it blocked straight away. We can't preview ads (except those sent by one ad provider) but we can select certain critera, and the way they are set we should not be sent any ads like that -- sannse (talk) 09:35, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
 * As Chip states above, its those Western Governors University ads, but I don't know the URL. I don't get them as I'm Australian, fortunately. --FFN 19:23, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
 * If they crop up again, please grab that URL... these are definitely not something we want to see here -- sannse (talk) 15:48, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

What now?

 * So, i have http://transformers.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page in my bookmarks, is it to early to switch to TFwiki.net or w/e? Will we be notified when everything is completed? (perhaps by email?) --Skyglide 01:32, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
 * You do know that both http://www.tfwiki.net and http://www.tfwiki.info work, right? --Salt-Man Z 15:31, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Right click on your Transformers Wiki bookmark, select Properties. In the URL field type either http://www.tfwiki.net or http://www.tfwiki.info .  Click OK to close the dialog box and update the bookmark.  RobSP 20:04, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Logged-in users = no ads?
I'd be irresponsible if I didn't mention this...

There's apparently a non-joking discussion about at Wikia about Possible changes for logged-in users, wherein logged-in users wouldn't get any ads. (Which I'm guessing means that their "New users like Monaco!" statistics probably also show a reduction in productivity, uptake or retention of content-generating members- killing the golden goose so to speak.) -Derik 18:21, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I say we take it. No move problems, no rival wikis, no disorienting ads which ruin our content. -- SFH 18:34, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Depends on if it's actually offered- it's still a discussion at this point, i think they're trying to gauge how much Community Rage this'd offset. -Derik 18:36, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

And from the looks of the discussion, it seems to be working. -- SFH 18:40, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
 * As most people pointed out here, users weren't against ads since they are the lifeblood of this free service. People were perfectly happy the way ads were until Wikia got all 'ZOMGs we needs bigger in-your-face banners'. I don't know what to do. On one hand I'm still concerned about rival wikis (however crap) and leaving my rut in this place and having to restart my TF Wiki promotional drive again. On the other hand, the Wikia wikis might look abit crap for non-logged in users (99% of their visitors, according to Wikia). --FFN 18:43, 1 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Notice that the spiked adverdildo has not actually been thrown away. They're merely discussing the possiblity of putting it down on the endtable for a little bit for a small fraction of the userbase... and not making any promises that they won't turn around and grab that thing again as soon as the advertizers demand greater intrusion for everyone... and that last part is not speculation. You know and I know they will demand it. I smell bait-and-switch. Why should we trust them, again? --M Sipher 18:44, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Sipher has a point insofar that- they might say editors are 1% of their userbase when making a soothing argument that "No ads for you- we MIGHT in the future- but there's so few of you, why would we bother?" it sounds perfectly reasonable- why piss off your hardcore base for only a 1% return?  But it elides over the fact that that 1% of users is probably a much higher percenage of the actual monthly pageviews.
 * (I wish we had our own numbers. Wikia's are censored for their own purposes.  Can we embed a traffic monitor in TT1 to find out for ourselves how users break down, just to cut down on the number of unknowables?) -Derik 19:04, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I wasn't even thinking about that angle, but it's a damn good one. Your average individual browsing the wiki will probably be here what, five, ten minutes tops? Personally, I spend several hours at this a day, even more on weekends. And doesn't every edit preview basically mean another page/ad hit, where most simple readers will probably stick to a single un-refreshed "page" for longer? And yes, there's the "pages are still shit for everyone else" angle, and the "no promises we won't stick it to you again once Pizza Hutt (sic) decides they want more intrusion" angle. Besides... I've really liking the idea of better personalizing a "new" wiki to simply look more TF-centric, add/delete features as we see fit, haev a choice in who advertizes with us... --M Sipher 19:22, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
 * *damn edit conflicts...*
 * I'm with Sipher - the minute people start registering/logging in to avoid the ads to any great extent, they'll claim force majure - the way they claimed it to put these supremely irritating adcubes in the content in the first place - and reverse the policy.
 * In addition, by their own standards, the user experience will still be $£%&ed for 99% of readers. - SanityOrMadness 19:07, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Arguably, this also seems to force/induce/invite people who would otherwise not be naturally inclined to join the editing body into it. And I'm wary of the prospect of letting the people who just wanted to RIDE the Matterhorn into the utility tunnels behind the ride.  Right now we simply lock the more sensitive pages to prevent unregistered users from editing them.  But when a significant chunk of our otherwise-uninterested-in-contributing readerbase is issued passes to change shit along with simple admission- they're gonna do it.
 * This argument smacks of elitism- yeah- but there is a difference in the quality of editors. The ones who want to be praised for doing anything because they "participated" (and throw fits if their contributions are not deemed worthy) are not the same as the ones who contribute constructively and collaboratively-- and in high volume.  We might pick up some small fraction of high-value contributors who would never have become editors without the pressure to join... but we also get the greater body of people surly they've been forced to give away their personal information for power they didnt' want-- but might as well use.
 * That's a very pessimistic picture, but situations where you induce change in users via punitive action or discomfort (or shelter from discomfort) never yield the healthy crops the architects of such situations imagine their idealized scenarios would create if only everyone would stop fighting and go along with them. -Derik 21:45, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
 * And that "picture" gets worse when you consider that they've said in that section that they "have considered other ideas, such as removing ads for people with over 1000 edits, or for those that edit at least once a week". That's just BEGGING for a bunch of spam edits if they ever moved to that model, as people make tiny changes followed by reverts, or do a bunch of  -worthy edits just to get to that 1k mark, or get their de facto enforced edits in for the week. Edits which, of course, would boost Wikia's activity stats... - SanityOrMadness 23:03, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

I commented in more detail over at the page Derik linked to, but basically I don't see this as a huge improvement. We're doing this for an audience; an audience who will still have ads interrupting the actual content, screwing up the formatting. Moreover, it seems clear that every time we rework the whole wiki's format to suit some change from Wikia, another will come along. There are a lot of things about this New Monaco shift that bother me, but the thing I can't live with is the interference in the actual content area. Chip 16:01, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

wait, wait, wait,
if this wiki moves (and no one follows my suggestion (the one with lots of bold, italics and caps)) then how do people find the new site? i dont think EVERYONE who likes this site loads is reading all this so how are we going to make sure EVERYONE moves with us?81.108.233.59 16:19, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I think the suggestion of 'Blank the pages, redirect to New Wiki, lock all articles against edits' plan was thrown about. We'd have to periodically check back and see if Wikia were asses and reverted them to working pages, but insofar as there is no option to simply have Transformers.wikia.com vaped entirely, without Wikia reserving their ability to simply undo the deletions, that seems like the only really viable option.
 * Also, if we went ape and flung our shit around like the monkeys over at ED... Well, maybe Wikia would recognize 'Hm, they seem to be annoyed at the ads' for a moment, but then they'd have more reason to revert everything back to pre-exodus state, ban all prior editors, and make Kremzeek or some other flunkie the admin. Nutjob RT 18:37, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

GDFL
Danny "Monorail Guy" Toughpigs said above that, and I quote:
 * Wikis on Wikia operate under GFDL, a free license that allows people to reuse the content in any way, as long as it's under the same license and links back to the original source. Wikia provides complete database dumps for anybody who wants them, so it's easy for people to move the content somewhere else if they want to. The moved content should link back to the original wiki, using a template like this.

The GDFL itself can be seen on this Wikipedia page.

The relevant sections, as far as I can see, are Sections 1 ("APPLICABILITY AND DEFINITIONS), 2 ("VERBATIM COPYING") and 4 ("MODIFICATIONS").

I've also looked at wikipedia:Wikipedia:Copyrights for a simpler version (since Wikipedia & Wikia both use the GDFL, the requirements are identical).

Frankly, my head's spinning, but three things leap to the eye:
 * 1) There is no specific, explicit requirement to link to the original page (transformers.wikia.com/wiki/PAGENAME). There are specific requirements to make to licence your modifications under the GFDL, make that clear & link to it; make a "Transparent copy" (machine readable, copyable by other users) available; and to acknowledge the authorship of the article. Wikipedia suggests that one way to "partially fulfill" the latter is to "provid[e] a conspicuous direct link back to the Wikipedia article", but also notes that they reserve the right to delete the page & authorship history, and that wouldn't be enough in such a case. It suggests that an alternative is to preserve the page history, and to list the five most prominent authors (all, if <5) on the "title page"/top of the document.
 * 2) If you do, answers.com - a prominent content aggregator, including from Wikipedia, has their notice in small letters in the page footer.
 * 3) If it is necessary, it may only be necessary to do it on the history page.

Someone else's reading would be appreciated, to see if I'm talking absolute gibberish. - SanityOrMadness talk page 17:41, 4 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Worth noting: we'll be importing the entire revision history, not just the current status of the page. So we don't have to link to anywhere to reflect that; it'll be on the wiki itself.
 * I definitely like the idea of putting it on the history page-- our original thought was to put it in the footer, like your answers.com example-- but that works even better. --Suki Brits 06:48, 5 July 2008 (UTC)