CzechOut

Unfortunately not.

See, we want to value your time by letting you know when a wiki's stats have effectively flatlined. This allows you to quickly "course correct" and move on to a different topic that has had more success on Fandom. That way, your contributions will likely last longer — and more people will read them.

Some topics simply don't fire our reader's imaginations. This is one.

You're fighting an uphill battle here because the band broke up in the middle of the decade — even if it did have a brief reunion earlier this year.

Of course, some bands do have staying power after they break up. But this band is not, say, The Beatles. F(x) was in some ways internationally successful — particularly with the SXSW crowd one year. But it was never a top-10 girl band in South Korea, and its presence on the global scene has now greatly diminished. And their name is now much more famous as that of an American cable network, and a contraction for "effects".

Unfortunately, there are just a lot of headwinds here. None of them are your fault. You can't be expected to make a popular wiki about a dead band — with a name that's horrible for SEO — half a decade after their last album.

Given you clearly have so many other interests, we're sure you'll have no difficulty editing on one of the several other wikis you already run. :)

Your request is filed under the Gaming category, which I don't typically handle. You should probably add this information to your request so that the appropriate staff member sees them.

Thanks!

Well, technically, it's not fully gaming. Algodoo can be considered a game, so I wanted to make it easier to find. But it's actually just a physics simulator.

I changed it. I also selected gaming because I didn't know you could choose misc wikis. So yeah.

Okay, so I see now you've taken it out of Gaming entirely. That doesn't actually help things, because now it's not in anyone's piles of requests. I'll go ahead and look at this one, but for the future, it's important to understand to put it only in one category, and that category should not be Category:Adoption requests — cause no one will see it then. :)

Hey, can you do me a favour? Please click on the "start a wiki" button and then start a brand new wiki called "algodoo.fandom.com". Thanks!

Okay.

It said something went wrong.

Try it now.

Perfect. That's now a wiki where you have full admin and bureaucrat rights, and you can use it to just grab the good parts of w:c:algodoo-old, rather than trying to "clean it up". When you've grabbed everything you need, lemme know, and I'll close the old one. Way faster than adoption, then clean up. And the fights with the other users should now end. Or if they don't, you have the power to instantly block them.

Nice: User:Tay-Toh.

You can delete the old wiki now. I'm finished.

Done! Good luck!

Oh, I wouldn't give that much of a second thought!

You created an edit conflict since I was editing at the time you snuck your edit in. The easiest way forward was simply to preference my edit and copy and paste it back into place from the edit conflict screen.

I should also point out that I don't always leave behind "unofficial answers". They're sometimes helpful, but because editors can't see all the reports I can, sometimes they leave remarks that miss a larger point — such as a wiki's relative inactivity, or the fact that the requester has local blocks.

Please don't be offended if your remarks are edited out in the future. It's all done in an effort to communicate clearly with the requester.

Oh ok. :) Thanks for letting me know!

Rights granted!

Requests like this are best handled via a Special:Contact message.

Ok.

Hey - i'll let Czech answer your question, but in the meantime, you can report vandalism to the VSTF wiki!

One small note: while the wiki was not at 50 pages when I put our submission in, we crested 50 pages yesterday, and are now at 62 (though the front page still says 36, for some reason) as we've continued daily work on it.

Edit: This morning the activity feed and the front page both say "50" pages so I'm not sure what's going on there.

When we on the adoptions team refuse a request on the basis of wiki inactivity, that's the end of the road. We don’t then say, "... but if you do x, y and z, we'll reconsider."

The hope is that by decisively “calling time” on wikis that have flatlined, people will focus on more active wikis.

We’re not doing that lightly. Nor are we attempting some form of reverse psychology to spur you into activity to try to “save” the wiki. We’re doing it because, in our experience of watching thousands of wikis over the years, once wikis flatline like Wars Wiki has, they aren’t salvageable in the long term.

We’re also able to see something that most users can’t. We can tell if there’s a natural readership for the topic. The key factor is not the number of pages a wiki has — though my statement that fewer than 50 pages had been created in the last almost-decade does reasonably suggest general inactivity. Rather, the important thing is how many people have viewed the wiki.

And what’s indisputable about Wars Wiki is that no one has seen it other than those few people who have edited in the last 24 hours. In fact, in the last seven days, four have been without any page views at all, while the other three haven’t been statistically different to zero. Before this week, there’s only been one day since mid-August with any page views at all.

That's pretty obviously not great -- and why our adoption guidelines regarding inactivity definitely apply.

Finally, due to issues of scale, we’re not typically able to give advance warning when we delete inactive wikis. However, the refusal of an adoption request is itself a pretty big clue that deletion is definitely an imminent possibility. Of course, when wikis are deleted, the database is downloadable for about 30 days afterwards, so, yes, it’s backed up. But you may want to grab any images while you can, since those are trickier to work with later.

Of course, you can try again by starting a new wiki. But the ten years of evidence we have so far on this topic suggests that there has not so far been a natural appetite for this material on Fandom. So it might well be that a year from now, the new attempt is equally unpopular and it would face deletion, too.

That’s why I think it’s fair to advise you to put your efforts towards topics that have clear audiences.