(172 intermediate revisions by 53 users not shown)
Line 1:
Line 1:
{{archive|t}}
Discuss issues in the proper heading, please. [[User:Makiah|Makiah]] 23:11, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
== Fanon wiki merge discussion ==
[[File:Pros and Cons of Merging with Fanon Wiki.jpg|thumb|250px|Davidmc's take on the pros and cons of merging.]]
Ok, after you hear this, I know that some of you may think that I am crazy, but I think we should merge [[w:c:simsfanon|The Sims Fanon Wiki]] with The Sims Wiki. Hear me out, at the [[w:c:avatar|Avatar wiki]], they have merged their fanon wiki with the main one. While this was initially a controversial move, they claim that it paid off, because their wiki has many more contributors and visitors, making it much more active. I think we should merge these two wikis because with [[The Sims 3: Ambitions]] coming out in June, we will need to make our wiki known to people, preferably before the release. Another reason is that I have noticed that the activity of the fanon wiki went down for a while. What better way to bring the activity back up than merge it with a more popular wiki? Thank you for listening to this and please tell me what you think. --[[User:Random Ranaun|Random Ranaun]] 03:05, April 5, 2010 (UTC)
I hear your reasoning. I support the merging of the 2 wikis! [[User:ArchieAndrewfan3001|Archie]] 03:08, April 5, 2010 (UTC)
__TOC__
I don't think that would be a very good idea. I think because there would be loads more of vandalism, but I'm just an IP so what do I know? :) [[Special:Contributions/74.216.88.170|74.216.88.170]] 03:10, April 5, 2010 (UTC)
==New Main Page==
I'm assuming there was a reason for creating a separate wiki for fanon. Has that reason gone away? Will it come back if the two are combined? If the two are combined, I'd think there would have to be some way to "mark" fanon as such. How will that be handled? I'm not categorically against a merger, but I'm also not sure it's all that great of an idea. [[User:Dharden|Dharden]] 14:30, April 6, 2010 (UTC)
It was suggested by someone that we format our main page differently (On the main page discussion). I just wanted to check with everyone about what they think. Do they like the 1 column page? Or would they prefer the 2 column page? More color? I think it's fine but I wanted to check. ~ [[User:Makiah|Makiah]] 19:30, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
:More thought into this I would like to bring up a few suggestions but would like some input. I was thinking about a two column format and also use of the Bulletin Board which I saw on [[The Sims Wiki]]. Also I was thinking of improving the 'In the News Section'. I like the header but the Sims Universe under it I think maybe should be smaller horizontal wise or at the bottom. Inputs? [[User:Makiah|Makiah]] 23:11, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
::I'm thinking about drawing up a test main page, I'll post it up on March 12th but I could still use some input. And anyone who would like to draw up a main page of their own that would be great. We could have a vote between them! [[User:Makiah|Makiah]] 01:20, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
:::Alright guys to see the potential main page go to the [[Sandbox]]. I'm thinking about making use of a bulletin board that was on the original main page. Suggestions would be great. Also if anyone else wants to make a new one and place it on a temporary page I would be fine with that but please serious main pages only and no new templates. [[User:Makiah|Makiah]] 23:38, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
::::The page in [[Sandbox]] looks good; personally, I can't design stuff so beyond that it looks better than the current main page, I can't really add anything. Much wootness, though, to be sure :) --[[User:Narc|Narc]] ([[User talk:Narc|talk]]) 18:48, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
:::::Thanks! I was afraid that the colors would be too strange or something. I also wasn't sure if other people would like it. ~ [[User:Makiah|Makiah]] 19:18, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
::::::As soon as we finalize the voting procedures I want to begin voting on the new main page. However before we do that I want to discuss something. One thing is something like the 'Needs improving page of the week' but not necessarily that title. XD Just something that puts a page that could have major improvement on the board so we as a group can concentrate on one page as well as our own separate projects. I believe this would benefit the community and put awareness on a page that needs it. I think this would fit best on the 'Got Time?' Section. Also adding to the got time section something that says 'Make sure you check if a page exists before you create one!' What does everyone think? If the reactions on positive I think we could vote on both ideas at once after we finish the voting procedures. ~ [[User:Makiah|Makiah]] 00:46, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
:::::::Well, the voting procedures are up, so we can start the vote whenever. I like the idea about a "Cleanup of the week", we should definitely do that -- except I'd make it more than one page. Not too many, though -- I think three or four really important pages are what we should begin with. I'm also thinking of an official list of pages needing updates, chronologically ordered. I dunno. I agree it's very important to highlight that if a page exists, a new one shouldn't be created -- that's how we ended up with four LTW pages in the first place, blech. Admittedly, that was easier to clean up than I thought it would be. *shrug* My two cents. --[[User:Narc|Narc]] ([[User talk:Narc|talk]]) 18:19, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
:There were two reasons for creating a separate wiki. One Dharden mentioned, the need to mark or keep separate premade content from custom content. The second was whether an editor had the right to change something that someone else had written given that player stories are creative rather than encyclopedic. I had a [[The Sims Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive 1#Policy on Writing and Editing Player stories|brief discussion]] with a former admin. At the time I was pretty much the only one on, I didn't want to spend all my time fixing the spelling and grammar of everyone's story and decided to move the stories to subpages. At this point, I concede that merging might be a good idea. It would also make the discussion on [[The Sims Wiki talk:Project Downloads and custom content#What downloads and custom content should be included?|what downloads and custom content should be included]] moot. --[[User:A_morris|a_morris]] <small>([[User_talk:A_morris|talk]])</small> 03:05, April 7, 2010 (UTC)
I do have my concerns about increased vandalism, but, it would seem good for the community. [[User:A.P. Freeman|Author]] 03:12, April 7, 2010 (UTC)
:I personally believe the two wikis should stay divided. There must be a reason why they were made into 2 different wikis, after all! [[User:Bleeh|Bleeh]] ([[w:c:Sims:User talk:Bleeh|talk]]) 22:40, April 28, 2010 (UTC)
I hate to jump back onto this Wiki after being so inactive for so long to voice my opinion, but I actually don't think this is a bad idea. My reasoning:
==Sims Policy==
1) If I remember correctly, fans do come here and do post fan material that then needs to be moved and/or deleted by admins. Merging the two wikis makes this no longer necessary, and encourages game fans to visit and enrich themselves in knowledge of the game while posting their own content.
2) Merging the two allows the new merged wiki to capitalize on the visitors to both, increasing the number of visitors, number of editors, and number of active members.
3) Merging the two makes it easier for a visitor to find information both on the game and on fan material in one location.
Additionally, even if the two were created intentionally separate, that's not necessarily a good enough reason to keep it that way. Just as there is no point in needless change, there is no point in maintaining the status quo if doing so is detrimental. It's up to the best judgment of the Admins and members here (and on the other wiki) to determine whether or not the status quo is detrimental or not - I hesitate to say that it is, though I still support their combination.
I believe we should have a policy, currently there is none but I believe it should address a few topics which may seem obvious but if it is written out it is more enforceable. Somethings I believe it should contain:
*A clause about vandalism not being allowed.
*Mention about inappropriate words such as cuss words.
*Something concerning new pages. Such as if there is a topic already on that page just with different capitals, should be deleted. Misspelled pages should be either deleted or moved depending on the circumstances.
*Also with new pages, I suggest that empty pages created after a policy is put in effect be deleted. Example: [[SimCity 3000]] has never had anything on it but can't be deleted per policy because it doesn't have anything on it. But if an empty page were to be created say titled [[Mirrors]] but has nothing on it, even though it is relevant to Sims it should be deleted. Maybe something saying you need at least 3 facts in complete sentences to start a page. That way there is something to build off of. Some sort of content.
::I'm thinking that we really don't want empty pages at all. I've seen pages like "There's no content here yet 'cause I'm concentrating on categorizing" -- we don't really want that to remain. If the page has no content, it should show up in [[Special:Wantedpages]] -- which it won't if it has nothing but that sentence on it. --[[User:Narc|Narc]] ([[User talk:Narc|talk]]) 12:07, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
:::I saw that page too. But I feel rather than deleting old empty pages we should work to improve them unless they show no potential. ~ [[User:Makiah|Makiah]] 19:39, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
::::Whether we find them via [[Special:Wantedpages]] or otherwise is the same thing in the end. I like what's currently in the proposed rules about using the "Report a problem" feature, since that would probably help prioritize things. --[[User:Narc|Narc]] ([[User talk:Narc|talk]]) 18:19, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Justsomestartingsuggestions. Anyone else have any ideas or comments? [[User:Makiah|Makiah]] 23:11, 12February2008 (UTC)
That's just my $0.02 though. [[User:LostInRiverview|LostInRiverview]] 23:31, April 29, 2010 (UTC)
:If no one has any input by March 12th I will draw up the policy and post it so everyone can see using my ideas. It would be great to have some discussion to include the community! [[User:Makiah|Makiah]] 01:20, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
::Well, everything you've mentioned so far sounds brilliant to me; please do write it up -- it sounds good. I do have one addition, though: I haven't looked around the Templates and such yet, but I know we have a <nowiki>{{stub}}</nowiki> template. I don't know if we have something like "cleanup required" yet, but we need it, too: several pages I've seen look like they have a bit of info but it's poorly formatted or even unformatted. Again, I haven't had a chance to look at the Templates yet, but if we don't have it yet, we need it. --[[User:Narc|Narc]] ([[User talk:Narc|talk]]) 12:07, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
:I actually never thought of those possibilities. Though, if users did add info about their own characters, there would need to be a way for other users to be able to distinguish whether or not it's a Sim that's made by Maxis. There would need to be a category, or something, which I'm sure most new-comers to the wiki wouldn't add, since Wikia is confusing enough. [[User:Bleeh|Bleeh]] ([[w:c:Sims:User talk:Bleeh|talk]]) 23:37, April 29, 2010 (UTC)
::This is interesting -- [[Special:Contributions/69.254.46.13|69.254.46.13]] used the template <nowiki>{{blank}}</nowiki> ([[Template:blank]]) on the page [[Biotech station]] earlier today, and it seems a decent way to get lists of blank, but "very" wanted pages. Personally, I'm thinking we might consider using that at first, and then deleting pages after a while if they're not filled in. Though, also personally, I'd prefer such pages were never created in the first place. --[[User:Narc|Narc]] ([[User talk:Narc|talk]]) 12:37, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
::Well, I'm not saying it wouldn't be complicated. That's why it's important to determine whether the changes are needed or desired enough to justify upsetting the status quo. [[User:LostInRiverview|LostInRiverview]] 21:14, April 30, 2010 (UTC)
:::That was me! ^_^ I found it yesterday while looking for useless images, when I had to delete a horse picture someone uploaded. I believe I have seen a clean up template somewhere but can't located it right now. I'm sure a little bit more searching and I will find it. ~ [[User:Makiah|Makiah]] 17:13, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
::::If needed, I'll work something up and make a note of it here; this seems to have become our village pump, apparently :) --[[User:Narc|Narc]] ([[User talk:Narc|talk]]) 18:19, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
::::C'mon people! We need to vote! We've had 16 people vote, but, no results! [[User:ArchieAndrewfan3001|Archie]] 23:56, April 29, 2010 (UTC)
I will begin the official vote, according to our [[The Sims Wiki:Policy#|voting procedure]], on May 1 and put an announcement on the main page. In the event of a tie, we will keep things the same, i.e. stay divided.
Everyone can check out the proposed policy at [[Sims wiki:Policy]]. [[User:Makiah|Makiah]] 21:06, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
:I added block times so everyone knows the consequences of their actions which hopefully will deteriorate them from breaking the rules. I would like to add a note at the bottom saying that Wikia helpers, janitors and admins may use their discretion when blocking a user as that user may also be vandalizing other wikis. I want to cover every angle...what do you guys think? In the past helpers such as [[User:Uberfuzzy|Uberfuzzy]] have helped us by banning vandals. [[User:Makiah|Makiah]] 02:20, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
::Vandals tend not to read the rules in the first place; those who do and still break them usually have a bone to pick. As far as I'm concerned, the simplest rule you can use is "Whatever the admin wants, the admin gets." As for Wikia people helping, I do believe it can't hurt to make a note of it. Covering every angle, though, that's a tough one. The best way to do that, I've found, is to make short and open-ended rules, without going into much detail about what ''exactly'' constitutes vandalism. In short, what you have now is probably best. On that note, however, I would personally recommend against very short blocks (like an hour), since those have practically no value unless they're given ''immediately'' once a violation is noted, and that will almost never happen unless someone sits on top of [[Special:Recentchanges]] refreshing every minute. I don't know about you, but I don't have that kind of time. --[[User:Narc|Narc]] ([[User talk:Narc|talk]]) 18:19, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
:::Good point, I changed that hour thing. I added the other clause. And I guess this can just go to voting... [[User:Makiah|Makiah]] 17:25, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
Should the "We combine" option prevail, it will be followed by a discussion/vote to determine how to add the new content and the merging will begin upon its conclusion and any maintenance tasks required (ex. creating templates, etc.) Any new content may be left until a decision is made. --[[User:A_morris|a_morris]] <small>([[User_talk:A_morris|talk]])</small> 14:01, April 30, 2010 (UTC)
==Main Page Voting==
:So then, if a user makes a page about a fanon Sim, we just let it stay in the wiki until the voting is over? Or would we move it to the user namespace? If it's the first, then how would we remember to move it to the user namespace if the wikis stay divided? [[User:Bleeh|Bleeh]] ([[w:c:Sims:User talk:Bleeh|talk]]) 20:49, April 30, 2010 (UTC)
After discussing the issue and asking members to submit their ideas for a new main page, we have received one (1) idea, which can be viewed at the [[Sandbox]]. So if you agree, you want to change the main page layout to the one in the sandbox as well as add 2 articles to a "Clean up of the Week" section and add a clause about checking for pages of the same content before creating them. If you disagree you want to keep everything as it is. Voting ends 28 March 2008. Please remember to sign your votes!
::No. After the first vote, if we are going to combine, only then will fanon pages be left as is until we decide how to deal with them. For now and if we decide to stay divided, fanon pages should be moved to the user namespace, as usual. --[[User:A_morris|a_morris]] <small>([[User_talk:A_morris|talk]])</small> 23:15, April 30, 2010 (UTC)
FYI - [[w:c:user:TamBams219|TamBams219]] has [http://community.wikia.com/wiki/Adoption#The_Sims_Fanon_Wiki_.28on_hold.29 requested to adopt The Sims Fanon Wiki]. This may have an impact on whether we will be allowed to merge the two wikis. --[[User:A_morris|a_morris]] <small>([[User_talk:A_morris|talk]])</small> 00:14, May 1, 2010 (UTC)
* At the present moment, I am mulling my thoughts over. I'm kind of thinking a merger would not be the worst thing. The Sims Wiki has a much more structured and, clean lay out. Of course given the time, I feel that I could equally make the Fanon Wiki just as efficent. Another plus, the fan fiction people make/compose would reach a wider audience if merged. It's a toguh decision... [[User:TamBams219|TamBams219]] 02:21, May 1, 2010 (UTC)
===Agree===
* I'm totally agains't it! Why did we make players stories after all?![[User:AGuyCalledJoe|AGuyCalledJoe]] 14:59, May 2, 2010 (UTC)
:I can't see merging being a disaster, but I can see it being a damn pain without extremely well-laid guidelines, and possibly even with them. There needs to be more than just a category or two from fanon if the merger takes place, there needs to be clear signalling so that we can see from every link and every page whether it is fanon or Maxis/EA canon. Keeping the two separate but working out a clearer agreement or wider cross-culture some other way seems infinitely preferable. This place has potential. That (alongside the fact that I've been housebound a bit lately) are the reasons I've made so many edits here. This is already a premium site for canonical information about the Sims, and that's a great specialty that I'd like to help realise. Approach the likes of Delphy, and get more traffic flowing between this site and MTS. Get the pages really informative so that people know this is the place they can come to see a list of every lot in Sunset Valley, or a list of all the starters. Useful info like that made easily accessible. The site is already most of the way there. A fanon merger will only - I suspect - detract from the canon. People will be here for their own stories, and not for The Sims series so much. ([[User:Kiwi tea|Kiwi tea]] 17:14, May 2, 2010 (UTC))
# [[User:Makiah|Makiah]] 17:25, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
# [[User:Narc|Narc]] ([[User talk:Narc|talk]]) 22:42, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
== Fanon wiki merge vote ==
===Neutral===
The Sims Wiki and The Sims Fanon Wiki should merge.
# [[User:A.P. Freeman|Author]] 16:20, May 8, 2010 (UTC) I wanna see how it goes.
# Yay! More pages! [[User:Salemguy123|Salem. Guy. 123]] 21:01, May 10, 2010 (UTC)
# [[User:Elfears|Elfears]] 21:56, May 11, 2010 (UTC) I would like that
* Hello. I'm an unregistered contributor! I'm not sure if I can vote but look at the facts. This wiki is very slow. Wikis like Avatar and Kingdom Hearts, have twice the many users we do. It's pretty sad. So I'm hoping that the merge will help us out. [[Special:Contributions/98.242.115.205|98.242.115.205]] 04:23, May 8, 2010 (UTC)
==SimsPolicyVoting==
=== Neutral ===
# [[User:Dharden|Dharden]] 05:11, May 1, 2010 (UTC)
=== Disagree ===
After discussing the issue a policy was written up and can be viewed at [[Sims wiki:Policy]]. If you agree, you want this policy to be put through. If you disagree, you don't want the policy to be put through. Voting ends 28 March 2008. Please remember to sign your votes!
# --[[User:Bleeh|Bleeh]] ([[w:c:Sims:User talk:Bleeh|talk]]) 03:28, May 1, 2010 (UTC) Bet I'll be the only one, but so be it. I definitely disagree with the option to merge, but hey, it's not my wiki anyways.
# --[[User:Sparrowsong|Sparrowsong]] 04:01, May 1, 2010 (UTC)
# -- [[User:Kiwi tea|Kiwi tea]] 09:12, May 1, 2010 (UTC) I know I'm new, and I can see the arguments in favour of this, but I see it making a mess. I have extensive Fanon for Riverblossom Hills. Now that would make things confusing! I'm sure I'm only one of hundreds like that.
# --<onlyinclude>'''[[UserDavidMC123:|<span style="font-family:Comic Sans MC; color:blue;">David</span>]][[User talk:DavidMC123|<span style="font-family:Comic Sans MC; color:black;">MC</span>]][[Special:Contributions/DavidMC123|<span style="font-family:Comic Sans MC; color:blue;">123</span>]]'''</onlyinclude> 14:13 Saturday, May 01, 2010 (UTC) (I think that's the right time)I have made an image of pros and cons. [[:File:Pros_and_Cons_of_Merging_with_Fanon_Wiki.jpg|Here is the image.]]
# [[User:AGuyCalledJoe|AGuyCalledJoe]] 14:56, May 2, 2010 (UTC) It would make a complete mess, people will be confused and they will probably wont know if a sim is fanon or not this is the same as when there was a discussion with the SimCity games of the MySims besides this wiki is about The Sims Series not The Sims Fanon Series >.>
# [[User:Mischem6|Mischem6]] 00:07, May 4, 2010 (UTC)
# [[User:Deftera|Deftera]] 18:17, May 4, 2010 (UTC)
# [[User:LostInRiverview|LostInRiverview]] 02:16, May 8, 2010 (UTC) While I personally agree with (or am at most neutral about) the idea of merging, I can see that quite a few people here are against the merge. Therefore, I'm voting against it, because I don't think we should go into something like this with a less than clear concensus, which I see we fail to have at the moment.
# [[User:Guffers|Guffers]] 13:23, May 8, 2010 (UTC) It would get to complicated as people wouldn't bother to mark their stuff as CC. And anyway, does the Fanon Wiki want to merge?
# --[[User:Lewislew|Lewislew]] 16:14, May 10, 2010 (UTC) I disagree, it would just make this confusing and pointless!
# [[User:UBFunkaneer|UBFunkaneer]] 21:54, May 11, 2010 (UTC) On the Spore Wiki, there was more Fanon than Canon. The same'll happen here. And if someone accidentally made a sim with the same name as a future sim, they'd be yelled at vandalism they did not commit.
# I agree with Funkaneer. [[User:RaikuLuciferSamiyaza|RaikuLuciferSamiyaza]] 00:56, May 15, 2010 (UTC)
== Fanon wiki merge vote results ==
===Agree===
Final count:
# [[User:Makiah|Makiah]] 17:25, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
:Agree: 45%
# [[User:Narc|Narc]] ([[User talk:Narc|talk]]) 22:48, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
:Neutral: 5%
:Disagree: 50%
As the majority did not agree with the merge, the two wikis will remain separate. --[[User:A_morris|a_morris]] <small>([[User_talk:A_morris|talk]])</small> 21:07, May 17, 2010 (UTC)
===Neutral===
It was 12 agree and 12 disagree get the neutral to decide whether he agrees or disagrees and then make the desision
===Disagree===
===Comments===
:I overall agree, with one exception. I think the text of rule #5 needs to be clarified or abbreviated; I'd personally suggest something like "Blocks will escalate in severity if multiple offenses are committed" -- assuming that's what you meant. Aside from that, my agree above stands. --[[User:Narc|Narc]] ([[User talk:Narc|talk]]) 22:48, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
:''Note:'' I've taken the liberty of copy-editing a bit, which has also highlighted one other question for me: what does it mean to use an inappropriate word "in general terms"? Can you clarify, please? Thanks, [[User:Narc|Narc]] ([[User talk:Narc|talk]]) 23:04, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
::Yes I guess #5 does sound confusing. I'll rewrite it to your suggestion. What I meant in general terms, which probably doesn't even need to be stated because I changed the block time. It was supposed to be like a differentiation between using curse words toward someone and using them in everyday speaking. Like for example, if you ask me a question and I reply, "#@&$ if I know!" That's the way I meant it but to make this go quicker we can just omit it since it really doesn't matter now. One other thing, I liked the changes to the policy you made but there was one thing I'm going to change back and that's the unannounced warning thing. No big deal I suppose with you but I don't want anyone to complain they didn't get a warning and me having to leave warnings on IP talk pages. [[User:Makiah|Makiah]] 23:28, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
:::Glad you liked my edits. I see what you meant now about the general terms. One question: if a warning is unannounced, is it still a warning? Perhaps consider it more of a "points" system (like for driving), and say "If you do such and such, you will be remembered and blocked if you keep doing it" or something? Or is there an official wiki warning system that actually does something else, and I'm missing the point entirely? --[[User:Narc|Narc]] ([[User talk:Narc|talk]]) 23:35, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
::::No there is no warning system, it would just mean that every time a minor offense is done once we would have to give a warning. I sorta consider that to be an unannounced warning, it's not hard to remember considering it's all kept in the contributions. Now I know this doesn't happen a lot but I don't want to create a lot of talk pages for IPs that are only going to be seen once. I figure they know what they are doing when they do it so they don't actually need a written warning. ~ [[User:Makiah|Makiah]] 06:48, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
:::::Considering some people can't figure out "that cupholder thingy" on their computer, I'm not 100% sure that'll work, but we can certainly try it. I'd honestly not mind creating lots of talk pages (it's not my server, and even if it was, it could only be a minor amount of space occupied, compared to the _real_ articles; and with a template to subst in, it shouldn't take more than a minute to create the page), but ultimately it makes little difference to me, since you're admin so this is your job. In any case, thanks for clearing it up for me. --[[User:Narc|Narc]] ([[User talk:Narc|talk]]) 12:44, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
==The Sims Categories==
''Continued from [[User:Narc/Categories Project]]''
I figured we should put this here since I foresee a problem should we not get this issue solved very soon. <u>I am personally suspending all category creations until we vote on our laid out plan.</u> This way everyone as a community knows what to do and is not doing their own thing. '''One weeks worth discussion and two weeks to vote on the issue is going to be our set time plan.'''
Issue: The category system needs fixing. It's very unorganized and messy.
'''(DO NOT COPY AND PASTE, RATHER EDIT YOUR IDEAS INTO AFTER DISCUSSION)'''
The proposed category system is as followed:
*'''Sims Wiki''' ''(this is our super-category, the mother of all categories; everything is rooted here)''
**'''Sims Games''' ''(this category is the root of the "games" tree as noted above; in this tree, we categorize things by the games it's in)''
***'''The Sims'''
****The Sims Base Game
****Livin' Large
****''(etc.; one category for each expansion pack)''
***'''The Sims 2'''
****The Sims 2 Base Game
****University
****''(etc.; one category for each expansion pack)''
****Stuff Packs
*****Holiday Party Pack
*****''(etc.; one category for each stuff pack)''
**'''Simology''' ''(this category is the root of the "simology" tree; it categorizes by aspects of a sim's life)''
***Aspirations
***Careers
***NPCs
***Talent Badges
***Skill points
***Motives
***Life Stages
***Life States
****Aliens
***Interactions
**'''Sims'''
***''(what we already have here)''
**'''Images'''
***Sim Images
***Sims 2 snapshots
***Sims 1 Snapshots
***Game Screenshots ''(For other game's screenshots)''
***Wiki Images
***Box Art
***Logo
**'''Templates'''
***Blank
***Stubs
***Disambiguation
***Featured Articles
**'''Games''' ''(for all other Sim games)''
**'''Community'''
***Websites
**EA Games (I think the Maxis category should be integrated into this one)
**''(more? Your input is required)''
===Comments===
I have added all the categories that I believe are available as of now (all the ones I believe should be kept) as well as inserted ideas. Realize when you are discussing these are the exact titles we want to name these categories. They are to be used as more efficient and to enable better searching. Time is of the essence people and by Monday, March 24, 2008 I hope to be voting on this issue. Thanks for your time, I know this is a long topic! If anyone thinks of anything to be added please do! [[User:Makiah|<font color="red">Makiah</font>]] [[User talk:Makiah|<small><font color="red">(talk)</font></small>]] 22:53, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
:I'll unfix the stuff in Simology, but what i want know is, how is any of that different then the stuff in "Games Systems" --[[User:Uberfuzzy|Uberfuzzy]] 23:03, 17 March 2008 (UTC)?
::Personally I don't like the Game Systems category because if I was a person looking for things to do with the sims such as aspirations I would not look under Game Systems. That's why we want to better the category system. I thank you for fixing that. The categories listed above would be the only ones we have so if anything is important it should be added! But again Uberfuzzy I believe you have some good ideas and can add them! [[User:Makiah|<font color="red">Makiah</font>]] [[User talk:Makiah|<small><font color="red">(talk)</font></small>]] 09:43, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
==Skin Voting==
Quote from [[User talk:Makiah|here]].
''"i would like to suggest you move to one of the monaco skins instead of quartz. wikia is no longer actively supporting quartz, so any problem with it are very unlikely to be fixed. monaco can be customized much in the same ways as quartz, but offers more controls and menus options. See [[w:inside:Monaco_Skin_Customization|Monaco Skin Customization]] for all the ways you can customize it. --[[User:Uberfuzzy|Uberfuzzy]] 23:47, 18 March 2008 (UTC)"''
Being suggested, I would like to take a vote to this. Wikia changed the default skin (I think earlier on 18 March 2008) I changed it back to Smoke Quartz, however as Uberfuzzy pointed out, above, Quartz is no longer supported. So I believe Smoke should be the color, but is everyone okay with Monaco? Personally it's what I use when I'm logged in. Doesn't really need a discussion since there are only two options...If you agree with Uberfuzzy, you want the supported skin Monaco. If you disagree, you want to keep it the way it is. I recommend you try each skin to know exactly what your voting for. <u>This vote ends April 1st, 2008.</u>
===Agree===
===Neutral===
# I hold the right to change my vote later. ^^ (Just incase everyone is neutral!) [[User:Makiah|<font color="red">Makiah</font>]] [[User talk:Makiah|<small><font color="red">(talk)</font></small>]] 02:05, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
# I can't say this makes any difference to me. My preferences are set to use the monobook skin I'm comfortable with and I don't see myself changing to any other. --[[User:Narc|Narc]] ([[User talk:Narc|talk]]) 13:09, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
===Disagree===
===Comments===
Latest revision as of 19:09, 18 July 2020
Archived page
This page is an archive. Please do not edit the contents of this page. Direct any additional comments to the current talk page.
Ok, after you hear this, I know that some of you may think that I am crazy, but I think we should merge The Sims Fanon Wiki with The Sims Wiki. Hear me out, at the Avatar wiki, they have merged their fanon wiki with the main one. While this was initially a controversial move, they claim that it paid off, because their wiki has many more contributors and visitors, making it much more active. I think we should merge these two wikis because with The Sims 3: Ambitions coming out in June, we will need to make our wiki known to people, preferably before the release. Another reason is that I have noticed that the activity of the fanon wiki went down for a while. What better way to bring the activity back up than merge it with a more popular wiki? Thank you for listening to this and please tell me what you think. --Random Ranaun 03:05, April 5, 2010 (UTC)
I hear your reasoning. I support the merging of the 2 wikis! Archie 03:08, April 5, 2010 (UTC)
I don't think that would be a very good idea. I think because there would be loads more of vandalism, but I'm just an IP so what do I know? :) 74.216.88.170 03:10, April 5, 2010 (UTC)
I'm assuming there was a reason for creating a separate wiki for fanon. Has that reason gone away? Will it come back if the two are combined? If the two are combined, I'd think there would have to be some way to "mark" fanon as such. How will that be handled? I'm not categorically against a merger, but I'm also not sure it's all that great of an idea. Dharden 14:30, April 6, 2010 (UTC)
There were two reasons for creating a separate wiki. One Dharden mentioned, the need to mark or keep separate premade content from custom content. The second was whether an editor had the right to change something that someone else had written given that player stories are creative rather than encyclopedic. I had a brief discussion with a former admin. At the time I was pretty much the only one on, I didn't want to spend all my time fixing the spelling and grammar of everyone's story and decided to move the stories to subpages. At this point, I concede that merging might be a good idea. It would also make the discussion on what downloads and custom content should be included moot. --a_morris (talk) 03:05, April 7, 2010 (UTC)
I do have my concerns about increased vandalism, but, it would seem good for the community. Author 03:12, April 7, 2010 (UTC)
I personally believe the two wikis should stay divided. There must be a reason why they were made into 2 different wikis, after all! Bleeh (talk) 22:40, April 28, 2010 (UTC)
I hate to jump back onto this Wiki after being so inactive for so long to voice my opinion, but I actually don't think this is a bad idea. My reasoning:
1) If I remember correctly, fans do come here and do post fan material that then needs to be moved and/or deleted by admins. Merging the two wikis makes this no longer necessary, and encourages game fans to visit and enrich themselves in knowledge of the game while posting their own content.
2) Merging the two allows the new merged wiki to capitalize on the visitors to both, increasing the number of visitors, number of editors, and number of active members.
3) Merging the two makes it easier for a visitor to find information both on the game and on fan material in one location.
Additionally, even if the two were created intentionally separate, that's not necessarily a good enough reason to keep it that way. Just as there is no point in needless change, there is no point in maintaining the status quo if doing so is detrimental. It's up to the best judgment of the Admins and members here (and on the other wiki) to determine whether or not the status quo is detrimental or not - I hesitate to say that it is, though I still support their combination.
That's just my $0.02 though. LostInRiverview 23:31, April 29, 2010 (UTC)
I actually never thought of those possibilities. Though, if users did add info about their own characters, there would need to be a way for other users to be able to distinguish whether or not it's a Sim that's made by Maxis. There would need to be a category, or something, which I'm sure most new-comers to the wiki wouldn't add, since Wikia is confusing enough. Bleeh (talk) 23:37, April 29, 2010 (UTC)
Well, I'm not saying it wouldn't be complicated. That's why it's important to determine whether the changes are needed or desired enough to justify upsetting the status quo. LostInRiverview 21:14, April 30, 2010 (UTC)
C'mon people! We need to vote! We've had 16 people vote, but, no results! Archie 23:56, April 29, 2010 (UTC)
I will begin the official vote, according to our voting procedure, on May 1 and put an announcement on the main page. In the event of a tie, we will keep things the same, i.e. stay divided.
Should the "We combine" option prevail, it will be followed by a discussion/vote to determine how to add the new content and the merging will begin upon its conclusion and any maintenance tasks required (ex. creating templates, etc.) Any new content may be left until a decision is made. --a_morris (talk) 14:01, April 30, 2010 (UTC)
So then, if a user makes a page about a fanon Sim, we just let it stay in the wiki until the voting is over? Or would we move it to the user namespace? If it's the first, then how would we remember to move it to the user namespace if the wikis stay divided? Bleeh (talk) 20:49, April 30, 2010 (UTC)
No. After the first vote, if we are going to combine, only then will fanon pages be left as is until we decide how to deal with them. For now and if we decide to stay divided, fanon pages should be moved to the user namespace, as usual. --a_morris (talk) 23:15, April 30, 2010 (UTC)
At the present moment, I am mulling my thoughts over. I'm kind of thinking a merger would not be the worst thing. The Sims Wiki has a much more structured and, clean lay out. Of course given the time, I feel that I could equally make the Fanon Wiki just as efficent. Another plus, the fan fiction people make/compose would reach a wider audience if merged. It's a toguh decision... TamBams219 02:21, May 1, 2010 (UTC)
I'm totally agains't it! Why did we make players stories after all?!AGuyCalledJoe 14:59, May 2, 2010 (UTC)
I can't see merging being a disaster, but I can see it being a damn pain without extremely well-laid guidelines, and possibly even with them. There needs to be more than just a category or two from fanon if the merger takes place, there needs to be clear signalling so that we can see from every link and every page whether it is fanon or Maxis/EA canon. Keeping the two separate but working out a clearer agreement or wider cross-culture some other way seems infinitely preferable. This place has potential. That (alongside the fact that I've been housebound a bit lately) are the reasons I've made so many edits here. This is already a premium site for canonical information about the Sims, and that's a great specialty that I'd like to help realise. Approach the likes of Delphy, and get more traffic flowing between this site and MTS. Get the pages really informative so that people know this is the place they can come to see a list of every lot in Sunset Valley, or a list of all the starters. Useful info like that made easily accessible. The site is already most of the way there. A fanon merger will only - I suspect - detract from the canon. People will be here for their own stories, and not for The Sims series so much. (Kiwi tea 17:14, May 2, 2010 (UTC))
Elfears 21:56, May 11, 2010 (UTC) I would like that
Hello. I'm an unregistered contributor! I'm not sure if I can vote but look at the facts. This wiki is very slow. Wikis like Avatar and Kingdom Hearts, have twice the many users we do. It's pretty sad. So I'm hoping that the merge will help us out. 98.242.115.205 04:23, May 8, 2010 (UTC)
--Bleeh (talk) 03:28, May 1, 2010 (UTC) Bet I'll be the only one, but so be it. I definitely disagree with the option to merge, but hey, it's not my wiki anyways.
-- Kiwi tea 09:12, May 1, 2010 (UTC) I know I'm new, and I can see the arguments in favour of this, but I see it making a mess. I have extensive Fanon for Riverblossom Hills. Now that would make things confusing! I'm sure I'm only one of hundreds like that.
--DavidMC123 14:13 Saturday, May 01, 2010 (UTC) (I think that's the right time)I have made an image of pros and cons. Here is the image.
AGuyCalledJoe 14:56, May 2, 2010 (UTC) It would make a complete mess, people will be confused and they will probably wont know if a sim is fanon or not this is the same as when there was a discussion with the SimCity games of the MySims besides this wiki is about The Sims Series not The Sims Fanon Series >.>
LostInRiverview 02:16, May 8, 2010 (UTC) While I personally agree with (or am at most neutral about) the idea of merging, I can see that quite a few people here are against the merge. Therefore, I'm voting against it, because I don't think we should go into something like this with a less than clear concensus, which I see we fail to have at the moment.
Guffers 13:23, May 8, 2010 (UTC) It would get to complicated as people wouldn't bother to mark their stuff as CC. And anyway, does the Fanon Wiki want to merge?
--Lewislew 16:14, May 10, 2010 (UTC) I disagree, it would just make this confusing and pointless!
UBFunkaneer 21:54, May 11, 2010 (UTC) On the Spore Wiki, there was more Fanon than Canon. The same'll happen here. And if someone accidentally made a sim with the same name as a future sim, they'd be yelled at vandalism they did not commit.
