Forum:Why not let Wikia be about wikis

Entertaining the possibility that I haven't "kicked the tyres" long enough on blogs and user mastheads and so on I spent quite some hours this past week searching and reading many blogs here at Wikia. ''I came away with that same empty feeling that I sometimes experience after watching a terrible movie long past a sensible bed time. I wish I could have all those hours back!''


 * I can't recall if it was his original quote but Stephen Covey writes, "The main thing is to keep the main thing the main thing!"

I am all for making friends via the internet and even growing a social network that way. My personal habits don't tend to include blogging but I respect the fact other people find it appealing to post their journal/diary like writings online for comment by other's or even for others to rate their opinion with 5 stars. What troubles me with this past year's social networking focus at Wikia is the apparent pre-occupation with what could be called trivial pursuits while the really tough nuts are left untouched or at least poorly supported. It would be fine if this trivia remained an optional spice to voluntarily add to your wiki browsing experience but the way it is being positioned front and center (to the point of being shoved down my throat as though it was the main course) is .. well ... misguided, and I think I am being charitable with that description.

I'd probably characterize these various social networking tools as "me too" features or "johnny come lately" tactics to follow a horse that has already bolted from the barn. The big shame is that all of that social networking stuff is Web 2.0 era stuff. Here we have Wikia positioned to be a potential leader or at least trend-setter in Web 3.0 evolution (I am thinking of such features as Semantic Media Wiki and perhaps Google Maps) and yet those tools are being overlooked and under-used due to what I think is this misguided fascination with the subject of social networking. The forays into this area seem to focus on canned solutions for prescribed ideas of what visitors to Wikia might want to view or explore. That is a closed approach which flies in the face of the Web 3.0 principle of leaving the utilization/application of the technology open to the user.


 * Blogs ... I've always thought of these as the semi-weekly journal of someone who feels a need to share such detail with the world.
 * What, pray tell, is the "killer application" that has propelled blogs into the Wikia limelight? I must be blind because I can't see it.

Forgive the unsavory subject but I am reminded of a popular sign posted at public swimming pools: "We don't swim in your toilet so please don't pee in our pool!" ... I don't see twitter or blogspot or even any of the ISP's who also offer blogging features trying to muscle in on the revision-controlled, collaborative data content that is typical of wikis.


 * It's the data dummy!

Can we please keep the data as the main course and allow those of us who wish to garnish that main meal with avatars, blogs, edit counts, gratuitous white-space and other ego-stroking social networking features to voluntarily add those like any other garnish?

--najevi 04:12, October 24, 2009 (UTC)
 * See User blog:Zapwire/Wikia's new "features" are bugs for more comments and opinions. --Michaeldsuarez (Talk) (Deeds) 04:16, October 24, 2009 (UTC)

Like I said in response to the blog posting Michael linked to, blogs can have a purpose on wikis, but only certain wikis. On Wookieepedia, for example, having blogs would be absurd. On other wikis like Star Wars Fanon, for example, I use blogs extensively to announce content releases for my fan fiction work and to discuss behind the scenes things that can be used in sourcing articles about my fan fiction (sourcing on SWF is optional; I choose to do it). When it comes to blog, I basically see it as being useless on purely encyclopedic wikis like Wookieepedia but very worthwhile on fanon wikis like Star Wars Fanon. That said, on wikis where it can be useful, there do need to be policies that are enforced about what can and cannot be used. For example, the Star Wars Fanon blog policy restricts the usage of blogs to only a few things. - Brandon Rhea (talk) 04:21, October 24, 2009 (UTC)


 * To add on, though, I do agree that wikis and wiki content need to be the main focus, not social networking and stuff like that. MyHome and MagCloud are but two examples of bad ideas, albeit ones with good intentions. - Brandon Rhea (talk) 04:23, October 24, 2009 (UTC)

Nail. Head. Whacked with a 50-ton hydraulic press.

Can we please cut out all this social bollocks and focus the resources on actually improving the services to those who are serious about wiki-editing? This kind of thing is really what things like LiveJournal, Twitter, Fail Facebook, My Fail Space are for, not to mention the many lovely instant-messaging clients and the network of IRC channels. Cut out all that fat, and that's less cost to be covered by advertising. The mastheads, IMHO, are quite ugly; certain blokes are trying to figure out how to get 'round them as we type.

Probably the best example of how overemphasis on social networking can ruin a wiki is Halopedia.

Seriously, need I say more?--Goodwood 04:26, October 24, 2009 (UTC)


 * Blogs are an optional feature, you can have it disabled. -- LordTBT Talk! 04:32, October 24, 2009 (UTC)

I personally don't mind what the mastheads look like. It doesn't really affect me in anyway. The downside, though, is that it doesn't let us use era icons on user pages. - Brandon Rhea (talk) 04:35, October 24, 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, you can still...no, wait, you can't. At least not in that way. Era tags have to be incorporated using a complicated series of code; Greyman did it, and let me rip it off his page for mine on Darthipedia. You can do the same if you'd like.-- 04:37, October 24, 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Goodwood. I'll take a look at that. - Brandon Rhea (talk) 04:39, October 24, 2009 (UTC)