Community Central

As 2021 draws to a close, let's look back at a very busy year for Fandom and our wiki communities, complete with Editors of the Year! Here is This Year at Fandom!

READ MORE

Community Central
Advertisement
Forums: Index Watercooler Featured Wikia -- proposed changes
Fandom's forums are a place for the community to help other members.
To contact staff directly or to report bugs, please use Special:Contact.


I'm proposing two changes to the Featured Wikia. Please provide your feedback below.

Documentation

I've documented the process for the monthly change of the Feature Wikia on a sub-page to my user page: User:CocoaZen/fw. It should probably be moved to a page in the main namespace. Should it be a sub-page to the Featured Wikia page? or somewhere else? What's most appropriate? What can be found most easily? --CocoaZen 05:05, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Blurbs

I'd like to add a requirement that to be eligible, a Wikia must create a blurb. This is the blurb that will be posted when it is featured. (It can be modified.) Having it in advance of the vote has at least two advantages:

  1. it gives voters more information about the nominated Wikia
  2. it makes it easier to switch over the feature Wikia promptly when it wins and the month begins

Is this change to the process and requirements fair? Even if it's not a requirement, I'd like to have it be an option. I'll be writing at least one leader from each of the currently nominated Wikia to ask for a blurb, unless I hear reasons not to do this here, promptly. --CocoaZen 05:05, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Example Blurbs

The blurbs get included multiple places:

  1. on the main page when featured,
  2. on the Recently featured Wikia page and
  3. on the page that gets created to give information about each Featured Wikia (the blurb, nominating comments, pro and con and a copy of the votes; example Featured Wikia/Redwall).

More blurb examples:

  • Featured_Wikia/Star_Wars/Blurb
  • Featured_Wikia/Muppet/Blurb
  • Featured Wikia/LOST/Blurb

--CocoaZen 05:17, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

If I don't hear any feedback on this by November 26th, I'll assume it's ok with everyone, and from now on new nominees will need to create a blurb to be eligible to be featured. --CocoaZen 16:35, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
I agree with everything you said (silent consent -> unsilent consent). ^_^ --Splarka (talk) 23:06, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
This sounds great to me. Thanks for all your work organising this. I just realised we reached 20 featured wikis! Angela talk 14:50, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

When to Tally the Votes and Why Have Blurbs in Advance

I was thinking this should happen for the collaboration of the month too, but that really needs an active coordinator so maybe it won't work. Would stopping the vote a week before the end of the month be better? -- sannse (talk) 06:58, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

As a not-very-active coordinator, I'm trying to make the process as self-sustaining as possible. That's part of the reason I've been asking winning Wikia leaders to write their own blurbs. The even more imporantant reason is that they can do it more justice than I can, since it's often a Wikia I have never participated in.
I think Sannse's point about stopping the vote before the end of the month is a good one. In the case of Featured Wikia, I think it would only have to be... 3 days? As long as the blurb is ready to go, that also gives us time for a tie-breaker if necessary.
Sannse may have also meant that this way only the winning Wikia would need to write a blurb. However, I think we get some other potential benefits from advance blurbs:
  1. more information about the nominated Wikia to inform the vote
  2. an advance chance to see what they propose featuring -- there are multiple reasons to feature a Wika
  3. it weeds out the nominations that have so little commitment that they can't even both with writing up some of the good things about their Wikia (or in cases where it's appropriate, enlisting the help of others)
--CocoaZen 18:06, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
My concern is that the coordinator will write up a blurb for the collaboration, not get voted for quickly, and have moved on before the wiki gets its chance. That might not be a problem with the featured Wikia, but I think it will be where we need an active contributor to coordinate the collaboration. I'm not sure what would work best for this -- sannse (talk) 21:32, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
Bill has just sugested that we stagger the Featured and the Collaboration, so as to keep new things showing on the main page. This would work I think. If we kept with the Featured on (or about) the first of the month, with pre-made blurbs. Then the voting for the collaboration could stop on the last day of the month as usual, but it not be put on the main page until the 15th. That would give time for the blurbs to be written (and so ensure the coordinator is active) and keep stagger the new stuff on the main page. What do you think? -- sannse (talk) 19:33, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
I don't think I was clear here, this is just about staggering the change over dates, not having each section for just half the month :) -- sannse (talk) 21:20, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
Actually, it was clear to me. And I think it's a good idea. As you and Bill point out, it ensures that the main page has fairly large blocks of new content at two different times each month. --CocoaZen 06:04, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Clarification: Restrictions

We have an existing restriction that Wikia which have been Featured within the past year are not eligible for nomination/featuring. Does this apply to all the languages of a Wikia? Most winning Wikia put the fact that there are multiple language versions in their blurb, so really they have all been featured.

Could a Wikia that's not eligible still start the nomination/voting process, but just not win until they meet the requirements? (For example, this would mean that a Wikia that just won could be nominated again immediately, but not win until next year.)

--CocoaZen 22:08, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Humm... what about if the new language isn't mentioned, or if the other language version is newer? I think we should leave this to the voters, if they thik the language version is good enough in it's own right, then it should get its chance.
I don't think I have an opinion on the other one, it somehow feels fairer for it to be assesed anew for the new year though, things might have changed. I've not got strong feelings about either of these though

Additional requirement -- recent votes

Right now, if you make a valid vote for a nominated Wikia, your vote remains until either (1) that Wikia wins or (2) you change your vote. This makes it possible for a Wikia that has not had any votes (or activity) for a very long time. It's even possible that none of the voters still participate in any Wikia (although that's hard to imagine ;-) ! ) So, should we have a requirement like, "at least one of the votes must have been made within 2 months". If you think so, but you think the number or timing of the recent votes should be different than 1 in 2 months, please note your improvements here. --CocoaZen 22:08, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

No more featured Wikia?

Nothing on the current Wikia page. Should we have a note on Featured Wikia and Featured Wikia/vote that the system is in abeyance and that people should therefore not spend time considering votes and nominations? (Thanks, CocoaZen, for working beyond the call of duty to administer the system while it functioned!) Robin Patterson 13:09, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

That's a good idea, especially since there isn't anything happening there anymore. --Michaeldsuarez (Talk) (Deeds) 00:55, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
Wikia Gaming has 3 promo spots. You would think 1 of those could be a Featured Wikia. -- LordTBT Talk! 05:25, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
Featured Wikias is dead, so there isn't any point. --Michaeldsuarez (Talk) (Deeds) 14:47, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
Advertisement