Forum:Does anyone actually like this Message Wall thing?

I don't hate it, but if it is mandatory, I will probably lock it and just tell people to use a subpage like User:Fandyllic/talk as a workaround. -- Fandyllic (talk &middot; contr) 27 Sep 2011 12:08 AM Pacific


 * I'm looking forward to see it, when it's done. If it's implemented properly, without bugs, then I'm all for it. I find that a lot of users have difficulties with wikicode on talk pages, at least on the wikis I edit. They also forget to add post titles, signatures, indent between posts etc.. This feature solves these problems, but again, if implemented properly.


 * I never bought this "Wikia isn't a social networking site" argument. After this statement I have never seen any convincing rationale why Wikia shouldn't import some social networking features, if the features in question can indeed be labeled as "social". Wikia wikis aren't just small Wikipedia's. While on Wikipedia the community is huge and rather anonymous, the subject of Wikipedia covers everything and the site has an encyclopedic profile, this is not the case on most Wikia wikis. On small wikis, fanon and entertainment wikis in particular, communities aren't big and are gathered around one subject. Contributors can follow all the changes on a wiki more easily and find out what other contributors work on and thus encourage more social activity. While I'm a big fan of Wikipedia; it's structure, consistency in layouts and functionalities, I don't believe that Wikia should be going the same way. — Sovq 07:37, September 27, 2011 (UTC)
 * I think the thing is that "social" functions are unnecessary on smaller wikis and poorly thought out. For the smaller wikis, you don't really need things like blogs to keep up with everyone; there's usually IRC and the like for that. The other thing is the functions appear to be poorly thought out, such as new the new Message Wall. Wiki users are quite conservative when it comes to the software they use, and adding things like the Message Wall because some execs saw a Powerpoint presentation about how social networking is the future is lame. Wikis are not social websites and they never will be, despite how many dumb features you add trying to convince people otherwise. Its like Wikia is at the center of some social experiment to see if wikis can be converted to useful social networking tools, but nobody really cares or wants it. Darkman 4 08:22, September 29, 2011 (UTC)


 * Yes, this pretty much proves my point - there's a lot of general criticism regarding this feature but very little constructive, specific and convincing arguments to support this criticism. Especially since none of us have even seen how the Message Wall works. It almost looks like the bashing is done on general principle, because every new Wikia feature has to be bad by default. — Sovq 09:27, September 29, 2011 (UTC)


 * I don't use IRC and I have never used IRC. I thought about using it once, but it turned out that I was too lazy to get into learning it. I'm sure it's pretty easy, but meh. I don't need it on any wiki I go to since they use chat and if I wanted to reach someone, they're normally there or on their talk pages.


 * I don't see a problem with too many social functions on smaller wikis because, frankly, smaller wikis probably talk to each other more because they are such a small, tight-nit community. Besides, if smaller wikis need this even less, why does it matter? Blogs are optional. Using the chat is optionl. Using a talk page is pretty close to being optional.


 * To me, wikis are social by their very nature. They're an open encyclopedia that anyone can edit. With anyone in the world able to come in and make changes, you'd think there would be communication between them in some way.


 * "A social networking service is an online service, platform, or site that focuses on building and reflecting of social networks or social relations among people, who, for example, share interests and/or activities" --From Wikipedia's Social website page


 * One of the makings of a social network include a common interest, not just friends and people.


 * All the wikis are connected on Wikia and the people on them share common interests. There's a community central where people can talk, ask questions and now, even chat in a room together on the site. By using the forums, blog talk pages, and chat rooms we're all participating in the many social network functions that everyone says shouldn't exist, but we use them, nonetheless.


 * I like the idea that the message wall is trying to get across. I do not like having to figure out who left a message because they forgot to leave a signature. I do not like that if I don't check the history of my page (or if the person is not the newest comment on the bottom) I have to seach for where someone responded to me.


 * People just don't like change. There are tons of things that can be improved with the message wall (if we assume that they're exactly like the comments), I just hope some of them get added in instead of looked over.


 * I have to agree with Sovq, though. I see tons of complaints, but not a lot of constructive criticsm. --Imanie 02:53, September 30, 2011 (UTC)


 * The problem is not the idea of the "message wall" - it's wikia's attitude to designing and implementing new changes. This new feature will be loaded with bugs, rendering it a brick wall to the functionality of any active wikis - but Wikia will set themselves an arbitrary deadline and make it live despite its inherent unreadiness. This is because it seems they desire, need, and require feedback from 100s of pissed-off users in order to motivate themselves into any proper action to fix things. It's like a schoolchild that procrastinates, and needs a teacher to tell them off in order to get them to work. Take the new editor - all of the issues were raised 2-3 months ago, but they're only getting fixed after they've forced it live and many people have come here to complain. The upshot of this is that the community gets very annoyed with wikia's laissez-faire, "we don't need to satisfy the community therefore we don't" attitude, and the hardcore editors (those that contribute the majority of the content they whore out with adverts) become disillusioned with the website.--Acer4666 03:01, September 30, 2011 (UTC)